Geopolitical analysis: The energy agreement between the US and Venezuela under the microscope
Lawyer and geopolitical analyst José Eliseo Almánzar recently described the new energy pact between the United States and Venezuela as a “legitimized heist.” According to the expert, this agreement is far from the official rhetoric regarding democracy or social welfare, being in reality a strategy for resource realignment in favor of the North American power.
Strategic control of the “yard”
According to Almánzar, the background of this negotiation is Washington’s desire to regain control over Venezuelan crude oil. Historically, this resource had been destined for nations competing with the United States, such as China, Russia, India, Iran, Cuba, and Nicaragua. The analyst maintains that this move responds to a foreign policy doctrine that seeks to shield its primary zone of influence against the expansion of rival powers.
Economic asymmetry and loss of income
The specialist presented comparative data that exposes the financial disadvantage for the Venezuelan State:
- Between 1999 and 2025, 21 billion barrels were extracted, generating significant tax revenue.
- The new pact covers 17 fields with reserves of 65 billion barrels (triple what was extracted in 26 years), but with much lower revenue projections.
- Venezuela will receive barely 209 billion dollars in 25 years, a figure that Almánzar considers the lowest proportion in the country’s history.
- The agreement imposes the delivery of 20% of the crude “at cost,” eliminating the profit margin for the producer.
For triple the oil, they are going to receive less than half of what they had previously received; it is the lowest proportion of income that any government has negotiated in Venezuelan history.
José Eliseo Almánzar
Judicial sovereignty and operational doubts
One of the most critical points pointed out by the jurist is the transfer of legal sovereignty over the oil fields, which will remain under the jurisdiction of U.S. courts. This means that any labor or environmental dispute must be settled exclusively in U.S. courts.
Furthermore, Almánzar denounced a lack of clarity in the terms of the contract, citing discrepancies between Venezuelan authorities, who speak of a 25-year term, and White House statements, which mention a period of up to 100 years.
The technical reality of crude oil
Finally, the analyst denied that this oil could be easily stored in the U.S. strategic reserves. He explained that Venezuelan crude, being heavy and extra-heavy, is technically incompatible with the salt caverns in Texas and Louisiana. According to Almánzar, the urgency of this agreement responds more to an internal political need in the United States in the face of the diesel price crisis, seeking to alleviate inflationary pressure in its domestic market.
