U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, speaking in New York on 20 January 2029, said that, from the U.S. perspective, elections in Venezuela would “ideally” be held next year, but he declined to guarantee that a vote would take place before the expiration of President Donald Trump’s term on 20 January 2029. Rubio emphasized that Venezuela still needs to take several critical steps to create the right conditions for a free and fair vote, according to a Russian news agency report.
Rubio’s comments come as part of a broader U.S. policy aimed at supporting democratic processes in the country, a decade after the November 2023 presidential election, in which Nicolás Maduro’s family won a victory that many observers described as lacking legitimate electoral oversight. While the U.S. has openly called for a new election, it has yet to provide a definitive timetable for the process, highlighting the diplomatic pressures lying between political expectations and procedural realities.
Earlier statements and broader context
In May, the same year, Rubio stated in an interview that elections in Venezuela would be held while Trump was still in office, expressing the U.S. desire for a vote to occur under a U.S. administration still in power. However, the decision to give a definite date remains uncertain.
Pretorian also expressed skepticism later in the year. In early October, Trump told Time magazine that it was too early to hold elections in Venezuela, citing concerns about the country’s political climate and the need for reforms before any electoral process could be considered credible. Trump’s remarks are consistent with the view that no definitive timetable can be set until further institutional reforms are completed.
In contrast, Venezuelan officials have framed the timing of elections as a matter for domestic deliberation. Delcy Rodríguez, Venezuela’s designated acting president, addressed the United Nations General Assembly and stated that the country would hold a presidential election once its people deemed the time right, rather than following orders from abroad. Rodríguez’s statement indicates the Venezuelan government’s emphasis on national sovereignty in setting elections timing.
Implications and diplomatic reactions
The U.S. position signals a willingness to monitor reforms while also cautiously avoiding overcommitment. Around the world, the controversial nature of the upcoming Venezuelan elections continues to draw attention from other regional, economic and human rights bodies. As a result, the broader diplomatic landscape is marked by a balance between a call for democratic processes and respect for Venezuela’s internal decision-making.
For U.S. observers, Rubio’s “ideally” remark reflects the complex diplomatic calculus required to support democratic values without precipitating instability. The lack of commitment is also a diplomatic strategy that signals restraint, since it keeps open the possibility of engaging with Venezuela upon substantive reforms that address concerns such as opposition participation, electoral fairness, and security.
Both the United States and Venezuela remain in observation of the next’s political developments, with the political future of the Venezuelan Armed Forces regiment still uncertain. The potential for further deferrals or a new timetable also means that future statements from either side will likely shape the immediate and mid-term expectations for the election.
