Opposition to Venezuelan Oil Deal With U.S. Grows

The deal, which aims to seize as much as one-third of Venezuela’s oil reserves, is being widely disavowed, including by opposition leaders

Photo by Mihai 👑 on Unsplash

Recently, the White House announced that Venezuela had agreed to grant North American Blue Energy Partners (NABEP) a 100-year lease on oil fields with proven reserves of approximately 65 billion barrels. Venezuela’s interim president, Delcy Rodriguez, says the deal is for just 25 years. However, what she is referring to is the initial investment of $200 billion paid in royalties and taxes over the first 25 years.

In the deal, Venezuela is only set to receive about $19 per barrel for its highly coveted oil. It should be noted that the vast majority of analyses agree that any deal the interim president makes is being made under duress and the threat of U.S. military action. The U.S. also has the “right of first refusal” to purchase the remaining 80% of NABEP’s production, making Washington the prioritized buyer for its energy reserves.

What has become apparent after the kidnapping of President Nicolas Maduro is that the U.S. was never interested in “democracy” in Venezuela and that much of the U.S. narrative about the country has been a lie. Now that the U.S. is getting what it wants, every claim about Maduro losing the last election, along with every story about dictatorship, suffering, drug smuggling, rigged elections, and a faltering economy, has been tossed out the window.

The conversation is now focused solely on what the U.S. can extract from a country that has been referred to as “El Dorado” by Trump sycophants such as Erik Prince, who salivate at the thought of Venezuela’s abundant gold deposits. Meanwhile, the supposed winner of the 2024 Presidential election, Edmundo Gonzalez, is no longer referred to as the “duly elected president,” and the loudest and wealthiest member of the anti-Chavista opposition, María Corina Machado, has been alienated and ostracized by the White House.

While Axios refers to the deal as a “legacy-defining moment for President Trump,” a member of Maduro’s opposition told the Guardian that what the U.S. is doing is a “massive land grab.”

“It’s a land grab – a massive land grab,” the well-known opposition figure said after asking not to be named due to fears of criticizing the US. “It’s revolting because this is not the United States one would have [expected]. This is not the United States of the Marshall Plan. This is a rapacious, mafioso United States.”

Economist and Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Economic Policy and Research (CEPR), Francisco Rodriguez took to social media and called on Venezuela’s National Assembly to “deny authorization of this predatory deal,” citing how it “contravenes” Venezuela’s Constitution. Even Elliot Abrams, the architect of misinformation and cruel sanctions against the Venezuelan people, among many other countries, objects to the deal.

“This is a terrible deal. [Rodríguez] has given away 20% of the national patrimony for nothing,” said Abrams. “I think she is simply complying with the demands she’s getting from Washington.”

Congressional lawmakers on both sides of the aisle criticized the deal. Ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Jack Reed (D-RI), pushed back, saying that the plan to use the Pentagon’s Office of Strategic Capital is “a blatant abuse of power and taxpayer dollars.” He further admonished the Trump administration for removing Maduro only to use military assets and taxpayer-backed financing to “boost a private oil venture.” Republicans such as Reps. Maria Elvira Salazar, Carlos Gimenez, and Sen. Ted Cruz also questioned the move.

Economist Francisco Rodríguez called it gunpoint diplomacy.

“It’s clear that this is not a deal that any Venezuelan government would have entered into unless this country had been subject to an invasion, and unless its authorities had been held at gunpoint,” said Rodríguez. “So I think we’ve replaced gunboat diplomacy now for gunpoint diplomacy.”

As the U.S. pillages Venezuela while claiming to be working toward “democracy,” a recent Congressional report noted that the Trump administration “did not request any funding for democracy programs in Venezuela in its FY2026 or FY2027 budget requests and has sought to cut funding for entities that have supported democracy and human rights programs in the country,” including the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

Although the Congressional report highlights how little concern the Trump administration has for Venezuelans, it also said that Congress later “appropriated $50 million for democracy programs in Venezuela and continued funding for the NED in the NSRP Appropriations Act.” The Trump administration’s very public plans, however, indicate that the White House is attempting to embed the U.S. as deeply into Venezuelan society as possible to assume control of the country’s resources, infrastructure, and economy through political manipulation.

Ultimately, Venezuela’s National Assembly voted in favor of the deal. But since it apparently violates the nation’s constitution and its hydrocarbon law, one has to wonder if legislators are aware of the deal inevitably being struck down under Venezuelan law. If so, it likely means that the country is buying itself as much time as possible with the current administration.

Where that leads is unknown.

---

I am an independent freelance journalist and stroke survivor trying to support my family. I have written hundreds of articles on policing, immigration, race, and Latin America. To support my work, become a paid subscriber or donate via Venmo, PayPal, or Cash App.