The back and forth maneuvers that the Donald Trump administration appears to be making on the Venezuela issue are not accidental. It is measuring several variables that have not yet matured.
The issue of regime change in Venezuela has dominated American foreign policy for over two decades, ever since Hugo Chávez took power and introduced a socialist experiment that many today consider a humanitarian catastrophe. With over 10 million Venezuelans living abroad, a population surviving on salaries ranging between $5 and $20 a month, and an economy destroyed despite having the world's largest oil reserves, the stakes are impossible to ignore. Now, with the US government signaling a potential military escalation against the regime of Nicolas Maduro, the old debate returns: Should the US intervene?
The position against intervention
For many Americans, including a growing number of conservatives, the answer is an emphatic no. The idea of military intervention abroad has become particularly odious, especially after decades of costly and unstable outcomes in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. Trump himself was elected, in part, on a promise to end the era of endless wars and stop acting as the world's policeman.
Critics argue that Venezuela must be left to resolve its crisis on its own. If the US proceeds with regime change, it risks delegitimizing any future Venezuelan government as a foreign puppet, destabilizing the country even further. It also sets a dangerous precedent. If Washington justifies a military intervention in the name of democracy, what will prevent Russia or China from using the same argument to justify their own actions in Ukraine or Taiwan?
And there is the image issue. Any intervention would appear less like an act for freedom and more like a matter of oil. Venezuela's huge oil reserves have attracted the interest of external actors for many years, and many fear that an invasion will be viewed, rightly or wrongly, simply as another resource grab disguised as liberation.
The position in favor of intervention
Nevertheless, not everyone agrees that non-intervention is the moral or strategic high ground. Proponents of intervention argue that Maduro has lost any democratic legitimacy he once had. Elections are widely considered fraudulent, international observers are blocked, and opposing voices are typically silenced or imprisoned. For years, millions of Venezuelans, both inside and outside the country, have been asking for external help. And, from their perspective, if the US truly stands for democracy and human rights, it cannot turn a blind eye forever.
Intervention, if done correctly, can be successful. Countries like South Korea, Japan, West Germany, and even Chile (depending on the viewpoint) are examples where American involvement helped rebuild or stabilize nations. The argument is that if Venezuela manages to emerge from the collapse of the Maduro regime, both the Venezuelan people and the US will benefit.
Energy is another undisputed factor. With Venezuela’s oil reserves, stabilizing the country could help lower global oil prices and reduce dependence on other hostile or unstable suppliers. This is not just economic strategy, it is national security.
Finally, from a geopolitical standpoint, inaction may not be an option. While the US delays, Russia and China are not sitting idly by. Both countries have deepened their ties with authoritarian regimes throughout Latin America, and a retreat of influence in Venezuela could hurt US power on its own continent.
A choice of strategy
There is no perfect answer. An American intervention in Venezuela could be disastrous or a saving solution. It could undermine the credibility of the US, or strengthen it. It could be a cynical exploitation of resources, or a necessary stand for democracy in a collapsing country.
In the end, the decision is not just about Venezuela. It is about how the US views its role in the world: passive or decisive, realistic or idealistic, constrained or responsible. And whether America can still afford to look away while others intervene.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών