Venezuela has been promised elections. But for millions of Venezuelans, the more important question is no longer whether elections will eventually be announced. It is whether the political transition will actually give citizens a meaningful opportunity to choose their government.

Interim President Delcy Rodríguez told the United Nations this week that Venezuela will hold elections as part of a transition toward “full democracy.” She said talks with opposition groups have begun and that all political forces would be allowed to participate. But she gave no election date.

That uncertainty matters because another part of Venezuela’s transition is moving much faster: oil.

Since Nicolás Maduro was captured in a U.S. operation in January, Washington and Caracas have moved toward a dramatically different relationship. President Donald Trump met Rodríguez in New York this week, while the United States has been negotiating energy, investment and debt arrangements with the interim government.

Oil is at the center of that relationship.

Trump announced in August a major agreement giving U.S. companies access to Venezuelan oil development, with the Venezuelan government saying the plan could bring around $100 billion in investment and more than $209 billion in tax revenue.

For Washington, the logic is straightforward: stabilize Venezuela, restore oil production, attract investment, restructure debt and prevent the country’s economic collapse from destroying the political transition.

But this creates a difficult question inside Venezuela.

What comes first: economic stabilization or democratic legitimacy?

The Trump administration has emphasized that Venezuela cannot simply hold an election and hand an elected government an economic catastrophe. U.S. officials have argued that economic and social stability are necessary for a durable political transition.

That argument has supporters. But it also creates resentment among Venezuelans who have waited years for political change.

Reuters reported this week that the election could be delayed for a year or more. Planned reforms include replacing the country’s 32 Supreme Court judges and the five directors of the National Electoral Council. Voter rolls would also need updating, political participation would have to be clarified and the electoral system prepared. Some sources told Reuters that an election before the end of 2027 is unlikely.

Meanwhile, María Corina Machado, one of Venezuela’s most prominent opposition figures, has been absent from the talks and has faced obstacles to returning to the country. That raises another question: can an election be considered genuinely competitive if important political actors cannot participate freely?

The resentment is therefore not simply about Maduro or Rodríguez.

It is about timing.

Venezuelans have watched political promises before. They have experienced economic collapse, migration, sanctions, political repression and years of institutional crisis. Now they are being told that reconstruction must come first.

At the same time, oil contracts are being negotiated, American companies are preparing for opportunities and Washington is rebuilding its economic relationship with Caracas.

That produces an uncomfortable perception: the oil timetable appears clearer than the democratic timetable.

Trump has said elections must happen. Rodríguez says elections will happen. Washington says Venezuela needs stability first. Opposition voices demand credible institutions and genuine political competition.

Those positions are not necessarily impossible to reconcile.

But Venezuela’s transition will ultimately be judged not by the number of oil deals signed, nor by diplomatic meetings in New York, but by whether Venezuelans are eventually able to participate in a credible electoral process.

Until there is a date, clear rules, independent institutions and broad political participation, the word “elections” remains a promise rather than a political reality.

And the longer Venezuelans wait while the oil industry moves forward, the more important the question becomes: who is the transition ultimately being built for?