Trump's oil-centric vision for Venezuela divides Congress
Progressive policy ambitions meet practical realities as Americans weigh costs and consequences.
Mainstream coverage treats an “oil-centric” approach to Venezuela as inherently suspect, as if energy interests and moral clarity can never coexist. That framing ignores a basic reality: Venezuela’s collapse has been financed by narcotics networks and sheltered by hostile actors, while U. S.
New Republican Times Editorial Board
The Trump administration's vision for the future of Venezuela is coming into view: lean on what remains of the Maduro regime to end drug trafficking and open up the country's oil industry to American companies — and eventually hold an election.
Each step of that plan is raising enormous questions, with Democrats arguing the administration [...]
Original source:
Read at Wsav-tvHow We See It
New Republican Times Editorial Board
Mainstream coverage treats an “oil-centric” approach to Venezuela as inherently suspect, as if energy interests and moral clarity can never coexist. That framing ignores a basic reality: Venezuela’s collapse has been financed by narcotics networks and sheltered by hostile actors, while U.S. policy has too often substituted slogans for leverage.
A serious plan starts with national security and public trust, not performative outrage. If limited engagement can disrupt trafficking and reduce Maduro’s ability to export chaos, it deserves scrutiny, not dismissal. But any opening to U.S. firms must be tied to rule of law safeguards, transparent contracts, and verifiable steps toward an election, not blank checks to a regime.
The principle is simple: America should pursue strategic stability in our hemisphere, using energy and diplomacy as tools, while refusing to trade away accountability.
Commentary written with AI assistance by the New Republican Times Editorial Board.