With Maduro Gone Democracy Must Remain the Goal
The successful capturing of Venezuela's dictator Nicolás Maduro by the United States has been far smoother than I predicted. While I (and I hope others) envisioned a tough scenario with protracted military action and an entrenched Maduro later being discovered as Hussein and Gaddafi were, the surgical extraction of the autocrat has been exemplary. With minimal casualties and precise strikes on military bases, it might change the game for regime changes in the future.
While many Venezuelans and those of us who have supported the ousting of Maduro celebrate, the jubilation shouldn't be too premature. As I argued in my essay last month, the end result of this intervention must mean a return of Venezuela's democracy which, at the moment, still hangs in the balance. Indeed, while the face of the Chavista regime has been arrested and will face trial, the dictatorship itself will still remain and will morph into something perhaps more vicious, unless it too is dealt with.
Marco Rubio is reported to have told Utah Senator Mike Lee that he doesn't anticipate any further action now that Maduro is in custody. This, if true, is wishful thinking. Much like the successful US-led coalition intervention that pushed Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait in 1991, it still left the Iraqi dictator in power instead of marching on to Baghdad to remove him once and for all. This kicking the can down the road ultimately meant that the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq ended up being the disaster that it was as sectarianisms intensified and the regime became more radically unstable. In a similar vein, the Obama administration's "half-in, half-out" policy toward Libya only meant that while Gaddafi was gone, the Libyan people were not given the support they needed to consolidate a stable government.
It is also important to highlight that a democratic consolidation in Venezuela would be immensely in the US’s interests in the long-term. Regardless of the interests have in a loyal Venezuela—whether that’s oil or whatever other mineral—the country would be much more reliable as a long-term ally than in the form of a coerced vicepresident looking to secure her own position. Indeed, stability for Venezuela can only be guaranteed through its return to democracy, no matter how tempting the short-termism is. The US would do well to think twice before betraying the Venezuelan democratic revolution, as winning the hearts of Venezuelans for helping them restore their freedom is just as important a geopolitical strategy as it is a moral imperative.
Momentum for regime change doesn't last, and leaving the work half done will only make it worse further on down the line. And the same is true of Venezuela. The point of removing Maduro is not because we are simply anti-Maduro but because we are pro-democracy, and a hands-off approach in the hope that the Venezuelans can manage this alone will result in more bloodshed than is necessary.
My fear is still Venezuela becoming another Libya if the US decides to give up now.
