Economic rationale behind sabotage claims

A note published by El Universal on Monday 27 argues that Petróleos de Venezuela could increase the amount it claims from insurance companies if it can show that direct sabotage was the cause fof the fire in the Amuay refinery last year.

The article cites sources from the insurance sector that explain that “the insurance policies contracted by Petróleos de Venezuela should include sabotage, because that has always been the case.”

But on the contrary, if the cause of the event was shown to be lack of maintenance in the refinery, as the opposition argues, the sources quoted by El Universal said that “not only could payments be limited, but [insurance companies] could reject the claims altogether.”

However they added that sabotage is very hard to demonstrate, and that PDVSA would be force to allow access to insurance companies to conduct their own investigations.

It is an interesting argument, but I tend to think that claims made by the government that the opposition is full of “wreckers and saboteurs” financed by the Empire have a broader political aim than negotiating insurance deductibles. In any case, both aims are not incompatible.