Venezuela blames power outages on sabotage and cyberattack.
Specifically on a yanqui "demonic electromagnetic attack." But most observers think the explanation is reaching. It's surely possible to take a grid down with a cyberattack (the Russians have done it twice in Ukraine), and there's little love lost between the Chavista regime and the US (indeed, little love lost between the Chavista regime and most of the Western Hemisphere) but an attack seems unlikely. Instead, the best explanation seems that the blackout is the result of corruption, neglect, and mismanagement (Business Insider).
Still, Maduro's story has found, if not many believers, at least some willing to suspend disbelief (as, arguably, with Green Left and Citizen Truth), or use the incident in the service of larger goals (as, arguably, with Sputnik or Tasnim). China has expressed its sympathy and offered to help with both investigation and recovery (Reuters).
So while taking down a power grid by cyberattack is certainly possible, it would seem that Venezuela's tottering infrastructure needed no such push to bring it down (Anatoly Kurmanaev). There's also the question of motive and national strategy, and neither of these seem to fit the US attack Maduro insists the US has made.
But Venezuela's current agonies are instructive nonetheless (New York Times). They show the widespread suffering a long-lasting interruption of electrical power can impose. Consider loss of lighting and its effect on public safety, or loss of refrigeration and its effect on food storage. An account in WIRED of the difficulty of a black start, that is, bringing a dead grid back online, illustrates the consequences of infrastructure collapse. Load balancing is particularly tricky, and a lack of understanding of what caused the outage in the first place renders it trickier.
The US State Department withdrew its remaining diplomatic staff from Venezuela this week. President Maduro shortly thereafter ordered them expelled (Reuters).