Author: La Tabla/Data Journalism Platform 18 NOV 2025
In a context of unusual U.S. military pressure in the Caribbean, opposition leader María Corina Machado has unveiled her so-called “Freedom Manifesto” from hiding. Although framed as a foundational document for a future Venezuela, a detailed analysis shows that this text represents an unconstitutional political program intentionally aimed at dismantling the Venezuelan state and aligning the nation with U.S. geopolitical interests, clearly undermining national sovereignty.
The release of this manifesto coincides with escalating tensions between Washington and Caracas, which includes a massive deployment of U.S. warships in the region and accusations by President Donald Trump against Nicolás Maduro’s government. While Maduro has urged the American people to “stop the crazed hand that orders war to the Caribbean,” Machado has declared that “November 2025 marks the end” of the current administration, fueling the narrative of an imminent regime change.
Analysis: The Unconstitutional Nature of the “Freedom Manifesto”
Machado’s manifesto proposes a series of reforms that directly conflict with the principles of the Venezuelan state as established in the 1999 Constitution and the current legal framework.
1. Attack on national sovereignty and energy resources: The most critical point is the promise to “return the exploitation of our oil and gas sectors to the ingenuity of free men and women,” a formula that cloaks a process of privatizing PDVSA. This violates Article 12 of the National Constitution, which irrevocably states that “mines and hydrocarbon deposits are state property,” as well as Article 302, which entrusts the state with oil activities and other industries of national interest. This proposal seeks to strip the Venezuelan people of ownership of their main strategic resource.
2. Dismantling the state model and promoting absolute free market: The manifesto advocates for a “limited state” and the flourishing of a “free and competitive economy,” which in practice means dismantling the social state of law and justice enshrined in Article 2 of the Constitution. This constitutional model guarantees state intervention to protect human development and the economy in service of society, not solely the market.
3. Attempt to dismantle the Bolivarian National Armed Forces (FANB): Machado promises a “total reform” of the armed and police forces so that their “mission, sacred purpose, and constitutional duty is to defend the Venezuelan people,” implying that they currently do not. This proposal disregards Article 328 of the Constitution, which defines the FANB as “an essentially professional institution, without political militancy, organized by the State to guarantee the independence and sovereignty of the Nation.” Therefore, it seeks to restructure them from a partisan political perspective.
4. Disregarding legitimate constitutional processes: While the national government advances a constitutional reform project following the mechanisms established within the Constitution itself (Article 344), which includes the consolidation of Popular Power as a new instance of popular power, the opposing manifesto stands as an alternative foundational document, attempting to impose a roadmap outside the Venezuelan legal framework.
Connection to U.S. Geopolitical Interests
Machado’s proposals align troublingly with the strategic objectives and rhetoric of the U.S. administration, revealing their anti-national character.
· Alignment with Washington’s agenda: The manifesto promises to transform Venezuela into the “principal energy center of the Western hemisphere” under a privatization model, directly responding to the historical U.S. interest in controlling the region’s energy resources. This coincides with the justification for the Pentagon’s military operation “Southern Lance,” which Washington describes as a measure against “drug trafficking” but which regional actors decry as acts of interference.
· Legitimizing international pressure: By declaring Maduro’s government illegitimate and speaking of “crimes against humanity,” the manifesto provides the casus belli that the U.S. narrative needs to justify coercive actions against Venezuela, including sanctions and the threat of military intervention.
· Alignment with U.S. hemispheric vision: Machado concludes her message by asserting that Venezuela will become a “pillar of democratic and energy security in the Western hemisphere” under her leadership, a concept that reflects the continental security doctrine promoted by Washington and aims to realign Venezuelan foreign policy, traditionally independent.
Sovereignty versus submission
Maria Corina Machado’s “Freedom Manifesto” goes far beyond a simple opposition government program. It is a political document that seeks the disarticulation of the Venezuelan constitutional state and the surrender of national sovereignty over its strategic resources, mainly oil and gas.
By openly promoting the privatization of PDVSA, the dismantling of the social state, and the restructuring of the FANB, her proposals are evidently unconstitutional. By aligning with the rhetoric and pressure actions of the Trump administration, including military deployment in the Caribbean, the manifesto reveals itself as an instrument of foreign geopolitical interests aimed at weakening Venezuela’s sovereignty and placing it in a position of subordination within the hemispheric security and energy framework directed by Washington.
In contrast to the agenda of peace and dialogue promoted by Maduro’s government and the development of People’s Power as an expression of participatory democracy, this manifesto represents a bet for confrontation and submission to foreign powers, where the ultimate result would be the sacrifice of national independence and the well-being of the Venezuelan people.