I would like to begin this note with a very recent reflection by R. Evan Ellis (1), perhaps one of the people who is most familiar with the impact of the policies of the People's Republic of China (PRC) in Latin America: “…in economic terms, the new U.S. tariffs may wreak the most harm on the U.S., while advancing the economic and political penetration of the PRC in Latin America” (see R. Evan Ellis, Reflections on a Tipping Point Moment, in https://legadoalasamericas.org/reflexiones-en-un-momento-de-inflexion/2/).
But I won't dwell on the impact PRC policies are already having on the US, occurring in reaction to the Trump administration's new trade policy. That is for Americans to deal with. I am even more concerned about the impact they will have on the rest of the hemisphere and in particular on Venezuela.
R. Evan Ellis, in a sort of “mea culpa” for his support to Trump's MAGA, concludes the referred article with a call that I think is very accurate: “In the U.S., Latin America and elsewhere, the trajectory of democracies depend, at the end of the day, on finding in ourselves the courage that we should never have to find, and to speaking out on what we know is right. Even if we as individuals do not impact worrisome trends, we can never know who will be moved to action by our voice, or by our silence”.
In other words, we have to find the courage to speak out about what we know is right, even if we don't influence policy, because if we don't someone else will take it upon themselves to act, whether we keep quiet or not. And worryingly the silence in Venezuela, and particularly from the opposition, is thunderous, especially when because of our particular problem, we are attached to the make or break fate of what the US is doing with the rest of the world.
In another article at the end of February, Ellis elaborates on this situation in more detail:“The Trump administration’s “Americas First” policy arguably represents. a significant strategic shift away from the pursuit of U.S. strategic interests through nurturing global support for democracy, universal rights, and institutions Instead, Washington is taking a much more transactional approach, pursuing more concrete benefits through a combination of carrots and sticks. International relations scholars will long be debating the strategic impact, efficacy, and morality of that shift” (see R. Evan Ellis, Trump’s Foreign Policy Could Accelerate China’s Advance in Latin America, in https://revanellis.com/trumps-foreign-policy-could-accelerate-chinas-advance-in-latin-america) (highlighted our).
This is what really lies in the conceptual background of our future relationship with the United States, at least from the perspective of the present U.S. administration. Venezuela and the rest of the countries now do not have the U.S. strategic perspective of yesteryear, which emerged after the Second World War and which drove the “nurturing global support for democracy, universal rights, and institutions”, but now what they are looking for from the rest of the world is a transaction that will bring material benefits to the United States. That is neither bad nor good, it is simply what is being imposed on us now.
To think that the US will help us get rid of the criminals who are in power because of a Human Rights logic will not happen. Or that they will follow the perspective that there are criminals -such as those of the Aragua Train or the Cartel of the Suns- that can affect the interests of the US from the point of view of their internal security and that is why they should lend us a hand, that will not happen either.
The perspective now understood by the new US administration is that they will only help us with our problem if they see that they can obtain concrete benefits along the way. How we approach this situation from the sidewalk of the opposition will compete with what the regime and its strong international partners (Russia, China, Iran) also propose to the US, or if in this trade war with China the balance is in their favor or not.
The big questions to answer would be, for example, these: “How economically convenient is it for the US that there is a democracy in Venezuela”, or “What could democratic leaders do for the US that the criminals of the regime of Nicolás Maduro Moros cannot do?
We could qualify the above with the Chinese variable. The relationship that the regime has with the PRC is widely known. We could ask ourselves these other questions: “What could we Venezuelans in a democracy give to the US to improve its strategic position in the face of the trade -or other- war that the Americans have with the PRC?”, or “What does Venezuela have that the PRC should not have to improve the position of the US, and that otherwise they would not have if there is a democratic government in Venezuela?”. I won't go ahead and give the possible answers to all those questions that I assume many of you already have. I will simply limit myself to the words of Venezuelan oil expert, Dr. Humberto Calderon Berti, at the end of an interview in a recent opinion program:
“Q: With the closing of the question, with the Trump administration, do you see an effective participation in the short or medium long term of Donald Trump's administration for a change in Venezuela in unity with the Venezuelans, Humberto?
A: I believe that we have a lot of international support at this time, a lot of support from the European Union, a lot of support in Latin America and a lot of support in the United States. I have no doubt about that, no doubt that there is a very solid bipartisan support, by the way, in the United States, both from the Republicans and the Democrats, for a political change in Venezuela. The fact is that people know, the oil companies themselves must know, and I am referring now to the oil companies, that if there is a change of government in Venezuela, the business that today is worth 200 is going to become a business worth 1000. Because the opportunities will be very great because the country has to be rebuilt. The fact is that people still do not understand very well that what we have in our hands is the reconstruction of a post-war country without having had a war, but that is the reality. So the opportunities are going to be gigantic for the whole world and that is what we have to internalize and that is the call we have to make to the international private sector and that is the call we have to make to Venezuelans to trust in Venezuela...”. (see in Spanish Norbey Marín, Hasta que caiga la tiranía, Calderón Berti habla sobre nuestro petróleo y el poder de negociar, in https://youtu.be/fcvfvQ1gK7g?t=2806) (emphasis added). I recommend every Venezuelan interested in the destiny of this country to watch this video of Dr. Calderón Berti in its entirety.
Given that everything points to a strategic shift in the U.S. towards a transactional conception of the world with this new Trump administration, why does Venezuela, having the support of the two major U.S. parties, still insist on the previous conception of a U.S. that prioritized the promotion of human rights and institutions in the countries? Is it not rather that the permanent narrative must be changed in the direction of convincing the US government that business in Venezuela of 200 today can be 1000 tomorrow, as Calderon Berti indicates, within the parameters of respect for contracts, and that this can only be done within the framework of a country in democracy, legal security and rule of law, in the logic of post-war reconstruction of a country that has not had war? Not to mention everything else that Venezuela has, in the trade dispute with the PRC, to negotiate in favor of the Western way of life. Just think of the Venezuelan rare earths...I leave them there for your consideration.
It is true that the shift, for many people unpleasant, of the US from promoting the values of democracy and freedom in favor of business -which they never stopped doing either- looking for concrete short term benefits from the world, directly affects our serious situation, to the point of allowing the country to continue sinking if we do not have a clear vision of what we want to do.
If we tell the Americans that we want them to do something because there are criminals here violating Human Rights as heads of the terrorist organization Tren de Aragua, we will be at the bottom of their list of priorities. Unfortunately, many more Human Rights are violated in the world than in our country. But if we tell them that we would contribute with a specific weight and in many ways to the war they have unleashed with the PRC, maybe things will be different and they will pay more attention to us, focusing them to negotiate with us the terms of how. And there we have people very capable of doing that in many fields, with decades of experience, like, for example, Dr. Calderon Berti in the oil business.
At this time we could do with a change in the discourse of the opposition, bringing us closer to what is happening in the world, updating the perspective even knowing that in reality the regime is advancing and violating more and more of our Human Rights. At some point the US will eventually understand that Latin America is the natural terrain of the Western way of life with freedom that it used to promote, and that it is precisely here where the strength of free trade and the protection of the values that made that country strong must be extended. As R. Evan Ellis says, we must talk about what we know is right, even if we do not influence what happens. In this modest tribune we have always done so. In the end, that is precisely the reason why we have always dared to express our opinion...
Caracas, April 16, 2025
Blog:
TIC’s & Derechos Humanos, https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
X (Twitter): @laguana
(1) Dr. Evan Ellis is a research professor of Latin American studies at the U.S. Army War College Strategic Studies Institute, with a focus on the region’s relationships with China and other non-Western Hemisphere actors as well as transnational organized crime and populism in the region.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario