The oil companies are not interlopers

Mar 03, 2025 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Peeping Tom…

Kaieteur News- There are few things more wearisome than a bully in a schoolyard who insists on pushing boundaries that have long since been set. Venezuela, that old and persistent antagonist, has made a habit of laying claim to what is not its own, dressing its territorial ambitions in the robes of grievance and sovereignty.

Its latest refrain is that the oil companies operating in the waters off the coast of Guyana are acting illegally, that they are trespassers in disputed territory, and that their work is a violation of Venezuela’s rights. It is an old song, sung slightly off-key, with a chorus that changes every time the facts get in the way.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has already spoken on this matter, if not in its final voice, then at least in a firm and unmistakable tone. In its provisional measures, the Court ordered that Venezuela do nothing to alter the situation in the area under dispute. What this means, in plain language, is that Venezuela must not seek to upset the status quo ante—the state of affairs before it began its latest round of saber-rattling.

That state of affairs is simple: Guyana, in the full exercise of its sovereign rights, has granted oil exploration and production licenses in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ), in accordance with international law. Venezuela’s claim to illegality, therefore, is not only spurious but is itself a transgression of the ICJ’s order. If Venezuela truly respects the rule of international regardless of whether its recognizes the jurisdiction of the ICJ, it must stay its hand until the Court delivers its final ruling.

But bullies seldom abide by the rules. Venezuela, with an air of practised indignation, continues to insist that Guyana has acted improperly, that ExxonMobil and other oil companies are guilty of some grand act of trespass. It does so even as it flouts the very order that demands it keep its actions in check. The irony is thick enough to cut with a knife.

One might pause here and consider the nature of the ICJ’s provisional measures. These are not mere suggestions. They are binding, and they exist precisely to prevent the kind of reckless brinkmanship that Venezuela seems eager to engage in. The Court, in its wisdom, recognizes that disputes of this magnitude require a careful and measured process, one in which neither party should be permitted to act unilaterally to change the existing order of things. If Venezuela wished to be seen as a responsible international actor, it would heed this directive. Instead, it persists in behaving as though the judgment of the Court is something to be ignored.

It is worth recalling that Venezuela’s position on this matter has been an evolving fiction. At times, it has laid full and unqualified claim to the Essequibo region, insisting that all lands and waters associated with it are Venezuelan territory. At other times, it has spoken in more circumspect tones, referring to the area as disputed and asserting that Guyana has no right to issue exploration licenses. This is the language of uncertainty, the argument of a claimant who has not yet settled on his own story. A nation confident in its territorial claim does not speak in shifting narratives; it states its case plainly and leaves the law to decide.

Guyana, by contrast, has not wavered. Its position is rooted in legal certainty: the waters in which oil production is taking place fall squarely within its EEZ, as defined by the 1899 Arbitral Award and by international maritime law. The ICJ’s order, far from lending credence to Venezuela’s claims, serves only to reinforce the fundamental principle that the situation should not be disturbed until the Court has rendered its final decision. In other words, Guyana’s sovereignty remains intact, its rights unimpaired, and its ability to develop its resources undiminished.

The Venezuelan government would do well to recognize the folly of its current course. To continue pressing its argument that oil companies are operating illegally is not only intellectually dishonest but legally indefensible.

For the oil companies, the situation is clearer still. They operate under the authority of the Guyanese government, in accordance with international law, and under the protection of a legal order that has not been overturned. They are not interlopers, nor are they engaged in an act of unlawful aggression. They are doing what businesses do: investing in development, creating wealth, and contributing to the prosperity of a nation that has every right to chart its own economic course. Venezuela’s suggestion that they are engaged in illegal activities is not only unfounded but reckless. It is an attempt to intimidate and destabilize, a tactic as transparent as it is tiresome.

(The oil companies are not interlopers)

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)  

 

---

• Bully, Peeping Tom, robes of grievance, schoolyard, sovereignty, territorial ambitions

---