Oil cargo ships are pictured at sunset in Puerto la Cruz city, Venezuela, on June 11, 2011. / Xinhua/Juan Carlos Hernandez/IANS

Roxana Vigil, an international affairs and national security expert specializing in U.S. policy toward Latin America, raised serious questions about the Trump administration’s approach to Venezuela during an American Community Media briefing, arguing that key elements of the strategy remain unclear, internally inconsistent, and disconnected from global energy realities.

While Secretary of State Marco Rubio has outlined a three-phase plan for Venezuela, Vigil noted that President Donald Trump has not publicly endorsed a democratic transition as part of that framework.

“Until we hear President Trump articulate some policy or some support for a transition, my sense is that this is not going to be an actual part of the plan,” Vigil said, emphasizing that Trump appears to be personally directing policy.

Venezuela’s economy is overwhelmingly dependent on oil revenues

Vigil pointed out that Venezuela currently produces roughly 900,000 barrels of oil per day, less than one percent of global supply. Although this output is marginal on a global scale, it remains central to Venezuela’s economy, which is overwhelmingly dependent on oil revenues.

To meet the administration’s stated objective of rebuilding Venezuela’s oil sector, Vigil argued that sweeping institutional changes would be required, changes that can only realistically be implemented by a democratically elected government. These include new laws, a stable economic framework, and a functioning rule of law capable of reassuring investors.

President Trump has suggested that rebuilding Venezuela’s energy sector could involve investments of up to $100 billion, signaling a multi-year, potentially decade-long effort. Vigil questioned whether such an undertaking makes sense given current market conditions.

The global oil market may face oversupply, reducing the need for additional Venezuelan crude

“The global oil market is very well supplied,” she said, noting that new production from non-OPEC countries, particularly the United States, Canada, Brazil, Argentina, and Guyana, collectively referred to by the International Energy Agency as the “Americas Quintet”, is expected to add significant supply in the coming years.

As a result, Vigil warned that oil markets may face oversupply, reducing the need for additional Venezuelan crude. She also highlighted the technical challenges associated with Venezuela’s oil, which is heavy and sulfur-rich, requiring specialized transport and refining infrastructure available at only a limited number of refineries worldwide.

Oil investments require long planning horizons

Sanctions, Vigil said, represent another major obstacle. Venezuela’s government, oil sector, and financial system are all subject to extensive U.S. sanctions. If the administration intends to attract meaningful long-term investment, she argued, it must provide clear signals that sanctions will not obstruct those efforts.

“What the market would be looking for is a long-term sanctions waiver commitment, not something short-term,” Vigil said, stressing that oil investments require long planning horizons.

So far, she noted, no such assurances have been announced. Instead, the administration has indicated that the U.S. government will indefinitely sell Venezuelan oil, with the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control issuing authorizations that may allow specific transactions. However, details remain sparse, and it is unclear whether these permissions will be granted broadly or on a case-by-case basis.

Lack of transparency around how proceeds from U.S. sales of Venezuelan oil will be managed

Vigil also addressed the continued naval blockade off Venezuela’s coast, which the Trump administration has said will remain in place. The blockade is intended to enforce oil sanctions and disrupt the so-called “shadow fleet,” a network of vessels transporting sanctioned oil from Venezuela, Iran, and Russia on the black market.

She noted that the use of military force to enforce sanctions marks a significant escalation and raises new legal and geopolitical questions, including whether Venezuelan oil will now be diverted almost exclusively to the United States and how this may affect Venezuela’s existing energy partnerships.

Perhaps most concerning, Vigil said, is the lack of transparency around how proceeds from U.S. sales of Venezuelan oil will be managed. According to current indications, the funds will not flow through the U.S. Treasury or be subject to traditional oversight mechanisms. Instead, they are expected to settle in U.S. accounts, with some reports suggesting offshore arrangements—raising concerns about accountability and corruption.

Vigil questioned who would ultimately control and distribute the funds, noting that some money may need to go to Vice President Delcy Rodríguez to operate the government currently in place, a scenario that carries sanctions and ethical implications.

Although President Trump has said the oil revenues will benefit the Venezuelan people, Vigil argued that Venezuelans themselves are absent from decision-making.

“Right now, the Venezuelan people are not being represented at this table,” she said, adding that the political opposition has been excluded from discussions over how proceeds would be used.

Without a representative mechanism to ensure public oversight, Vigil warned, the administration’s stated humanitarian objectives risk remaining rhetorical rather than real.

“To prevent these proceeds from falling into corruption, as history tells us programs like this often do, you would need an independent third party to control both the funds and their distribution,” she said.