Key Findings: A Crisis Without a Single Cause

A central conclusion of the survey is that Venezuela’s condition cannot be reduced to a single explanatory factor. Antonio María Sojo Pereira (Venezuela, Business Consultant, Oplaics Consultants Corp) explains that it reflects “the interaction between domestic fragility and international competition,” situating the crisis within both internal and global dynamics.

Jeirosmar Perez (Argentina, Head of Administration and Finance, ROUSSEAUX) reinforces this view, emphasizing that Venezuela’s trajectory is shaped by a convergence of governance challenges and geopolitical pressures.

However, contrasting perspectives remain. Francisco Contreras (Venezuela, Professor of Project Evaluation, Universidad Metropolitana) simplifies the diagnosis as a “crisis of the political model,” while Andrés Magallanes (Venezuela, Economist, ANOVA Policy Research) challenges the framing itself, stating that “the term ‘crisis’ is somewhat imprecise,” as it overlooks deeper structural dynamics of state behavior.

These differences highlight that Venezuela’s situation is not only politically contested, but also analytically debated across disciplines.

 
Perception Divide: Internal Reality vs External Analysis

One of the most consistent insights across the survey is the divergence between domestic and international perceptions.

Cristian Cataldo (Chile, Economist and Researcher, Universidad de Playa Ancha) notes that internally the situation is understood in terms of “stability and daily life,” reflecting immediate lived realities.

In contrast, external perspectives tend to emphasize broader strategic implications. Luis Alberto Coronado Prada explains that events are “analyzed as pieces on an international chessboard,” indicating a focus on geopolitical positioning rather than everyday experience.

Valeria Delgado Turanza (Argentina, International Relations Specialist, Native Antarcticans Inc) similarly highlights that external interpretations prioritize “geopolitical, energy and regional control,” reinforcing the strategic framing of Venezuela’s situation.

Adding further nuance, Gabriel Alejandro Velasquez Castrillo observes that domestic perception is “more pragmatic and survival-oriented,” underscoring the gap between lived experience and external abstraction.


Governance Dynamics: Reform Signals and Structural Limits

Assessments of recent governance measures reveal a spectrum ranging from cautious optimism to structural skepticism.

Gustavo Abreu (Venezuela, Financial Planning Manager, Droguería Nena) highlights positive developments, particularly in economic restructuring and efforts to create conditions for investment. His analysis suggests that institutional adjustments could support recovery if sustained.

However, Ángel Sarti Matheus (Venezuela, Credit Specialist, Mercantil Banco) provides a critical counterpoint, stating that reforms are “extremely superficial and are a long way from making any notable difference.”

Andrés Magallanes reinforces this skepticism, suggesting that several measures appear reactive rather than part of a coherent transformation strategy.

At a structural level, Gabriel Alejandro Velasquez Castrillo emphasizes that governance stability depends on internal alignment, particularly among “the administrative apparatus, economic sectors linked to energy, and military structures.”

This perspective is echoed by Antonio María Sojo Pereira, who notes that recent measures aim at preserving stability through a combination of control and pragmatic adaptation rather than systemic change.


Challenges Ahead: Managing Stability Across Time Horizons

Experts consistently identify a layered set of challenges unfolding over time.

In the short term, maintaining stability remains the priority. Cristian Cataldo emphasizes the need to sustain governance under pressure, while Jeirosmar Perez highlights the challenge of balancing internal stabilization with external demands, particularly in the areas of security and economic recovery.

Over the medium term, Antonio María Sojo Pereira stresses the importance of securing sustainable revenue, especially through the energy sector. Gabriel Alejandro Velasquez Castrillo adds that maintaining cohesion is critical to prevent systemic instability.

In the longer term, Luis Alberto Coronado Prada points to the necessity of “redefinition of the economic model,” while Gustavo Abreu emphasizes rebuilding institutional trust as essential for attracting capital and ensuring sustained growth.

Henry Eduardo Carrillo Correa (Venezuela, Research Teacher, Colegio de Economistas) introduces a more cautionary perspective, warning of the need to “maintain internal cohesion… and prevent a civil war.”


Energy and External Engagement: Opportunity Under Constraint

The energy sector remains central to Venezuela’s strategic outlook. Experts broadly agree that engagement with emerging partners offers opportunities, but under significant constraints.

Antonio María Sojo Pereira highlights the role of international partnerships in creating space for maneuver, while Gabriel Alejandro Velasquez Castrillo notes that opportunities depend on regulatory conditions and external frameworks, particularly given “regulatory uncertainty.”

Jeirosmar Perez underscores that U.S. influence remains decisive in shaping financial and energy outcomes, while Gustavo Abreu suggests that Venezuela could reposition itself within global markets if institutional conditions improve.

Cristian Cataldo, however, cautions that outcomes will ultimately depend on political stability and the broader geopolitical environment.


Pragmatism and Power: A Transactional Political Logic

A defining feature across expert responses is the emergence of pragmatism as the dominant political logic.

Luis Alberto Coronado Prada describes this as “a survival-oriented pragmatism,” while Gabriel Alejandro Velasquez Castrillo frames it as a “transactional logic” driven by strategic interests.

Antonio María Sojo Pereira reinforces this interpretation, emphasizing that current policies are shaped more by necessity than ideology.

Several experts associate this pragmatism with interactions involving the administration of Donald Trump, though interpretations differ. Jeirosmar Perez links it to broader security and geopolitical considerations, while Ángel Sarti Matheus associates it with economic pressures.

Future scenarios remain uncertain. Luis Alberto Coronado Prada suggests a trajectory in which Nicolás Maduro retains symbolic relevance, while María Corina Machado gains political prominence. Other experts caution that outcomes will depend on negotiation dynamics and internal alignments.


Conclusion: A Fragile and Contingent Equilibrium

The survey reveals a Venezuela navigating a fragile and evolving equilibrium. The country is neither in full collapse nor in stable recovery, but operating within a constrained environment shaped by internal limitations and external pressures.

Gabriel Alejandro Velasquez Castrillo’s description of “multiple imbalances” captures this structural complexity, while Luis Alberto Coronado Prada’s emphasis on systemic fragmentation highlights the broader context.

Ultimately, Venezuela’s trajectory will depend on its ability to balance internal cohesion, external engagement, and structural reform. What emerges is not a predetermined outcome, but an open-ended process shaped by negotiation, adaptation, and the shifting dynamics of global power.