Field Note: Lines on the Water

It started with a question that sounded simple enough.

A U.S. maritime company was evaluating an opportunity linked to Venezuela, and their general counsel wanted to understand what they were really walking toward. Not the headlines. Not the speculation. The operational and geopolitical reality underneath.

The timing mattered. Sanctions policy was shifting just enough to generate interest but not enough to provide clarity. Chevron had a narrow license. Everyone else was operating off a mix of public guidance, diplomatic signals, and industry rumor. On the surface the environment looked calm. Beneath it, nothing was settled.

The first step was to build a geopolitical and sanctions assessment that could support real decisions, not theoretical debate. That meant mapping three layers.

The formal layer, where OFAC rules, enforcement patterns, and licensing structures established the boundaries.

The practical layer, where PDVSA’s internal instability, unpaid intermediary networks, and failing terminal infrastructure shaped what the client would actually face.

And the human layer, where credibility, alignment, and capacity of local actors often determine whether a deal evolves or unravels.

The aim was not to predict outcomes. It was to show where conditions were stable, where they were deteriorating, and where assumptions could quietly fail without warning. Good executives know the difference between risk and uncertainty. Great ones insist on seeing both before they act.

When the assessment was finished, the company decided to send a small delegation to Caracas to understand the opportunity firsthand. My role shifted to movement planning and environment shaping. On paper this is logistics. In reality it is about removing unnecessary friction so the client can focus on the substance of the trip, not the volatility around it.

You plan routes that allow for quiet adjustments. You choose hotels where the security environment is predictable rather than polished. You build schedules that respect local rhythms so meetings do not start with cultural missteps. You manage exposure, not through force, but through alignment with how the country actually works. If you get it right, the day feels uneventful.

That is the point.

The trip was productive. The executives returned with a clearer sense of what was possible and, more importantly, what was not. There were no dramatic moments. No visible threats. No disruptions. What happened was more subtle. Their picture of the opportunity shifted from abstract to grounded. They understood which risks were structural, which were manageable, and which would require time or policy change before becoming viable.

What stood out was the discipline in their approach. They did not travel seeking confirmation of a desired outcome. They traveled to test their assumptions. They held their conclusions lightly until the evidence supported them. In environments shaped by sanctions policy, political incentives, and contested institutions, that discipline separates prudent exploration from preventable error.

Good preparation does not eliminate uncertainty. It defines it. It gives clients the room to slow down, to see the difference between an opening and a mirage, and to make decisions based on conditions rather than momentum.

From above, lines on the water look straight even when the currents beneath them are shifting. The work is learning to read the movement below the surface before you turn into it.