The rapid shift in U.S. policy toward Venezuela, now collaborating with the former vice president of Nicolás Maduro’s government, has provoked strong reactions from the opposition.
María Corina Machado, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate and presidential candidate, may refrain from openly criticizing President Trump, whose support she seeks, but other figures have been less restrained.
Venezuelan economist Ricardo Hausmann wrote on social media, accusing U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio of using American power to ally with oppressors rather than liberate Venezuelans.
He added that the administration opted to enforce an asset seizure and sign an agreement with an illegitimate government instead of leading efforts to restore constitutional order and democracy.
Many opponents view the absence of a clear electoral timeline as a betrayal.
The backlash also extends to the left, as members of the ruling socialist party, PSUV, who backed Rodríguez, feel that the deal represents a capitulation.
After decades of opposing U.S. influence, some socialists believe the agreement hands Venezuela’s most valuable resource to a historic adversary.
Rafael Ramírez, former head of PDVSA and oil minister under Hugo Chávez, called the accord a new form of American colonialism.
In 2008, Chávez delivered his weekly broadcast from former ExxonMobil fields in the Orinoco Belt, asserting national control after expropriating assets.
He declared that the state would never relinquish the reins of the oil industry and denounced previous pro‑Washington governments for turning Venezuela into “a nation of gringos.”
Chávez thundered that the Bolivarian Revolution had ended the theft of the nation’s resources.
Yet it was a successor of his chosen heir who has now signed this opaque agreement with Washington, praising it as a triumph for Venezuela.
