1. Avoiding Destruction
By U.S. Sanctions
– Imminent collapse risk: Monómeros operates under temporary waivers from the OFAC (Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S.), which will expire in 2025. Given the recent tightening of sanctions against Venezuela, their renewal is unlikely. Without sales, the company would face financial and operational blockages leading to bankruptcy, impacting food security in Colombia and Venezuela’s income.
– History of sabotage: Between 2019-2022, during the management of the Venezuelan opposition (backed by the U.S.), Monómeros was subjected to a deliberate plan to render it “financially unviable”. Executives connected to Juan Guaidó and suppliers like Nitron Group manipulated information and contracts to facilitate a hostile takeover, reducing production from 92% to 22%.
2. Nitron Group: Links with Political and Economic Adversaries
Corrupt intermediaries’ networks:
– Jorge Pacheco and the Venezuelan opposition: Director of Nitrofert (a purchasing company linked to Nitron), Pacheco has ties to Leopoldo López, Juan Guaidó, and ultra-right sectors in Colombia. His aim was to acquire Monómeros through fraudulent maneuvers during the opposition’s tenure, using offshore companies to evade sanctions.
– Connection with Uribe and Duque: Iván Duque’s government (2018-2022) facilitated the Venezuelan opposition’s control of Monómeros in 2019, overlooking corruption complaints. The Superintendency of Companies of Colombia — then aligned with Duque — intervened in the company to legitimize the transition, paving the way for Nitron.
Geopolitical links with the U.S.:
– Trump Era Strategy: Nitron Group, based in Connecticut (U.S.), is the “second largest fertilizer distributor worldwide”. During the Trump administration (2017-2021), it pushed for expansion in Latin America, using agreements with allies like Macri in Argentina to control strategic infrastructures (e.g. Paraná-Paraguay Waterway). With Trump’s return in 2025, these operations were reactivated under Milei’s government, confirming its role as a commercial arm of the U.S. agenda.
– Monopoly and price hikes: Acquiring Monómeros would give Nitron control of 40% of the fertilizer market in Colombia, raising agricultural input costs and hurting small producers. This would benefit U.S. conglomerates, not Venezuela or Colombia.
3. Consequences of a Sale to Nitron:
Strategic Risks
– Financing the adversary: The sale proceeds would flow to a company under investigation for corruption, whose executives conspired with the Venezuelan opposition to dismantle state assets.
– Legitimizing the blockade: Selling to Nitron would validate U.S. sanctions as an economic coercion tool, encouraging repeat actions against other Venezuelan assets (e.g., CITGO).
Conclusion: Reasons for a Strategic Sale (but not to Nitron)
– Protection, not surrender: Selling to a neutral partner prevents Monómeros from being destroyed by sanctions, preserving income for Venezuela and stability for Colombia.
– Defense of sovereignty: Rejecting Nitron is an ethical and political imperative: do not reward actors who sabotaged the company or strengthen a key ally of Trump, whose administration maintains the blockade against Venezuela.
This decision isn’t just economical: it is an act of resistance against a hoarding scheme led by Washington and executed by corrupt intermediaries. Selling to another actor — ideally Colombian — would protect the asset without sacrificing national dignity.