Lhe kidnapping by the United States on January 3 of the disputed President of Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro, was applauded by those who believed that the end justified the means, even if it involved trampling on international law. These voices were more discreet after Donald Trump’s announcement on August 28 of a leonine agreement, which, if implemented, will allow Washington to take control of between a quarter and a fifth of this country’s gigantic oil reserves.
Nothing is going well in what is more of a diktat than a real compromise. It first of all consecrates a predation worthy of the colonial empires of the worst era on the land of a Bolivarianism concerned with relations between States marked by mutual respect. This predation will surprise no one since it was at the heart of the interventions of the President of the United States intended to justify this unilateral military operation.
The agreement on oil completes the demonstration that this operation had less of an objective of removing a regime carried away in a dictatorial drift, responsible for a state of decay that the double earthquake of June tragically highlighted, than of replacing Nicolas Maduro with a personality at the behest of Washington, in this case his former right-hand man, Delcy Rodriguez.
Virulent reaction from the Venezuelan opposition
The removal of the heir of Chavismo, who had stubbornly broken down the institutions of his country to remain at his head, should nevertheless have been followed as a priority by their restoration to working order. Getting Venezuela out of the rut promises to be difficult after more than two decades of wanderings. This challenge makes it imperative the emergence of a power with the legitimacy that only universal suffrage can confer.
Interim President, Delcy Rodriguez cannot claim this legitimacy, especially for an agreement that is supposed to commit her country for several decades. The Venezuelan opposition therefore reacted with virulence to what it considers to be a quasi-mafia-like coup. Especially since she fears that the agreement will put the democratic restoration of the country on the back burner in Washington, the foundations of which have only just been laid, with the national dialogue initiated less than a month ago.
There is also no shortage of criticism regarding the American side of the agreement. The United States oil companies having shown little enthusiasm to invest in a bankrupt country, precisely due to the lack of functioning institutions and a clear legal framework, the federal state will play the role of entrepreneur. The Pentagon will thus be on the front line, relying on a Venezuelan intermediary, who knew how to take advantage of the Chavista regime to enrich himself and whose name appeared in money laundering cases. A particularly baroque carriage.
Even if Donald Trump assures that the adventure will not cost the American taxpayer a cent, the latter risks waiting a long time for the effects at the gas station, where prices will probably remain at high levels, well after the mid-term elections scheduled for November, due to the open war in the Middle East by the tenant of the White House.
The agreement made public on August 28 finally illustrates the disturbing obsession of the President of the United States with the queen resource of the 20th century.e century whose responsibility for climate change has been proven. An obsession as anachronistic as the neo-imperialism at work in Venezuela.
