defiant

As the United States reasserts its hemispheric priorities in its recent National Security Strategy document, Latin America and the Caribbean are once again cast as a zone of interest, with Venezuela squarely in Washington’s sights. Puerto Rico—still a US colony more than a century after the 1898 invasion—plays a central role in this imperial architecture, serving as both a military platform and a living example of colonial rule in the region. 

Cira Pascual Marquina spoke with Puerto Rican geographer, author, and longtime activist Déborah Berman Santana about the continuity of US imperialism, the island’s strategic function in projecting imperialist military power in the region, and why Venezuela’s insistence on sovereignty represents such a profound threat to US interests. 

Drawing on decades of grassroots struggle against militarization, including the successful campaign to halt US Navy bombings in Vieques, Berman Santana situates today’s escalation against Venezuela within a broader history of colonial control, neocolonial coercion, and popular resistance in the continent.

The US has just issued a new National Security Strategy document that shifts its focus to the Western Hemisphere. From your perspective in Puerto Rico, what does this reveal about Washington’s imperial ambitions, and how does it impact the Caribbean and specifically Venezuela?

From Puerto Rico, and with the history of US-Latin American relations in mind, what is being presented as a “new” security strategy is really the old one. Even before the Monroe Doctrine, Thomas Jefferson was already worried that Spain’s colonies might become independent before the United States was strong enough to take control of them. Hemispheric domination has always been central to US policy.

What this document makes clear is that Washington wants absolute control over the Western Hemisphere, regardless of what happens elsewhere in the world or how competition with China or Russia evolves. When US officials say “America for the Americans,” they mean the entire hemisphere for the United States: its peoples and its resources, all under US imperialist control.

The Caribbean is still referred to as the US “backyard,” even by sectors of the US left. Venezuela’s oil—the largest proven reserves on the planet—is treated as US oil. Bolivia’s lithium is viewed as US lithium. The strategy simply reasserts the United States as the dominant power, the plantation owner of the hemisphere.

There is nothing new in this policy paper except how openly it is stated. I don’t believe the substance would be radically different under a Democratic administration; it would simply be expressed in more polite language.

Puerto Rico is identified as a US “territory,” but in reality, it’s an occupied colony. How does that colonial status enable the buildup of US bases and military deployments, and why is Puerto Rico so central to projecting imperialist power in the Caribbean, especially toward Venezuela?

In the US Constitution, “territory” essentially means property. The US Supreme Court has defined Puerto Rico as an unincorporated territory belonging to, but not part of, the United States. “Unincorporated” means there is no obligation to ever make Puerto Rico a state.

The simplest analogy is a pair of shoes: they belong to you, but they are not part of you, and you can dispose of them at will. That is how Puerto Rico is legally understood. We don’t even have the limited sovereignty administratively allowed for Native peoples in the US. This is not my opinion; it is established by Supreme Court rulings.

This colonial condition makes militarization extremely easy. For roughly twenty years there was a visible reduction in US military presence, but that period is clearly over. The US does not need to negotiate with us. If it chooses to offer compensation, it may, but it is under no obligation.

There are six US military bases in Puerto Rico. Four were never meaningfully demilitarized. Two—Ramey in Aguadilla and Roosevelt Roads in Ceiba—were supposedly closed and slated for civilian redevelopment. In practice, that process has been partial at best.

I live near Ceiba, and since the summer, there has been a dramatic increase in military air traffic. The airstrip, which had been used for regional civilian flights since 2004, is now filled with F-35s, Hercules aircraft, and Ospreys. No permission was requested. The military simply took it over.

If the US decides to deploy additional warships or aircraft carrier groups—as it recently did with the USS Gerald R. Ford—it can do so without even consulting us. Whether this is intended as a prelude to an actual attack on Venezuela or primarily as pressure, it clearly sends a message.

It is the logic of a bully: “I am here, and I am ready to hurt you unless you comply.” Even without an invasion, the buildup is meant to force concessions, deepen internal divisions, or provoke instability in Venezuela. I doubt this will succeed, given Venezuela’s strong commitment to sovereignty, but it clearly reflects the US’ strategic thinking.

Venezuela faces escalating economic, political, and military pressure. Why is the Bolivarian Revolution perceived as such a threat to US imperialist interests?

The United States seeks to remain the dominant global power, but when that dominance is challenged—especially by China—it insists on absolute control of this hemisphere. In this worldview, Latin America and the Caribbean are US turf: their resources belong to Washington, and their peoples are treated, implicitly, as subjects.

What the US will not accept is a country that insists on real sovereignty, a country that engages with Washington as an equal. Venezuela’s decision to control its own resources and choose its own trading partners is intolerable to US policymakers.

That is why Cuba has faced a blockade for more than sixty years, why Nicaragua is targeted, and why Venezuela is now under such intense pressure. A Russian ship making a courtesy visit to Venezuela or expanded ties with China are treated not as sovereign decisions, but as provocations.

The real threat to Washington is not Venezuela in isolation, but the precedent it sets. The Bolivarian process represents a living challenge and a model that could inspire others across the region. That is why US policy aims either to overthrow the government or to force it to abandon its sovereign course.

And it would not stop with Venezuela: Cuba would be next, and Nicaragua would follow. Donald Trump has openly warned Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro that they could also “be next.” This military buildup sends a message to all of Latin America and the Caribbean—Mexico included—about the limits Washington seeks to impose on sovereignty.

As one billionaire ally of Trump [Elon Musk] once crudely said about Bolivia’s lithium: “We coup whoever we want.” It may sound blunt, but it reflects a long-standing reality. When US interests are challenged, it resorts to coups—soft or hard. It prefers banks over tanks, but ultimately it will do whatever is necessary to maintain imperialist control.

While Puerto Rico is under direct colonial rule, much of Latin America faces neocolonial domination. How do these models operate together today?

Puerto Rico is a colony with no sovereignty, now effectively governed by a fiscal control board imposed by the US Congress. Appointed under Obama and maintained by subsequent administrations, this unelected body can veto budgets and policies. Its priority is not social well-being, but debt repayment—most of it owed to Wall Street hedge funds.

This structure enforces privatization: electricity, education, and public services. Environmental protections are also under attack. But colonialism works by degrees. A country can be formally independent and still be coerced through debt, IMF pressure, financial blackmail, economic war, etc.

Chile’s water privatization after the Pinochet coup is one example. Haiti is another—it is formally independent, yet occupied and burdened with illegitimate debt. Elsewhere, intervention comes through NGOs, the National Endowment for Democracy, election interference, or direct coups, as in Honduras in 2009.

In Venezuela, when the right wing loses elections, the US cries fraud. When it wins, there is silence. This selective logic serves as justification for sanctions, isolation, and ultimately military threats.

The US justifies its military buildup in the Caribbean using anti-drug rhetoric. What does this narrative conceal?

Historically, Washington claimed to be fighting communism. Later, it was terrorism. Now the target is supposedly drugs. Yet it is widely known that drug demand is driven by the United States itself, and that many of its closest allies have been deeply involved in drug trafficking. It’s allowed as long as they remain politically obedient.

Meanwhile, fisherfolk across the Caribbean are targeted and killed under the pretext of drug interdiction, without evidence and without inspections. This is not about drugs. It is about control.

Most people understand this, even within the United States. The real objective is hemispheric domination and control over strategic resources—above all, Venezuelan oil.

Puerto Rico has a long history of resistance to militarization. How do those struggles connect today with Venezuela and the broader region?

Puerto Rico has consistently resisted US militarism. The struggle against US Navy bombings in Vieques was long and difficult, but it ended in a victory: the base was shut down. Although the land has yet to be fully cleaned up or returned to the community, the pueblo won that battle.

The same anti-militarist, independentista, and socialist forces that fought in Vieques continue to resist today, grounded in the understanding that Puerto Rico is part of the Caribbean and Latin America. Simón Bolívar himself insisted that his liberation project would remain incomplete without Cuba and Puerto Rico.This struggle is far from over. It will not be complete until Puerto Rico is free and can stand alongside Venezuela, Cuba, and other pueblos of the region in a hemisphere that truly belongs to its people—free, just, and sovereign.

Former Lionness Karen Karney, Reality TV personality Amber Davies and social media star George Clarke will battle it out this weekend at the Strictly Come Dancing 2025 live grand final

“It’s not about the Glitterball trophy… it’s so much bigger than that,” says former Lioness Karen Carney ahead of the Strictly Come Dancing final this weekend.

Viewers have watched Karen go on quite a journey over the 13 week series, transforming from shy ex-footballer into elegant ballroom dancer.

Karen, 38, is now favourite to win the show over her fellow finalists George Clarke and Amber Davies, though she’s already taken one title in being the first football star in 21 years to make it to the end.

“It feels weird and I can’t quite believe it but I’m really proud,” says Karen. “What I learned from being an athlete is that things are over very quickly. One minute I was a 17-year-old footballer who burst onto the scene, allegedly, and the next I was old and retired and couldn’t move. Life goes very, very quick. I’ve tried to enjoy every second.”

Following her decision to retire after a spate of injuries at 31, Karen suffered a total crisis of confidence. “I couldn’t figure out how to fix that,” she says. “For five or six years I felt crushed. But I always thought if I could ever get the opportunity to throw myself into what I felt would be a safe environment then I’m taking it. I always knew in my heart Strictly would be that thing. Every Saturday I’d watch it at home and I’d fall in love with the dancers and enjoy their journeys and I’d forget about everything else. I thought if I ever got the privilege to join it would help me and it absolutely has.

“It’s rebuilt my confidence and this is by far the happiest I’ve ever been. I’ve smiled like I never have before, and I’m forever grateful to the show and to Carlos [partner Carlos Gu] for that. I feel I have a responsibility to give it everything I’ve got because I know when I was sitting on the sofa Strictly helped me. I have to give that feeling back to everyone at home.”

Viewers have seen Karen thrive on the show, as she jokes she’s been ‘living her best life’ in sequins and feathers.

“I hoped the show would be everything I dreamed of and it’s absolutely smashed it and surpassed it. I’ve drummed with the band, I’ve got a signed photo of [costume designer] Vicky Gill and I’ve had one of my outfits signed. But I’ve also been naughty and nicked my Peaky Blinders hat,” confesses Karen, admitting she swiped the flat cap from her Brummie inspired Argentine Tango, a dance she will recreate for the judge’s pick in the final. “I never thought I’d do it again so I took it as a memento. Now I’ve got to find it in the house again for Saturday.

“That dance was a turning point because we dipped for about four or five weeks until that. This number was about representing Birmingham for me. I said to myself, ‘You cannot let your city down girl. You’ve got to dig deep, fight for this and you’ve got to represent.’ I walked in on a Monday and I was like, ‘Right I’m in character and I’m ready to go’… and Carlos laughed at my serious faces.”

Despite their obvious banter, it’s clear nobody is a bigger champion of Karen than her partner Carlos who has had a front row seat for the huge change in the sportswoman.

“In the beginning when I met her, she was not confident and insecure.,” recalls Carlos. “But we all saw that Waltz where she became a princess. It was one of the best moments in my life to see her like that. She was so beautiful.”While Karen has undergone a journey of self-belief, for fellow finalist Amber, Strictly has been an often emotional and challenging battle with the public’s perception of her. After being accused of being ‘too confident’, ‘too polished’ and ‘too good’ for the show, Amber’s previous stage experience – appearing in hit shows including 9 to 5: The Musical and The Great Gatsby musical – seemed to be the very thing that sabotaged her.

Despite huge praise and high scores from the judges each week, Amber is the only finalist to have been in the dance-off this series.

“I didn’t know what my purpose was on Strictly until I realised that I was getting a lot of negative comments for being good,” she says. “I can’t believe I have to say this in 2025 but being ambitious as a woman, being confident, having dreams and working hard does not mean you are stuck up. It doesn’t mean you are arrogant. I want to change that. It shouldn’t even be the narrative.

“I’ve had lots of people say, ‘I can’t warm to her’. It’s because they don’t want to warm to me. That’s it. At the end of the day, I come from a small town in north Wales and I have worked so hard because I love what I do.”

Defending her place in the competition, Amber says: “I was given this opportunity… nobody was going to decline Strictly as a Strictly fan.”

Amber, 29, had been a last minute sign up after fellow ex Love Island star Dani Dyer withdrew to injury days before the launch.

“Getting to the final was never on my bingo card,” says Amber. Asked if she could see herself take home the trophy, she replies: “What is the definition of winning? For me, even just getting that phone call to be on the show I felt like I’d won.”

Revealing what she’s learned from the experience, Amber says: “Whatever you care for in life, go for it with two hands and don’t undermine yourself to make other people feel comfortable, because that’s not what we’re here for.”

For professional dance partner Nikita Kuzmin it’s been a dream to be paired with a celebrity with Amber’s skill.

“It’s just outstanding to see your partner shine,” he says. “I’ve found it exciting to do things on the show that have never been done before because the show’s been going over 20 years and to create new things and to think outside the box… And then when you have people like Amber, who are light, can do everything that you ask of them then why not go for it?”

While the finalists are gearing up to compete in front of an audience of millions this Saturday night, content creator George will be one of the first to admit he started as one of the lesser known names on this year’s line-up, despite having two million followers on TikTok.

“It’’s a completely different world to what I’m used to. I’m used to performing into a camera that’s [close up to] my face and I can cut out all the rubbish bits. Unfortunately, I can’t do that on the dancefloor,” says George, 26. “This is something my family can properly understand. They’ve always been supportive but this is different.”

Being on the show has also brought George to the attention of a whole new fan base. “It’s weird to walk down the street now,” he says, revealing he’s approached by grandmothers asking for selfies to youngsters calling his name. “And screaming teenage girls,” adds his partner Alexis Warr. “I block that out,” insists George.

After Angryginge won I’m A Celebrity… Get Met Out of Here! , 2025 could be the year two social media stars win the biggest reality shows on television.

“It’s good to have that representation,” says George. “Congratulations to him and fingers crossed for me!”

The final is also the last time Tess Daly and Claudia Winkleman will front the show after announcing their exit, with emotions set to run extra high in the ballroom this weekend.

“We’re aware of how big a part of Strictly Tess and Claudia are and it’s a privilege to be able to be a part of one of their seasons let alone their last one,” says George. “Even after one series we’ve realised how inclusive and loving they are. We’ve known them for 13 weeks but it feels like longer and they genuinely care about us. You can tell why they’ve been a part of the show for so long.”

Strictly Come Dancing: The Final, Saturday, BBC One,7pm