The US will not “stand by and watch sanctioned vessels sail the seas”, the White House has warned, after American forces seized an oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela.

Spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told reporters she would not speak about future ship seizures, but said the US would continue to follow Donald Trump‘s sanction policies.

“We’re not going to stand by and watch sanctioned vessels sail the seas with black market oil, the proceeds of which will fuel narcoterrorism of rogue and illegitimate regimes around the world,” she said.

The US is gearing up to intercept more ships, six sources familiar with the matter told Reuters.

One source said several more sanctioned tankers had been identified by the US for potential seizure.

Two of the people said the US Justice Department and Homeland Security had been planning the seizures for months.

American forces were monitoring vessels in Venezuelan ports and waiting for them to sail into international waters before taking action, one source added.

It comes after a crude oil tanker, named Skipper, on Wednesday was stormed by US forces executing a seizure warrant.

The ship left Venezuela’s main oil port of Jose between 4 and 5 December after loading about 1.1 million barrels of oil, according to satellite information analysed by TankerTrackers.com and internal shipping data from Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA.

The real reason for Donald Trump’s Venezuela exploits

Ed Conway

Economics and data editor

@EdConwaySky

Donald Trump wants you to know that there is one leading reason why he is bearing down militarily on Venezuela: drugs.

It is, he has said repeatedly, that country’s part in the production and smuggling of illegal narcotics into America that lies behind the ratcheting up of forces in the Caribbean in recent weeks. But what if there’s something else going on here too? What if this is really all about oil?

In one respect this is clearly preposterous. After all, the United States is, by a country mile, the world’s biggest oil producer. Venezuela is a comparative minnow these days, the 21st biggest producer in the world, its output having been depressed under the Chavez and then Maduro regimes. Why should America care about Venezuelan oil?

For the answer, one needs to spend a moment – strange as this will sound – contemplating the chemistry of oil…

Read more

US attorney general Pam Bondi said on X, formerly Twitter, that the ship was “used to transport sanctioned oil from Venezuela and Iran”.

“For multiple years, the oil tanker has been sanctioned by the United States due to its involvement in an illicit oil shipping network supporting foreign terrorist organisations,” she added.

Ms Leavitt said that “the United States does intend to get the oil” that was onboard the vessel.

The government in Caracas, led by President Nicolas Maduro, branded the ship’s seizure a “blatant theft” and an “act of international piracy”.

Read more:
Analysis: Is this what the beginning of a war looks like?
US-Venezuela crisis explained
Why tanker seized by US was ‘spoofing’ its location

The US has been ramping up the pressure on Mr Maduro and is reportedly considering trying to oust him. It has piled on sanctions, carried out a military build-up in the southern Caribbean, and launched attacks on suspected drug vessels from Venezuela.

Now America has issued new sanctions targeting Franqui Flores, Efrain Antonio Campo Flores, and Carlos Erik Malpica Flores – three nephews of Mr Maduro’s wife, Cilia Flores – as well as on six crude oil tankers and six shipping companies linked to them.

By seizing oil tankers, the US is threatening Mr Maduro’s government’s main revenue source – oil exports.

The sources said the US was focusing on what’s been called the shadow fleet – tankers transporting sanctioned oil to China, the biggest buyer of crude from Venezuela and Iran.

They said one shipper had already temporarily suspended three voyages transporting six million barrels of Venezuelan crude oil.

“The cargoes were just loaded and were about to start sailing to Asia,” a source said.

“Now the voyages are cancelled and tankers are waiting off the Venezuelan coast as it’s safer to do that.”

The US has intercepted and seized a sanctioned oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela, Donald Trump has said.

President Trump confirmed the operation at a meeting with business leaders at the White House on Wednesday.

“We’ve just seized a tanker on the coast of Venezuela, a large tanker, very large, largest one ever seized, actually,” he said at the start of the meeting.

It marks the latest escalation from the Trump administration, which has in recent months ramped up pressure on Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.

The US accuses Mr Maduro of presiding over a narcotrafficking operation in Venezuela, which he denies

Tanker ‘used to transport sanctioned’ oil, US claims

Later, Attorney General Pam Bondi shared a video of the operation, confirming that the FBI, Homeland Security, US Coast Guard, and Department of Defence were involved.

She said on X that the US forces “executed a seizure warrant for a crude oil tanker used to transport sanctioned oil from Venezuela and Iran”.

“For multiple years, the oil tanker has been sanctioned by the United States due to its involvement in an illicit oil shipping network supporting foreign terrorist organisations,” she added.

“This seizure, completed off the coast of Venezuela, was conducted safely and securely-and our investigation alongside the Department of Homeland Security to prevent the transport of sanctioned oil continues.”

She did not name the vessel, what flag the vessel sailed under, or exactly where the incident took place.

UK maritime risk management group Vanguard said that the tanker Skipper – which the US sanctioned for alleged involvement in Iranian oil trading under the name Adisa – was believed to have been seized.

Trump on seized oil: ‘We keep it’

Without giving additional information on the operation, Mr Trump added during the White House meeting with business leaders that “other things are happening”.

Later, Mr Trump said that the tanker was “seized for a very good reason,” and when asked what will happen to the oil on board the vessel, he added: “Well, we keep it, I suppose”.

He also suggested that Colombian President Gustavo Petro, who angered the Trump administration by speaking at a pro-Palestinian demonstration outside the UN in September, could “be next” if his country doesn’t “wise up” on alleged drug trafficking.

The US has escalated military deployments against the Latin American country over the last few months, with Mr Trump suggesting that American forces could launch a land attack on Venezuela.

On 2 September, the White House posted on X that it had conducted a strike against so-called “narcoterrorists” shipping fentanyl to the US, without providing direct evidence of the alleged crime.

Sky’s Data & Forensics unit has verified that in the past four months since strikes began, 23 boats have been targeted in 22 strikes, killing 87 people.

Read more: Is this what the beginning of a war looks like?

Geoffrey Corn, director of the Centre for Military Law at Texas Tech University, told Sky News’s Mark Austin on The World that Mr Trump’s remarks on land strikes “ostensibly” refer to drug cartel members.

Formerly a senior adviser to the US army on warfare law, Mr Corn added: “That could very easily provide the pretext for some confrontation between Venezuelan armed forces and US armed forces.

“And then that would open the door to a broader campaign to basically negate the power of the Venezuelan military.”

Read more on Venezuela:
Hegseth cites ‘fog of war’ in defence of second US strike
Most advanced US aircraft carrier close to Venezuela

Venezuela ‘prepared to break the teeth’ of US

Speaking to Politico on Tuesday, Mr Trump declined to comment on whether US troops would enter Venezuela, but said that Mr Maduro’s “days are numbered”.

According to Bloomberg, the Maduro government describes US actions as a grab for Venezuela’s oil reserves – among the biggest in the world.

Meanwhile, at a rally before a ruling-party-organised demonstration in Caracas, Mr Maduro did not address the seizure, but told supporters that Venezuela is “prepared to break the teeth of the North American empire if necessary”.

Flanked by senior officials, he said that only the ruling party can “guarantee peace, stability, and the harmonious development of Venezuela, South America and the Caribbean”.

All tourists – including those from Britain – will have to undergo a social media screening before being allowed entry into the US under new plans being considered by the country’s border force.

At the moment, Britons are among those who can visit for up to 90 days without a visa. They just have to obtain an electronic travel authorisation, known as an ESTA, for $40 (£30).

The potential social media mandate being proposed by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) would apply to anyone visiting, whether they require a visa or not.

According to a notice published in America’s federal register on Tuesday, foreign tourists would need to provide their social media from the last five years.

It will be “mandatory” to hand over the information, and other details – including email addresses and telephone numbers used in the last five years, as well as the names, addresses, numbers, and birthdays of family members – will also be required.

Currently, as part of the ESTA application process, a tourist from Britain would have to provide an email address, home address, phone number, and emergency contact details. If approved, the ESTA lasts for two years.

CBP is proposing that moving forward, ESTA applications would require a selfie.

It further wants to collect biometrics – face, fingerprints DNA and iris – as part of the ESTA application. It currently only records face and fingerprints upon arrival at the US border.

The proposed changes are open for public consultation for 60 days.

So much for free speech?

There have been several reports of travellers already having been denied entry into the US over social media posts and messages found on their personal devices after President Donald Trump took office in January.

This includes a French scientist who was turned away at the US border in March after messages “that reflect hatred toward Trump and can be described as terrorism” were found on his phone.

Despite Mr Trump vowing to “restore freedom of speech” on online platforms and end “federal censorship” when he took office, he has found himself at the centre of various free speech rows since.

In September, talk show host Jimmy Kimmel was taken off-air by Disney-owned ABC over comments he made about the assassination of the right-wing influencer Charlie Kirk.

Mr Kimmel accused the Trump administration and its allies of “working very hard to capitalise on the murder of Charlie Kirk”, with the president among those to pin it on left-wing extremism.

At the time, Mr Trump suggested certain networks should have their licenses revoked over a lack of support for him.

Mr Kimmel’s show was reinstated less than a week after his suspension following widespread backlash from celebrities and viewers.

Read more from Sky News:
This is the reality of Trump’s trade war
Trump’s verdict on America’s traditional allies

And in April, Harvard University sued the Trump administration for seeking “unprecedented and improper” control of the school, after it froze $2.6bn (£1.9bn) of its federal funding.

Harvard’s lawsuit accused the government of waging a retaliation campaign against the university after it rejected a list of 10 demands from a federal antisemitism task force, which included sweeping changes related to campus protests, academics and admissions.

A judge ruled in September that the Trump administration’s freeze of billions in research funding to Harvard was unconstitutional and retaliatory, a decision the US government vowed to appeal.

An agreement has not yet been reached, so the fight between the Ivy League university and Mr Trump rages on.