Follow us on social

google cta
Screen-shot-2021-04-02-at-2.09.56-pm

Sooner or later, Biden will need to take Venezuela talks off the back burner

The US should move quickly, particularly if Maduro shows signs that he’s serious about negotiating.

Analysis | Latin America
google cta
google cta

With a razor-thin Senate majority and midterms fast approaching, it will be tempting for President Biden to play it safe on Venezuela policy — to maintain punishing sectoral sanctions without matching offers of relief to concessions, and to avoid using political capital in support of negotiations between the Maduro regime and the opposition. But while this logic seems to sell in Washington, it has failed the Venezuelan people.

As Biden himself has noted, one of the biggest missteps of former President Trump’s Venezuela policy was to approach the issue as part of an electoral strategy in South Florida rather than a complex crisis that requires an innovative diplomatic strategy. “The Trump administration,” Biden told the Council of Foreign Relations in August 2019, “appears more interested in using the Venezuelan crisis to rally domestic political support than in seeking practical ways to effect democratic change in Venezuela.”

So far there have been some signs that Biden wants to avoid Trump’s mistake. Senior foreign policy staff have expressed clear interest in taking Venezuela policy in a new direction. Juan Gonzalez, the National Security Council’s senior director for the Western Hemisphere, has emphasized that the White House is interested in supporting credible talks leading to new elections. He has also indicated that the U.S. government is focused less on the question of the legitimacy of Juan Guaido’s claim to the interim presidency, and more on the need for new presidential elections.

In all of these statements, though, the administration’s message has been clear: the ball is in Maduro’s court. Gonzalez and other senior officials have insisted that Biden “is in no rush” to lift sanctions, especially not unless the Maduro government “undertakes confidence-building measures that show that they’re ready and willing to engage in real conversations with the opposition.”

This approach makes sense for the time being. It is understandable for the international community, and the Venezuelan opposition, to seek signs that Maduro is actually interested in negotiations that could threaten his hold on power. In previous negotiations, Maduro has used talks to exploit opposition divisions and has failed to deliver meaningful concessions. Venezuela does not need another exercise in aimless dialogue, but a credible negotiation between political elites in which verifiable progress can be made towards restoring the country’s democratic institutions.

At the moment, Maduro has several opportunities to show he is serious. Today the government is involved in negotiations with the opposition, with the support of the international community, on at least three fronts. The first of these is related to the country’s electoral authority, the National Electoral Council. The regime has been discussing the makeup of the five-person CNE with opposition representatives since February, and it is likely that the new CNE will be named in the coming months.

Separately, in recent weeks Maduro’s Health Ministry and opposition health advisers have begun discussing how to access a COVID-19 vaccine through the World Health Organization’s COVAX mechanism. The incentives in these talks are clear: Maduro controls Venezuela’s territory but Guaido has access to billions of dollars of Venezuelan assets frozen abroad. Despite Maduro’s initial reticence, negotiations are ongoing and U.S. officials have told reporters they remain hopeful that a deal can be reached.

Finally, the opposition has consistently called on Maduro to broaden access for U.N. humanitarian agencies in the country, in particular for the World Food Programme. Progress on this front would be welcomed by Washington, and could benefit the over nine million Venezuelans believed to be food insecure.

None of these three processes on their own will lead to a return to democracy in Venezuela. However, progress on one or all three could jumpstart broader negotiations that could lead to a badly-needed transition. In that sense, the Biden administration should be prepared to capitalize on early concessions. The White House will need to continue to make clear that engaging in credible negotiations is the only way for Maduro to obtain the things that he and those around him want: relief from individual or sectoral sanctions, and the possibility of a political future. Keeping Maduro at the table may thus require the United States to ease some aspects of the current sanctions regime, such as by ending the ban on diesel swaps that is impacting fragile supply chains in the country.

Some early concessions from Maduro would clearly make it easier for Biden to move Venezuela higher on his foreign policy priority list. Yet Biden may have to do so even if Maduro refuses to budge. The crisis in Venezuela is too important to human rights and stability in the region for policy to be left on the back burner. Breaking the current stalemate — which only benefits Maduro — will require active multilateral coordination in addition to creative use of incentives.

Success will also require Biden to overcome domestic obstacles to any efforts to coax Maduro to the negotiating table, or to keep him there. Today the slim Democratic majority in the Senate means that the White House will need to keep influential senators like Bob Menendez and Marco Rubio satisfied in order to advance their preferred political appointments. At least until the confirmations process ends in mid-2021, Biden will face serious backlash to anything perceived as going “soft” on Maduro. This dynamic may even extend to 2022, when Rubio will be up for re-election and his state will elect a new governor. With midterms fast approaching, the administration may face pressure to avoid making any changes in Venezuela policy, even if the current approach has clearly failed.

However politically difficult it may be to change course, it is important to recognize that the current “maximum pressure” strategy has failed. Today Maduro is stronger than at any point in the last years, with the clear backing of the military and greater economic and political support from Russia and China. It will be tempting for Biden to stay the course to avoid the wrath of hardliners, but doing so will only extend, not resolve, Venezuela’s crisis.


Photos: StringerAL and BiksuTong via shutterstock.com
google cta
Analysis | Latin America
Iran says ‘no ship is allowed to pass’ Strait of Hormuz: Reports
Top image credit: A large oil tanker transits the Strait of Hormuz. (Shutterstock/ Clare Louise Jackson)

Iran says ‘no ship is allowed to pass’ Strait of Hormuz: Reports

QiOSK

Hours after the U.S. and Israel launched a campaign of airstrikes across Iran, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is warning vessels in the Persian Gulf via radio that “no ship is allowed to pass the Strait of Hormuz,” according to a report from Reuters.

The news suggests that Iran is ready to pull out all the stops in its response to the U.S.-Israeli barrage, which President Donald Trump says is aimed at toppling the Iranian regime. A full shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz would cause an international crisis given that 20% of the world’s oil passes through the narrow channel. Financial analysts estimate that even one day of a full blockade could cause global oil prices to double from $66 per barrel to more than $120.

keep readingShow less
What Pakistan's 'open war' on Taliban in Afghanistan really means
Top image credit: FILE PHOTO: Afghan Taliban fighters patrol near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border in Spin Boldak, Kandahar Province, following exchanges of fire between Pakistani and Afghan forces in Afghanistan, October 15, 2025. REUTERS/Stringer

What Pakistan's 'open war' on Taliban in Afghanistan really means

QiOSK

Pakistan’s airstrikes on Kabul and Kandahar over the last 24 hours are nothing new. Islamabad has carried out strikes inside Afghanistan several times since the Taliban’s return to power. Pakistan claimed that the Afghan Taliban used drones to conduct strikes in Pakistan.

What distinguishes this latest episode is the rhetorical escalation, with Pakistani officials openly referring to the action as “open war.” While the language grabbed international headlines, it is best understood as part of a managed escalation designed to signal resolve without crossing red lines that would make de-escalation impossible.

keep readingShow less
POGO The Bunker
Top image credit: Project on Government Oversight

'Going it alone' approach will leave one person holding the Iran bag

Military Industrial Complex

The Bunker appears originally at the Project on Government Oversight and is republished here with permission.


keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.