Author: La Tabla/Data Journalism Platform 2 DEC 2025
The report published on December 1st by Reuters regarding the alleged call between Donald Trump and Nicolás Maduro confirms the existence of a media operation aimed at depicting a triumphant U.S. president and a humiliated, defeated Latin American leader.
While more elaborate than the story from the Miami Herald, this new “narrative” is even more implausible: among the requests attributed to Maduro is the closure of an investigation by the International Criminal Court (ICC), an entity that the United States is not a member of and has directly sanctioned in 2020 and 2025 for investigating its own officials.
This aspect is not only legally impossible, but also reveals a structural contradiction in the story: how could Trump negotiate the closure of a case in a court that his government rejects, sanctions, and does not recognize?
The inclusion of this request cannot be attributed to narrative clumsiness but rather to an explicit intent to deceive. Reuters is not mistaken: it constructs a false narrative, just as it did when announcing the arrival of U.S. warships to the Caribbean in “36 hours,” a claim that La Tabla promptly debunked.
Validation of Key Elements
Below are the components of the narrative published by Reuters, along with their respective legal, institutional, and narrative validation:
1. The Trump–Maduro Call on November 21
Reuters states that it was brief (less than 15 minutes) and that Trump rejected the key requests.
– Consistency: plausible as a news item, but the lack of official details and dependence on anonymous sources limits verification.
– Narrative: aligns with Washington’s maximum pressure strategy, but the “ultimatum” format simplifies what is usually more complicated in real negotiations.
2. Maduro’s Requests
– Complete legal amnesty + lifting of sanctions + closure of the ICC case:
• Legally unfeasible: the ICC is independent, and the U.S. cannot close a case there. Sanctions depend on sovereign decisions of the U.S. Executive and Congress.
• Narratively inconsistent: Maduro denies crimes; asking for “global amnesty” would imply an admission. A more plausible request would be for security guarantees or asylum in a third country.
– Lifting of sanctions for more than 100 officials:
• Theoretically possible, but unlikely: would require a major political shift in the U.S.
– Transitional leadership of Delcy Rodríguez before elections:
• Politically coherent as an internal transition formula, but unacceptable to Washington: the U.S. does not recognize either Rodríguez or Maduro as legitimate authorities.
3. Trump’s Rejection and One-Week Ultimatum
Reuters reports that Trump gave Maduro a one-week deadline to leave with his family.
– Consistency: fits the pressure narrative, but lacks institutional traces (there was no official announcement or public timeline).
– Narrative: serves as a dramatic ultimatum rather than a realistic negotiation.
4. Expiration of “Safe Passage” and Airspace Closure
Trump allegedly declared Venezuelan airspace “closed” after the deadline expired.
– Legally inconsistent: the U.S. does not have jurisdiction over Venezuelan airspace. It can declare prohibitions for U.S. aircraft, but cannot “close” foreign airspace.
– Narrative: a symbolic pressure tactic rather than a viable operational measure.
5. Rewards and Judicial Accusations
It confirms the reward of $50 million for Maduro and $25 million for other officials (Cabello, etc.).
– Consistency: this is verifiable and official; it is part of U.S. federal narcotrafficking accusations.
– Narrative: reinforces the contradiction: offering “safe passage” clashes with ongoing judicial processes.
6. Withdrawal of the ICC Technical Office in Caracas (December 1)
Coincides with the context: the ICC announced its closure due to lack of cooperation.
– Consistency: verifiable and official.
– Narrative: amplifies the tension and renders the idea of “closing” the case through negotiation even less viable.
Conclusion
Reuters’ narrative blends verifiable facts with impossible demands, constructing a story that fails legal and political scrutiny. More than a faithful reconstruction of a negotiation, the report operates as a dramatic pressure script, designed to reinforce an image of U.S. victory and Venezuelan defeat. The intent to liie, rather than incompetence, defines the character of this informational operation.