Donald Trump was not present at the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo. I was also not expected to witness an act ultimately absent from the prize, María Corina Machado. But the American president has been an indirect protagonist: the promise of the leader of the Venezuelan opposition that his country “breathes again” intensifies the attention on the Republican pulse of Nicolás Maduro and the uncertainty about himself will end up ordering an attack against targets on the territory of the Caribbean country.
Awaiting Machado’s arrival in Oslo, Trump warned this month in an act at Casa Blanca of any possibility that the Venezuelan opposition leader would be arrested if she tried to return to her home country. “I would not like” her to be arrested, declared the American president.
The Venezuelan opposition leader dedicated his prize to Trump, among others, when he announced in October that he was the winner of this edition of the Nobel Peace Prize and that he was in telephone contact with the American president. Afterwards, Machado declared that he had ended Maduro’s “war” in Venezuela.
The opposition leader favors U.S. intervention to force Maduro’s downfall, and in his speech this week he declares a list to seek regime change in Venezuela: “During these two months of hiding, we have built new networks of civic imprisonment and disciplined disobedience, preparing us for an orderly transition that is now democratic,” his daughter read.
The Trump administration says the huge military deployment it has maintained since August in international waters of the Caribbean against Venezuela is aimed at combating drug trafficking as part of Operation “Lanza del Sur,” during which it bombed at least 22 suspected drug boats and killed at least 87 people.
But Caracas, as well as many American experts and legislators, consider that the real reason for this campaign is to try to force the march of Maduro and the end of the Chavista regime. In an interview recorded and published online on Politico Digital, Trump assured that the days of the Venezuelan leader in power “are numbered” and did not rule out sending American troops to that country. In his speech in Pennsylvania, the president reiterated his threats to take the campaign to Venezuelan soil. “Por Tierra is easier… (and drug trafficking) is more widespread,” he argued.
The big unknown is whether Trump will eventually follow through on his threats. Yes, in this case, with what result. The military maintained in the area is not sufficient for a ground invasion: the think tank CSIS calculates that at least 50,000 troops would be needed for an aggression of this type. It is not clear that the goal of overthrowing Maduro has been achieved – and even if it is a setback, we would still like to resolve Venezuela’s post-conflict stability. The precedent of the last major intervention of the United States abroad, in Iraq – another oil country – is not halagüeño.
“For Maduro, it is a question of survival,” says Francesca Emanuele, of the Center for Political and Economic Research (CEPR), who excludes the possibility that the Chavista leader voluntarily abandons power. “Under the conditions under which the United States is currently created, this situation will not change.”
If the attack on the ground that Trump threatens happened, the expert warns, “it would be something terrible on the ground for Venezuela, a bell for the whole region.” Many illicit agents with access to weapons are present in this South American country, and even in Colombia, its internal situation has given rise to the largest migration crisis in modern Latin American history. “We could see a terribly destructive conflict in Venezuela that could spread throughout the region,” he said.
“The consequences could range from a schism between the Venezuelan armed forces to the emergence of a pro-provincial guerrilla, including a civil war and even the worsening of the migration crisis that Trump perceives as the key to the national security problems of the United States,” underlines Daniel de Petris, of think tank Defense priorities.
Despite Trump’s threats, it is not yet clear whether the president has made a final decision. In addition to the difficulties associated with an attack and the resulting situation, the president is faced with his own electorate. The majority of Americans, according to polls, do not support military intervention. And his own team of advisers appears divided between those who prefer a diplomatic solution and those who support military force.
“Secretary of State Marco Rubio has been the driving force behind US policy towards Venezuela and the military deployment in recent months,” recalls Brian Finucane, former legal advisor to the State Department and now a member of the conflict resolution organization Crisis Group. The hope of the head of American diplomacy, according to this expert, is that an attack “will cause the departure of Maduro or remove other members of the government to dismiss him”. “If it were just Rubio, he would authorize military action to force regime change. But that is not up to him, like Donald Trump, who, to our knowledge, has not authorized direct military intervention in Venezuela.”
According to this expert, it is still possible that the conflict between the two governments will eventually be resolved peacefully and that, without bloodshed, Trump can achieve victory.
“The president attributes his interests in Venezuela to immigration and deportation concerns, as well as the war on drugs. Since Venezuela does not export fentanyl, Trump can claim victory on that front. Borders are at an all-time low and Caracas just announced it would reauthorize repatriation flights for deportees. Demand that leaders reach some sort of agreement for greater participation by U.S. companies in Venezuela’s oil sector…The risks intervention are real, given the irregular nature of this administration, but there are also possible solutions to avoid military action,” explains Finucane.
About The Author
