The Latin American chessboard has just shifted with a violence that few anticipated and that no one in the business world can ignore. The US military attack against Venezuela and the capture of “President” Nicolás Maduro alter more than just a political regime : they shake the economic foundations of the region.
As a businessman, I cannot view this episode solely through ideological lenses. What is important here is to understand what lies ahead for Mexico, how much instability costs, and why this episode marks a turning point that will have real effects on investment, energy, and trade.
The intervention in Venezuela immediately set off alarms in international markets. Not out of sympathy for the ousted regime, but for one simple reason: oil. Venezuela has the largest proven reserves on the planet, and any sign of disruption raises tensions in crude oil prices. In the short term, the adjustments may be moderate, as there is a global surplus and Venezuela’s oil infrastructure has not been destroyed. Even so, expectations weigh heavily. And in the markets, expectations also have a cost. For Mexican companies, this translates into pressure on energy costs and logistics, even without an immediate impact on supply.
Mexico produces its own crude oil, but depends on foreign sources for gasoline and diesel. This is no minor detail. Armed conflict in the region disrupts the international refined fuel supply chain. If the prices of these derivatives rise, the blow is not limited to Pemex or large companies. It affects small and medium-sized businesses, transportation, industry, and ultimately, consumers. Geopolitics does not ask for permission: it filters directly into the accounts.
Another front that cannot be minimized is the financial one. The bombing and capture of Maduro reinforced a perception of legal fragility in Latin America. International funds reacted quickly, seeking refuge in the dollar and gold, and withdrew capital from markets considered risky. Mexico is not immune to this movement. Each episode of regional tension puts pressure on the peso and makes financing more expensive. There is no need for panic; there is a need for realism. Regional stability has always been a silent factor in any business plan.
From a political perspective, Mexico’s reaction was clear. President Claudia Sheinbaum expressed her strong rejection, condemned the United States’ actions, and demanded respect for international law. This stance is in line with diplomatic tradition, but it also raises questions. Mexico maintains a deep interdependence with the United States. If Washington redirects its attention and resources toward a conflict in Venezuela, the bilateral agenda may change pace. Trade, energy, and USMCA issues could enter a phase of greater friction or lower priority. Added to this external scenario is a worrying internal reality: the closure of businesses in Mexico. In recent months, the loss of employers and active companies has reached levels not seen since the deep crises of the past. Thousands of micro and small businesses have closed their doors, affected by lower consumption, higher costs, and fragile economic expectations. This is not just about statistics: every business that closes its doors reduces employment, weakens production chains, and limits the country’s ability to absorb external shocks such as the current one.
That said, it is also worth mentioning the uncomfortable truth: Nicolás Maduro’s capture removes a source of permanent distortion in the region. His permanence sustained years of dictatorship, opacity, sanctions, and tensions that did not help Latin American economic stability either. Without public celebrations, it is clear that the departure of an isolated regime opens the door to an eventual political and energy reconfiguration. The problem is not change, but the cost of the process.
For Mexico, the lesson is clear. The economy does not exist in isolation. Businesspeople must read international politics with the same seriousness as a financial balance sheet. Diversifying risks, taking care of liquidity, and anticipating external movements is no longer a sophisticated option; it is a basic necessity.
What happened in Venezuela is not a distant episode. It is a direct warning of how the real world hits business when least expected. And it is better to understand this now, not when the bill arrives in full.
