They are more likely to install a friendly government in Kiev

How though ?
You’re excluding a russian occupation of Ukraine, so have you something else in mind to make it happen ?

I know that i didn’t went far enough when searching for something that would please both sides in my first comment(, and even less in the subsequent ones), but if it’s not through strength then it’ll be through mutual concessions, i think.

And as said/implied earlier, using strength won’t make ukrainians like Russia, while mutual concessions may inverse their western shift.

Anyway, i don’t know the perfect solution to each conflict, but what should distinguish us from the past is to avoid situations such as “the winner takes all”, in the case of Israel there should be a two-states solution eventually leading to a single state with a brotherly unity between israeli jews and arabic muslims, in the case of Venezuela they should have a control of their oil, and if they choose to accept foreign companies then it shouldn’t be the current decades-long robbery but stops e.g. at a 20% ROI, we should allow socialist/islamic/… states and other differences, and in every case we should treat others as we would like to be treated, which is obviously a laughable notion in international politics where strength(&‘narrative management’) rules supreme, a conclusion which leads to the necessity of establishing solutions such as an international army and tribunal, for example.
Or we could just continue to fight between each other so that we’re on the good side of an unfair situation that only one side agrees to.
I don’t know if it’s true, but Russia often said that Ukraine can choose any side it wants as long as it doesn’t endanger Russia, closing a path to n.a.t.o. but leaving them to choose the e.u… Seems reasonable if they stay demilitarized, but it’d mean joining the e.u. over keeping their south-eastern territories, which shouldn’t be considered worth it i.m.o.

avoidance

When either the Kiev regime or the Ukrainian armed forces collapse the Russians can occupy as much of Ukraine as they want.

How will that happen, an invasion of the whole territory seem possible to you ?
It seems to me that Ukraine cannot progress further, and Russia either can’t or refuses to in regard to the costs(, not that it’s bidding its time).
I think it’ll end up with a negotiation as said previously(, i.e. Ukraine in the e.u., but demilitarized and not in the n.a.t.o., with the risks it entails), i’m curious to know if you’d attempt a more precise prediction for this year.

That would signal to the population of those regions, who are now officially Russian citizens, that Russia is not serious about protecting them, that Russia lied about viewing them as an integral part of the Russian nation, and instead sees them as a bargaining chip that can be given away as a “concession”.

I don’t agree, these populations rejected a certain kind of Ukraine, so may like to be given another choice in regard to another kind of Ukraine, and as stated it would weight in the negotiations without costing much, among other advantages.
But w/e, i get your point, no need to discuss it further i think.

i am not angry

Oh ! Great then, thanks for saying that :) !
I must have misunderstood

No, i see no indication of that. (…) I think the current regime in Kiev is never going to accept those demands.

I partially agree with you, Ukraine wasn’t aiming for a negotiated settlement in 2022 with its unreasonable demands that can only be asked of a defeated country, and they didn’t care about multiplying the proposals or intensifying the negotiations.
It’s just much less excessive nowadays, e.g. the 4th and 13th point aren’t uninteresting, but it’s still far from there, so Russia won’t accept.

Why would the result be any different than in 2022 ?

Because they were opposed to an anti-russian shift, so could eventually want to reconcile with a pro-russian Ukraine, whether by nostalgia or more pragmatically to influence it from the inside.

I’m trying to see what would make Ukraine desire to give up its western shift, hence why i necessarily have to be looking for russian concessions.
It’d be easier(, but even more futile,) to just say that “there’s nothing to be done, let’s just wait until Russia invade the rest of Ukraine”, but i wanted to see if i/we could find what a negotiated resolution accepted by both sides would entail.
Promising such referendums could weight in the balance towards obtaining a ukrainian agreement, such promise could also be useful to maintain their desire of being pro-russian, since they’d want to become attractive again to their old territories. Russia, being the largest country on Earth, may agree to such potential loss if it’s worth it to them.

Apart from the referendums, a second thing that could weight in their decision to shift their allegiance would be money, but the e.u. promised them the same economic boom as Poland, a promise hard to compete against.
If they ever manage to outclass such economic promise though(, which remains doubtful), then i think that Ukraine’s shift may be assured.

Realistically, they’ll lose their territories and be demilitarized, not allowed in the n.a.t.o. But they may be in the e.u., and may conspire to wage another war while breaking their demilitarization promise(, just like they never intended to respect the Minsk agreements in the first place), i suppose that we’ll see.
Russia may invade the rest of Ukraine, i.d.k. why they haven’t yet, retreating from Kiev at the end of March and mostly defending their line afterwards instead of attacking.

It’s just my opinion, and w/e, it’s not that easy to find a win-win situation :/

I added an edit to my previous answer while you were writing yours, and if you’re angry/‘the one who downvoted my previous comment(, a few minutes after you answered)’, then chill out man, if you’re looking for opponents then go elsewhere than Lemmygrad where we’re all on the same side, don’t picture me as someone i’m not.

the Kiev regime had no intention of negotiating

Yeah, they thought they could win(, or that they had to take the chance). Wouldn’t you agree that they seem to have changed their mind since the last year, being now more inclined towards a negotiated settlement that doesn’t come ?
I suppose that not, based on your comment. Would you say that they’re simply delusional ? I tried here to imagine what would be conditions such that both sides could agree to it, as pointless as it is.

Here’s the russian’s June 2024 demands b.t.w.
So, i think that Ukraine could accept them, by asking for these economic promises and later referendums in surplus, since it’s not forbidden to add their conditions to the russian ones.
I think that both sides could end up agreeing on these conditions. If you don’t then ok, i don’t see what i could add to what i said.

The Russian people would see relinquishing what they fought and died for as a complete betrayal and would oust any Russian government that tried to do that.

Even if it’s a 2050 referendum from these regions(, after Ukraine went back to support Russia, Belarus, and the side it held for pretty much its whole past) ?
If they still don’t want to in 2050, then Ukraine will have taken its chance.

Ukraine had a chance to keep the entire Donbass with the Minsk agreements.

Yeah(, the civil war kept raging though, even if Ukraine put anti-russian leaders in charge in these regions, they often had more than 95% of them voting for pro-russian political parties, not easy to overturn that), because they were interested in Crimea, and instead of cancelling their western shift they increased it, motivated by revenge instead of recognizing their wrongs.
Similarly, they lost Crimea due to previous pro-western decisions that endangered Russia(, making Crimea a n.a.t.o. port, overthrowing Yanukovich, anti-u.s.s.r. and anti-russia sentiments, opening themselves entirely to western companies and organizations, …) It was multiplied under Poroshenko, etc.
They perfectly knew how the west intended to use them against Russia, how we destroyed Yugoslavia and acted in the Chechnyan conflict, or used other russian neighbours against it, but despite knowing the consequences for Russia they went for it anyway.

And that is exactly why they are incompatible with eastern Ukraine

They were pro-u.s.s.r. in the past, they can become pro-Rus again. As i said above, perhaps not for all of them though(, e.g. eastern Galicia).
And if you disagree and claim that Kiev, for example, will never rejoin its old side again, then we’ll both disagree, and so be it.

You may not have seen the edition of my previous comment

What “Ukraine” - aka the current illegitimate regime in Kiev - values is of no importance to Russia.

What’s the difference with the west then ? Aren’t they supposed to be the civilized side while we’re barbarians crowning ourselves the policemen of the world after having attempted to colonize it(, and continuing to steal their raw materials, etc.) ?
Or perhaps that there’s no difference and they should just do as they want to since they’re the strongest.

Those territories are essential to Russia’s security.

Having a pro-russian Ukraine is essential, not having n.a.t.o. and c.i.a. bases(/ports/…) at its borders is essential, …
Whether these territories are pro-russian or russian doesn’t change much.

If they were to give them back to a Russia-aligned Ukraine who’s to say Ukraine wouldn’t turn back into a hostile entity again at some point ?

Yeah, i developed that point when editing my previous comment.
Especially here : « That’s why i initially thought of a relative control of Ukraine as an autonomous territory inside the russian federation, but perhaps that any agreement leaving Ukraine’s military in Russia’s hands would be enough. »
With the conclusion that « So either Ukraine is proposed something that they desire more than their military/‘ability to threaten Russia’, and willingly agree to such negotiation, as said above. Or the strong takes what it can while the weak endures what it must. »
Russia hasn’t decided on a complete invasion of Ukraine for some reason(, which can be imagined), and everything indicate, from the first weeks of the war and the years preceding it, that they would prefer a negotiation to the use of force.

And i think you are seriously underestimating the animosity that the people in the Donbass have toward the Ukrainian state.

Don’t you think that they still consider themselves ukrainian ?
I.m.o., they just don’t perceive Ukraine as pro-n.a.t.o., and consider themselves as the true ukrainians, while the other are fake newcomers that changed it after 1991, while painting the u.s.s.r. and Russia as an oppressive ruler instead of their brother.
Pro-e.u. ukrainians don’t have a problem with capitalism, n.a.t.o. interventionnism, nor the increasing grasp of the e.u. on the sovereignty of its member-states. They also consider themselves authentic by picturing ukrainians as having always struggle for independence, instead of belonging to the same Rus people, closer to Belarus and western Russia than to western Europe and eastern Russia.
What i think is that they would like to bring back the rest of Ukraine to their side.

The rest of your arguments seem to have been answered above :) ?

(Feels weird to argue with someone from my side, i should perhaps take my lemmy.world account again)

Edit post-answer :

To sum up all these words : i think that ukrainians would value their western shift less than an economic boom and/or their territories so, if we suppose that Russia is looking for a negotiated resolution, it could promise referendums and negotiated economic advantages in exchange for the definitive loss of the ukrainian military capacity.

If we take things from the ukrainian side : you’re proposed a possibility to get back your territories if you’re pro-russian, among other requirements needed to have the votes of these populations in the upcoming referendums ; you’re also promised, through negotiated explicit conditions, an economic growth demanded by your population.
In exchange, you just have to give up on your n.a.t.o. alliance.
I don’t see why they’d refuse.

I don’t think they’re buying that they’re on the side of freedom(, of speech, election, …,) against authoritarianism. Nor that they’d join the anti-imperialist internationalist struggle for a multipolar world, against hegemonic capitalist-owned nationalists.
Each ukrainian is different, but ideological battles of the good side against the bad one don’t seem like it’d weight in their considerations. So i don’t see why they’d refuse such proposal(, only seeing the economic promise of the e.u. based on Poland for their interest).

I think that Ukraine values these territories more than it values being able to contain&hamper Russia, but it could content itself with an immediate economic program and future territorial promises.
So, an option could be the implementation of a negotiated economic program, as well as referendums in its old territories for, e.g., 2030, and then again one ~last time in 2050.

In comparison, it’s my belief that Russia values a friendly/russia-aligned Ukraine more than it values keeping these territories for itself. It remains to be determined if such alignment of Ukraine could be compatible with its election of a government among multiple political parties, not sure that banning all western influence could be done, sufficient, or even desirable perhaps(, because of the retaliation against foreign medias in the west).
That’s why i initially thought of a relative control of Ukraine as an autonomous territory inside the russian federation, but perhaps that any agreement leaving Ukraine’s military in Russia’s hands would be enough.
The whole “security guarantees” that both sides are asking for is representative of the problem, since Ukraine will say that not being able to threaten Russia will threaten them.
So either Ukraine is proposed something that they desire more than their military/‘ability to threaten Russia’, and willingly agree to such negotiation, as said above. Or the strong takes what it can while the weak endures what it must.

The west obviously cares more about Ukraine’s ability to hinder the Russian federation than Ukraine’s economy or territory.
However, Russia will care about its security much more than we(sterners) care about bringing its downfall(, just like we(sterners) would care about our security more than Russia would care about bringing our downfall).

I don’t think that there is that much hate between north-western and south-eastern ukrainians(, obviously there is once you start killing each other), the latter mostly fought against n.a.t.o., anti-russians, the e.u., …, as well as against cultural/linguistic/political/socio-economical/… ukrainian laws, and an overall change of their historical path.
Perhaps would there be some irredeemable exception to a pro-russian reunification, such as eastern Galicia, which Poland would pay a lot to gain(, if the local population is given a choice through a referendum between independence or joining either side).

Territories are a weird thing, we’re ready to hurt everything in our path(, including erasing the local culture,) to gain what seems to be the most important possible thing a state could gain, yet won’t like extending it through an alliance of different ideologies.
It’s precisely because we lack experience throughout history in such alliance of different ideologies that it’d appear nonsensical to claim that if Ukraine joined (with )the russian federation, then it’d be (part of )the largest country on Earth.

I’d almost certainly learn more by talking with pro-n.a.t.o. redditors(, i.d.k. how long a single thread would take though, if i’m not censored before that), but let me know your thoughts if you ever feel inclined to.

hypocrites

Yeah, look at this ex-general, current member of the Congress, a classic lack of self-awareness, especially two weeks after what they did to Venezuela and are doing to Iran, and are threatening to do in Mexico/Colombia/Cuba/…, and the (parliamentary )coup they supported in Peru, etc. :

No doubt that if Ukraine was on Russia’s side, they would consider it a security threat just like they’re currently claiming for Russia, China, Iran, …
I think that Ukraine would be ready to rejoin the Russian federation in exchange for :
- a recovery of their territories(, even if they were given by Russia in the past) ;
- an autonomous status inside the federation(, it could be strong enough as long as there’s no risk of western-backed remilitarization directed against Russia) ;
- a serious heavyweight economic program with China’s help for its development(, i.d.k. what China would receive, but ukrainian poverty was a huge factor that turned them against their previous family/side, even if we(sterners) were clearly responsible for it, accusing their oligarchs isn’t going far enough) ;
- the recovery of Transnistria according to the will of its population.
It could be an alliance or confederation that would include a military fusion, there’s no need to go as far as formally including Ukraine in the russian federation(, or giving back immediately each territory without referendums, negotiations are more complex than a lemmy comment, i’m just exploring possibilities)
Of course, the west will complain, but nothing new at this point, they may forget a decade later, and historians will take into account the arguments presented in the russian speeches.

Anyway, we(sterners) won’t care about creating a world where everyone’s security would be ensured against ©overt influences. It’s not even discussed, much less researched. And if it’s not on our mind, it’s because hegemony is our goal, not living (united )in diversity. Hegemony, and hence we(sterners), should be opposed.
We may have many more problems(&qualities), but i currently don’t care in comparison.

As a kinda unrelated note, homicides went down 30%(!) in a single year, because repression/violence isn’t the only way(, nor the best i.m.o.,) way to lower criminality, at least she adds social policies to her repression : https://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/mexico-homicide-rate-2026

(AMLO was awesome, and Ecuador proved among other countries that repression without social measures is less efficient than the right depicts it, they should just look at what works, e.g. many studies point to abortion in order to explain the diminution of criminality in the 90s, people aren’t genetically predestined to sin, it’s almost entirely a result of the environment, of course)

Anyway, D.Trump shouldn’t strike territories that don’t want his “help”.
If we(sterners) want less crimes in poor countries, then having a relatively same standard of living in all of them should be our first priority(, but we’d lose our advantage when buying/investing abroad, as well as our disadvantage when exporting products made in the west, a disadvantage that we’ve shouldered until now through our monopoly on highly complex manufactured products).
Also, perhaps attack the american buyers instead of the mexican makers ? I don’t get it. Just like for the american druglords, one less mexican drug-maker would leave room for a new one to arrive.

If i understood correctly, they’d need to work 3-4 times more in order to buy the same thing :

So much “justice”.

Marco Rubio gave countries some tips on how to remain sovereign/free :

Thanks for the hope

(if you’re french, and so many beyond the ex-director of Le Monde Diplomatique, e.g. 1, 2, and more, i didn’t know/expected that they had such direct access to H.Chávez and N.Maduro)

More informations :

The Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela reiterates its international condemnation of being the victim of a criminal, illegitimate, and illegal aggression against its territory and its people, an action that has resulted in the deaths of more than one hundred civilians and military personnel who, in defense of the Homeland, were killed in flagrant violation of international law.
As is well known, within the framework of this aggression, the illegal kidnapping of the Constitutional President of the Republic, Nicolás Maduro Moros, and the First Lady, Cilia Flores, took place, an act that constitutes a serious violation of the personal immunity of heads of state and of the fundamental principles of the international legal order.
In order to address this situation within the framework of international law, and in strict adherence to the principles of national sovereignty and Bolivarian Peace Diplomacy, the Bolivarian Government of Venezuela has decided to initiate an exploratory diplomatic process with the Government of the United States of America, aimed at re-establishing diplomatic missions in both countries, with the purpose of addressing the consequences of the aggression and kidnapping of the President of the Republic and the First Lady, as well as addressing a working agenda of mutual interest
In this context, a delegation of diplomatic officials from the United States Department of State arrives in the country to conduct technical and logistical assessments inherent to the diplomatic function. Likewise, a delegation of Venezuelan diplomats will be sent to the United States to carry out the corresponding tasks. As the Acting President, Delcy Rodriguez, has reiterated, Venezuela will confront this aggression through diplomatic channels, convinced that Bolivarian Diplomacy of Peace is the legitimate path for the defense of sovereignty, the restoration of international law, and the preservation of peace.
Caracas, January 9, 2026.

Here’s the full declaration(, automatic spanish subtitles translated in english works well).
Does anyone here think that they shouldn’t ?

The argument/fear would be that they survived until now partly because they were authoritarian&cautious enough to prevent multiple coup attempts that would have worked in a lot of other countries(, but also because they got through economically, etc.). What if the u.s. warmed up the relations only to get close enough with them to do a coup ?

I’d like to believe that after so many years they won’t put themselves in a situation where the expected western betrayal has too much of an impact, among other precautions.
I also believe in their participatory(&protagonic) process(, its critics would prefer bourgeois democracies). A contented population is useful against coups, and if all goes well economically then the best is yet to come and they’ll have many more reasons to be proud of their collective accomplishments.
They ‘know what’s at stake’/‘feel the “weight of the centuries”’ better than i do, and won’t lower their guard, may there be no more killings&destructions.

I’m perhaps wrong but if they sell the oil at an unfair price, while paying for the whole infrastructure themselves, then they could keep 100% of what the u.s. leaves them, and use it for the good of the venezuelans.


https://open.substack.com/pub/gzucman/p/understanding-us-intervention-in
« In 1958, the 40–50 thousand workers employed by the oil and iron industries, comprising less than 3% of the country’s total workforce, earned more than half of the country’s wages. In addition, their housing, education and health services were provided by their employers.
In contrast, the common city wage earner employed in industry and commerce on the other hand, spent 48% of his income on food. Less than one-third of dwellings were reported to have running water in the 1957 national census. Thus, even if Venezuela reportedly had the continent’s highest per capita income at the time—US$743 in 1962—this wealth was concentrated in the hands of those who benefited from the oil industry. » (source)

It depends on how much the u.s. intends to rob them but, foolishly perhaps, i’d like to naively hope that D.Trump would then leave them in peace despite their direct democracy and egalitarian values(, until the next u.s. president).

A weird idea would be a national referendum along the lines of “Would you rather [u.s. economic demands post-negotiations], or fight an invasion ?”, both to show that they’re not a dictatorship, and in order to leave the fate of the revolution to their hands.

Through negotiations, these kind of demands could be granted as long as it doesn’t exceed +10% of non-us products, reducing it to a selection of sectors. If it’s understood that it’d ease the negotiations on oil, and be included in the eventual national referendum, just my ignorant opinion.

Why would venezuelans revolt against participative democracy ? These accusations of dictatorship can’t apply for once.
https://x.com/i/status/2007752956016476515
https://x.com/i/status/2007470177508860377
https://x.com/i/status/2007918112696614959
https://x.com/i/status/2007691484322247101
https://x.com/i/status/2007691205837238546
https://x.com/i/status/2007797250320412991

https://x.com/i/status/2007630518683349184
https://x.com/i/status/2007588951608177081

(note that a numeric identity emitted by our governments, as is currently being applied all over the western world, will obviously not protect us from the astroturfing of our government/allies, they’ll use it to fight “extremism”)

https://www.presidencia.gob.ve/ and https://www.mppre.gob.ve/ don’t seem to load :

But https://prensapresidencialvenezuela.gob.ve/index.php/author/prensa still works, as well as https://t.me/DrodriguezVen

https://youtube.com/@telesurenglish is worth mentioning, but does anyone know of a website with english subtitles for speeches from venezuelan officials(, ideally like https://youtube.com/@michaelrossipolisci) ?

This channel seem to be an equivalent. It only has automatic subtitles in english, but they’re much better nowadays, if you want to give them a try : https://youtu.be/TMk-l6SNb4g, https://youtu.be/p4V7Qiu7NrQ

It’s very close to the historical US invasion of Panama in 1989

B.t.w., Manuel Noriega surrendered in Panama on January 3, 1990

1. With Venezuelan President Maduro deposed, what do you think the people in Venezuela would do in response to the US (under Trump)’ involvement in his deposition ?

Guerilla warfare worked for Afghanistan(, no doubt that they’ll be called terrorists and not the u.s. troops).

2. Would Acting President of Venezuela Delcy Rodriguez (who served as Maduro’s Vice President) pick up where Maduro left off ?

I.d.k., i.m.o. she should prepare for the incoming counter-revolutionary propaganda by, e.g., reminding everyone that the economic revival was going to happen and that’s why the u.s. attacked, they’ll need illegal propaganda outlets if invaded.
And also prepare actively for resistance cells, how to hide them, finance them, recruit, plan ahead, achieve a relative autonomy, etc.
An advantage to them is that Trump is hated by the (neo-)liberals, so they may repel an invasion by holding out long enough. Any last stand would in any case be of use to fuel the future nostalgia.
Here they/we thought that the darkest times were past them, it’s not fair.

3. How do you stay hopeful and optimistic despite the current (as of this post) administration?

I don’t, but what’s the difference compared to before ?
I/We hated the west for a reason, it tells us that we(sterners) haven’t changed.

5. Also, would Venezuela be better off if it were decentralized ?

https://venezuelanalysis.com/infographics/15642

They’ll then act surprised that we’d cheer for the US demise

Banned for 30 days for lashing out in anger.
I hope that the mods will reduce his sentence(, they pinned his post on Venezuela, and then ban him for a month for being angry at N.Maduro for not managing to avoid capture ?)

You can often hear the argument that the sanctions against Venezuela began after its economic crisis, whereas in fact they started when the oil’s crisis ended :


https://cepr.net/images/stories/reports/venezuela-sanctions-2019-04.pdf
« According to the National Survey on Living Conditions (ENCOVI by its acronym in Spanish), an annual survey of living conditions administered by three Venezuelan universities, there was a 31% increase in general mortality from 2017 to 2018. This would imply an increase of more than 40,000 deaths. »
https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/s/bfcVHBTZaQ
More here :

« The Government’s revenue was reported to shrink by 99% with the country currently living on 1% of its pre-sanctions income. » — https://www.ohchr.org/en/statements-and-speeches/2021/02/preliminary-findings-visit-bolivarian-republic-venezuela-special
Their foreign currency revenue also dropped.

These numbers were now back to a million barrels per day and rapidly rising.

The truth is, of course, not that socialism never works, but that capitalists fear that socialism works so much that they fight it until it falls. That’s what they did/do with Cuba or the USSR.

Other links :
- John Bolton admitted that the US attempted at least once to coup N.Maduro in Trump’s first term : https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/former-national-security-adviser-john-bolton-admits-planning-foreign-c-rcna37968 ;
- Not only does Venezuela has the world’s largest oil reserves, but also south america’s largest gold reserves ;
- As easily debunkable as these accusations are, the official reason for a $50M bounty is narco-trafficking : ;
- https://liberationnews.org/an-open-letter-to-the-american-people-from-president-nicolas-maduro
;
- multiple gestures since anticommunism/anti-‘worker’s liberation from exploitation’ is a bilateral policy, no need to enumerate all of his gestures towards peace, since nobody doubt that the u.s. attacked unprovoked ;
- They claim that the sanctions caused them to lose more than $1.000 billions(!) ;
- A twitter thread with a lot of informations : https://x.com/i/status/1827707466114568370 ;
- On the accusations of fraud(, which aren’t related to the official accusations of narco-trafficking, necessary to present Venezuela’s existence as an attack to the USA), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, …, that many disinformation to censor(, soon, they’re working on it) ;
- Memories of Alex Saab(, infographic), hinting at a possible detente after 3 years and a half of incarceration, it didn’t last and neither did this after Russia’s oil ban ;
- Don’t miss venezuelanalysis infographics : https://venezuelanalysis.com/category/infographics ;
- A little victory

I deleted that part :

Of course, they censored teleSUR, nothing is more common than censorship nowadays, freedom( of expression for our opponents) is only a western value for the ignorant.

Articles from https://www.telesurenglish.net/, and hence https://t.me/teleSUREng as well, currently don’t load for me, but it works indeed on https://www.telesurtv.net/, thanks.
(Also, the US banned N.Maduro’s YouTube account in September)

Edit : Neither https://www.presidencia.gob.ve/ nor https://www.mppre.gob.ve/ seem to work :