A letter sent from a United States prison has reopened questions the Venezuelan government has tried to silence for years.
Caracas, December 2025
The recent publication of a letter written by Hugo Carvajal, former director of Venezuela’s Military Counterintelligence, has intensified scrutiny over the nature of state power in Caracas. The document, addressed to former United States president Donald Trump, asserts that the ruling structure led by Nicolás Maduro evolved into a hybrid apparatus that fused political dominance with illicit economies and covert alliances. Carvajal, currently incarcerated in the United States for narcotics related crimes, claims that top officials oversaw a regional trafficking network that depended on military protection, clandestine finance, and collaborations with armed groups across Latin America.
He describes an operational system that used Venezuelan territory as a strategic corridor for cocaine shipments toward the Caribbean and West Africa. Europol has previously emphasized the importance of these maritime routes, which often serve as transit points for substances directed at European markets. According to Carvajal, trafficking revenues were integrated into political operations, propaganda efforts, and mechanisms of internal control, suggesting that illegality and governance became intertwined within the Venezuelan state.
The letter also references interactions with Colombian insurgent groups. Security analysts across the Americas have documented instances in which armed Colombian organizations operated along the border, providing logistical support in exchange for territorial access. Carvajal argues that ideological discourse masked a pragmatic relationship anchored in mutual benefit. Concerns voiced by the FBI in earlier assessments pointed to similar patterns of convergence between political movements and illicit economies in the region.
Another dimension of his testimony involves external intelligence advisers who, according to him, shaped a surveillance architecture that strengthened the regime’s grip on society. Studies by the CSIS have noted that Venezuela built a security structure combining digital monitoring, population mapping, and covert targeting in ways that erode transparency. Carvajal further claims that these capabilities were deployed outside Venezuela to influence narratives and political processes abroad.
He additionally mentions actors with ties to Middle Eastern organizations, suggesting they operated as financial or logistical intermediaries. Analysts interviewed by Al Jazeera have discussed previous episodes of contact between external ideological groups and Latin American networks for resource related purposes. Although independent verification is required, the statement broadens the geopolitical implications surrounding the Venezuelan crisis and raises questions about unconventional alliances.
Carvajal’s willingness to collaborate with United States authorities reinforces the gravity of the moment. His prior admission of involvement in drug trafficking lends partial credibility while simultaneously reminding observers that he was embedded in the very system he now condemns. He asserts that he can provide documents and testimonies that outline how illicit funds supported political campaigns, information operations, and electoral interference. Specialists at MIT Tech Review have highlighted the increasing use of digital manipulation within authoritarian environments, a trend that aligns with aspects of his account.
The Venezuelan government dismissed the letter as fabrication and political provocation. Independent reporters, however, note that multiple international bodies have ongoing investigations into corruption, human rights violations, and possible cooperation with armed groups. The UNODC has stressed the expansion of trafficking routes in the Caribbean, while the IMF has linked Venezuela’s institutional deterioration to broader regional instability.
If verified, the allegations would reframe the crisis from a domestic political dispute to a transnational security issue involving criminal revenue, clandestine alliances, and influence operations. This potential reclassification has relevance for governments in the Americas, Europe, and Africa, where internal assessments already consider the spillover risks posed by Venezuela’s evolving crisis.
The determining factor will be whether investigators can corroborate Carvajal’s claims through independent evidence. Without confirmation, the letter will remain a politically disruptive piece whose interpretation fluctuates with the regional climate. With confirmation, it could become central to understanding the mechanisms through which illicit economies reshape state behavior and extend their reach into global politics.
More than the event, the structure.