The United States has announced new sanctions targeting 21 senior Venezuelan officials and allies of President Nicolás Maduro. These measures, enforced by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the U.S. Treasury, aim at key figures of political repression, including members of the military, intelligence services, and government. Visa restrictions were also imposed on individuals accused of undermining democracy in Venezuela.
President Joe Biden emphasized that these actions are part of a broader strategy to hold Venezuelan authorities accountable for human rights abuses and undemocratic governance. Accusations of electoral fraud during the July 28 presidential election, where the opposition claims Edmundo González won 67% of the votes, have intensified international tensions. Maduro, on his part, has declared victory with 51% of the votes without providing substantial evidence, while repression against political opponents continues to draw condemnation.
Energy stakes in the balance
Despite these sanctions, licenses granted to oil companies like Chevron, Repsol, Eni, and Maurel to operate in Venezuela have not been revoked. These specific licenses, issued as part of an energy diplomacy compromise, allow the United States and its European partners to maintain a strategic presence in Venezuela’s oil sector. In 2023, energy sanctions were temporarily eased after Maduro promised to hold free elections in 2024, only to be partially reinstated following renewed repressive actions by the regime.
Venezuela’s oil production declined in October, averaging 910,000 barrels per day, compared to 943,000 in September, according to internal data from PDVSA (Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A.). This decline reflects ongoing challenges within the national oil sector, subjected to sanctions and inefficiencies, while highlighting the global reliance on Venezuela’s energy resources.
Prospects for energy diplomacy
Maintaining oil licenses is part of a U.S. strategy to balance economic pressure with diplomatic influence. During a Congressional hearing, U.S. officials stressed the importance of preserving these licenses to encourage democratic progress in Venezuela while ensuring critical energy market stability.
However, this approach is divisive. Some members of Congress, such as Maria Salazar, have strongly criticized companies operating in Venezuela, accusing them of indirectly financing the Maduro regime. Others, like Marco Rubio, advocate for a return to Trump-era strict sanctions, arguing that tougher measures could further weaken the Caracas regime.
Internationally, this diplomatic stance is perceived as a signal to other authoritarian regimes: economic sanctions should not compromise strategic energy interests. U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken recently reiterated U.S. support for the Venezuelan opposition while calling for a peaceful power transfer.
As Venezuela remains a key player in the global energy landscape, Washington’s choices underscore the complexity of reconciling energy diplomacy with the defense of human rights. The retention of licenses reflects a pragmatic approach but raises questions about the effectiveness of pressure on the Maduro regime.
