-
Click here to listen to this article - Share via
See more from the L.A. Times in Google Search. Set us as preferred
- The White House has said the sweeping oil deal between the U.S. and Venezuela would make elections ‘possible’ in a country long battered by economic and other problems.
- President Trump and interim President Delcy Rodríguez, however, will not commit to when an election might be held.
- ‘We were expecting elections,’ said one Caracas resident. ‘This pact with Trump entrenched the dictatorship that he himself declared war on.’
WASHINGTON — President Trump has locked in a deal to develop Venezuela’s vast oil resources, an arrangement the White House says will bring a country battered by years of economic collapse to a “place where elections are possible.”
But the agreement — backed by acting President Delcy Rodríguez, a holdover from the Nicolás Maduro government that Washington deems “illegitimate” — is raising new uncertainty about how entrenched the unelected government may become.
In January, when the U.S. military captured Maduro, Trump did not say how long a democratic transition would take but said Rodríguez was “gracious” and “essentially willing to do what we think is necessary.”
Asked by The Times on Wednesday what was stopping him from demanding Venezuela set a firm election date, Trump was blunt: “I just don’t think they are ready yet.”
“It’s very new. We took them out of a dictatorship and we’re getting along great with the government,” Trump said. But he said an election would happen “soon.”
Under the deal, the U.S. government is partnering with an oil producer to create a new company, North American Blue Energy Partners, to develop 17 fields with a proven potential of 65 billion barrels. NABEP will have rights to the fields for 100 years.
For many Venezuelans, the lack of urgency around elections — set against a deal that gives the United States majority control over roughly a third of the country’s oil reserves — is starting to feel like a broken promise.
“They tell us we have to wait two years, maybe more, while in the meantime they do business with a government that wasn’t elected, that was imposed on us, and that we don’t want,” Carlos Pérez, a 23-year-old automotive mechanics student, told The Times.
Antonio Marchetti, a 45-year-old plumber and electrician, said that while he sees the removal of Maduro as a “good thing,” the oil deal makes it seem as though Trump’s plans were those of a “cowboy, the invader John Wayne,” all along.
“We were expecting elections,” Marchetti said. “This pact with Trump entrenched the dictatorship that he himself declared war on. But to get rid of Maduro, he left the rest and did business with them. It disgusts me.”
The frustrations go beyond Venezuela. In Washington, Republican lawmakers have praised the oil deal, while calling Rodríguez an “interim dictator” who cannot be trusted.
María Corina Machado, the exiled leader of the Venezuelan opposition and a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, on Thursday raised her own worries about what the oil deal means for the future of Venezuela.
In a video message, Machado stopped short of criticizing Trump’s oil deal, but acknowledged concerns about a pact negotiated with an “illegitimate” government.
“Venezuelans know that there can be no development without strong institutions and a government elected by popular vote,” she said. “That is the only real guarantee of success and stability for any large-scale investment.”
A plan in the works
Trump administration officials have characterized the deal as an economic lifeline that will eventually stabilize a country and prepare it for free and fair elections.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said last week that the United States is facilitating talks between Venezuela’s interim government and Dinorah Figuera, an opposition figure leading Venezuela’s 2015 National Assembly, the last democratically elected legislature recognized by the United States.
Broken pumps, rusted pipes, ghost towns mark Venezuela’s once vibrant oil hub. It will cost billions to restore the industry.
Machado has been left out of those talks. They are expected to resume in mid-September.
Rubio says that for any election to be “credible,” the voting system will require an overhaul and political parties will need time to organize. Steps also must be taken to ensure the country has a free press.
Echoing Rubio’s comments, the White House said Friday that Trump wants elections held at the “right time,” but that his top priority is to bring Venezuela “back from the dead and rebuild the country after it was incompetently ruled by a nasty dictatorship.”
On Wednesday, while Energy Secretary Chris Wright visited Caracas, Rodríguez declined to set a firm date for an election, but added, “I have worked tirelessly to ensure that Venezuela is ready and prepared when the time comes for its electoral process, which will take place — have no doubt about that: There will be an electoral process.”
The open-ended approach to holding an election, however, has drawn criticism from former Trump administration officials, who argue the lack of a timeline essentially lets Rodríguez govern indefinitely.
“Here’s my fear: It makes us Delcy’s partner, and gives the president a reason to want her to remain in power,” Elliott Abrams, who served as U.S. special envoy to Venezuela during Trump’s first term, told The Times.
He contended that the White House so far appears to prefer a pliant interlocutor, and Rodríguez, he says, will do “whatever Trump tells her to do.”
If an election is to take place in Venezuela, a nine-month runway for preparation is likely to be expected, Abrams said.
In Washington, some Republican lawmakers have continued to call for elections in Venezuela, arguing that Rodríguez cannot be trusted.
“The only way we will have a prosperous Venezuela is with the end of the murderous regime and the return of democracy,” Rep. Carlos A. Gimenez (R-Fla.) wrote on social media. He also called Rodríguez an “interim dictator.”
There’s a lot that’s not immediately clear about President Trump’s deal giving the United States a stake in Venezuela’s vast oil reserves.
In an interview with NBC News’ “Meet the Press,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said he does not necessarily think elections should happen before the oil agreement is finalized, but he said they “need to proceed rapidly.”
“I believe they should proceed no later than midway through next year,” he said.
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) said he is working with Trump and Rubio to ensure “free, fair and transparent elections as soon as possible.” He did not, however, say what would constitute “soon.”
Mixed views on economic hope
In the Lake Maracaibo region, an area that would see renewed investments under the oil agreement, Junior Araujo — a 47-year-old oil worker — sees a “wonderful opportunity to be reborn.”
Araujo, the father of three, is in desperate need of a better economic outlook. He works 120 hours a week and earns only $20. For his family, food alone usually costs about $150 a week.
“We have to get creative and find new ways to make ends meet through side jobs like selling clothes and making yogurt,” he said. “That’s our real financial situation.”
For Araujo, the hope for a better economy does not take away his frustrations with the government.
“We’re neither happy nor dancing here, all our benefits have been taken away from us,” he said. “Our main problem is the current government; we need to restore our institutions.”
Nazareth Lezama, a 35-year-old teacher, also sees the oil deal as an economic opportunity but remains concerned that the current government may not have negotiated the best price or conditions for Venezuela. She added this has happened in the past.
“We must be clear that this regime destroyed the oil industry,” she said, adding that Venezuelans “need elections to choose leaders based on merit.”
Marchetti, the plumber from Caracas, says the oil deal is a “100-year chain” on Venezuelans imposed by Trump. He said it has become the “last straw” for him, and he has decided to leave Venezuela and emigrate to Europe.
“With all the pain in my heart, I will leave everything behind. I have a European passport; it won’t be easy to start a life from scratch, but there is no hope left here,” he said.
He does not know where he will land yet. But he knows he needs to leave Venezuela.
“This ship is sinking,” he said.
Times staff writer Ceballos reported from Washington. Special correspondent Mogollón reported from Caracas.
Facts Only
* President Trump locked in a deal to develop Venezuela’s oil resources.
* The White House states the deal will bring elections to a country battered by economic collapse.
* The agreement is backed by acting President Delcy Rodríguez, a holdover from the Nicolás Maduro government.
* The U.S. government is partnering with an oil producer to create North American Blue Energy Partners to develop 17 fields.
* NABEP will have rights to the fields for 100 years.
* Trump stated he does not think Venezuela is ready for elections yet.
* One Caracas resident stated they were expecting elections and the pact entrenched the dictatorship.
* Carlos Pérez stated Venezuelans must wait while doing business with an unelected government.
* Antonio Marchetti expressed disgust that the deal entrenched the dictatorship established by Trump.
* María Corina Machado acknowledged concerns about a pact negotiated with an illegitimate government.
* The U.S. is facilitating talks between Venezuela’s interim government and Dinorah Figuera, an opposition figure.
* Venezuela's oil industry requires billions to restore.
Executive Summary
Full Take
The narrative surrounding the oil deal reveals a tension between external geopolitical interests and internal demands for legitimate political change. The core pattern observed is the friction between transactional agreements—like the resource deal—and foundational democratic principles, as evidenced by the divergent views of those involved. The uncertainty stems from the structure of the agreement itself: an economic lifeline contingent on an indefinite timeline for elections, which some observers view as a mechanism to entrench existing power rather than fostering true transition.
The divergence among Venezuelan stakeholders highlights this structural tension. Some actors, like oil workers and educators, view the deal primarily through an economic lens, seeing it as an opportunity or a painful constraint that exists outside their control. Others, such as opposition leaders and former administration officials, focus on the legitimacy of the governing structure—arguing that any stable future requires institutional overhaul rather than continuation under current terms.
The most significant implication is how external agreements can become perceived internally as instruments of control. When economic incentives are tied to a process controlled by an unrepresentative entity, the call for elections becomes less about popular mandate and more about institutional sovereignty. The resistance observed suggests that the pursuit of stability must be decoupled from the specific terms of resource-based pacts, demanding instead a focus on establishing foundational, recognized institutions before any electoral clock is set.
Bridge Questions: If an election timeline were guaranteed, would the terms of the oil deal themselves be subject to immediate renegotiation based on democratic consensus? How can external economic leverage be successfully decoupled from domestic political legitimacy without creating new forms of dependency? What are the long-term consequences when vested interests prioritize transactional stability over institutional recognition?
Sentinel — Human
The article is a complex journalistic synthesis that effectively juxtaposes high-level geopolitical agreements with on-the-ground economic and personal frustrations, indicating a human editorial process focused on narrative construction.
