[News] US Sanctions on Venezuela Continue: Corporate Beneficiaries and a Targeted Society

[Anti-Imperialist News]

resumen-english.org
<https://resumen-english.org/2026/03/us-sanctions-on-venezuela-continue-corporate-beneficiaries-and-a-targeted-society/>
US Sanctions on Venezuela Continue: Corporate Beneficiaries and a Targeted
Society
------------------------------

By Roger D. Harris on March 24, 2026

In the wake of Washington’s January 3 military attack and then problematic
détente <https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/venezuela-post-maduro> with
Caracas, corporate media suggest a meaningful shift in Venezuela policy,
implying relief for a country long subjected to economic coercion. However,
far from dismantling the sanctions regime, the US has merely adjusted its
application through licensing mechanisms, leaving the core structure of
coercive measures fully intact.

*Reuters* reported
<https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-eases-sanctions-venezuelan-oil-industry-2026-01-29/>
“US lifts some Venezuela sanctions,” followed
<https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-allows-oil-majors-resume-venezuela-operations-broadly-okays-new-energy-2026-02-13/>
by news of sanctions being further “eased.” Both *NBC News
<https://www.nbcnews.com/business/energy/us-eases-venezuela-oil-sanctions-trump-seeks-boost-oil-supply-iran-war-rcna264109>*
and *ABC News
<https://abcnews.com/US/wireStory/us-eases-venezuela-oil-sanctions-trump-seeks-boost-131182882>*
likewise reported sanctions “eased,” while the *Financial Times
<https://www.ft.com/content/18a2f7dd-c0f6-4ced-8355-cada07d7dd41>* wrote
that Washington “relaxes sanctions.” *Reuters
<https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-waives-sanctions-deals-involving-venezuelas-pdvsa-2026-03-18/>*
later found that “US waives many of the sanctions,” and the *Los Angeles
Times
<https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2026-03-18/u-s-eases-venezuela-oil-sanctions-as-trump-seeks-to-boost-world-oil-supply-during-iran-war>*
noted “targeted relief from sanctions” The Washington Office on Latin
America (WOLA) described
<https://www.wola.org/analysis/two-months-without-maduro-in-venezuela-democratic-transition-or-authoritarian-adaptation>
a “huge easing of sanctions.”

*Not a single sanction has been rescinded*

 In fact, there is no evidence of any revocation of executive orders,
removal of Venezuela-related sanctions authorities, and certainly no formal
termination or suspension of Washington’s sanctions regime.

At a February 21 meeting I attended in Venezuela, Anti-Blockade Vice
Minister William Castillo described sanctions as a “policy of
extermination.” These measures, “the most cruel aggression against our
people,” had been renewed the day before by Trump. To do so, he had to
certify the original mistruth first fabricated
<https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/DCPD-201500159/pdf/DCPD-201500159.pdf>
by Barack Obama in 2015: that Venezuela poses an “extraordinary threat” to
US national security.

Castillo cited 1,087 measures imposed by the US and another 916 by its
echo, the European Union. These unilateral coercive measures have a
corrosive effect on popular support for the government, which is precisely
the purpose of this form of collective punishment, illegal
<https://press.un.org/en/2025/ga12691.doc.htm?utm_source=chatgpt.com> under
international law.

In 2023, Castillo described
<https://en.ultimasnoticias.com.ve/economia/william-castillo-las-sanciones-van-donde-causen-mas-dolor/>
Washington’s economic aggression as a means to destroy Venezuela without
having to invade. The Bolivarian Revolution’s successful resistance,
including positive GDP growth
<https://orinocotribune.com/venezuelas-gdp-grows-almost-9-in-third-quarter-exchange-rate/>
while under siege, suggests why the US felt compelled to escalate with a
military incursion on January 3, killing over 100
<https://orinocotribune.com/venezuelas-interior-minister-cabello-updates-death-toll-of-us-military-attacks-president-maduro-liberation-committee-created/>
and kidnapping the country’s lawful head of state and his wife.

In Castillo’s words, the US escalated
<https://en.ultimasnoticias.com.ve/economia/william-castillo-las-sanciones-van-donde-causen-mas-dolor/>
from “a war without gunpowder…against the civilian population” to an actual
one. As grave as the direct US military aggression has been – including 157
fatalities
<https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-strikes-against-suspected-drug-boats-have-killed-157-people-official-says-2026-03-17>
since last September in alleged drug interdictions of small craft in the
Caribbean and eastern Pacific – the body count from the coercive economic
measures has been far higher. Former UN Special Rapporteur Alfred de Zayas
estimated
<https://dezayasalfred.wordpress.com/2019/06/30/unilateral-sanctions-and-international-law/>
that sanctions have caused over 100,000 excess deaths.

There is even a literal playbook on how to apply sanctions to inflict
“pain” on civilians for “maximum effectiveness.” The author of *The Art of
Sanctions
<https://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-art-of-sanctions/9780231180269/>* is
Richard Nephew, a former US State Department senior official in the Biden
administration who was responsible for implementing such policies.

*Licenses vs. sanctions*

 What has happened in practice is a much more limited form of relief under
the sanctions regime. The Treasury’s Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC)
has issued broad licenses
<https://orinocotribune.com/dynamics-of-ofac-licenses-for-venezuela-managing-a-sanctions-regime/>
allowing certain dealings primarily with Venezuela’s state oil (PDVSA) and
gold (Minerven) sectors.

OFAC licenses carve out limited exceptions principally benefitting US and
other foreign corporations, not necessarily the Venezuelan people.
Activities are authorized that would otherwise be illegal* under US law*,
even though such activities are lawful *under international law*. They come
with conditions, limits, and reporting requirements and can be revoked at
any time.

In practical terms, sanctions remain in place, although certain
transactions are temporarily allowed under strict licensing rules. “The
result is a hybrid scheme in which formal sanctions and operational
licenses coexist, enabling limited flows of economic activity,” according
<https://misionverdad.com/venezuela/alcance-y-caracteristicas-de-las-licencias-ofac-para-venezuela-en-2026>
to *Misi**ón Verdad. *

 This flexible arrangement of sanctions combined with licenses allows US
and other foreign corporations to make a profit off of the coercive system.
Under sanctions alone, the targeted people overwhelmingly suffer but,
secondarily, US and other corporations are shut out. Under this hybrid
system, control is maintained *and* money is made.

However, most foreign investors are reluctant to make important investment
decisions when there is uncertainty, especially given Mr. Trump’s mercurial
reputation. A temporary license does not provide the security that
corporations normally require. Recuperating the Venezuelan oil industry
would necessitate <https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/15419/> “a
gigantic investment.” Such investments will be unlikely if Venezuela is
sanctioned, the licenses notwithstanding.

*Media framing and blaming*

 Meanwhile, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and “First Combatant” Cilia
Flores remain in a New York City jail, reportedly
<https://solitarywatch.org/2026/01/07/maduro-held-in-solitary-in-federal-jail-known-for-barbaric-conditionsand-other-news-on-solitary-confinement-this-week/>
in solitary confinement.

Regarding what happened on January 3, corporate media sources
overwhelmingly use relatively anodyne terms such as “downfall
<https://www.newsweek.com/venezuelans-crying-tears-joy-maduro-downfall-11302555>,”
“removal
<https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/bessent-says-largest-oil-companies-are-likely-move-slower-venezuela-2026-01-08/>,”
or “ouster,” rather than the more pointed “kidnapping” or “abduction.” When
the legality of this clearly illegal act of war is questioned by either the
media or by the Democrats <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFnW7GN7-NQ>, it
is mainly confined to whether President Trump required congressional
approval.

Likewise, application of international law regarding the illegality of
unilateral coercive measures is largely absent from media coverage. Where
legal issues appear, they tend to address mechanics (e.g., the
US-controlled fund arrangement), rather than whether sanctions themselves
violate international law.

When media outlets express concern
<https://apnews.com/article/trump-iran-war-venezuela-oil-supplies-prices-3a3ca446459b3ab0127c08ad0808cc15>
about Washington’s restrictions, it is often that easing them would “reward
Maduro loyalists.” While the plight of the Venezuelan people may be
acknowledged, the blame is mainly attributed to corruption and economic
mismanagement, with little if any opprobrium for sanctions.

As former political science professor at the Universidad de Oriente Steve
Ellner, notes, corruption and mismanagement do exist. But the overwhelming
factor has been the sanctions regime. The blockade targeted Venezuela’s oil
industry – at one point accounting for 99% of foreign-exchange
<https://www.cato.org/commentary/last-rites-venezuelas-state-owned-oil-company>
earnings – forcing the country out of normal dollar-denominated markets and
into black markets to survive.

What Alfred de Zayas
<https://www.instagram.com/empirefiles/reel/C-PXsspC_aw/?locale=ja-JP&hl=en>
dubs the “human rights industry” similarly exhibits a convenient blind spot
regarding sanctions. WOLA, for example, advocates
<https://www.wola.org/analysis/two-months-without-maduro-in-venezuela-democratic-transition-or-authoritarian-adaptation>
“addressing the complex humanitarian emergency.” Yet the NGO strongly
opposes sanctions relief for the people, because the coercive measures are
such an effective “pressure” tool on the leadership.

Former WOLA staffer David Smilde
<https://davidsmilde.substack.com/p/trump-will-resist-spending-his-political>
is preoccupied with “restoring” American-style democracy by imposing
pressure on the “regime.” He argues: “The democratic transition in
Venezuela…requires the support of international organizations.”

In contrast, acting President Delcy Rodríguez views ending interference by
foreign actors in Venezuela’s internal affairs as a precondition for
credible elections. In particular, she calls for the US “blockade and
sanctions
<https://orinocotribune.com/delcy-rodriguez-requests-that-trump-end-sanctions-and-blockade-against-venezuela/>
against Venezuela [to] cease.” With sanctions still in place, the US
remains the biggest obstacle
<https://www.counterpunch.org/2024/05/22/the-biggest-obstacle-to-free-and-fair-elections-in-venezuela-is-the-us/>
to free and fair elections in Venezuela.

*Roger D. Harris **is with the Venezuela Solidarity Network
<https://www.venezuelasolidaritynetwork.org/>, Task Force on the Americas
<https://taskforceamericas.org/>, and the US Peace Council
<https://uspeacecouncil.org/>.* He recently visited Venezuela.

Source: Resumen Latinoamericano – English
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20260325/53a83d5a/attachment-0001.htm>