The Venezuelan tragedy – What next?
Occasionally, it feels like the political situation in Venezuela no longer receives the international coverage its political and humanitarian crisis corresponds to. Having said that, Venezuela’s recent controversial victory of a seat on the UN Human Rights Council seems to have reignited the global interest. Ever since a full-scale crisis broke out in 2013 due to economically motivated pressures on the government, the situation has consistently worsened. Nicolas Maduro, the highly disputed president of the country, has been placed under the spotlight by the international community for his failure to manage the conflict, and for his part in deepening human rights violations. Evidently, the country has suffered as a result of poor leadership, but also unfortunate economic circumstances, combining to create a severe situation few could have imagined prior to Maduro’s takeover in 2013. Given the gravity of the situation and the limited progress in encountering a solution, the origins of this crisis deserve to be analysed. This should help provide an insight into what the future holds for Venezuela.
The decline in the Venezuelan GDP between 2013 and 2017 is of unprecedented magnitude. Described as more significant than the US collapse after the Great Depression, the collapse of the heavily oil-reliant economy culminated in a much broader humanitarian and political crisis than initially anticipated. Official figures have reported several millions having fled the country since 2015. Most recently, a 2019 figure shows the considerable long-term impact of the crisis, as national debt is expected to double the country’s GDP. Considered one of the wealthiest Latin American countries due to its richness of natural resources, a mixture of corruption scandals and a poorly managed response to the collapsing oil prices of 2014 started this crisis. Widespread discontent among the Venezuelan population was met with government force, a first step taken by Maduro in damaging his own human rights record and global reputation.
Nicolas Maduro took over the Venezuelan presidency following the death of his predecessor, Hugo Chavez, in 2013. Venezuela had been benefiting from the oil barrel being set at more than US $100, contributing significantly to Chavez’s domestic popularity and support. This enabled the leader to consolidate his influence over the Constitution and extend presidential terms by one year. Maduro, the successor, was a strong advocate of his policies and was able to carry on given his experience working below Chavez. However, the situation changed dramatically after oil prices began to fall. In addition, Venezuelans and the global community in general have noted Maduro’s “lack of charisma and instinct”, especially in comparison to Chavez. Control over military forces and the Supreme Court have maintained Maduro in power, both a direct consequence of Chavez’s time as President. Maduro has, however, been able to leave his own mark by forming the National Assembly in 2017, facilitating control by introducing several of his supporters into key positions. Maduro, a self-proclaimed Chavez supporter, was keen on expanding upon policies of previous governments. This approach was proving insufficient as social unrest continued to develop and most crucially, the attitude of the international community began to change for the worse. The government now faced more than just domestic protests, as suspicions among international actors developed considerably.
Reported human rights abuses against the opposition caught the attention of the international community, and in particular major powers like the United States. The legitimacy of Nicolas Maduro’s government was clearly damaged and lacks international recognition, with numerous sanctions focusing on the Venezuelan oil industry. Described by the government as an attempt to “destabilize the country”,Maduro insists in the legitimacy of his governance and most crucially, his path to electoral success in the highly disputed 2018 general election. This considerably deepens the gravity of the Venezuelan situation as the country has been left isolated in the international system, impoverished by its weakened economy and the reluctance of major powers to develop bilateral relations. This complicates the crisis as the government is forced to balance the maintenance of domestic control with the avoidance of total isolation and even further economic chaos. Ever since the voices of the protestors reached the international community, keeping control was always going to prove a near impossible task for the government.
As sanctions increased and discontent was reinforced, the economic figures showed no signs of improvement. A recent report from the IMF predicts Venezuelan inflation rates to surpass 10 million percent in 2019. In terms of humanitarian damage, the United Nations predicts the figure for forced migration to reach 5.3 million by the end of this year. The pressure from the opposition, both in terms of social and also political instability, reached new heights when the Maduro established National Assembly increased its pressure on the leader, and Juan Guaido was declared interim leader of the country. Logically, this stimulated some optimism amongst both the domestic and international community. Some states were quick to recognize Guaido as the legitimate leader, but time will tell if this will be enough to defeat Nicolas Maduro’s military backed government. In response, government supporters are blaming the opposition for collaborating with external forces, with increased suspicion about the attitude shown by the United States.
The Venezuelan situation will not improve if left in the hands of domestic leaders and authorities. The economy is showing no signs of recovery, and most importantly, the fragmented government power structure weakens any challenge from the opposition and prohibits sustained political reform. Although weakened in the eyes of the majority of the population and international community, power continues to be on Maduro’s side. Hence, it is essential for the international community to intervene and support the country in its search for an internal solution. The country is so dangerously divided that neither the government nor the opposition have the required support to rule peacefully. Simply relying on Guaido as a ‘replacement’ leader is insufficient, given the political power that legitimately still remains with Maduro; what should be encouraged is a democratic general election, monitored by international organizations, enabling a new political framework. This has been referred to by the opposition dominated National Assembly, as “taking the Venezuelans to free elections” is the most reasonable option. This is a highly optimistic proposition given Maduro’s sustained resistance, but it must be the preferred route if protests and economic uncertainty are to fade. Placing decision-making power in the hands of individuals would be even more self-destructive, as no individual has the support once enjoyed by Hugo Chavez.
The international community must do all it can to minimize its impact on Venezuela’s economic isolation. Dialogue between the two domestic leaders must be encouraged in the search for an internal solution, leading to the gradual restoration of democratic values and elections. On an optimistic note, several international actors, including Venezuelan authorities are reaching a general consensus that the Maduro government is no longer sustainable. In fact, with the emergence of Guaido as a potential challenger, Maduro’s position is weakening considerably, with reports suggesting that “secret talks” have been held with the US in search of a way for him to step down. Military support remains, but recent events in Bolivia, for example, suggest the situation has the potential to turn against the government. Elsewhere, international organizations like the EU and the Lima Group have been discussing the possibility of more direct support to the country to restore democracy, but have warned against the “politicization” of humanitarian aid. Major powers must ensure the battle for restoring Venezuela’s democracy continues. The power to decide must be placed in the people’s hands, who must reach a purely Venezuelan decision on future leadership. This is the only clear way to guiding the country towards a long but urgent process of recovery. Preserving the status quo or relying on existing domestic actors will only deepen an already tragic situation.
