Riverside Protest Condemns Trump’s Venezuela Raid as ‘Illegal,’ Warns of Another Endless War

Residents and activists from across the Inland Empire flocked to downtown Riverside Saturday evening, Jan. 3, to protest what organizers described as an illegal U.S. attack on Venezuela, condemning the Trump administration’s foreign policy and broader U.S. intervention in Latin America. 

The demonstration comes amid renewed national debate over U.S. foreign and executive overreach, international law, regional precedent and the human costs of unprovoked military action abroad. 

The move has drawn criticism from lawyers, scholars and foreign governments, many of whom argue it violates international law governing the use of force against sovereign states.  

That this coincides with rising political and economic turmoil at home is a growing concern for local activists. 

Jag Arreola, a Riverside based hip-hop artist who attended the rally, said the protest was an act of solidarity with Venezuela and a rejection of U.S. imperialism. 

“We are demanding an end to the criminal attack that happened on Venezuela,” Arreola said. “We say no war with Venezuela: not one more life lost for the greed and interests of the ruling class of the United States.”

Arreola framed the moment as a part of a long history of U.S. intervention in Latin America, saying the recent events fit a familiar pattern of undermining national sovereignty. 

Other protestors emphasized the domestic and international consequences of Trump’s attack on Venezuela. 

Odeh Gammoh of Inland Empire Democratic Socialists of America (IEDSA), spoke to the crowd as the rain waxed and waned. He later told IECN he was angered over how federal resources are used. 

“The administration is taking my tax dollars and my colleagues’ tax dollars and deciding to use that for another endless war overseas,” Gammoh said, adding that many Americans struggle with rising grocery prices, healthcare costs and poor infrastructure, emphasizing Trump’s imprudence. 

Gammoh described the U.S. intervention as illegal under both domestic and international law and argued that decisions of this magnitude should not be made unilaterally by a president. 

“No single person in this country should be able to launch decisions like this on their own,” he said. “There should be a democratic process.”

For Arreola and Gammoh, their emphasis resides in democratic rhetoric used to justify military action. Arreola said claims that the United States acts to defend democracy often obscure political, regional, economic and strategic interests. 

“They’re using the old boogeyman trick,” he said, arguing that foreign governments are routinely portrayed as threats to justify intervention. 

Gammoh echoed that view, drawing comparisons between Venezuela and past U.S. interventions in the Middle East and Latin America. He argued that the difference under the Trump administration is not policy, but presentation. 

“Trump doesn’t give you the whipped cream and the cherry on top,” Gammoh said. “He just says it: ‘we want the oil.’”

Gammoh emphasized the impact of U.S. foreign policy on the country’s reputation abroad. He said that while skepticism toward U.S. intentions is longstanding, recent actions have made American power appear more unstable and exposed, likening it to a fractured empire. 

Even so, Gammoh cautioned against apathy, adding that future IEDSA efforts will focus on community organizing, labor advocacy and political education. 

“Politics is not every two or four years,” Gammoh said. “It’s every day.” 

For Arreola, art and culture are central to political resistance. He urged artists to use their work to challenge dominant narratives and counter what he described as U.S. propaganda. 

He said: “We’ve got to create art that resists and challenges the colonial and imperial violence of the United States.”