Empty shelves in the supermarket, a month-long shortage of insulin in the hospitals, expensive infant formula that costs twice the amount of a family’s monthly income — these are only some of the many problems local Venezuelans have to deal with on a daily basis. Since 2015, Venezuela’s GDP has been declining at a rate of 15 percent per year. Limited food production has driven prices far beyond the financial capability of average citizens, leaving millions relying on state-subsidized food stamps. In addition, the news media and opinions online media are heavily censored due to a newly-enacted law by the government that makes any public expression that incites “hate and intolerance” illegal, according to
Bloomberg
.
After taking office in 2013, the current president of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro, immediately implemented a series of policies to consolidate his newly-assumed power. One such policy was his intervention in the National Constituent Assembly. Tightened domestic policies stiffened the locals’ meager hope of gaining freedom from strict authoritarian rule. In 2018, national favorability of Maduro has dropped to around 20 percent, with the vast majority of the population calling for a change.
The U.S. has always been keen on spreading democracy around the world. Faced with the current humanitarian crisis in Venezuela, the U.S. government, along with many Americans, see it as its moral duty to save the people in Venezuela from the peril of dictatorship. On Saturday, Sept. 8,
The New York Times
published an article reporting a meeting between the Trump administration and several Venezuelan officers. The news was quickly followed by a statement from the Venezuelan government, denouncing the U.S. motive to put forth a coup against the current Venezuelan government led by Maduro. It also spurred a nationwide discussion on what the U.S. should do regarding the crisis in Venezuela, keeping in mind the best interest of the Venezuelan people but also citizens of the U.S.
More sanctions will only exacerbate the problem. From 2015 to 2018, the U.S. government imposed four sanctions on Venezuela, including the prohibition of selling its national bond to America, a response to its massive economic inflation and unstable economy. It turns out, however, that the U.S. was not Venezuela’s only potential partner. Maduro quickly turned to his other allies for help. For example, over the past decade, China has channeled over $50 billion into Venezuela through “oil-for-loan” agreements, temporarily ameliorating Venezuela’s economic crisis and helping China fuel its rapidly-growing economy. As the U.S. tries to use sanctions to catalyze reform in Venezuela, it should also recognize that it is no longer the only country that “saves” everyone. Anti-U.S. sentiment continues to grow in South America with the establishment of the socialist national alliance, ALBA
(Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America). By increasing sanctions on Venezuela, the U.S. is simply pushing the country further away from building a constructive relationship and closer into the bosoms of the countries with ideals that are alien to those of the U.S.
What’s more, Venezuela’s broken economy not only puts its government on the brink of collapse, but also harms the millions of citizens in the country who suffer from shortages of food and other necessities. The soaring prices of commodities and increasingly-scarce resources widen the gap between the rich and the poor. While the people in the upper class can still afford most consumables and send their children abroad to pursue a better life, the vast majority of people in the middle and lower class are stuck in the country with no power to effect change. Economic sanctions would deteriorate the situation by stripping away more opportunities that could help the country restore its economy in the future. Even if the current regime was successfully overthrown, a shattered economy and a country imbued with misery is not going to contribute to the long-term stable development of the new government.
Given that economic sanctions are not the best option, what about something more direct, such as organizing a coup? This sounds like a good idea at first glance — quick, direct, and thorough. And since the U.S. ostensibly has the most powerful military in the world, an armed intervention seems easy to pull off. But, we also have to constantly bear in mind that any action taken by the U.S. government should also ensure the protection of the interests of the Venezuelan people. After all, Venezuela should be an independent country. If the U.S. managed to overthrow the current regime and implement another one immediately afterwards, the leader of the new regime is likely to side with the U.S. and be willing to help the U.S. maximize its interests in the region. The political vacuum after the coup creates risk of more domestic conflicts and turmoil. Who is going to monitor a fair and transparent re-election of government? How is the country going to recover after such drastic political reorganization? Unless these questions are properly answered ahead of time, a coup led or supported by the U.S. remains an unwise decision.
Additionally, the fact that President Maduro has tightened Venezuela’s domestic policies suggests insecurity. Maduro rose to power through a “special election” without the support of the public but rather on the coattails of the legacy of the previous strong-rule president, Hugo Chavez. Maduro knew from the beginning of his rule that in order to secure his position as head of the country, he needed to be aware of all potential enemies, both domestically and overseas. The recent meeting between the Trump administration and the Venezuelan officers has without a doubt touched the nerves of the Maduro regime, intensifying the anti-U.S. sentiment in the government and precipitating the creation of stricter censorship of freedom of speech in the country. It is my contention that the possibility of a U.S. coup will encourage the Venezuelan government to increase its military spending, a bad proposition for all involved.
With the complicated situation in Venezuela, the U.S. government should rethink their current and past policies in dealing with its government. The key is to find a balance between pressure and leeway. While economic sanctions can be an effective leverage for change, the U.S. should make sure that it leaves spaces for Venezuela to adjust and concede without harming its people. While starting a coup sounds efficient, we should also consider difficulties that would arise with the following aftermath. After all, any foreign political intervention should be conducted with the principle of prioritizing the interest of the people of the country involved. No one should be the “meat on the plate” in a political game between those who wield the most power on the geo-political stage.
