Donald Trump declared an agreement with Venezuela to be “the biggest oil deal in world history” after US forces seized Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro in January. In August, he announced the Pentagon’s office of strategic capital (OSC) would own a third of the second-biggest private Venezuelan oil firm, North American Blue Energy Partners (Nabep). The deal has since drawn questions from experts, critics and people who know the man at its center.
Alejandro Betancourt López, 46, controls Nabep and stands to become a partner of the US government via the deal. He pursued his education in Massachusetts and keeps residences in Spain, the UK and New York City. He also runs a sunglasses company. Once he employed Rudy Giuliani as his lawyer, and he has been drawn into several international investigations linked to Venezuelan corruption allegations.
Three people familiar with him say Betancourt was introduced into the arrangement through a private associate of Marco Rubio. Officials from the Venezuelan government once employed investigators and hackers to probe the origin of Betancourt’s money. Betancourt has never faced charges or been found guilty of any crime.
Ownership, Warrants and the Defense Production Act
Trump’s initial announcement said: “The United States of America has just entered into an Agreement with the Country of Venezuela.” That framing drew immediate pushback. Two people familiar with the process say Trump began looking for a way to ensure the US had “skin in the game” — financial ownership that would put investors at ease.
Barbados-registered Nabep’s board is said to be majority US citizens, according to the administration. The Pentagon has drawn on the 1950s Defense Production Act to treat it as a sort of massive investment fund. The OSC sits beneath deputy defense secretary Stephen Feinberg, a billionaire with great power who surrounds himself with former Cerberus employees. Feinberg placed a former Cerberus employee, David Lorch, at the head of the OSC.
The law governing oil development in Venezuela permits contracts lasting up to 25 years, not 100-year arrangements. US law does not authorize the OSC to hold stock in firms, experts say. And the arrangement’s design will fail to deliver new money to Venezuela’s oil industry, according to experts.
The White House and the defense department insist the US holds 35% ownership of Nabep, yet the Pentagon informed lawmakers on the congressional armed services committee that it possesses merely “warrants” there — rights to acquire shares rather than the shares themselves. The state department will secure a right to buy 20% of all the oil Nabep extracts at cost, which works out to less than market price.
The Oil Claims That Don’t Add Up
Venezuelan oil will not help refill the US strategic petroleum reserve anytime soon, contrary to Trump’s claims. Exxon’s CEO Darren Woods said less than a month after the January raid that Venezuela was “uninvestable” due to legal and commercial frameworks.
The State Department is adamant about its position, saying that “This is a private deal with a private company. It’s not a deal with the interim government of Venezuela and there was not a political process included in the negotiations.”.
The Pentagon’s own spokesman has said the arrangement secures “US majority control of more than 65bn barrels of proven oil reserves in Venezuela at zero taxpayer cost.”. Whether it actually does depends on how the warrants read, a matter that experts contest.
| Step | Detail |
|---|---|
| January | US forces seize Maduro |
| August | Trump announces OSC owns a third of Nabep |
| Later | Pentagon tells lawmakers it has warrants, not shares |
| Experts | Question OSC authority and deal structure |
Who Is Alejandro Betancourt
The deal’s terms are complex, and so too is Betancourt’s background. He studied in Massachusetts, has homes in Spain, the UK and New York City, and owns a sunglasses company. His connections to Giuliani have attracted attention, even though he has never faced charges.
Three people who know him say Betancourt was brought into the deal through a private associate of Marco Rubio. Government officials in Venezuela once hired investigators and hackers to examine the source of his money. He has never been charged with or convicted of any crime.
The choice of his role in the arrangement has raised questions about how the US government picked its partner.
The Critics’ Case
Venezuelan oil legislation permits agreements lasting no more than 25 years, not 100 years. The OSC has no authority under US law to hold company stock. As a result, the arrangement will fail to deliver new funds to Venezuela’s oil industry.
This administration is operating in a manner unlike any prior administration. The Pentagon is now doing so under the 1950s Defense Production Act.
The administration’s case for the agreement is weak. The state department contends it is a private arrangement between two private parties, not a bargain with the interim government of Venezuela. The Pentagon maintains the US secures majority ownership of proven reserves without costing taxpayers anything.
What We Know
A deal was announced by Trump. Experts question the law, the authority and the economics behind it. Betancourt has never been charged with or convicted of any crime.
According to the administration, the arrangement is both legal and private, and serves the national interest. Critics counter that the OSC lacks authority to hold shares, that Venezuelan law does not permit a 100-year contract, and that the setup has no precedent, in the view of the former US diplomat John Feeley.
The risks are significant. No prior administration has held warrants in a Venezuelan oil company, yet the US now does.
The truth behind Donald Trump’s “biggest oil deal in world history” is that it is a deal whose details keep changing. The warrants are not shares. The OSC may not be authorized. The law may not allow it. And the man who owns the company has never been charged with or convicted of any crime.
The argument made by the administration is that this arrangement involves a private deal between two private parties. It fails to hold up as a meaningful distinction when the Pentagon possesses warrants and the United States gains a majority stake.
Processing of the deal continues, with the warrants still under discussion, and the questions left without answers.
Where the paper stands
The paper backs the people questioning the deal and is against the Pentagon’s office of strategic capital acquiring a third of Nabep through its OSC office. The arrangement rests on warrants, not shares, and the Pentagon itself told lawmakers it holds only warrants. The administration insists the deal is legal and private, but experts say the OSC has no authority to hold company stock under US law, and Venezuelan law permits contracts of up to 25 years, not 100. The paper supports smaller government and opposes offices gathering power beyond their legal bounds, whoever holds them.
The paper backs decisions pushed back toward citizens and away from Washington. It is against agencies writing their own authority and against mandates on private life. A government office holding a third stake in a foreign oil company through warrants, while denying it holds shares, crosses the line. The paper wants the questions answered before the arrangement moves forward.
The warrant language matters. The Pentagon told lawmakers it holds warrants, not shares, yet the administration insists it holds a controlling stake. The OSC has no authority to hold company stock under US law, and Venezuelan law caps contracts at 25 years. The arrangement also raises questions about how the US government picked its partner, given Betancourt’s ties to a private associate of Marco Rubio. The paper will continue watching this deal closely.
Source material: “The truth behind Donald Trump’s ‘biggest oil deal in world history’,” The Guardian.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.