President Donald Trump’s plan to take control of Venezuela’s oil industry and ask American companies to revitalize it after capturing President Nicolás Maduro in a raid isn’t likely to have a significant immediate impact on oil prices.

Venezuela’s oil industry is in disrepair after years of neglect and international sanctions, so it could take years and major investments before production can increase dramatically. But some analysts are optimistic that Venezuela could double or triple its current output of about 1.1 million barrels of oil a day to return to historic levels fairly quickly.

“While many are reporting Venezuela’s oil infrastructure was unharmed by U.S. military actions, it has been decaying for many many years and will take time to rebuild,” said Patrick De Haan, who is the lead petroleum analyst at gasoline price tracker GasBuddy.

American oil companies will want a stable regime in the country before they are willing to invest heavily, and the political picture remained uncertain Saturday with Trump saying that the United States is in charge, while the current Venezuelan vice president argued, before Venezuela’s high court ordered her to assume the role of interim president, that Maduro should be restored to power.

“But if it seems like the U.S. is successful in running the country for the next 24 hours, I would say there would be a lot of optimism that U.S. energy companies could come in and revitalize the Venezuelan oil industry fairly quickly,” said Phil Flynn, a senior market analyst at the Price Futures Group.

And if Venezuela can grow into an oil production powerhouse, Flynn said “that could cement lower prices for the longer term” and put more pressure on Russia.

Oil isn’t traded over the weekend, so there wasn’t an immediate impact on prices. But a major shift in prices isn’t expected when the market does reopen. Venezuela is a member of OPEC so its production is already accounted for there. And there is currently a surplus of oil on the global market.

Proven reserves

Venezuela is known to have the world’s largest proven crude oil reserves of approximately 303 billion barrels, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. That accounts for roughly 17% of all global oil reserves.

So international oil companies have reason to be interested in Venezuela. Leading companies, including Exxon Mobil and Chevron, didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment Saturday. ConocoPhillips spokesperson Dennis Nuss said by email that the company “is monitoring developments in Venezuela and their potential implications for global energy supply and stability. It would be premature to speculate on any future business activities or investments.”

Chevron is the only one with significant operations in Venezuela, where it produces about 250,000 barrels a day. Chevron, which first invested in Venezuela in the 1920s, does business in the country through joint ventures with the state-owned company Petróleos de Venezuela S.A., commonly known as PDVSA.

But even with those massive reserves, Venezuela has been producing less than 1% of the world’s crude oil supply. Corruption, mismanagement and U.S. economic sanctions saw production steadily decline from the 3.5 million barrels per day pumped in 1999 to today’s levels.

The problem isn’t finding the oil. It’s a question of the political environment and whether companies can count on the government to live up to their contracts. Back in 2007, then President Hugo Chávez nationalized much of the oil production and forced major players like ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips out.

“The issue is not just that the infrastructure is in bad shape, but it’s mostly about how do you get foreign companies to start pouring money in before they have a clear perspective on the political stability, the contract situation and the like,” said Francisco Monaldi, who is the director of the Latin American energy program at Rice University.

But the infrastructure does need significant investment.

“The estimate is that in order for Venezuela to increase from one million barrels per day — that is what it produces today — to four million barrels, it will take about a decade and about a hundred billion dollars of investment,” Monaldi said.

Strong demand

Venezuela produces the kind of heavy crude oil that’s needed for diesel fuel, asphalt and other fuels for heavy equipment. Diesel is in short supply around the world because of the sanctions on oil from Venezuela and Russia and because America’s lighter crude oil can’t easily replace it.

Years ago, American refineries on the Gulf Coast were optimized to handle that kind of heavy crude at a time when U.S. oil production was falling and Venezuelan and Mexican crude was plentiful. So refineries would love to have more access to Venezuela’s crude because it would help them operate more efficiently, and it tends to be a little cheaper.

Boosting Venezuelan production could also make it easier to put pressure on Russia because Europe and the rest of the world could get more of the diesel and heavy oil they need from Venezuela and stop buying from Russia.

“There’s been a big benefit for Russia to see Venezuela’s oil industry collapse. And the reason is because they were a competitor on the global stage for that oil market,” Flynn said.

Complicated legal picture

But Matthew Waxman, a Columbia University law professor who was a national security official in the George W. Bush administration, said seizing control of Venezuela’s resources opens up additional legal issues.

“For example, a big issue will be who really owns Venezuela’s oil?” Waxman wrote in an email. “An occupying military power can’t enrich itself by taking another state’s resources, but the Trump administration will probably claim that the Venezuelan government never rightfully held them.”

But Waxman, who served in the State and Defense departments and on the National Security Council under Bush, noted that “we’ve seen the administration talk very dismissively about international law when it comes to Venezuela.”

___

Associated Press writers Matt O’Brien and Ben Finley contributed to this report.

One person was killed and two others wounded when a Ukrainian drone struck a car in the Russian border region of Belgorod, local officials said Sunday, ahead of peace talks to end the nearly 4-year-old war in Paris this week.

Belgorod regional Gov. Vyacheslav Gladkov said a young child was among the wounded.

In Ukraine, three people were wounded in the Kharkiv region in drone strikes overnight into Sunday, the country’s State Emergency Service said.

Meanwhile, the death toll from a Russian missile attack on the city of Kharkiv on Friday increased to four when two other bodies were found under the rubble of a building, Kharkiv regional head Oleh Syniehubov wrote on Telegram Sunday.

The latest attacks came after national security advisers from Europe and other allies visited Kyiv on Saturday to discuss security guarantees and economic support, as a U.S.-led diplomatic push to end the war in Ukraine intensifies.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, preparing to travel to Paris for a meeting with partners, said Saturday that work on the peace proposals could now accelerate as Ukraine has shared all documents under discussion with the 18 national security advisers, including those on security guarantees.

He said representatives from Ukraine’s General Staff and military sector would meet on Monday in Paris, followed by a meeting Tuesday of European leaders, where he said he hoped documents on security guarantees would be finalized. He said there also would be meetings with U.S. representatives in Paris.

___

Follow AP’s coverage of the war in Ukraine at https://apnews.com/hub/russia-ukraine

DALTON, Ga. (AP) — President Donald Trump says Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene is a traitor. But for Jackie Harling, who chairs the local Republican Party in Greene’s northwestern corner of Georgia, she’s still “mama bear.”

“Every thought that we had in our minds, she seemed to be very good at verbalizing,” Harling said.

Saying things that no one else would say may be Greene’s most durable legacy as she steps down on Monday, resigning halfway through her third term in Congress. First, it was her embrace of conspiracy theories and incendiary rhetoric, turning her into a national symbol of a political culture without guardrails. Then it was her willingness to criticize Trump, a schism that made her position in Washington untenable.

In interviews in Greene’s district, constituents described her over and over as a “fighter.” For Republicans like Harling, that was enough.

“We got a lot of satisfaction,” Harling said. “She was our voice.”

It was less satisfying for an independent like Heath Patterson, who struggled to think of ways that Greene’s fame and notoriety made a difference for her district during her time in the U.S. Capitol.

“I don’t know of anything that she did do here except, certainly, got her voice heard. But where did we, how did we benefit from that?” he said. “I don’t think we did.”

From MAGA warrior to exile

Greene began clashing with Trump last year, criticizing his focus on foreign policy and his reluctance to release documents involving the Jeffrey Epstein case. The president eventually had enough, saying he would support a primary challenge against her. Greene announced a week later that she would resign.

She has kept up the criticism since then, including over Trump’s decision to strike Venezuela this weekend.

“This is what many in MAGA thought they voted to end,” Greene wrote on social media on Saturday. “Boy were we wrong.”

The split was surprising because, until that point, Greene’s trajectory had mirrored Trump’s own rise to power. She didn’t become politically involved until his presidential campaign in 2016 and first ran for Congress in 2020. Greene considered trying to represent Georgia’s 6th congressional district, which includes the Atlanta suburbs, before relocating to the 14th, where the Republican incumbent was retiring.

She remained loyal to Trump after he lost to President Joe Biden, promoting his falsehoods about a stolen election. When Trump ran again in 2024, she toured the country with him and spoke at his rallies while wearing a red “Make America Great Again” hat.

Her Georgia district is one of the most Republican-leaning in the state, although it wasn’t always that way. The region once backed Democrats like Zell Miller, a governor and U.S. senator who spearheaded Georgia’s lottery program that still bankrolls college scholarships and early childhood education programs.

But residents have felt left behind by years of change, said Jan Pourquoi, a Belgian native who emigrated in 1987, became a U.S. citizen and later won local office in Whitfield County.

His county’s population has grown by roughly by 32% since 1990, which pales in comparison to statewide growth of 74%. As the U.S. becomes more urban, secular, and diverse, Pourquoi said residents believe they’re “culturally oppressed.”

“They see themselves as great Americans, proud Americans, Christian Americans, and that doesn’t fit the American model anymore as they see it,” said Pourquoi, who said he left the Republican Party because of Trump. Greene exemplified the political backlash, which he summarized as “stick it to them — any possible way you can.”

Georgia leaders, like those in many other states, have spent years drawing congressional districts to pack like-minded voters together. That means in red areas, whoever wins the Republican primary is virtually guaranteed to come out on top in the general election, incentivizing candidates like Greene with more hardline views.

The political landscape means former Republicans like Pourquoi or independents like Patterson say they have no shot at helping a centrist win.

“I’m kind of square in the middle,” said Patterson, adding that it sometimes feels like he’s “the only one around here who’s that way.”

Republicans plan their path forward

Whitfield County Republicans gathered at a local restaurant last month for their annual Christmas party, where seasonal decor and a visit from Santa Claus were intermingled with the red, white and blue regalia and a smattering of MAGA paraphernalia.

There was still deep affection for Greene and plenty of talk about the cultural issues she championed.

“I think it’s just the fact that she was unwavering in ‘America First,’” said Gavin Swafford, who worked on Greene’s initial campaign.

Swafford called her “an accountability representative” because of her clashes with Republican leaders.

Lisa Adams, a party volunteer, called Greene “our stand-up person.”

“Look at her stance on transgenderism. That’s a big one,” she said. “Abortion. That’s a big one.”

None of Greene’s inconsistencies — real or perceived — were a problem, they said.

For example, Greene has praised the Korean-owned solar panel factories in the district even after voting against Biden-era policies intended to boost production. She broke with Republicans, Trump included, and sided with Democrats who wanted to extend premium subsidies for Affordable Care Act health insurance customers.

None of the Republicans at the Christmas party expressed any interest in taking sides between Trump and Greene.

“I think it’s inevitable when you have two firebrands that are both stubborn,” Swafford said.

Asked whether the district missed having a more traditional lawmaker, the kind who might cut bipartisan deals and bring as much federal money as possible back home, Swafford was unconcerned.

“The biggest thing that Marjorie contributed wasn’t even in legislation,” he said.

Still, there was also a sense among some that Greene, for all her bare-knuckle politics, could have gone further.

Star Black, a Republican who is running to replace Greene, was already planning a primary challenge before she announced her resignation.

“You had a great representative who was a fighter. Well, you know what? I want to take it one step further,” Black said.

“Not only do you need a fighter,” Black said, “you need someone who is going to listen. You need someone who is going to represent you.”

NEW YORK (AP) — A newly unsealed U.S. Justice Department indictment accuses captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro of running a “corrupt, illegitimate government” fueled by an extensive drug-trafficking operation that flooded the U.S. with thousands of tons of cocaine.

The arrest of Maduro and his wife in a stunning military operation early Saturday in Venezuela sets the stage for a major test for U.S. prosecutors as they seek to secure a conviction in a Manhattan courtroom against the longtime leader of the oil-rich South American nation.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a post on X that Maduro and his wife “will soon face the full wrath of American justice on American soil in American courts.”

Here’s a look at the accusations against Maduro and the charges he faces.

Maduro faces drugs and weapons charges

Maduro is charged alongside his wife, his son and three others. Maduro is indicted on four counts: narco-terrorism conspiracy, cocaine importation conspiracy, possession of machine guns and destructive devices and conspiracy to possess machine guns and destructive devices.

Maduro is facing the same charges as in an earlier indictment brought against him in Manhattan federal court in 2020, during the first Trump presidency. The new indictment unsealed on Saturday, which adds charges against Maduro’s wife, was filed under seal in the Southern District of New York just before Christmas.

It was not immediately clear when Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, would make their first appearance at the courthouse in Manhattan. A video posted Saturday night on social media by a White House account showed Maduro, smiling, as he was escorted through a U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration office in New York by two federal agents grasping his arms. He was expected to be detained while awaiting trial at a federal jail in Brooklyn.

Maduro allowed ‘cocaine-fueled corruption to flourish,’ US says

The indictment accuses Maduro of partnering with “some of the most violent and prolific drug traffickers and narco-terrorists in the world” to allow for the shipment of thousands of tons of cocaine into the U.S. Authorities allege powerful and violent drug-trafficking organizations, such as the Sinaloa Cartel and Tren de Aragua gang, worked directly with the Venezuelan government and then sent profits to high-ranking officials who helped and protected them in exchange.

Maduro allowed “cocaine-fueled corruption to flourish for his own benefit, for the benefit of members of his ruling regime, and for the benefit of his family members,” the indictment alleges.

U.S. authorities allege that Maduro and his family “provided law enforcement cover and logistical support” to cartels moving drugs throughout the region, resulting in as much as 250 tons of cocaine trafficked through Venezuela annually by 2020, according to the indictment. Drugs were moved on go-fast vessels, fishing boats and container ships or on planes from clandestine airstrips, the indictment says.

“This cycle of narcotics-based corruption lines the pockets of Venezuelan officials and their families while also benefiting violent narco-terrorists who operate with impunity on Venezuelan soil and who help produce, protect, and transport tons of cocaine to the United States,” the indictment says.

Allegations of bribes and orders of kidnappings and murders

The U.S. accuses Maduro and his wife of ordering kidnappings, beatings and murders “against those who owed them drug money or otherwise undermined their drug trafficking operation.” That includes the killing of a local drug boss in Caracas, according to the indictment.

Maduro’s wife is also accused of accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes in 2007 to arrange a meeting between “a large-scale drug trafficker” and the director of Venezuela’s National Anti-Drug Office. In a corrupt deal, the drug trafficker then agreed to pay a monthly bribe to the director of the anti-drug office as well as about $100,000 for each cocaine-carrying flight “to ensure the flight’s safe passage.” Some of that money then went to Maduro’s wife, the indictment says.

Nephews of Maduro’s wife were heard during recorded meetings with confidential U.S. government sources in 2015 agreeing to send “multi-hundred-kilogram cocaine shipments” from Maduro’s “presidential hanger” at a Venezuelan airport. The nephews during the recorded meetings explained “that they were at ‘war’ with the United States,” the indictment alleges. They were both sentenced in 2017 to 18 years in prison for conspiring to send tons of cocaine into the U.S. before being released in 2022 as part of a prisoner swap in exchange for seven imprisoned Americans.

Operation to capture Maduro was a ‘law enforcement function,’ Rubio says

During a news conference, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, cast the military raid that captured Maduro and his wife as an action carried out on behalf of the Department of Justice. Caine said the operation was made “at the request of the Justice Department.”

Rubio, as he responded to a question about whether Congress had been notified, said the U.S. raid to get the couple was “basically a law enforcement function,” adding that it was an instance in which the “Department of War supported the Department of Justice.” He called Maduro “a fugitive of American justice with a $50 million reward” over his head.

___

Richer reported from Washington.