By Luis Manuel Aguana
From the Dictionary of the Royal Spanish Academy (DRAE), Legitimacy: “1. F. Quality of being legitimate. Synonyms or related terms for Legitimacy: legality, validity, lawfulness, authenticity, veracity.” (see in Spanish DRAE, in https://dle.rae.es/legitimidad).
I wanted first to establish the meaning of the term we have been using in Venezuela regarding the regime led by Delcy Rodríguez—spanning the Executive Branch and the rest of Venezuela's public powers. After all, was Nicolás Maduro Moros legitimate on January 3, 2026, when viewing his status solely from the perspective of the July 28, 2024, election? Was he—by that definition of legitimacy—legal, valid, lawful, authentic, and genuine? Clearly, NO. As we all know, Maduro brazenly stole the July 28, 2024, election. Consequently, his successor—who took over following his removal on January 3, 2026—is even less legitimate, having been appointed Vice President of the Republic by an illegitimate official.
However, under the 1999 Constitution, that fully illegitimate successor had 90 days (extendable by another 90) to call for elections to replace the supposedly "legitimate" official following his absolute absence.
Yet, accounts have emerged suggesting that if a power vacuum were declared due to the president's absolute absence (under Article 233 of the Constitution) and his equally illegitimate successor called for elections, this would—paradoxically—transform Maduro's initial illegitimacy into legitimacy, without erasing the fact that he stole an election. This is supposedly the reason the US would cite for keeping Delcy Rodríguez in power until the North American three-phase plan is concluded.
To me, this explanation seemed just as absurd as leaving the Rodríguez duo at the helm of the executive and legislative branches—and keeping Diosdado Cabello in his post—so that *they* would be the ones commanding the country during supposedly free, fair, and verifiable elections. It is like putting a vulture in charge of guarding the meat. From the very night of July 28, 2024, the Maduro administration was a *de facto* government (having stolen the election), and it was replaced by another—equally *de facto*—in the early hours of January 3, 2026. Yet, according to the U.S. view, following constitutional rules makes no sense—whether calling for elections within 180 days, declaring a power vacuum, citing an "absolute absence" of leadership, or addressing any of those Venezuelan "constitutional trifles"—because, in their judgment, doing so would amount to "legitimizing" Maduro. It is the end of the world!
Thus, the US is merely prolonging—with the backing of its military might—Maduro’s de facto government, albeit through his alter ego, Delcy Rodríguez, and without the legitimacy of the Venezuelan Constitution.
Faced with this reality, ANCO has proposed to the "guardian" or "tutor" that the leaders of this de facto government be replaced by figures who do not embody the 27 years of corruption, crime, destruction, and regression. This replacement should hold until an electoral process takes place that guarantees fair, free, and verifiable manual elections in accordance with international standards. Given the current state of affairs in Venezuela—and following the guardian's own reasoning—these leaders cannot be replaced through the Venezuelan Constitution, which has been effectively suspended since July 28, 2024. They can only be ousted by the entity with the power to sustain a government in Venezuela: the United States.
Consequently, regardless of street-level rhetoric or appeals to the sovereignty enshrined in Article 5 of the Constitution, things are unlikely to change without an order from the US President. Many in Venezuela still need a heavy dose of a reality check; therefore, the best course of action is to convince the guardian that it is more economically and politically advantageous for the US to remove these criminals from power than to keep them there.
And why must the US be convinced? Because our problem will not be solved here, but there. Powerful forces—including well-paid lobbyists in Washington—are actively persuading the Trump Administration to keep the Rodríguez regime in power. These are the same forces that previously sustained Chevron’s operations in Venezuela despite sanctions, and that secured the release of Alex Saab and the "narco-nephews" under the previous US administration. However, there are also forces advocating for a radical change in Venezuela’s leadership. We must support these groups by providing arguments that bolster our position. And that is not achieved with just anyone, but with statesmen of significant stature in their respective fields—such as those proposed by ANCO.
In light of the latest revelations in the US by President Trump regarding the declassification of documents from the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), which corroborate in every part my article published on March 22, 2026, entitled “A confession of fraud no need for proof” where the technical-electoral fraud of the regime in all elections since 2004 is clearly established with witnesses (see article in https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/p/a-confession-of-fraud-no-need-for-proof.html).
Indeed, President Trump’s devastating statement leaves no doubt for all those who, until now, insisted on the alleged transparency of that corrupt vote-counting system:
“Today we are releasing documents that show the CIA obtained reporting of a specific plot to do a big number in favor of the corrupt Maduro regime in Venezuela. And that's exactly what happened. Conspiring to digitally rig their own country's elections in 2020. And that's what they did. This reporting included details about methods to regime develop to digitally alter vote totals in ways that could not be detected even with an audit no matter how deep they went. This intelligence underscores why must take urgent action to ensure that our own system can never ever be hacked or compromised like it was in the past” (see FULL VIDEO: President Trump delivers primetime address, 07-16-2026, en https://youtu.be/wBECTm9smMM?t=976).
Consequently, it is hardly sustainable to continue using Jorge Rodríguez’s electoral system in Venezuela in the near future, especially following that statement by the U.S. President. This inevitably leads us to the need for a new electoral architecture for the CNE and a change in Venezuela's election procedures—specifically, implementing manual voting supplemented by technology for the transmission of tally sheets, but only after each and every vote has been counted and verified by genuine witnesses. This process certainly cannot be accomplished in a month or two—regardless of who assumes the responsibility, provided they do so seriously and conscientiously—unless, of course, they use the existing CNE machines, a method that would suit Jorge Rodríguez’s regime perfectly.
Even with manual voting, numerous preliminary tasks would be required: a thorough cleansing of the Electoral Registry to ensure voter rolls accurately reflect the country's actual population; guarantees for manual voting by the global diaspora and their representation within Venezuela; a redistricting of electoral circuits to align with current population demographics; the elimination of single- or dual-polling-station centers in locations where the regime coerced voters (such as the *Misiones Vivienda* housing projects); reform of the Organic Law on Electoral Processes (LOPE) and the repeal or amendment of all regulations that facilitate the subversion of the popular will; and the implementation of a new system using secure transmission technology—strictly for sending and publishing tally sheets to the central tabulation center after each polling station closes.
These are, at a minimum, the tasks that would fall to a technical commission charged with organizing new elections in Venezuela—following the confirmation of the fraud to which we have been subjected in every election for over twenty years. And as the United States can readily understand, these efforts cannot be coordinated by the very perpetrators and accomplices of that fraud against the Venezuelan people—the very individuals who would be sitting down to negotiate new elections starting August 1st.
In the wake of the earthquakes that devastated the country, the US is planning to deploy 3,000 technicians and assume temporary administration of Venezuela. Indeed, according to a headline in Spain's ABC newspaper, "The White House is considering mobilizing $3 billion (€2.6 billion) to rebuild infrastructure and prepare for democratic elections" (see in Spanish ABC, US plans to deploy 3,000 technicians and assume temporary administration of Venezuela, in https://www.abc.es/internacional/eeuu-ultima-plan-multimillonario-ayuda-elecciones-venezuela-20260715015509-nt.html).
According to a report by Spain’s ABC, “this would not involve a military contingent or a combat force. A significant portion of the team would come from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, accompanied by civilian specialists in infrastructure, urban planning, logistics, communications, energy, and land-use planning. Their mission would be to assist in the restoration of roads, ports, airports, power grids, water supply systems, and public buildings damaged by the earthquakes. They would also undertake tasks related to aid coordination and the planning of reconstruction priorities for the hardest-hit areas”.
Should this decision be made, the U.S. would take direct control of Venezuela’s electoral process—as well as other administrative functions critical to the country's basic operations—thereby rendering the aforementioned fears regarding the regime’s remaining in power unfounded. Yet, for those in the U.S. making this decision, such a move would be a grave error and a mirage.
Venezuelans will always perceive those holding power at Miraflores as the country's leaders, even if U.S. technicians are actually running things behind the scenes. A change in the individuals who serve as the public face of the leadership—communicating progress on the administration of reconstruction resources to the nation—would be decisive in securing the cooperation and buy-in of the Venezuelan people. It would be a mistake for the Trump administration to leave in power the very people who have caused such harm to the population.
We believe that changing the faces of political leadership would reassure the international community, helping to restore the confidence needed to move forward with recovery and the rapid implementation of the U.S. three-phase plan. Allowing Delcy Rodríguez’s illegitimate interim leadership to continue would instead delay, or even hinder, that process. It is not too late to change that decision.
Caracas, July 21, 2026
Blog: TIC’s & Derechos Humanos, https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario