Did Trump Just Reveal the US Plan for Iran’s Oil? ‘Like Venezuela’
WANA (Sep 14) – Donald Trump’s latest remarks about the future of the U.S. presence in Iran have added a significant new dimension to the debate over the war: Oil is one of Washington’s calculations for the post-war period.
Speaking during his visit to Ireland on Sunday, the U.S. president was asked whether the United States would leave Iran after the war. Trump said Washington would eventually leave, unless it decided to remain in Iran and “keep the oil, like Venezuela.”
It may be Trump’s most explicit reference yet to U.S. interests in Iran’s oil resources. More importantly, he did not present Venezuela merely as a political comparison; he specifically invoked the country’s oil as an example of what Washington could seek in Iran.
A banner with a picture of U.S. President Donald Trump next to an Iranian missile system at Azadi Square in Tehran, Iran, July 30, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency)
Venezuela Is More Than a Casual Comparison
The significance of Trump’s reference becomes clearer when viewed against the backdrop of Washington’s policy toward Venezuela. The United States has exerted extensive pressure on the government of Nicolás Maduro in recent years. Following a January 3 operation, U.S. forces detained Maduro and his wife in Caracas and transferred the Venezuelan president to the United States to face trial.
Washington subsequently assumed a broader role in controlling and managing Venezuela’s oil sales and pursued arrangements that opened the way for U.S. interests to gain access to the country’s vast crude reserves.
That is why Trump’s decision to cite “Venezuela’s oil” when discussing the possibility of remaining in Iran cannot easily be separated from the energy dimension of the Venezuelan case.
From Iran to Venezuela: A Shared Pattern of U.S. Intervention
WANA (Jan 05) – What has unfolded in Venezuela in recent days may, at first glance, appear to be a local crisis or a political dispute confined to Latin America. For a significant part of the international community, however, these developments evoke a familiar pattern—one previously applied in the Middle East, particularly toward Iran, and […]
Oil Prices Add Pressure on Washington
Trump’s remarks also come as the war with Iran continues to disrupt energy markets. Oil prices have climbed above $100 a barrel, while diesel prices in the United States have risen above $6.20 per gallon.
Trump, responding to the situation, has promised that U.S. gasoline prices will “drop like a rock” once the war ends.
This creates a notable contradiction. On the one hand, the continuation of the war is putting pressure on the U.S. economy and American consumers, giving Trump an incentive to seek a quick end to the conflict. On the other, he is openly raising the possibility of remaining in Iran and securing access to its oil.
Energy, therefore, could simultaneously be one of the costs of the war and one of the incentives for maintaining a U.S. presence after it.
A Deal That Goes Beyond Ending the War
Trump also claimed that Iran has been “constantly” reaching out to seek a deal with the United States, while stressing that Washington would accept only an agreement that meets its demands.
“We have to get the right deal,” he said, adding that he would not accept a deal that was “not a good deal.”
His position takes on added significance when considered alongside his comments about oil. If the end of the war is accompanied by an agreement that affects not only military and security issues but also Iran’s economic and energy arrangements, then such a deal would be more than a document ending the conflict. It could become a framework for the post-war order.
Trump has also said he expects the war to end “right after the midterm elections, maybe before,” referring to the U.S. elections scheduled for November. This suggests that, from his perspective, the timing of the war’s conclusion is also tied to domestic political considerations.
Trump’s Repeated Iran Threats and Sudden U-Turns
WANA (Aug 02 ) – Since the beginning of 2026, U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly issued harsh threats against Iran, warning that critical infrastructure, including power plants, oil facilities, bridges, and strategic sites, could be targeted. However, in several cases, these threats were followed by a retreat, extensions of deadlines, or a shift in […]
The Real Question Is What Comes After the War
Trump’s remarks alone do not prove that the United States has made a final decision to seize Iran’s oil. But their political significance cannot be ignored.
Iran possesses vast oil and gas reserves and sits alongside the Strait of Hormuz, a critical artery for global energy supplies. As a result, control over Iran’s energy resources carries implications far beyond access to oil revenues. It can also translate into influence over one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints.
That is perhaps why the most consequential part of Trump’s latest remarks was not his prediction about when the war would end, nor his claim that Iran is repeatedly seeking a deal, but his brief reference to staying in Iran and “keeping the oil, like Venezuela.”
The statement raises a fundamental question about the future of the conflict: Is Washington seeking merely to end the war, or is it seeking to shape a post-war order in which the United States can retain a share of Iran’s resources, influence and economic leverage?
