Tensions between Venezuela and Trinidad and Tobago have reached a boiling point this week, as diplomatic and energy disputes threaten to upend regional cooperation in the Caribbean. In a dramatic turn of events on Tuesday, October 28, 2025, Venezuelan lawmakers voted to cancel a longstanding energy agreement with Trinidad and Tobago after a heated parliamentary debate, and declared Trinidad and Tobago’s Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar persona non grata. The move, which was made under Article 111 of Venezuela’s Constitution, was unanimously endorsed by President Nicolás Maduro and marks a significant escalation in a series of recent confrontations between the two nations.
According to reporting by WIC News, the Venezuelan parliament’s decision followed a tense session in which lawmakers accused the Trinidad and Tobago government, led by Persad-Bissessar, of supporting United States military actions against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. Jorge Rodríguez, President of Venezuela’s National Assembly, characterized the cancellation as a matter of “honor, dignity, morality, and respect,” and accused Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar of betraying regional solidarity. Rodríguez did not mince words, stating that it was “unacceptable to maintain the agreement that favored Trinidad and Tobago, while the country has now become an agent of aggression against Venezuela.”
Despite the harsh rhetoric, Rodríguez insisted that Venezuela still valued its relationship with the people of Trinidad and Tobago, expressing a desire to maintain peace within the Caribbean region. “Venezuela loves the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago and still, wants and seeks to maintain peace within the Caribbean region,” Rodríguez said, suggesting that the dispute was with the government, not the people themselves.
The immediate backdrop for this diplomatic rupture was the arrival of the USS Gravely, a U.S. Navy destroyer, which docked off Trinidad and Tobago on Sunday, October 26. The presence of the American warship in the region sparked alarm in Caracas, with Venezuelan officials accusing both the United States and Trinidad and Tobago of plotting to invade Venezuelan territory. These allegations have been firmly denied by Trinidad and Tobago, but the incident has only added fuel to an already smoldering fire.
U.S. involvement in the region—and its support for Trinidad and Tobago—has not gone unnoticed by Venezuelan officials or American lawmakers. U.S. Senator Rick Scott, in comments reported by WIC News, advised President Maduro to seek refuge in Russia or China, warning that “his days are numbered, something is going to happen internally or externally.” Senator Scott added, “It will be the end of Cuba, America is going to take care of the Southern hemisphere and we are going to make sure that there’s freedom and democracy.” While denying any U.S. plans to invade Venezuela, Scott made clear the American intention to rid South America of socialist regimes, further heightening the sense of confrontation.
Against this tense political and military backdrop, energy cooperation between Venezuela and Trinidad and Tobago has become a casualty. The now-canceled agreement, which included a number of joint gas ventures, had been a cornerstone of economic collaboration between the two countries. Its abrupt termination signals not only a breakdown in bilateral relations but also a potential setback for regional energy security and economic development.
As if the diplomatic row needed another flashpoint, a new controversy has emerged over offshore oil and gas exploration near the maritime boundary between Venezuela and Trinidad and Tobago. According to Iran’s Tasnim News Agency, Venezuelan Vice President and Oil Minister Delcy Rodríguez has demanded detailed information from Trinidadian authorities regarding a recently awarded offshore block to Exxon Mobil. This block, which marks Exxon Mobil’s return to Trinidad’s energy sector, lies perilously close to the maritime boundary with Venezuela and northwest of Guyana’s Stabroek block—a region already known for geopolitical tension.
During a recent meeting in Caracas with Trinidad’s acting head of mission, Dayne-Marc Chin Slick, Rodríguez cited Article 8 of the border delimitation treaty between the two nations. This article requires mutual notification of any planned exploration activities within 500 meters of the maritime boundary. Venezuela is now seeking clarification on whether Exxon Mobil’s field tests or potential discoveries could extend into Venezuelan territorial waters.
Caracas’s request for details comes hot on the heels of the energy agreement’s suspension, and appears to be part of a broader Venezuelan effort to assert its sovereignty and protect its interests in a region where the stakes—both political and economic—are high. At their narrowest point, Trinidad and Venezuela are separated by just six miles (9.7 kilometers), underscoring the delicate nature of their shared maritime frontier.
The offshore block in question is not just any patch of sea; it is a strategic asset whose proximity to the border has long been a source of contention. The Stabroek block, located just northwest of the newly awarded Exxon Mobil area, has already been the site of significant oil discoveries and has attracted the attention of global energy giants. With Exxon Mobil’s return, Trinidad is hoping to revitalize its energy sector, but the move has clearly raised hackles in Caracas.
The Venezuelan government’s concerns are not without precedent. Article 8 of the border delimitation treaty was designed precisely to prevent unilateral actions that could destabilize the region or lead to disputes over resources. By demanding transparency and invoking treaty obligations, Venezuela is signaling that it intends to defend its interests vigorously, even as its relations with its neighbor deteriorate.
For Trinidad and Tobago, the stakes are equally high. The country’s energy sector is a pillar of its economy, and new exploration projects are seen as essential for sustaining growth and national revenue. The government has denied any intention to encroach on Venezuelan waters and insists that all activities will comply with international law. Nevertheless, the timing of the Exxon Mobil award—coming so soon after the diplomatic crisis—has inevitably been interpreted by some in Caracas as a provocation, or at least as a lack of sensitivity to Venezuelan concerns.
Observers say the current standoff is emblematic of broader regional tensions, where energy, geopolitics, and national pride intersect. With the United States, Russia, and China all vying for influence in the hemisphere, local disputes can quickly take on global significance. The fate of the suspended energy agreement, the future of offshore exploration, and the broader question of regional stability now hang in the balance.
As the situation unfolds, both sides face difficult choices. Will Venezuela and Trinidad and Tobago find a way to de-escalate tensions and restore cooperation, or will this dispute mark the beginning of a more profound rift in the Caribbean? For now, the only certainty is uncertainty itself—a reminder that in international affairs, the line between partnership and rivalry can be as thin as the six-mile stretch of water that separates these two neighbors.
