oil

Feb. 26 (UPI) — The U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control said it will allow certain operations to resell Venezuelan-origin oil destined for Cuba, provided the fuel is used by citizens and private companies on the island.

The island nation relied for years on Venezuela for fuel, but shipments stopped after the United States captured Nicolás Maduro on Jan. 3 and took control of Caracas’ energy industry.

After the operation, President Donald Trump repeatedly warned that Cuba was on the brink of economic collapse, and he threatened to impose further economic pressure on the country to reach an agreement with the United States. Trump has not publicly defined what kind of agreement he seeks.

The trade measure, published Wednesday, says that the transactions must comply with the conditions of General License 46A for Venezuela. This license is an authorization issued by foreign assets office that allows companies to conduct operations involving Venezuelan oil under specific terms, despite the sanctions in place against that country’s energy sector.

Companies that seek authorization will not need to have an entity established in the United States, and the usual Cuba-related restrictions set out in that license will not apply.

The Treasury Department specified that the policy will cover only exports for commercial or humanitarian purposes that benefit Cuba’s private sector.

Operations involving the Cuban armed forces, intelligence services or other government entities will not be permitted, including those listed on the U.S. Department of State’s Cuba Restricted List.

The Treasury Department recalled that the Commerce Department primarily regulates the export or re-export of U.S.-origin oil to Cuba.

Under the Support for the Cuban People License Exception, certain exports of gas and other petroleum products intended to improve living conditions and support independent economic activity in Cuba do not require separate authorization from foreign assets office provided the applicable terms are met.

The agency referred to its Frequently Asked Question 1226 for the definition of “Venezuelan-origin oil,” which includes petroleum products.

Preliminary data from the Energy Information Administration show that Venezuela exported 339,000 barrels per day of crude to the United States in the third week of February.

At the same time, regional fuel supply to Cuba has been limited. On Jan. 29, the Trump administration declared a national emergency with respect to Cuba, creating a new mechanism to impose tariffs on imports from any country that provides oil to Havana.

On Feb. 17, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said her government would not send fuel to Cuba “for now” amid the current situation and potential U.S. trade measures.

Cuba faces fuel shortages that have affected electricity supply, transportation and other basic services, and it relies heavily on oil imports.

Separately, the Russian Embassy in Havana confirmed two weeks ago that Russia will send crude oil and refined products to Cuba as humanitarian assistance.

Russia is sending the oil directly, not through intermediaries, and the shipments are considered to be aid, not commercial sales.

US eases oil embargo on Cuba as Caribbean neighbours warn worsening humanitarian crisis could destabilise region.

The United States has said it will allow the resale of some Venezuelan oil to Cuba in a move that could ease the island’s acute fuel shortages, as neighbouring countries raised the alarm over a rapidly deteriorating humanitarian situation caused by Washington’s oil blockade.

In a statement on Wednesday, the US Department of the Treasury said it would authorise companies seeking licences to resell Venezuelan oil for “commercial and humanitarian use in Cuba”.

It said the new “favorable licensing policy” would not cover “persons or entities associated with the Cuban military, intelligence services, or other government institutions”.

Venezuela had been the main supplier of crude and fuel ⁠to Cuba for the past 25 years through a bilateral pact mostly based on the barter of products and services. But since the US abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro last month and took control of the country’s oil exports, Caracas’s supply to Cuba has ceased.

Mexico, which had emerged as an alternate supplier, also halted shipments to the Caribbean island after the US threatened tariffs on countries that send oil to Cuba. The US blockade has worsened an energy crisis in Cuba that is hitting power generation and fuel for vehicles, houses and aviation.

The shift in US policy came as Caribbean leaders gathering in Saint Kitts and Nevis expressed alarm at the impacts of the blockade on the island nation of some 10.9 million people. Speaking to Caribbean leaders during a meeting of the regional political group CARICOM on Tuesday, Jamaican Prime Minister Andrew Holness affirmed solidarity with Cuba.

“Humanitarian suffering serves no one,” Holness said at the meeting. “A prolonged crisis in Cuba will not remain confined to Cuba.”

The Caribbean summit’s host, Saint Kitts and Nevis Prime Minister Terrance Drew, who studied in Cuba to be a doctor, said friends have told him of food scarcity and rubbish strewn in the streets.

“A destabilised Cuba will destabilise all of us,” Drew said.

But addressing the meeting in Saint Kitts and Nevis on Wednesday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed that the humanitarian crisis had been caused by the Cuban government’s policies, not Washington’s blockade.

Rubio, whose parents migrated to the US from Cuba in 1956, warned that the sanctions would be snapped back if the oil winds up going to the government or military.

“Cuba needs to change. It needs to change dramatically because it is the only chance that it has to improve the quality of life for its people,” Rubio told reporters.

It is “a system that’s in collapse, and they need to make dramatic reforms”, he said.

Rubio went on to blame economic mismanagement and the lack of a vibrant private sector for the dire situation in Cuba, which has been under communist rule since Fidel Castro’s 1959 revolution.

“This is the worst economic climate Cuba has faced. And it is the authorities there, and that government, who are responsible for that,” Rubio said.

The US pressure on Venezuela and Cuba ⁠has left several fuel cargoes undelivered since December, according to the Reuters news agency, contributing to the island’s inability to keep the lights on and cars circulating. A Cuba-related vessel that loaded Venezuelan gasoline in early February at a port operated by state-run company PDVSA remained this week anchored in Venezuelan waters waiting for authorisation to set sail.

Mexico and Canada have meanwhile announced they would be sending aid to Cuba, and Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak also said his government was discussing the possibility of providing fuel to the island.

Separately on Wednesday, Cuba’s Ministry of the Interior announced killing four people and wounding six others on board a Florida-registered speedboat that it said entered Cuban waters.

Rubio told reporters it was not a US operation and that no US government personnel were involved.

“Suffice it to say, it is highly unusual to see shootouts in open sea like that,” he said. “ It’s not something that happens every day. It’s something frankly that hasn’t happened with Cuba in a very long time.”

Energy affordability was in the spotlight during President Trump’s lengthy and at times rambling State of the Union address Tuesday evening as the president promised to bring down electricity prices in an effort to assuage voter concerns about rising costs.

The president announced a new “ratepayer protection pledge” to shield residents from higher electricity costs in areas where energy-thirsty artificial intelligence data centers are being built. Trump said major tech companies will “have the obligation to provide for their own power needs” under the plan, though the details of what the pledge actually entails remain vague.

“We have an old grid — it could never handle the kind of numbers, the amount of electricity that’s needed, so I am telling them they can build their own plant,” the president said. “They’re going to produce their own electricity … while at the same time, lowering prices of electricity for you.”

The announcement comes as polling shows Americans are dissatisfied with the economy and concerned about the cost of living. Experts on both sides of the political spectrum have said the energy affordability issue could translate to poor outcomes for Republicans in the midterm elections this November, as it did in a few key races in New Jersey, Virginia and Georgia last year.

While Trump has focused on ramping up domestic production of oil, gas and coal, residential electric bills have been soaring — jumping from 15.9 cents per kilowatt-hour in January 2025 on average to 17.2 cents at the end of December, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Through one year into his second term as president, Trump has vastly changed the federal landscape when it comes to energy and the environment, reversing many of the efforts made by the Biden administration to prioritize electrification initiatives and investments in renewable energy via the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.

Among several changes, Trump’s administration has slashed funding for solar programs, ended federal tax credits for electric vehicles and canceled grants for offshore wind power — even going so far as to try to halt some such projects that were nearing completion along the East Coast.

Trump has also championed fossil fuel production and on Tuesday doubled down on his “drill baby drill” agenda, touting lower gasoline prices, increased production of American oil and new imports of oil from Venezuela.

Many of the president’s efforts are designed to loosen Biden-era regulations that he has said were burdensome, ideologically motivated and expensive for taxpayers.

Trump has taken direct aim at California, which has long been a leader on the environment. Last year, the president moved to block California’s long-held authority to set stricter tailpipe emission standards than the federal government — an ability that helped the state address historical air quality issues and also underpinned its ambitious ban on the sale of new gas-powered cars in 2035.

Trump also slashed $1.2 billion in federal funding for California’s effort to develop clean hydrogen energy while leaving intact funding for similar projects in states that voted for him. In November, his administration announced that it will open the Pacific Coast to oil drilling for the first time in nearly four decades, a move the state vowed to fight.

But perhaps no issue has come across voters’ kitchen tables more than energy affordability.

So far this term, Trump has canceled or delayed enough projects to power more than 14 million homes, according to a tracker from the nonprofit Climate Power. The group’s senior advisor, Jesse Lee, described the president’s data center announcement as a “toothless, empty promise based on backroom deals with his own billionaire donors.”

“Making it worse, Trump is continuing to block clean-energy production across the board — the only sources that can keep up with demand, ensure utility bills don’t keep skyrocketing, and prevent massive new amounts of pollution,” Lee said in a statement.

Earlier this month, Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency repealed the endangerment finding, the U.S. government’s 2009 affirmation that greenhouse gases are harmful to human health and the environment, in what officials described as the single largest act of deregulation in U.S. history. The finding formed the foundation for much of U.S. climate policy. The EPA also loosened guidelines around emissions from coal power plants, including mercury and other dangerous pollutants.

The president’s environmental record so far is “written in rollbacks that put the interests of some corporate polluters above the health of everyday Americans,” read a statement from Marc Boom, senior director of the Environmental Protection Network, a group composed of more than 750 former EPA staff members and appointees.

Further, Trump has worked to undermine climate science in general, often describing global warming as a “hoax” or a “scam.” During his first year in office, he fired hundreds of scientists working to prepare the National Climate Assessment, laid off staffers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and dismantled the National Center for Atmospheric Research, one of the world’s leading climate and weather research institutions, among many other efforts.

In all, the administration has taken or proposed more than 430 actions that threaten the environment, public health and the ability to confront climate change, according to a tracker from the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council.

The opposition’s choice for a rebuttal speaker is indicative of how seriously it is taking the issue of energy affordability: Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger focused heavily on energy affordability during her campaign against Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears last year, including vows to expand solar energy projects and technologies such as fusion, geothermal and hydrogen. Virginia is home to more than a third of all data centers worldwide.

Feb. 24 (UPI) — The U.S. military seized a third oil tanker moving from the Caribbean Sea to the Indian Ocean, the Pentagon said Tuesday.

The Bertha, a ship flying the Cook Islands flag, was intercepted overnight in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command region after the Defense Department said it attempted to evade U.S. forces.

“International waters are not a refuge for sanctioned actors. By land, air, or sea, our forces will find you and deliver justice,” the Department of Defense said in a post on X. “The Department of War will deny illicit actors and their proxies freedom of maneuver in the maritime domain.”

The department alleges that the ship was “operating in defiance of President [Donald] Trump’s established quarantine of sanctioned vessels in the Caribbean.”

The Cook Islands is a nation of 15 islands located in the South Pacific.

Two more oil tankers were seized in the Indian Ocean by the United States earlier this month.

On Feb. 9, the military pursued an oil tanker from the Caribbean Sea to the Indian Ocean without incident.

On Feb. 14, another oil tanker was captured. The Veronica III was the ninth oil tanker the United States had intercepted or seized that was linked to Venezuela since Dec. 10.

The United States has enforced a blockade on oil tankers from Venezuela since Dec. 10. The initial operation was meant to pressure President Nicolas Maduro to step down. In January, the U.S. military captured and detained Maduro and his wife.

Recently, the United States reached a new historic milestone: it produced over 13.6 million barrels per day, a staggering feat for a country that many thought had peaked in 2008 when production bottomed out at 5 million bpd. This staggering increase was not achieved by a state giant, but by an ecosystem of thousands of independent operators driven by market-based incentives that, in Venezuela, might seem from another planet.

Meanwhile, Venezuela has traveled the opposite path: from a proud peak of 3.7 million bpd in 1970, it has collapsed to a stagnant output below 1 million bpd. 

In Texas, the landowner owns the oil; in Venezuela, it is the State—which claims, all the while, to represent us all.

The hundred-year war

Since the Los Barrosos II blowout in December 1922, our oil history has been defined by a relentless tug-of-war between private capital and the State over the capture of oil rent. This conflict is not unique to Venezuela, but as we enter this “third opening,” the question is unavoidable: how do we prevent a third nationalization?

Having done it twice before (1976 and 2006), Venezuela has established a precedent that alters risk assessment across all investment horizons. How can we guarantee investors that history won’t repeat itself? While often sold as a patriotic triumph, nationalization is a terminal breach of contract and a direct assault on property rights, deterring the very capital profiles that otherwise would be participating. International arbitration, legal reforms, and institutional frameworks are necessary, but they are not sufficient.

Government take and the global race

To put things in perspective: before the 2026 reform, the Venezuelan fiscal system was among the least competitive on the planet. Between royalties on gross income, income tax (ISLR), and “windfall profit” taxes, the State extracted a “Government Take” that often exceeded 80%, with marginal tax rates reaching up to 95% depending on price thresholds. In a scenario where the operator’s net margin was squeezed to a minimum, production became a game of survival and reinvestment became technically impossible.

While the January 2026 reform moves in the right direction, we aren’t just competing against our own past; we are competing against the world. Consider the current margins (Operator Share) in the region:

• Canada (Alberta, Heavy Oil): Private 50%-55% | Government 45%-50%
• Texas (Permian Basin): Private 45%-55% | Government 45%-55%
• Colombia (New Reforms): Private ­40% | Government ­60%
• Brazil (Pre-Salt): Private 39% | Government 61%
• Guyana (2025 Model): Private 25%-35% | Government 65%-75%
• Venezuela (2026 Law): Private 20%-35% | Government 65%-80%

Even with the recent reform, Venezuela is far from being a “bargain” for long-term investment.

The proposal: from State-partner to citizen-owner

To mitigate expropriation risk and attract long-term capital, I propose a model built on four foundational pillars:

• Private Capital-Citizen Partnership: The State is removed from operations. Incentives are aligned directly between citizens—the ultimate owners of the subsoil—and those who risk the capital to extract it.

• Zero Corporate Taxes (Tax Displacement): Eliminate corporate income tax, royalties, and all “shadow” taxes at the source. This slashes the operational break-even to technical average levels of $30 to $40 per barrel, turning “iron cemeteries” into profitable ventures even in low-price environments. This is not a tax holiday, but a redirection of the fiscal take: the operator delivers a major share of the value directly to the citizens, while the State sustains itself by taxing the total income of the citizenry and companies in the rest of the economy.

• The Citizen Dividend (Oil-to-Cash): Instead of paying a traditional tax to a discretionary Treasury, the operator delivers 50% of its net profit—effectively a flat tax paid to the owners—directly into a sovereign trust (or similar non-state mechanism) managed by top-tier international banks. While 50% is a significant share, the absence of any other fiscal burden makes this model one of the most competitive in the region. This trust distributes periodical dividends to every Venezuelan citizen, including those abroad. The State then funds its operations by taxing these dividends as part of the citizens’ total income via personal income tax (ISLR) and other tax sources from a diversified economy. This ensures that the government’s budget depends on the collective prosperity of its people, not on political control over the oil.

• The Citizen as “Guardian” and Auditor: This is the ultimate shield. In 1976 and 2006, the State nationalized because it was easy to seize control from a “multinational” and hand it to a bureaucracy. Under this scheme, any government attempting to expropriate would be taking directly from the pockets of 30 million owners. Transparency is embedded: citizens monitor production and distributions through real-time digital platforms, independent audits, and other decentralized oversight mechanisms. The citizen ceases to be a spectator and becomes the industry’s most powerful defender.

Unlike the State, whose lust for oil rent is political and lacks immediate consequences for those in power, the citizen acts with the prudence of an owner—because they become one. Under this model, any attempt to “suffocate” the private partner translates immediately into a drop in personal dividends. Private ownership of the benefit is, in itself, the best guarantee of stability for capital.

Application and reality

Under this model, the direct net profit split for the oil industry would be: Private 50%, Citizens 50%, State 0%.

This “State 0%” applies exclusively to the source to insulate the industry from political rent-seeking. It does not mean a zero-revenue State; the government continues to fund its functions, but through a transparent tax system (ISLR, VAT) derived from a citizen-owned economy.

To illustrate, with oil at $100 and production at 3.5 million bpd, each citizen would have received $1,500 annually ($6,000 for a family of four). At a $60 base price, the dividend would be $640 per person. Today, with production stalled below one million barrels, a citizen would receive a mere $185. It is modest, but it represents the starting point of a virtuous cycle where the State only prospers if its citizens do first.

Herein lies the virtue of the model: the alignment of interests. Under the current system, citizens watch from the sidelines as oil wealth vanishes into the state vortex. With this approach, each Venezuelan has a personal stake: the more their private partner thrives, the more they themselves benefit. Citizens move from passive critics to primary stakeholders in the nation’s industrial growth.

Considerations for a new Venezuela

Under other circumstances, I might not be a proponent of direct “cash” transfers. But given the alternatives, it is the “lesser evil”. The political class will likely claim this is neither feasible nor “patriotic.” For many politicians, the incentive is two-fold: the salivating prospect of managing an immense oil “booty,” and the recurring ideal of “doing good” with other people’s resources.

Still in doubt? Look at our track record: despite having the world’s largest proven reserves and over 20 different administrations of every political stripe since 1922, the State captured and managed over $1.2 trillion in rent between 1920 and 2015. The result? A Guinness world record in squandered booms, the largest migration in the hemisphere without a formal war, and unprecedented institutional destruction.

Isn’t it time to withdraw the State from oil? 

This proposal would achieve:

• Real competitiveness: By matching Texas and Alberta margins (50%+ for the private sector), we compensate for institutional risks with top-tier global profitability.
• A limited State: The State ceases to be an inefficient businessman and becomes an arbiter: providing control, arbitration, and security. Its funding would come from taxing other economic activities, forcing it to foster general prosperity rather than living off the subsoil.
• A path towards a dividend-producing nation: Why not extend this to all extractive activities (gas, gold, iron, rare earths)? Perhaps the gold of the Arco Minero would stop being a black hole and become a direct dividend, shielding resources from looting and opacity.

The January 2026 reform is just a sigh in a prolonged agony. We cannot expect different results by doing the same thing. The “Hundred-Year War” over oil rent has left the State as a jailer rich in promises and a citizenry poor in realities.

Avoiding a third nationalization requires moving the subsoil out of the political arena and into the sphere of economic freedom. The US does not dominate markets by government mandate, but through an ecosystem that rewards risk and efficiency. Venezuela can emulate this success, but only by breaking the State lock and allowing a fabric of investors to flourish in direct alliance with citizens.

True sovereignty is not the State running the wells; it is Venezuelans themselves being the real owners of the benefits. Only through this pact of ownership can we hope that oil becomes, at last, an engine of development and not the tool of our own institutional destruction.

Slovakia had issued a two-day ultimatum to Ukraine to reopen the Soviet-era Druzhba pipeline so that it could receive Russian oil deliveries.

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has said his country will halt emergency electricity supplies to Ukraine until Kyiv reopens a key pipeline transporting Russian oil to Slovakia, making good on an ultimatum he issued to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Fico’s announcement on Monday came two days after he warned Zelenskyy on social media that he would ask state-owned company SEPS to halt emergency supplies of electricity if flows of Russian crude oil via the Soviet-era Druzhba pipeline crossing Ukraine did not resume.

“As of today, if the Ukrainian side turns to Slovakia with a request for assistance in stabilising the Ukrainian energy grid, such assistance will not be provided,” Fico said in a video on his Facebook page.

Ukrainian grid operator Ukrenergo said in a statement that it had not been officially informed yet, but that it would “not affect the situation in the unified power system of Ukraine”.

“The last time Ukraine requested emergency assistance from Slovakia was over a month ago and in a very limited volume,” it said.

Fico said the stoppage would be lifted “as soon as the transit of oil to Slovakia is restored”.

“Otherwise, we will take further reciprocal steps,” he said, adding his country would also reconsider “its previously constructive positions on Ukraine’s EU membership”.

He said the stalled oil supply was a “purely political decision aimed at blackmailing Slovakia over its international positions on the war in Ukraine”.

Slovakia and neighbouring Hungary, which have both remained dependent on Russian oil since the Kremlin launched its invasion of Ukraine almost four years ago, have become increasingly vocal in demanding that Kyiv resume deliveries through the Druzhba pipeline, which was shut down after what Ukraine said was a Russian drone strike hit infrastructure in late January.

Ukraine says it is fixing the damage on the pipeline, which still carries Russian oil over Ukrainian territory to Europe, as fast as it can.

Slovakia and Hungary say Ukraine is to blame for the prolonged outage and have declared emergencies over the cut in oil deliveries.

The EU imposed a ban on most oil imports from Russia in 2022, but the Druzhba pipeline was exempted to give landlocked Central European countries time to find alternative oil supplies.

Meanwhile, the European Union failed to agree on new sanctions on Russia for the fourth anniversary of Europe’s biggest war since World War II, after Hungary vetoed the move.

Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban – the friendliest EU leader to the Kremlin – is stalling the sanctions and a 90-billion-euro ($106bn) EU loan to Ukraine until Kyiv reopens the oil pipeline.

Fico also said he has refused to “involve the Slovak Republic” in the latest EU loan due to Zelenskyy’s “unacceptable behaviour”, alluding to Ukraine’s earlier halting of Russian gas supplies after a five-year-old transit agreement expired on January 1, 2025, which Fico claimed is costing Slovakia “damages of 500 million [euros; $590m] per year”.

Hungary and Slovakia have accounted for 68 percent of Ukraine’s imported power this month, according to Kyiv-based consultancy ExPro. It was not immediately clear if emergency electricity supplies were included in that figure.

Slovakia and Hungary vexed after Russian oil flows via Ukraine halted by alleged Russian drone strike last month.

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has issued Ukraine a two-day deadline to resume the pumping of Russian oil through its territory, threatening to cut off electricity to the war-torn country if this demand is not met.

Fico issued his ultimatum to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Saturday, warning on X that he would ask state-owned company SEPS to halt emergency supplies of electricity if flows of Russian crude via the Soviet-era Druzhba pipeline crossing Ukraine are not resumed by Monday.

Slovakia and neighbouring Hungary, which have both remained dependent on Russian oil since the Kremlin launched its invasion of Ukraine almost four years ago, have become increasingly vocal in demanding Kyiv resume deliveries through the pipeline, which was shut down after what Ukraine said was a Russian drone strike hit infrastructure in late January.

The Slovak leader accused Zelenskyy of acting “maliciously” towards his country, alluding to Ukraine’s earlier halting of Russian gas supplies after a five-year-old transit agreement expired on January 1, 2025, which he claimed is costing Slovakia “damages of 500 million [euros; about $589m] per year”.

Describing Zelenskyy’s actions as “unacceptable behaviour”, he said that his refusal to “involve the Slovak Republic in the latest 90 billion euros ($105bn) military loan for Ukraine” had been “absolutely correct”.

Slovakia is a major source of European electricity for Ukraine, needed as Russian attacks have damaged its grid. Energy sector experts say Slovakia provided 18 percent of record-setting Ukrainian electricity imports last month.

EU loan in peril

Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic all opposed the interest-free European Union loan package, which was agreed to by the bloc’s member states back in December to help Ukraine meet its military and economic needs over the coming two years.

While the three nations opposed the package, which replaced a contentious plan to use frozen Russian assets that ran aground over legal concerns, a compromise was reached in which they did not block the initiative and were promised protection from any financial fallout.

However, as tensions mounted over the interrupted supply of Russian oil this week, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban threatened on Friday to overturn December’s deal by vetoing the EU loan package.

“As long as Ukraine blocks the Druzhba pipeline, Hungary will block the 90‑billion-euro Ukrainian war loan. We will not be pushed around!” the Hungarian leader wrote on Facebook.

Slovakia and Hungary both received a temporary exemption from an EU policy prohibiting imports of Russian oil over the war in Ukraine.

Ukraine responds

The Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs slammed Slovakia and Hungary on Saturday for what it called their “ultimatums and blackmail” over energy issues, saying the two countries are “playing into the hands of the aggressor [Russia]”.

The ministry said that Ukraine had provided information on the damage that resulted from “Russian attacks” on the Druzhba pipeline to Hungary and Slovakia, and that repair work is under way.

In the meantime, it said, it has “also proposed alternative ways to resolve the issue of supplying non-Russian oil to these countries”.

Caracas, February 20, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – The Trump administration is forcing all royalty, tax, and dividend payments from Venezuelan oil production be paid into accounts managed by Washington.

The mandate reinforces the White House’s control over Venezuelan crude export revenues in the wake of the January 3 military strikes and kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro, as well as a naval blockade imposed in December.

The US Treasury Department updated its FAQ section on February 18 to clarify conditions on recently issued sanctions waivers allowing expanded participation in Venezuela’s oil sector to Western corporations.

Under the licenses, only “routine payments of local taxes, permits, and fees” to Venezuelan authorities are permitted.

“Other payments, including royalties, fixed per-barrel production levies, or federal taxes to blocked persons, such as the Venezuelan government or (state oil company) PDVSA, must be made into the Foreign Government Deposit Fund,” the text read.

The acting Rodríguez administration has yet to comment on the new restrictions. 

Since January, Washington has imposed control over Venezuelan crude exports, with proceeds deposited in a US-administered account in Qatar. US Energy Secretary Chris Wright announced recently that funds will now be deposited directly in a US Treasury account. Senior administration officials have stated that the arrangement gives the White House “leverage” to condition Venezuelan government policies, while Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that Caracas must submit a “budget request” to access its own oil revenues.

At least US $500 million, out of an initial deal estimated at $2 billion, have been returned to Venezuela and offered by banks in foreign exchange auctions. Venezuelan authorities have also reported the import of medicines and medical equipment from US manufacturers using “unblocked funds.”

On Thursday, the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued General License 50A allowing select firms to conduct transactions and operations related to hydrocarbon projects with PDVSA or any other Venezuelan public entity. The document mirrors General License 50 issued on February 13 but added French firm Maurel & Prom to a list including BP, Chevron, Eni, Repsol, and Shell.

Maurel & Prom’s main project in the Caribbean nation is a minority stake in the Petroregional del Lago joint venture, which currently produces 21,000 barrels per day (bpd). The company’s executives recently held a meeting with Acting President Delcy Rodríguez as part of Caracas’ efforts to secure foreign investment.

In recent weeks, the Trump administration has issued several licenses to boost US and European involvement in the Venezuelan energy sector, with imports of diluents, inputs and technology now allowed. General License 49, issued on February 13, demands that companies apply for a special license before striking production and investment deals with Venezuela.

The US Treasury issued sanctions waivers while maintaining existing coercive measures against the Venezuelan oil industry in place, including financial sanctions against PDVSA. The licenses likewise block any transactions with companies from Cuba, China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia.

The selective flexibilization of sanctions followed the Venezuelan National Assembly’s approval of a pro-business overhaul of the country’s Hydrocarbon Law. The reform grants private corporations expanded control over operations and sales, while opening the possibility for disputes to be taken to external arbitration.

The reformed law also allows the Venezuelan executive to arbitrarily reduce royalties and a new “integrated tax,” capped at 30 and 15 percent, respectively. The executive is likewise entitled to grant reductions to the 50 percent income tax set for the oil industry if deemed necessary for projects to be “internationally competitive.”

According to US-set conditions and the reformed law, minority partners such as Repsol are authorized to sell crude from Venezuelan joint ventures before depositing the owed royalty and tax amounts, as well as dividends belonging to PDVSA, to US Treasury-designated accounts.

The initial crude sales as part of the Trump-imposed arrangement were conducted via commodity traders Vitol and Trafigura, which lifted cargoes at Venezuelan ports before re-selling them to final customers. However, according to Reuters, US-based refiners including Phillips66 and CITGO are looking to secure crude directly from Venezuela to maximize profits.

CITGO, a subsidiary of PDVSA, is close to being taken over by vulture fund Elliott Management following a court-mandated auction to satisfy creditor claims against the South American country. The company has been managed by boards appointed by the US-backed Venezuelan opposition since 2019.

Feb. 17 (UPI) — The Venezuelan government on Tuesday released Evanan Romero, a Venezuelan-American oil consultant detained four days earlier at the Maracaibo airport, without a judicial warrant or formal charges publicly announced.

Romero, 86, a Venezuelan with U.S. citizenship, was detained by authorities under Delcy Rodríguez’s government while attempting to travel from Maracaibo to Caracas, where he had scheduled a series of meetings with companies in the oil sector.

After an initial detention, Romero spent the first night at Interpol facilities at the airport. The next day, due to his advanced age and medical condition, authorities authorized his transfer to a private clinic in Maracaibo, where he remained under guard, local outlet Efecto Cocuyo reported.

The release occurred without official statements from the government. Local journalists and media outlets, such as Spain’s ABC, reported Romero’s detention.

“I’ve been here since Friday,” the expert said from a private clinic, while guards remained in an adjacent room.

Romero had planned to meet with the local management of Repsol and to participate in a videoconference with Reliance’s leadership in India to discuss a possible return to oil blocks in the Orinoco Belt.

He also had meetings scheduled with investors interested in the energy stabilization phase that would reportedly be coordinated from Washington after the capture of President Nicolás Maduro in a U.S. military operation Jan. 3.

The consultant had arrived in Venezuela from Panama, with a stop in Colombia, intending to visit a relative before traveling to the capital.

In statements to ABC, Romero said his detention could be linked to a past administrative dispute related to a family investment, which he said was resolved in his favor by the Supreme Court of Justice.

No Venezuelan authority has publicly confirmed that or provided details about the case.

Romero is part of a committee of about 400 former state-owned oil company Petróleos de Venezuela technicians and executives dedicated to developing proposals for rebuilding the energy sector under a future government, Infobae reported.

He has maintained contacts with U.S. oil companies such as Exxon and ConocoPhillips, and his name has appeared in discussions about compensation for expropriated assets and the opening of new blocks, the publication added.

Romero is considered a veteran expert in Venezuela’s oil sector, with more than six decades of experience. He served on the board of PDVSA, since the 1960s, with responsibilities in operational oversight, capital projects and maritime operations.

He later served as president and chief executive officer of Grupo Asesor Petrolero Venezolano LLC, a firm specializing in reservoir performance studies, reserves evaluation, thermal recovery of heavy crude and basin master development plans.

He has also been affiliated with the Harvard Electricity Policy Group at Harvard University.

The detention occurred just days after the visit to Caracas by U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright at a time when the White House has intensified pressure for the release of political prisoners and reiterated that reconstruction of the oil sector will depend on clear legal and political guarantees.

President Donald Trump has publicly argued that major U.S. companies should invest billions of dollars to repair deteriorated infrastructure and restore production.

Feb. 17 (UPI) — Oil prices climbed on Tuesday as Iran partially closed the Strait of Hormuz, a critical shipping path, to conduct military drills.

Fars, an Iranian news agency, cited “security precautions” as the reason for the closure, with no indication of when the Strait of Hormuz will fully open again.

About 13 million barrels of crude oil were transported through the strait each day in 2025, making up about 31% of oil shipments by sea. It is the main seaborne export route for Middle Eastern oil shipping to Asia.

Iranian naval forces began the drill “Smart Control of the Strait of Hormuz,” on Monday.

The drill involves deploying drones capable of striking aerial and maritime targets and is “focused on enhancing operational readiness, strengthening deterrence, and reinforcing multilayered defense,” Fars reported.

Tuesday is the first time that Tehran has closed any part of the Strait of Hormuz since President Donald Trump threatened military action against Iran in response to the killings of protesters.

The United States has posted warships on the Indian Ocean as Trump attempts to negotiate with Iran to scale back its nuclear program.

The United States and Iran held a second round of negotiations in Geneva on Tuesday. Trump was not present for those negotiations but said he would participate “indirectly.”

WASHINGTON — President Biden is considering a ban on imports of Russian oil while weighing actions that would boost energy production by autocracies in the hopes of mitigating the effects on American consumers and global energy markets, U.S. officials said.

“What the president is most focused on is ensuring we are continuing to take steps to deliver punishing economic consequences on [Russian President Vladimir] Putin while taking all action necessary to limit the impact to prices at the gas pump,” White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said Monday.

Until now, the economic strangulation of Russia by the West over its unprovoked invasion of Ukraine has avoided its robust energy sector, with administration officials suggesting that such a move could weaken the global economy.

But as Russia increases its unrelenting bombardment of Ukrainian cities, political pressure on the West has grown to do more to put pressure on Putin to stop the onslaught. U.S. officials said the Biden administration is considering easing restrictions on imports of oil from Venezuela to alleviate the void left by Russian oil bans, a politically problematic step.

It has also sought to convince Saudi Arabia, which has been under fire from U.S. and European officials over its human rights record, to boost oil production.

Biden spoke Monday for more than an hour with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, although the official White House readout of the conversation did not explicitly state that they discussed a ban on Russian energy.

According to the White House, “the leaders affirmed their determination to continue raising the costs on Russia for its unprovoked and unjustified invasion of Ukraine. They also underscored their commitment to continue providing security, economic and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine.”

Psaki said administration officials were also discussing whether the U.S. would send military aircraft to Poland should its leaders provide Soviet-era bombers to support Ukraine, but noted that the White House was not “preventing or blocking or discouraging” officials in Warsaw. “They are a sovereign country. They make their own decisions, but it is not as easy as just moving planes around,” she said.

The U.S. has been reluctant to get ahead of European allies in responding to Putin’s aggression. And while an oil embargo from Washington would have some effect, doing so in concert with Europe would deliver a far greater impact. Europe imports 4 million barrels of Russian oil a day, compared with 700,000 barrels imported daily by the U.S.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken said Sunday during an interview with CNN that the administration was indeed exploring the “prospect” of an energy ban “in a coordinated way” with allies, although he did not rule out the possibility that Washington could act on its own to bar Russian oil.

The administration may not have much of a choice. Members of both political parties have introduced bills in both houses of Congress to block such imports.

“We may have to pay more at the pump because of this attack and our bipartisan response, but it is worth it to ensure that Putin pays the price for his paranoid adventurism and his attack on a peaceful democracy,” Rep. Jimmy Panetta (D-Carmel Valley), who has co-sponsored a bill to ban Russian oil, said in a statement.

Rep. Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana), who supports the measure, said a Russian oil ban may only have limited success if the U.S. cannot persuade other countries to join the effort.

“I don’t believe Europe and some of the other countries are ready to say no to Russian energy, so that’s the challenge right now,” Correa said in an interview. “Not only does Russia have nukes, but also people have to buy their energy from the Russians.”

Congress is weighing an oil ban as it pushes to pass a measure to send Ukraine billions of dollars in emergency assistance. Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Monday called for passage of a $12-billion aid package this week, saying it “will provide both humanitarian and military assistance for Ukraine: funding for refugees, medical supplies, emergency food supplies, as well as funding to support weapons transfers into Ukraine, and help for our eastern flank NATO allies.”

In a letter to House Democrats on Sunday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) said Congress intended to pass $10 billion in emergency aid for Ukraine as part of a larger government funding measure. The House is also exploring legislation that would “further isolate” Russia from the world economy, Pelosi said.

Banning Russian oil imports would probably lead to higher prices at the pump in the U.S. and globally. Gas is averaging $4 a gallon nationwide, up from $2.77 a year ago, according to AAA. The average price of gas in California during that same period has risen from $3.75 to $5.34.

In a clear signal of how seriously the Biden administration is considering a Russian oil ban, U.S. officials traveled over the weekend to Caracas, Venezuela, for talks about potentially easing sanctions imposed on the South American nation by the Trump administration in 2019. President Trump took that step after declaring President Nicolas Maduro’s election victory a sham and recognizing another politician, Juan Guaido, as the country’s rightful leader, a position Biden has affirmed.

Those measures built upon similar sanctions imposed by President Obama, signaling the long history of trouble Washington has had with Caracas and its socialist leaders.

The Venezuela economy is reeling, despite sitting on some of the world’s largest oil reserves, and Maduro is likely eager to be free of the sanctions. However, his economy and many of his government agencies are deeply intertwined with Russian assets and advisors. Any lenience by the White House toward Maduro, even if it’s driven by a desire to crack down on Putin, could undercut Biden’s messaging about the existential threat that autocracies present to democracies.

Psaki on Monday batted away questions about a potential rapprochement with Caracas, telling reporters that any easing of sanctions was “leaping several stages ahead” of where talks currently stand.

Complicating matters has been Venezuela’s decision to imprison six executives from the Citgo oil company for the last four years. Five are U.S. citizens and the sixth a U.S. permanent resident. They were convicted in show trials on trumped-up embezzlement charges and other crimes, according to their families and human rights activists.

Psaki said discussions about the release of the men and sanctions relief were taking place “in different channels,” and not tied together.

Republicans, who have seized on the potential energy crisis to call for stepping up domestic fossil fuel production, have already made clear that they will hit the White House hard should it look to offset any ban on Russian oil by looking to foreign suppliers.

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio criticized Biden in a tweet Sunday, saying: “Rather than produce more American oil, he wants to replace the oil we buy from one murderous dictator with oil from another murderous dictator.”

Feb. 15 (UPI) — The U.S. military intercepted an oil tanker overnight that was linked to Venezuela after tracking it from the Caribbean into the Indian Ocean.

The tanker, the Veronica III, was boarded without incident late Saturday night in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command area of responsibility after it attempted to outrun the Trump administration’s naval blockade in the Caribbean, the Department of Defense announced early Sunday.

The United States has now intercepted or seized nine oil tankers associated with Venezuela since Dec. 10 when the administration started enforcing a blockade on oil tankers leaving the South American nation to pressure it’s president, Nicolas Maduro, to leave power.

After the U.S. military captured Maduro in a clandestine early morning mission in January, several tankers scattered from the country, according to reports.

“The vessel tried to defy President Trump’s quarantine — hoping to slip away,” the Pentagon said in a post on X. “We tracked it from the Caribbean to the Indian Ocean, closed the distance and shut it down. No other nation has the reach, endurance or will to do this.”

The Veronica III, flagged in Panama, has previously been linked with transporting sanctioned Iranian oil and working with a sanctioned Chinese ship-management company, Fox News reported.

The tanker was sanctioned by the U.S. Department of the Treasury for shipping Iranian oil to other markets and has since used different names and flags in order to evade capture.

At least 16 tankers docked in Venezuelan ports tried to escape the U.S. naval blockade in the days after Maduro’s capture, the New York Times reported, with at least 12 of them turning off their transmission signals in the effort.

A fire at a key fuel refinery in the capital comes amid Cuba’s mounting fuel emergency due to US-imposed restrictions.

A fire broke out at a key fuel processing plant in the Cuban capital Havana, threatening to exacerbate an energy crisis as the country struggles under an oil blockade imposed by the United States.

A large plume of smoke was seen rising above Havana Bay from the Nico Lopez refinery on Friday, drawing the attention of the capital’s residents before fading as fire crews fought to bring the situation under control.

Cuba’s Ministry of Energy and Mines said the fire, which erupted in a warehouse at the refinery, was eventually extinguished and that “the cause is under investigation”. There were no injuries and the fire did not spread to nearby areas, the ministry said in a post on social media.

“The workday at the Nico Lopez Refinery continues with complete normalcy,” the ministry said.

The location of the fire was close to where two oil tankers were moored in Havana’s harbour.

Cuba, which has been in a severe economic crisis for years, relied heavily on oil imports from Venezuela, which have been cut off since the abduction of the country’s leader Nicolas Maduro by United States forces last month.

US President Donald Trump has also threatened Cuba’s government and passed a recent executive order allowing for trade tariffs on any country that supplies oil to the island.

The country has seen widespread power outages due to the lack of fuel. Bus and train services have been cut, some hotels have closed, schools and universities have been restricted, and public sector workers are on a four-day work week. Staffing at hospitals was also cut back.

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned last week of a humanitarian “collapse” in Cuba if its energy needs go unmet.

On Thursday, two Mexican navy vessels carrying more than 800 tonnes of humanitarian aid arrived in Havana, underscoring the nation’s growing need for humanitarian assistance amid the tightening US stranglehold on fuel.

Experts in maritime transport tracking told the AFP news agency that no foreign fuel or oil tankers have arrived in Cuba in weeks.

Cuba can only produce about one-third of its total fuel requirements.

Cuba’s Deputy Foreign Minister Carlos de Cossio accused the US of carrying out “massive punishment” against the Cuban people in a post on social media Friday.

Cuba requires imports of fuel and “the US is applying threats [and] coercive measures against any country that provides it”, the deputy minister said.

“Lack of fuel harms transportation, medical services, schooling, energy, production of food, the standard of living,” he said.

“Massive punishment is a crime,” he added.

Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum has said her government seeks to “open the doors for dialogue to develop” between Cuba and the US and has criticised Washington’s oil restrictions as “unfair”.

Winning bidders include Chevron, Eni, QatarEnergy and Aiteo.

Libya has assigned new oil and gas exploration rights to foreign firms, aiming to revamp the sector after years of civil strife.

The country’s National Oil Corporation (NOC) announced the results of its first licensing round since 2007 on Wednesday. Winners included US oil giant Chevron and Africa’s largest privately-owned energy company, Nigeria’s Aiteo.

Other winning bidders were consortia: Spain’s Repsol with British Petroleum, Eni North Africa with QatarEnergy, and Repsol with Hungary’s MOLGroup and Turkiye Petrolleri.

The licensing awards signal some renewed interest in Libya’s oil sector, which foreign investors had long been wary of after the country erupted into conflict in 2011 with the overthrow of longtime ruler Muammar Gaddafi. But experts said the response was smaller than expected.

“It is likely that lingering uncertainty over Libya’s political dysfunction and insecurity in the areas around the blocks on offer were factors in the underwhelming response,” Hamish Kinnear, an analyst with UK-based risk consultancy Verisk Maplecroft, told the AFP news agency.

Libya remains politically divided between rival administrations in the east and west, and disputes over the central ‌bank and oil revenues often disrupt production at key oil fields.

‘Return of trust’

The licensing round, in which five of 20 blocks on offer were awarded, follows a $20bn deal last month with France’s TotalEnergies and ConocoPhillips to boost oil production over 25 years.

Prime Minister Abdelhamid Dbeibah, who announced the deal, said the goal was to increase daily oil production by 850,000 barrels within that timeframe. Libya currently produces approximately 1.4 million bpd.

The round used a new, more investor-friendly contract model to replace the rigid terms that previously deterred investment.

NOC chief Masoud Suleman said a committee will be created to further “improve the terms” of the bidding system and negotiate with candidates to grant unallocated blocks.

Speaking at the bid’s announcement ceremony, he said “a return of trust and resuming institutional work in one of the country’s most important sectors after a long period of pause and challenges.”

“They are part of a broader national path that aims for prosperity, growth, the return of normalcy,” he added.

Caracas, February 11, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuela’s oil output contracted to a two-year low following  Washington’s month-long naval blockade against the Caribbean nation’s crude exports.

The latest OPEC monthly report placed Venezuela’s January production at 830,000 barrels per day (bpd), down from 917,000 bpd in December, according to secondary sources. The figure is the lowest since May 2024. 

For its part, state oil company PDVSA reported 924,000 bpd produced in January, down from 1.12 million bpd the prior month. The direct and secondary measurements have differed over the years due to disagreements over the inclusion of natural gas liquids and condensates.

The output contraction was a result of the US Navy imposing a blockade on Venezuelan oil exports and seizing several tankers allegedly involved in Venezuelan crude shipments. The exhaustion of storage capacity forced PDVSA and partners to cut back production.

The blockade came on top of draconian sanctions that have stymied the Venezuelan oil industry for years. Since 2017, Washington has levied financial sanctions, an export embargo, secondary sanctions, and a host of other coercive measures aimed at strangling the country’s main source of foreign revenue.

Following the January 3 US military strikes and kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, Venezuelan oil began to flow once more under an arrangement imposed by the Trump administration. Commodity traders Vitol and Trafigura have been lifting Venezuelan crude, depositing proceeds in White House-administered bank accounts in Qatar, and offering cargoes to customers all over the world.

On Tuesday, the Venezuelan government denied a Bloomberg report that the country had shipped crude to Israel. According to the business outlet, the shipment would be delivered to the Bazan Group, Israel’s largest refiner. Bloomberg did not specify whether the Venezuelan crude cargo was purchased from Vitol, Trafigura, or another source. As part of the new US-imposed arrangement, the sale marks the first time Venezuelan oil will reach Israel since at least 2020, per Bloomberg. 

The Trump administration has sought to leverage its influence over the Venezuelan oil sector to pressure allies such as India to replace imports from US geopolitical rivals, including Russia and Iran. Indian public companies Indian Oil and Hindustan Petroleum are set to join private refiner Reliance Industries in purchasing Venezuelan oil, with 2 million barrels of Merey crude expected to be delivered in the coming weeks. Nevertheless, Venezuelan supplies are not expected to significantly alter global demand given the present output and the extra-heavy nature of Venezuelan crude blends.

US and European firms have likewise acquired Venezuelan cargoes in recent weeks.

For their part, Venezuelan acting authorities have courted foreign investment and enacted a pro-business overhaul of the country’s oil legislation. The reform offers lower taxes and royalties, as well as increased control over operations and sales, to private corporations, reducing the role played by the Venezuelan state.

Trump administration officials praised the oil reform for “eradicating restrictions” on private investment, while the US Treasury Department has issued several sanctions exemptions to boost US corporate involvement in the Venezuelan oil industry.

A January 29 license allowing US companies to purchase and market Venezuelan crude was followed up with a waiver on diluent exports to Venezuela on February 3. On Tuesday, the US Treasury published General License 48 permitting US exports of goods, technology and software for oil exploration to Venezuela.

The sanctions waivers demand that contracts be subjected to US law and forbid any transactions with companies from Russia, Iran, Cuba, North Korea, and China. They also mandate that payments be deposited in accounts determined by the US Treasury.

In early February, US officials confirmed that US $500 million from crude sales had been rerouted to the South American country, to be offered in foreign currency auctions by public and private banks. A further $300 million is expected in the coming days. 

However, the initial deal announced by Trump comprised 30-50 million barrels and an estimated $2 billion. Venezuelan authorities have not disclosed what portion of revenues the country will receive, while Trump has said the US will “keep some” of the income. 

Senior Trump administration officials have vowed to maintain control over Venezuelan oil exports for an “indefinite” period, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio claiming that the Venezuelan acting government headed by Delcy Rodríguez needs to submit a “budget request” before accessing the country’s oil proceeds.