Suscribete a TICs & Derechos Humanos

TIAR: the justification of an election?

By Luis Manuel Aguana

The approval of the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance (TIAR) by the Permanent Council of the OAS, to be applied in Venezuela, even if it is a preliminary action before taking any decision that implies the application of force, opens a new front of possibilities to submit to new international pressures the usurper regime of Nicolás Maduro Moros.

Indeed, "the Treaty provides for a range of options, ranging from negotiations, the severance of diplomatic relations, the severance of consular relations, the suspension of economic communications, land, sea and air transport, radio and radio communications and the option of military coercive action". See note of La Voz de América “OEA aprueba convocatoria para activar el TIAR en Venezuela”, en

But will this preliminary approval bring a forceful solution tomorrow to dislodge the tyranny of Nicolás Maduro Moros? Definitely NO. It opens if a new chapter of diplomatic struggle as long as the ordeal we Venezuelans suffer. The official opposition has sold people that this activation would bring instant results. Nothing could be further from the truth. Chile, which voted in favor in the OAS Permanent Council, indicated that it would not approve a force solution. In fact, it requested, along with Peru and Costa Rica, that such a possibility be excluded through an amendment, which was rejected.

The Rio Treaty, as TIAR is also called, like all post-World War II relics, was created as an insurance for a world subject to nuclear conflict between powers. The United States made its regional influence clear by promoting its creation, since in no Latin American country was there any obligation to accompany an armed conflict of this nature, of there being an aggression against the Americas by any other power involved, which was otherwise the furthest removed from our realities.

However, TIAR has foreseen the case of an armed conflict between the same American States (Article 7), something that we could possibly live with Colombia because of the criminal imprudence of the one who holds power in Venezuela, who intends to lead us to an armed conflict with Colombians, as Leopoldo Galtieri did in Argentina in an attempt to remain in power at the expense of the blood of his compatriots, starting a war with England for nationalist motives. It is in this context that the Treaty, in its Article 8, establishes those measures that the Voice of America reviews in its journalistic article. (see

It could be considered that the presence in Venezuela of Cuban, Russian, Chinese, Iranian military forces, etc., as well as the permanent refuge of the Colombian guerrillas FARC and ELN in our territory, both propitiated by the regime to remain in power, could be taken to the stage of TIAR discussions in the OAS, as a case within the scope of the Rio Treaty discussions, but hardly, unless a conflict is initiated with Colombia, is material for what we are really interested in now, which is nothing other than removing Nicolás Maduro from power as soon as possible, which is what Venezuelans desperately need.

It is incomprehensible the special interest of the official opposition to take TIAR beyond having been the distraction of the National Assembly to freeze the discussion of the approval of the foreign military presence for the accompaniment of humanitarian aid. If not, what is the reason for not having approved 187#11 before taking the TIAR proposal to the OAS? That would have given more force to the proposal within the framework of the Organization because it would have presented us as willing to go further.

TIAR was - and still is in my opinion - a parapet to tell Venezuelans "we are doing something to force them out, as you are asking”. They used it to freeze in the National Assembly the discussion of 187#11 and then the R2P, which are effectively the instruments to force a decision of foreign military accompaniment of the International Community - with the United States at the head - for humanitarian reasons, and which makes the countries mobilize immediately. This route is truly supported by reports of violations of Human Rights of the UN and the OAS, and of proven crimes of Lesa Humanidad. However, the entire diplomatic effort of the Interim Government has focused on TIAR. Why?

I believe that the reason is that since nothing immediate will be achieved "with what you are asking for" then we will have to go to an election with the regime because "this can't be tolerated anymore". That's a very old trick of Venezuelan politics where I distract you in a solution that finally proves impossible, to then convince you of what you really didn't want to do that was go to an electoral process cheated with the regime. Does this seem crazy to you? So they don't know half the story of those who are there not precisely because of assholes.

In Venezuela there will not be a humanitarian intervention solution, which is really the immediate solution to the problem, if we do not work for it in the corresponding international scenarios, negotiating the conditions that trigger that event and on which such intervention could be carried out, such as, for example, a direct pronouncement of popular sovereignty. Why hasn't Juan Guaido gone to speak personally with Donald Trump about the humanitarian intervention with military support from the United States and other allies? Why haven't his people in the United States intensified their contacts with the help of our main ally in this crisis, which has been from the beginning, Luis Almagro, Secretary General of the OAS? So I don't see what the Americans call "commitment," that is, you're not committed. And if they don't see that in those who "represent us" much less will they make a decision to expose their people to armed conflict in Venezuela. The rest is, as a good friend says, water, cologne and peo... because those are the ones the wind takes away.

Caracas, September 11, 2019


No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario