Why Washington avoids an abrupt collapse in Venezuela?

Danilo Caruso, a professor at the Federal Institute of Rio de Janeiro (IFRJ), argues that oil’s central role in the Venezuelan economy is key to understanding the limitations of the United States’ interventionist strategy toward the country.

According to the academic, an abrupt overthrow of the Chavista government could trigger a scenario of instability affecting oil production in the short, medium, and long term—a result that would not serve Washington’s interests.

In this context, Caruso evaluates that the most effective strategy for the US is to exert pressure on the cadres of the Bolivarian government, which he identifies as the only force capable of managing or containing the potential reaction of the Chavista base.

President Donald Trump’s preference not to force a total political transition reinforces this reading.

Speaking to the Brazil-based newspaper Opera Mundi, Caruso said: “Venezuelan politics and the economy have revolved around oil since the early 20th century, and the situation is no different today. The best scenario for the US to impose its interests is to force the Bolivarian administration into concessions. This is because only this administration has the conditions to prevent or control a potential reaction from the Chavista base. Trump’s preemptive rejection of the possibility of bringing María Corina Machado or another opposition figure to power clearly demonstrates this.”

The Donald Trump administration announced this week—without providing official details of the agreement—that the provisional administration led by Delcy Rodríguez has agreed to deliver 30 to 50 million barrels of oil to the US.

Venezuelan officials have not yet issued a confirmation regarding the matter.

According to Trump, the South American country’s oil will be sold at market prices, transported by storage vessels, and unloaded at US ports. The US president also stated that he would maintain control over the funds generated by the sale.

Caruso emphasized that US aggression toward Venezuela must be read through broader strategic interests that transcend the domestic scenario and fit into global geopolitical competition.

“Beyond this very heavy attack on international law, Venezuela’s sovereignty, and the Bolivarian Revolution, this is also a clear sign of the role imperialism has assigned to us in the face of China’s rise—turning us into colonies to support US hegemony,” Caruso evaluated. “Today it is Venezuelan oil; tomorrow it will be our rare earth elements, water resources, or the Amazon.”

Last week’s US operation resulted in the deaths of more than 80 people and the abduction of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.

The Venezuelan leader and the First Lady were illegally taken to New York, where they were brought before a court on narco-terrorism charges.

The IFRJ professor pointed out that the charges presented by Washington to justify the kidnapping are “fragile.”

“There is no evidence that a structure called the Cartel of the Suns (Cartel de los Soles) actually exists,” Caruso said. “Beyond the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) ‘anonymous sources’ constantly cited in mainstream media, there is no proof that they constitute an organized group.”

The US Department of Justice has also walked back the accusation that Maduro was the leader of the Cartel of the Suns, now defining it as a “culture of corruption” composed of high-ranking Venezuelan civilian and military officials who “protect and encourage drug trafficking.”

This definition differs from the rhetoric Trump propagated months before the military assault.

According to the professor, the direct accusation against Maduro is even less credible.

Stressing that state control over oil revenues would make any relationship with illegal structures unnecessary, Caruso said: “The idea that Maduro is part of this so-called criminal organization is even less plausible. There will be no ‘trial’ for Maduro, only an extrajudicial and illegitimate conviction.”

Is there a deal between Caracas and Washington?

Caruso also commented on narratives suggesting a possible deal between Washington and the upper echelons of the Venezuelan military.

While noting that this perception has not yet been proven, the academic highlighted its political weight and the challenges of the new balance of power.

“From a pragmatic perspective, the rumor of ‘betrayal’ is already being discussed in the streets, and if the Venezuelan government makes concessions in future oil agreements, this situation will be ‘proven,’” Caruso said.

Stating that the provisional government is walking an extremely delicate line, Caruso evaluated: “This is the razor’s edge that the provisional government will now have to navigate.”

According to Caruso, national sovereignty remains a constitutive element of Venezuelan identity. “Millions of people voted for Maduro knowing that this would mean the continuation of economic sanctions imposed by the US,” the academic said, emphasizing that this stance demonstrates the determination of Venezuelans not to submit to foreign yokes.