The growing tensions between the United States, Venezuela, and China highlight the “gaps” present in the international system. The ongoing crisis between Venezuela and the U.S. demonstrates how far a major power can go in enforcing sanctions beyond its own jurisdiction.
The contentious issue is Washington’s expanded maritime policy, which targets energy shipments linked to sanctioned countries. The U.S. considers its actions a legitimate part of its sanctions policy, including the confiscation of oil tankers in international waters near Venezuela. Representatives of the U.S. National Security Council noted that these measures aim to halt the illicit transportation of sanctioned oil. Critics, however, argue that these measures further blur the line between law enforcement and de facto maritime coercion, which could have serious implications for international maritime law.
On December 22, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement condemning U.S. actions and describing the confiscation of a tanker linked to China as a “serious violation of international law.” The official Beijing stated that it opposes such unilateral measures carried out without U.N. authorization. At the same time, China expressed support for Venezuela’s appeal to the U.N. Security Council, where Washington’s actions were called “unilateral bullying” and a violation of Venezuela’s sovereignty.
For Beijing, the severity of the issue is linked not only to Venezuela but also to the precedent it sets. Chinese officials and analysts view this case as an example of how economic pressure can escalate into physical control over trade routes, a scenario that could be repeated in other waters in the future.
Although the precedent occurred directly in the Caribbean, it has sparked debates in East Asia as well. Analysts believe that measures taken against energy shipments today could be replicated in other regions in the future.
It is noteworthy that despite its dissatisfaction, China is not engaging in direct confrontation with the U.S. Instead, it is adapting to the situation through indirect means. Specifically, there are changes in procurement, insurance, and shipping strategies. These adjustments highlight the efforts of actors dependent on energy imports to ensure the resilience of supply chains amid geopolitical tensions.
Author: Nia Kokhreidze
