File photo- Oil platforms and pumpjacks at Lake Maracaibo, in Cabimas, Venezuela, January 26, 2026. REUTERS/Leonardo Fernandez Viloria
US issued on February 10, 2026 license facilitating oil, gas exploration and production in Venezuela
Why betting billions before a legitimate democratic government replaces Nicolás Maduro’s discredited regime is a dangerous illusion
By Ya Libnan , Op.Ed
Venezuela is not ready for an oil rush, and pretending otherwise risks repeating one of the most expensive mistakes in modern energy history. Despite recent headlines about reform, sanctions relief, and renewed interest from U.S. energy firms, the reality on the ground has not fundamentally changed: the same illegitimate regime that destroyed Venezuela’s oil industry and expropriated American assets still runs the country.
Maduro did not come to power through a credible democratic mandate. His regime stole elections, dismantled independent institutions, crushed dissent, and weaponized the courts to maintain control. No amount of rebranding, emergency legislation, or interim arrangements can erase that fact. An illegitimate government cannot provide legitimate guarantees—especially when billions of dollars and long-term assets are at stake.
The temptation is understandable. Venezuela holds some of the world’s largest proven oil reserves. After years of sanctions and isolation, any signal of openness feels like an opportunity. But history should serve as a warning. This is the same regime that nationalized foreign oil assets, voided contracts, hollowed out PDVSA, and presided over catastrophic corruption and environmental collapse. To assume that this political culture has suddenly transformed is not optimism—it is negligence.
U.S. energy companies should absolutely prepare, but they should not commit. Preparation means conducting due diligence, mapping degraded infrastructure, evaluating environmental liabilities, and designing entry strategies that can be activated quickly after Venezuela has a legitimate, democratically elected government with enforceable rule of law. It does not mean betting billions on promises made by an unelected authority operating under the shadow of a discredited regime.
Equally naïve is the belief that the United States can somehow manage or “run” Venezuela remotely—through sanctions waivers, temporary licenses, or transactional energy deals. Nation-building by spreadsheet and oil contracts has failed before, and it will fail again. Venezuela’s recovery must be driven by Venezuelans through accountable institutions, not choreographed from Washington or Houston.
A real oil revival will come only after a credible election, an independent judiciary, ironclad property protections, and a clean break from the regime that turned one of the world’s richest energy producers into an economic ruin. Until then, restraint is not hesitation—it is prudence.
The oil will still be there. The question is whether investors will wait for a Venezuela that can be trusted to honor its word.
