Post New

There's lots of questions about the international and long-term ramifications of the seizure of Maduro - and amazing praise due to the military for the execution of this operation, once the order was given. But I'm actually far more curious about the more prosaic questions about what happens in Venezuela over the very near term. Who is actually going to run the country in the next few days and weeks, and how?

Pres. Trump's comments today suggested that "we" - presumably the United States - are going to run the country in the short term. But how would that work? We have no personnel in the country. We haven't invaded with troops, we have no diplomatic staff there (the embassy was closed and all personnel withdrawn in 2019)...and while Trump left open the possibility of putting a large number of boots on the ground, that seems inconsistent with what his supporters would countenance. So how would "we" actually run the country?

If it's not the U.S. directly running the country, then other possibilities would be Machado or someone else from the opposition party in coordination with the U.S. But Trump's comments on Machado seem to pretty clearly indicate that we're not looking for her to leave Spain and head back to Venezuela. And we haven't taken any steps to dislodge anyone else in the Maduro government, so there doesn't seem to be a plausible mechanism for her or anyone else from the opposition to take over.

Perhaps we're thinking that Delcy Rodriguez will be a compliant partner? Seems unlikely - she's a committed Chavista and loyal supporter of Maduro, and has already thrown water on that idea. We can threaten her with an invasion, of course - and no doubt she's being told that she has to follow U.S. demands. But that seems unlikely to get her to toe the line.

I suppose another possibility is for one or more military generals to take charge. No doubt some are feeling a wee bit unsettled in their position, given the complete and utter failure to defend against the U.S. marching in and capturing their President. A Rodriguez regime will be sorely tempted to put one or more military officials up against the wall for that failure, and maybe they decide that a sharp turn away from Chavism into an alliance with the U.S. can preserve their skins. But given that the military is filled with Chavistas loyal to the administration, that seems more like a recipe for civil war rather than a smooth takeover leading to a U.S. partner state.

The President's press conference was genuinely confusing. They obviously couldn't have had any prior arrangements with anyone on the Venezuela side about a post-Maduro government. They seem to be ruling out Machado or any other opposition partners. But they didn't roll in with any troops or personnel that would allow the U.S. to run the country directly. So - what's the plan for who's going to be in charge of Venezuela for the next few days and weeks? It sure seems like the idea is that it will just be the Maduro government (minus Maduro), but hoping that they'll now privatize the oil industry and give it to U.S. companies and stop the drug trade for us? I genuinely can't figure out what even the short-term strategy is....

Before we dwell on recent happenings in Venezuela, I would point out that the media is no longer talking of Epstein, tariffs, inflation and so on as it is distracted by the newest shily object.

Thinking that the transition was as well thought out as the kidnapping is likely giving too much credit to those running the show in the US.

Expecting Trump to give Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado (she who took HIS Nobel Peace Prize) is unlikely. It has been clear from the beginning that what the US administration was really interested in were the Venezuelan oil fields. This is a dream-come-true for the US oil industry. We will likely find out that the very significant taxpayer cost of both the initial attacks on Venezuelan boats as well as its decapitation, not to mention the continuing expense of running a country where we are not welcome, in order for private commercial interests to be awarded a significant windfall.

There are (according to reports - true or not) up to $50B in infrastructure investments required to build up the oil fields - which will then produce billions of dollars in oil. I won't speculated on the opportunity of those close to this administration to make a huge amount of money in the converting of the oil fields to a US controlled asset. (What happens to the population of Venezuela is not particularly important - as long as they don't migrate to the US.

Trump actively solicited large donations from oil executives, promising to overturn environmental regulations and boost fossil fuel production, reports Politico and The Guardian.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/09/trump-ask...

Former President Donald Trump asked oil industry executives ... (April 2024) to donate $1 billion to aid his campaign to retake the White House, three people familiar with the conversation told POLITICO — a request that campaign finance experts said appeared troubling but is probably legal.

The request, first reported Thursday by The Washington Post, occurred during a meeting of industry executives at the former president’s home in Palm Beach, Florida.

The oil industry has a long list of policy actions it would want Trump to take, including dismantling parts of President Joe Biden’s green agenda and rolling back pollution regulations that threaten to crimp their profits. As POLITICO reported Wednesday, oil executives are also preparing some highly specific requests for Trump, including executive orders they hope he would sign if reelected.

Oil and gas industry figures, including CEOs like Kelcy Warren (Energy Transfer), Harold Hamm (Continental Resources), and George Bishop (GeoSouthern Energy), donated significant amounts, with some billionaires giving millions to Trump's 2024 campaign and supporting PACs, totaling over $75 million from the industry to his campaign and related groups, receiving promises of policy favors like deregulation in return.

Kelcy Warren (Energy Transfer) was a major donor, co-hosting fundraisers, with his company's projects benefiting from Trump's policies.
Harold Hamm (Continental Resources) donated $1 million to the campaign and $614,000 to the Trump 47 Committee, a significant funder of MAGA PACs.
George Bishop (GeoSouthern Energy) donated $1.5 million to Trump's fundraising efforts.
Timothy Dunn (CrownQuest): A major oil and fracking figure, among Trump's mega-donors.
Timothy Mellon (Banking/Oil) was another significant mega-donor.
Vicki Hollub (Occidental Petroleum) co-hosted a major fundraiser with Warren and Hamm, with Occidental having previously donated to Trump's inaugural fund.

In total, the oil and gas industry funneled over $75 million directly to Trump's campaign and affiliated PACs, with some estimates reaching over $96 million, according to analyses by The New York Times, Yale Climate Connections and The Guardian. Donations went to his main campaign, the Trump 47 Committee, and the America First Action/Policies PAC, notes OpenSecrets.

From The Guardian:
Big oil spent a stunning $445m throughout the last election cycle to influence Donald Trump and Congress, a new analysis has found.

That figure includes funding from January 2023 and November 2024 for political donations, lobbying and advertising to support elected officials and specific policies. Because it does not include money funneled through dark-money groups – which do not have to reveal their donors – it is almost certainly a vast understatement, says the report from green advocacy group Climate Power, which is based on campaign finance disclosures and advertising industry data.

Fossil fuel interests poured $96m into Donald Trump’s re-election campaign and affiliated political action committees, the report found. Much of that was covered by megadonor oil billionaires, such as the fracking magnate Harold Hamm, the pipeline mogul Kelcy Warren and the drilling tycoon Jeffery Hildebrand.

Additional contributions came from lesser-known oil and gas interests, including fossil fuel-trading hedge funds, mining corporations and the producers of offshore-drilling ships and fuel tanks.

Fossil fuel companies and their trade groups spent another $243m lobbying Congress. Those donors stand to profit from priorities set by Senate-confirmed Trump cabinet appointees, such Chris Wright, the fracking CEO who was tapped to head the Department of Energy, and Lee Zeldin, the former New York representative who has accepted more than $400,000 in fossil fuel-tied campaign donations and who will lead the Environmental Protection Agency.

Big oil also spent some $80m on advertising to support their interests. That includes funding for ad campaigns run in swing states, such as one from the refining lobbying organization American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, which railed against Joe Biden’s pro-electric vehicle policies, or another eight-figure ad blitz from top US oil lobbying group the American Petroleum Institute that promoted the idea that fossil fuels are “vital” to global energy security. Neither campaign directly endorsed Trump, but both targeted audiences in swing states.

Additionally, oil and gas companies and trade groups spent more than $25m on Republican down-ballot races, including $16m on House races, $8m on Senate fights and more than $500,000 on GOP gubernatorial candidates.

These investments are “likely to pay dividends”, the report says, with Republicans holding control of the White House, House and Senate – as well as some key states. Trump unleashed dozens of pro-fossil fuel executive actions on his first day in office and is expected to pursue a vast array of others with cooperation from Congress.

These contributions flowed to the campaign and related groups, with some industry figures acting as major backers, as detailed by The New York Times and The Guardian.

Jeff

Before we dwell on recent happenings in Venezuela,

I am saying plenty on the policy board, for which I would surely be flamed here.

Steve...long Chevron and ConocoPhilips

But I'm actually far more curious about the more prosaic questions about what happens in Venezuela over the very near term.

Interesting that Trump has ruled out the woman who won the election (we all assume, but vote counts are notoriously opaque) and won the Nobel Prize while praising Trump, and the admin, at least at this moment, is fixating on the VP.

Which is weird, because that’s a long-time Socialist (with a Capital S) and who has declined to criticize Maduro ever. (That, obviously, is a political thing, given how long people who criticize Trump remain in the inner circle) but there is no indication that there’s some wont to “come over from the dark side” either.

That said, it’s hard to take over a government without having some of the people in place who know where the levers and switches are, so it may be a reasonable approach - or it could go the way of rioting in the streets as basic services fall. This is a serious case of “wait and see”.

I note that China has invested more than $100B in Venezuela over the past couple decades, so I’d guess there’s a bit of worry there. Maybe they make it back when we don’t do anything to stop their takeover of Taiwan ;)

And maybe Russia, which gets a fair amount of Venezuelan oil is mollified when they get to keep the best part of Ukraine as our attention immediately and totally goes elsewhere.

Oh, it’s a funhouse international world we’re living in. Hope I make it long enough to see how this one turns out.

Interesting that Trump has ruled out the woman who won the election (we all assume, but vote counts are notoriously opaque) and won the Nobel Prize while praising Trump, and the admin, at least at this moment, is fixating on the VP.

Which is weird, because that’s a long-time Socialist (with a Capital S) and who has declined to criticize Maduro ever. (That, obviously, is a political thing, given how long people who criticize Trump remain in the inner circle) but there is no indication that there’s some wont to “come over from the dark side” either

You mean the VP who fled to Russia? Color me not surprised, comrade.

IP

albaby1 wrote:
The President's press conference was genuinely confusing. They obviously couldn't have had any prior arrangements with anyone on the Venezuela side about a post-Maduro government. They seem to be ruling out Machado or any other opposition partners. But they didn't roll in with any troops or personnel that would allow the U.S. to run the country directly. So - what's the plan for who's going to be in charge of Venezuela for the next few days and weeks? It sure seems like the idea is that it will just be the Maduro government (minus Maduro), but hoping that they'll now privatize the oil industry and give it to U.S. companies and stop the drug trade for us? I genuinely can't figure out what even the short-term strategy is....


I expect Trump has an inside man in Venezuela, trying to take power. Oil motivated the coup, but will be costly to extract. (Venezuela's heavy oil can be extracted at a profit when oil prices are $100, but not when oil prices are $50.) Oil prices will be volatile tomorrow.

In the next few days, the inside man will try to consolidate power (recruit allies). The name will emerge at some point. Either a civil war will erupt, or martial law imposed with some general in charge. Given the vast amount of oil wealth, I would guess the generals will find agreement with enough wealth to go around for those in power.

=== links ===
Venezuela has the largest proven oil reserves in the world, after tripling around 2010.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by...

Venezuela's Oil Reserves Are Probably Vastly Overstated, July 1, 2016
"Was this massive increase in its proved reserves a result of huge new oil discoveries in Venezuela? No, it was actually a function of how proved reserves are defined. Reserves and resources are often confused, but their distinction is very important. Venezuela's reserves additions have been a result of rising oil prices, and this is a source of frequent misunderstanding on the topic on reserves. ... It has been known for decades that the Orinoco Belt likely contains over a trillion barrels of oil. But this oil is very heavy, and as a result it is expensive to extract and upgrade. Thus, a very small fraction was historically classified as proved reserves."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2016/07/01/ve...

U.S. Crude Oil Price chart
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx...

Factoid to consider:

If the election of Maduro was illegal as the Trump administration asserts as a rational for removing him from power, then so was the election of the vice president. The US administrations claim was that Maduro stole the election from Machado's party, but putting the recipient of Trump's Nobel Peace Prize as the leader of a country ain't gonna happen. Since the bombed boats were bringing their drugs elsewhere, the whole drug thing is a potentially red herring.

Jeff

"The US has in the past carried out war games to simulate a scenario where Venezuelan leadership was “decapitated”. The simulations predicted prolonged chaos, with refugees pouring out of Venezuela and rival groups fighting one another for control of the country.

“You’d have prolonged chaos … with no clear way out,” said Douglas Farah, a Latin America expert who helped run the war games."

quoted from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/03/why-...

Yet that is nothing on the losses in the Pacific and Europe.

Worse yet, our economic losses at home evading the tax hikes on the wealthy.

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.