US President Donald Trump’s talk of a “military option” in Venezuela risks alienating Latin American nations that overcame their reluctance to work with the Republican leader and had adopted a common, confrontational approach aimed at isolating Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro’s embattled government.
Well before Maduro himself responded, governments in Latin America with a long memory of US interventions were quick to express alarm over what sounded to them like saber-rattling.
Even Colombia — Washington’s staunchest ally in the region — condemned any “military measures and the use of force” that encroach on Venezuela’s sovereignty.
Illustration: Mountain people
Maduro has long accused Washington of having military designs on Venezuela and specifically its vast oil reserves.
However, those claims were dismissed by many as an attempt to distract from his government’s failures to curb problems such as widespread shortages, spiraling inflation and one of the world’s worst homicide rates.
“For years he’s been saying the US is preparing an invasion and everyone laughed, but now the claim has been validated,” said Mark Feierstein, who served as former US president Barack Obama’s top national security adviser on Latin America. “It’s hard to imagine a more damaging thing for Trump to say.”
The timing of Trump’s remarks could not be worse, coming on the eve of a four-nation Latin America trip by US Vice President Mike Pence intended to showcase how Washington and regional partners can work to promote democracy.
This week in Peru, foreign ministers from 12 Western nations condemned the breakdown of democracy in Venezuela and refused to recognize a new, pro-government assembly created by Maduro that is charged with rewriting the Venezuelan constitution, but is seen by many as an illegitimate power grab.
The US did not take part in the meeting, a show of deference to countries historically mistrustful of heavy-handed policies out of Washington.
Suspicion and resentment linger in many corners of the region, a reflection of years past when US troops did in fact invade parts of Latin America to oust leftist leaders or collect unpaid debts.
Yet a number of leaders, amid prodding from the Trump administration, have lately been overcoming their reluctance to intervene in a neighbor’s internal political affairs after looking the other ways for years on Venezuela.
For the first time, leaders have started using the D-word — dictatorship — to describe Venezuela’s government and have recalled their ambassadors from Caracas in protest.
Peru on Friday went so far as to expel Venezuela’s ambassador and last week the South American trade bloc Mercosur suspended Venezuela for breaches of the group’s democratic norms.
Even more surprising, with the exception of close ideological allies such as Cuba and Bolivia, no country spoke out against Trump’s decision to slap sanctions on more than 30 Venezuelan officials, including Maduro himself, despite past criticism of similar unilateral actions.
Not even the frustration over Trump’s decision to partially roll back Obama’s opening to Cuba — a diplomatic thaw that was applauded across the region’s political spectrum — or his constant talk of building a border wall to keep out immigrants got in the way of presenting a united front toward Maduro.
However, the swift reaction to Trump’s “military” remarks shows there is no appetite in the region for US troops to get involved.
On Saturday the nations of Mercosur, which includes Brazil and Argentina, issued a statement saying: “The only acceptable means of promoting democracy are dialogue and diplomacy” and repudiating “violence and any option that implies the use of force.”
US engagement with other countries has not been constant and may have benefited more from the deteriorating situation in Venezuela than any concerted diplomatic outreach.
US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in June skipped a key meeting of the Organization of American States, depriving some Caribbean countries that depend on Venezuelan oil shipments of the political cover they were looking for to abandon their support for Maduro.
Under the advice of Pence and Republican Senator Marco Rubio, Trump appears to have taken an interest in Venezuela and even met at the White House with the wife of a prominent jailed opposition leader.
That in turn has emboldened Maduro opponents, who have been protesting for four months demanding he give up power.
Their efforts could be undermined if Maduro expands his crackdown on dissent, arguing as he has in the past that their tactics are a prelude to a US-backed coup.
Only this time he can point to Trump’s words as evidence.
Pence arrived in Colombia on Sunday to begin his Latin America tour, during which discussions on how to deal with Venezuela are expected to feature prominently.
Instead he might be forced to do damage control, said Christopher Sabatini, executive director of Global Americans, a Web site focused on US policy in the region.
“He’s about to get an earful,” Sabatini said. “The eagerness of Trump and some people around him to mouth off without any idea of context is really damaging not only to US policy, but also regional stability.”
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
RSS