By Tom Fowdy
It is a well-established fact by now that Republicans in the United States do not approve of the socialist government of Nicholas Maduro in Venezuela, and there has been a longstanding effort to pursue regime change. Indeed, in 2018, ultra-hawk John Bolton engineered the US's decision to recognise Juan Guiado as the "legitimate interim President" of the South American country and refuse to recognise its election results, calling for Maduro's removal. The coup attempt in Caracas ultimately failed to materialise and was eventually shelved by a Biden administration more focused on dual confrontation with Russia and China.
However, Donald Trump's return to office has seen Venezuela regime change placed high on the agenda again, but in a different sort of way. While his administration of old used the tedious US "democracy and freedom" playbook, Trump 2.0, which has disposed of the NeoConservatives and is loyal to the "America First" ideology, is framing his policy towards the Latin American state in a strictly nationalistic lens, one which appeals directly to his MAGA base and plays on racial and immigration-based discourse.
Trump does not frame Maduro as an "oppressive dictator to be toppled," but instead depicts him as an effective cartel leader who is shipping drugs and criminality into the United States, and thus a threat to national security. Anyone who is even vaguely familiar with Trump's politics will be aware that dislike of Latin American-based migration into the United States, its association with narcotics, gangs, and violence, is a core liturgy for his supporters. Hence, Trump's entire movement began all the way back in 2015 with claims that Mexicans were bringing "drugs" into the country, his calls to build a wall, and for mass deportations.
Trump has therefore fused the idea of regime change in Venezuela with his immigration doctrine, making it a very valuable selling point for his political platform and domestic support. The application of this tactic has allowed the President to gravitate towards military action in a manner that can be framed as purely defensive. Hence, military strikes on Venezuelan boats and seizure of ships are framed as Anti-drug operations. This allows him to avoid his base's dislike for aggressive NeoConservative wars, which are waged in the name of bringing "democracy and freedom" to other countries. His supporters thus will tell you he isn't waging war for war's sake, he's defending America from criminality and drugs.
The decision to incrementally increase military pressure on Venezuela is also in line with a broader geopolitical shift in US priorities. As stated in the recent US national security strategy, the White House is now reorienting to a new "Monroe Doctrine" policy that reaffirms American hegemony in the Western Hemisphere and the backyard of its core interests. While the administration doesn't have the political space to simply abandon Asia, the shift is said to reflect the pragmatic reality that the world has changed, the age of unilateral US hegemony is over, and the cost of pursuing an outright cold war confrontation with China is too high.
Venezuela thus represents an ideologically hostile state inside of America's self-declared sphere of influence, wherein, as noted above, there is domestic political gain and practically no costs to terminating Maduro's regime, who, of course, controls huge oil supplies that the US would like to dominate, affirming their own economic and energy security. Thus, Trump sees it as an optimum opportunity for his political interests and US national interests to move towards removing him, although specifically "how" remains to be seen. If Russia and China are strategically smart, they should not intervene in this. First, while Venezuela provides oil, US sanctions have already long crippled their economy and the functionality of their industry for all intents and purposes. Caracaras is a political basket case, a borderline failed state that barely functions at all. There is absolutely zero strategic or political gain for Moscow or Beijing to provide a lifeline for a faltering state that offers very little.
By now, both powers should have learnt that if you do not challenge Trump's domestic political agenda and interests, you can improve relations, and he pragmatically reciprocates the favor. Hence, the Trump administration has dramatically de-escalated with both Moscow and Beijing in a reversal of Biden-era NeoConservatism. So, is there any reason to go out of their way to oppose regime change in Venezuela? Nope, because let's put it this way, in some instances, it better serves Chinese interests when geographically distant faltering regimes fall, because there are paradoxically more opportunities to engage with their successors, which ideology can't compensate for.
For example, the broken, war-torn, and sanctions crippled Assad regime in Syria wasn't useful to anybody. Once it was toppled, Russia simply diplomatically negotiated an extension on its military presence, and then the US lifted sanctions anyway, with the country now having a chance to rebuild itself. What was the strategic loss here? The same goes for Venezuela. Let Trump do his thing and let's see what happens.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:
Opinion | One rule for themselves, another for Jimmy Lai
Opinion | The problematic politicisation of the Tai Po fire tragedy
Opinion | The era of detente has begun, ending the anti-China epoch of 2019-2024
Comment