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.”
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission