Trump floats idea to ‘stay and keep the oil’ in Iran, noting Venezuela deal

Trump raises prospect of retaining Iranian oil as conflict continues

Provpnadvice.com – President Trump suggested Sunday that the United States might consider remaining in Iran to control its oil resources, linking the idea to Washington’s recently announced energy arrangement with Venezuela.

Speaking with reporters in Doonbeg, Ireland, Trump said he expects the conflict involving Iran to conclude after the midterm elections. He also said Iran’s government is eager to reach an agreement and has repeatedly sought contact.

“We’ll ultimately get out unless we decide to stay and keep the oil, like Venezuela,”

The remark adds to Trump’s earlier comments about the possibility of asserting control over Iranian petroleum supplies. It also places oil at the center of his public discussion of the war, alongside diplomatic negotiations and the pressure created by rising fuel costs.

Midterm timetable and oil-price pressure

Trump had made a similar prediction about the timing of the conflict only days earlier. While traveling from Joint Base Andrews to a Republican midterm convention in Dallas on Wednesday, he told reporters that the fighting would end after the elections.

In a separate Truth Social post earlier in the month, Trump argued that oil prices elevated by the Iran war would fall sharply once the conflict was over.

“will drop precipitously”

The issue has particular significance for drivers and consumers because the disruption has pushed gasoline prices higher across the United States. Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz has restricted a crucial transit route for global oil shipments, contributing to a substantial increase in fuel costs.

The national average price for a gallon of gasoline reached $4.31 on Sunday. That was more than $1.10 above the average recorded a year earlier, based on AAA data. Higher gasoline prices can quickly affect household budgets, freight expenses and the cost of moving goods throughout the economy.

Venezuela agreement offers Trump’s comparison

Trump’s reference to Venezuela concerned an agreement under which the United States would purchase 20 percent of oil produced by North American Blue Energy Partners, identified as Venezuela’s second-largest private oil producer. The oil would be acquired at its production cost.

Supplies obtained through that deal could be used to replenish the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the federal emergency stockpile intended to provide a cushion during major energy disruptions. Both the Trump and Biden administrations have drawn on reserve barrels in recent years as they sought to respond to higher fuel prices following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the start of the Iran war.

Venezuelan interim President Delcy Rodríguez described the arrangement in August as a long-term project focused on significant field development.

“This 25-year bilateral project envisages the development of 17 strategic oilfields with a production target of more than 1.5 million barrels per day,”

“That figure relates solely to the bilateral agreement between Venezuela and the United States.”

The planned production figure underscores the scale of the Venezuela arrangement and explains why Trump has pointed to it while discussing Iran. A larger supply available to the United States could help rebuild the petroleum reserve, although oil-market prices are influenced by many factors, including production levels, transport routes and geopolitical risks.

Iranian oil has been a recurring focus

Trump has publicly discussed taking control of Iran’s oil for months as the conflict has continued. In an interview with the Financial Times in March, he called taking the oil his preferred option while criticizing domestic opponents of the approach.

“favorite thing”

“some stupid people back in the U.S. say: ‘Why are you doing that?’ But they’re stupid people.”

The comments point to a broader debate over what a post-conflict U.S. role in Iran could entail. America does not depend on Iranian crude to meet its own energy needs, but access to the country’s oil sector could have implications for commercial activity, infrastructure and the wider regional energy market.

Victoria Coates, vice president of the Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy at the conservative Heritage Foundation, has said that involvement in Iran’s energy industry could allow businesses to enter the country and participate in rebuilding the sector. She compared that possibility with the approach toward Venezuela.

For now, Trump’s latest remarks leave open several possibilities: an eventual U.S. departure, a negotiated settlement with Tehran, or a more prolonged role tied to oil resources. His prediction that the war will end after the midterms remains central to his public message, even as elevated gasoline prices continue to make the conflict’s economic effects visible to American consumers.