Dear readers, don’t be fooled by misleading headlines; Venezuela is unlike anything else. It is neither Iraq, nor Libya, nor Afghanistan. The announcement of a military operation in the Caribbean, promoted by President Donald Trump’s government to dismantle narco-terrorism networks in the region, has sparked false alarms that ignore Venezuelan realities.
Headlines like “USA promotes regime change in Venezuela” inevitably recall interventions in Iraq (2003), the international campaign against Libya (2011), or Afghanistan (2001). However, to claim that this would be a regime change similar to those countries completely overlooks two fundamental realities: first, Venezuelans have already determined our destiny through voting, and secondly, a foreign military operation, a “palace change through weapons,” undermines our most treasured achievement from 25 years of struggle: the legitimacy of our democratic aspiration.
Those in the U.S. or elsewhere trying to interpret the current situation on the coasts of Venezuela through the lens of other wars are mistaken. Despite enduring over 25 years of authoritarianism, dictatorship, humiliation, and corruption, Venezuela remains a country with a democratic memory, with wounded but not extinguished institutions, and with a people who, on July 28, 2024, decided —against all odds— to oust an authoritarian regime through the great door of sovereignty: the vote. Join the club now! Subscribe to the most important newsletter about Venezuela.
For decades, Venezuelans grew up believing that democracy was an acquired right, not the fragile treasure it truly is. Entire generations voted without fear, protested, and criticized the government of the day from all the platforms that democracy provided: from media outlets to university classrooms. The Venezuelan people have democracy in their DNA, which is why they have demonstrated resilience and combativeness against dictatorships. That spirit did not vanish with Hugo Chávez or Nicolás Maduro; it was merely cornered.
And from that dark corner of repression, millions of Venezuelans rose and voted on July 28 of last year. With a National Electoral Council controlled by the government, journalists persecuted, disqualified candidates, 1,000 political prisoners, media outlets shut down or controlled, and a massive migration that left nearly a third of the country excluded or without access to the electoral register, the opposition appeared on the ballot, almost bare, at a total disadvantage, with hope and fear mixed in the same ballot box… And yet it won with 70% of the votes.
No country in the world can claim that a regime change voted under those conditions is “typical” or “comparable” to Afghanistan, Iraq, or Libya. In those instances, the change was determined from the outside, imposed by another country for various reasons. In Venezuela, the opposite occurred: it was decided from within.
The Nicolás Maduro regime is falling, and not because another nation wants to impose a friendly government. Its downfall is occurring because it has already lost the popular mandate and clings to power without legitimacy. The world is not witnessing an intervention to change a government; it is witnessing an intervention to force the regime to accept a defeat that Venezuelans have already given.
Those who see today’s military maneuvers in the Caribbean as an “intervention” for a regime change in Venezuela fail to realize that a new future isn’t being constructed; rather, there is a protection of one that has already been decided. The international pressure surrounding Maduro is not an imperial project; it is the legitimate use of coercive force to ensure that popular sovereignty is not held hostage by a group benefiting from drug trafficking, terrorism, repression, and hunger.
The Venezuelan democracy, though maimed, is still alive and does not need foreign saviors. It needs allies who understand that this story isn’t written with invasions, but with respect for the voice of a people who refuse to be humiliated and chose to be free.
And that, in a world accustomed to violence as a method of political change, doesn’t resemble anything at all.
@JuliaJattar