4 Effects on Brazil of American action in Venezuela

For Carolina Silva Pedroso, professor of international relations at the Federal University of São Paulo (Unifesp), US action could take the form of a sea, land or air attack, but also through US support for some kind of internal resistance against the Maduro government, using the CIA.

“It is not clear what the United States will do next, but we have increasingly strong evidence that there is, in fact, planning that goes beyond the official justification to combat drug trafficking,” Pedroso says.

According to the expert, in any of the worsening scenarios, the repercussions for other countries in South America would be practically inevitable.

Check below what is at stake and what are the four main impacts that Brazil could suffer if the conflict escalates.

The presence of US aircraft carriers and troops in the Caribbean goes against the Latin American tradition of non-combatantism, according to Monica Herz, a professor at the Institute of International Relations at PUC-Rio.

“This calls into question decades of efforts to maintain the South Atlantic and Latin America as zones of peace,” warns Herz.

The expert considers an American invasion of Venezuela similar to Iraq in 2003, when American and allied forces invaded the Middle Eastern country and overthrew Saddam Hussein’s regime, to be unlikely.

But according to Herz, the Trump administration’s recent attacks on ships and the significant increase in military presence in the Caribbean indicate a massive show of force by the United States amid the dispute over spheres of influence.

“There is a long tradition, since the Monroe Doctrine, of regarding Latin America as a North American sphere of influence,” he says. “But there is also a current reality, related to this government, which asserts that military power relations are absolutely dominant and throws all international law into the trash.” “It’s a very worrying situation.”

All of this, the professor says, has great potential to cause regional instability, whether in military, political, humanitarian or economic terms.

Herz also points out that, at least so far, there have been no major demonstrations of dialogue among Latin American leaders in search of consensus or resolution on the crisis, indicating a lack of coordination to deal with the escalation.

In turn, Carolina Pedroso does not rule out the militarization of the current confrontation. According to the expert, Venezuela’s military doctrine, based on “armed civil resistance” and inspired by Vietnam, could turn the country into a phase of protracted war, with repercussions similar to those occurring in the Middle East.

“We could see elements of conflicts like Syria or Libya in Venezuela, with the presence of multiple armed groups, political division and external support for regime change generating long-term problems. This would generate a spiral of instability across the region.”

Experts say another immediate consequence of direct conflict or increased political tension would be a greater increase in the flow of migration from Venezuela.

“The biggest risk of all is the deterioration of the humanitarian situation, which is already happening, but will certainly get worse,” says Carolina Pedroso. She recalls that states such as Roraima and Amazonas are already facing social tensions due to the arrival of Venezuelans, with public services overloaded and bouts of xenophobia.

As the economic and social crisis in Venezuela has worsened in recent years, the flow of Venezuelan citizens to various destinations in Latin America and the Caribbean has increased significantly.

Colombia and Peru receive most of the refugees and migrants from Venezuela. In Brazil, 568,000 Venezuelans entered between 2015 and June 2024, according to the United Nations.

Monica Herz also highlights that internal conflict or civil war “would bring serious security challenges to controlling the Brazilian border.” According to her, “this would increase the risks related to transnational crime and the circulation of weapons and drugs in the region.”

Intervention in North America would also put the Brazilian government in a sensitive position, especially on the eve of the 2026 elections.

Experts interviewed by BBC Brazil believe that Washington’s support to overthrow the government of Nicolas Maduro is likely.

In this scenario, they say, the rise to power of the opposition and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Maria Corina Machado or other right-wing forces would also be possible.

María Corina defends US military operations in the region and has stated in interviews that she maintains contacts with Washington, and has even requested the Trump administration’s support to oust Maduro.

The opposition also criticized the position of Lula, who during his meeting with Trump last October defended a “political and diplomatic” way out of the crisis in the neighboring country and suggested Brazil’s participation as a facilitator in possible negotiations.

In an interview with the newspaper O Globo, María Corina stressed that any negotiations with Maduro must have as its starting point the victory that the opposition claims to have achieved in the presidential elections of July 28, 2024. “Everything else is unacceptable, and certainly unacceptable if it comes from a leader who claims to be a democrat,” she said, referring to Lula.

For Monica Herz, the previous closeness between the current Brazilian president, his party and the Maduro government could make dialogue difficult in the event of a change of government.

“A potential right-wing government in Venezuela would present President Lula with another regional challenge, at a time when progressive forces are facing difficulties in South America,” Herz says.

However, Carolina Pedroso believes that Brazil will be a key player in any negotiation attempt. “There will be no successful mediation without Brazil,” he says. “It is the country with the best political and diplomatic conditions to try to prevent the conflict from escalating.”

The question, in her view, is whether the United States or a potential Venezuelan government allied with Washington would accept Brazilian action as a mediator.

“There is still room for diplomacy, but time is running out,” the expert warns. “Every week that passes brings the region closer to a scenario that would have been unimaginable just a few years ago.”

Another point of concern is the discourse in North America linking drug trafficking with terrorism.

Since the beginning of his term, Donald Trump has designated several Latin American drug cartels as global terrorist organizations. According to experts, this measure opens the possibility for the US Armed Forces to take direct action against these organizations.

Among the cartels affected are Tren de Aragua, which is based in Venezuela, and Cartel de los Soles, which, according to the United States, is linked to high levels of the Venezuelan government. The two organizations are at the center of recent American attacks in the Caribbean.

For Carolina Pedroso, the US strategy of equating drug trafficking with terrorism also opens the way for unilateral actions and violations of other countries’ sovereignty.

“If this logic is strengthened, Brazil may in the future become a target of external pressure under the pretext of fighting organized crime,” he says.

The Brazilian government rejected this comparison. “Terrorism always involves an ideological issue. Political action and social repression with sporadic attacks. Criminal factions consist of groups of people who systematically commit crimes provided for by the Penal Code. Therefore, it is very easy to identify the criminal faction based on the results of their actions,” Justice Minister, Ricardo Lewandowski, said recently.

Monica Herz believes that the internal discussion about public security in Brazil and police actions in Rio already reflects a tendency toward militarization. “There is an increasing normalization of the use of force, which is dangerous for democracy,” he says.