Caracas (AFP)

Negotiators of the shadow, "internal divisions" and "calculations": the "contacts" between Washington and members of the government of Nicolas Maduro are opaque and the topics discussed globally unknown, but they show that the Venezuelan crisis has entered a phase of negotiations in all directions.

"All parties - the Maduro government, the Trump administration and Juan Guaido's opposition - are moving towards an agreement to end the crisis and move towards a transition," says AFP Michael Shifter, President of the Inter-American Dialogue, a think-tank based in Washington.

But these negotiations are not limited to the dialogue undertaken since May between the Venezuelan government and the opposition.

On Tuesday, the US president revealed that "contacts" "at a very high level" existed between Washington and "several representatives of Venezuela." On the other hand, motus on the identity of the protagonists.

His counterpart Nicolas Maduro, who feeds a persistent hatred against Donald Trump, was quick to "confirm" that these contacts existed "for months" and that they proceeded with his "express authorization".

A dialogue would have emerged between the Trump administration and the "rogue regime" of Mr. Maduro she continues to denounce?

The next day, John Bolton, Donald Trump's national security advisor, set the record straight.

He explained that the Venezuelan negotiators had spoken with Washington "in the back of Maduro" and that they "speak only of his departure and free elections". In other words, two demands ... of opposition leader Juan Guaido, who has been trying to drive Nicolas Maduro out of power since January.

So, who in the Maduro camp speaks to the Trump administration?

According to several media, it would be the president of the Constituent Assembly and unavoidable of the Chavist system, Diosdado Cabello. He neither confirmed nor denied. Washington, he exclaimed, "thinks we can divide ourselves with gossip."

- "Nest with intrigues" -

But, according to Michael Shifter, "there are internal divisions within the governments of Trump and Maduro". "Some factions fighting for power send often conflicting messages," he adds.

In this "nest of intrigues", all are trying to advance their pawns and "seek a solution" to the crisis, said political scientist Luis Salamanca.

Because the South American country is bogged down in the worst crisis of its recent history. In addition to political instability, Venezuela is bled by economic chaos that has pushed 3.3 million people to emigrate since 2016, according to the UN.

The United States continues to strengthen their economic sanctions and their pressure to push Nicolas Maduro to the exit. But Juan Guaido, since he proclaimed himself acting president and has been recognized as such by some fifty countries including the United States, has still not reached the palace of Miraflores.

Negotiations between the opposition and the government have been held since May under the auspices of Norway, but on August 7, Nicolas Maduro suspended his camp's participation when the Trump administration announced new sanctions against Caracas.

This dialogue could resume next week, according to a source in the opposition.

And, according to an opposition MP, the government's emissaries are ready to accept an early presidential "in exchange for the lifting of sanctions, but the United States will not accept until Maduro is in power."

Because the sanctions, which hit hard the population, force Nicolas Maduro to negotiate.

"Maduro does not have any more money," says Luis Salamanca. And the high-command military, pillar of the Venezuelan political system, "makes its calculations.The structure of power is cracking and the support he enjoyed is cracking."

What is striking is also that the Trump administration has directly taken the lead in the negotiations, implying that his confidence in Juan Guaido's ability to chase Nicolas Maduro diminishes.

But the analyst Luis Vicente Leon warns: "Negotiations that are likely to succeed are not the ones we announce, that we denounce or those where we reveal the identity of his interlocutor".

"These methods would tend to indicate that (dialogue) attempts have failed," he says.

© 2019 AFP