Trump touts US takeover of Venezuela's oil wealth in new pact
President Trump announced an agreement with Venezuela's interim leader giving the US majority control of 65 billion barrels of oil reserves. The deal, brokered by top officials, aims to boost American oil supplies and ease gasoline prices. Details on the arrangement remain scarce.
The agreement follows the U.S. capture and removal of former president Nicolás Maduro in January, after which Washington sought stable crude flows for American refineries while courting investment into Venezuela’s deteriorated energy sector, currently producing 1.25 million barrels per day. Reports this week indicated talks over a direct U.S. stake in more than a dozen oilfields holding roughly 90 billion barrels of proven reserves, with Chevron and other firms expected to sign investment deals next week. Venezuela’s total proven reserves stand at 303 billion barrels, the world’s largest.
Trump framed the pact as doubling U.S. oil reserves at no taxpayer cost, but details on fields, companies, or control mechanisms remain undisclosed. The announcement comes amid rising gasoline prices ahead of November midterm elections, and as the administration explores replenishing the strategic petroleum reserve, including possible crude swaps with domestic producers. Opposition figures in Venezuela have privately condemned the arrangement as a “massive land grab,” expressing dismay at what they see as a departure from postwar U.S. principles.
This deal could reshape U.S.-Venezuela relations and global oil markets, potentially lowering American fuel prices if output expands, but may also deepen perceptions of U.S. resource imperialism. Venezuelan citizens, already under U.S. influence since Maduro’s removal, could see their national wealth controlled externally, fueling resentment and political instability. The lack of transparency may invite legal and diplomatic challenges, while U.S. taxpayers might ultimately bear costs if the promised revenue fails to materialize. Its impact will depend on implementation and whether it genuinely benefits both populations or primarily serves corporate and electoral interests.