Election box where a US flag is cast as a ballot. Photo: Ali Al-Hadi Chemis/Al Mayadeen.
No sooner did the Venezuelan government set the election date, the far-right opposition parties backed by the US government began disrupting the polling process.
Supporting the opposition’s claims of election manipulation, the US and the West continue to foster mistrust among Venezuelans over the July election results, which saw President Nicolas Maduro emerge victorious.
The US and its allies responded to the opposition’s protests against the election results, anticipating that the chaos would lead to the formation of a loose, pro-Western coalition in Venezuela, potentially serving their interests in Latin America. The US openly opposes Venezuela’s socialist rule and does not want Maduro to remain in the saddle and continue its independent foreign policy.
Meanwhile, Maduro announced during a rally of supporters last week that the state agency responsible for telecommunications will “discontinue dissemination” of X, previously known as Twitter. The suspension’s operational mechanics remained unclear. “No one will quell my voice; I shall directly challenge the covert activities of the technological hegemony,” he declared, alleging that American billionaire Musk is “provoking animosity and promoting fascism.”
It is not difficult to comprehend the rationale behind Washington’s designs to terminate Venezuela’s 25-year-old socialist dominance. Following Hugo ChĂĄvez’s Bolivarian Revolution in 1999, Venezuela implemented geopolitical measures that conflicted with the US’s hegemonic global policies. These included adopting multipolarity and subsequently re-evaluating its foreign policy objectives concerning Iran, China, Cuba, Russia, and Turkey.
There seems to be well-thought-out planning to replace Maduro with a puppet regime that could strengthen the US foothold in Latin America. Washington has devised a strategy beforehand to make the 2024 election controversial. This strategy is believed to have worked in the recent elections, but Washington failed to play it well.
No sooner did the Venezuelan government set the election date, the far-right opposition parties backed by the US government began disrupting the polling process by discrediting the election process and causing chaos in the country by dangling the threats of financial and trade sanctions.
Despite enjoying backing from the US, the Venezuelan opposition parties have not been able to pose a serious challenge to Maduro’s rule. This is partly due to the opposition’s lackluster performance and internal disarray, as well as a disenchantment in ordinary Venezuelans to engage in anti-Maduro political campaigns.
Does Machado qualify for holding public office?
In late January this year, the Supreme Tribunal of Justice (Tribunal Supremo de Justicia, TSJ) declined an appeal to review its June 2023 ruling, disqualifying the far-right political figure and a key leader of the opposition coalition, MarĂa Corina Machado, from holding any elected position until at least 2029.
In 2023, the TSJ observed that Machado has advocated for US sanctions against her own country. It has also implicated her, saying she reportedly urged Washington to intervene militarily against Venezuela to topple Maduro’s democratically elected government.
Just as the TSJ declined to entertain the review petition, the top court found itself right in the heart of political mayhem and criticism. Four days later, US State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller made it clear that the US did not support the ‘barring of candidates’ from the Venezuelan presidential elections.
Venezuela Presidential Election: US and Accomplices Left Grasping at Straws
The US wasted no time in pulling the plug on General License 43, a Treasury license that allows Venezuelan public-sector gold mining companies to do business with US entities and companies. The US State Department also issued a warning that if the Venezuelan government doesn’t give Machado the green light to participate in the 2024 election, they will revoke General Licence 44, which is the lifeline for Venezuela’s oil and gas sector.
Violation of the UN Charter
What moral grounds does the US have to slap sanctions on an independent country in violation of the United Nations Charter? Under Chapter VII, Article 41, the Security Council has the authority to slap sanctions, but putting these measures into action can only happen with a consensus decision from the UN Security Council.
The sanctions imposed by the US on Venezuela, and for that matter on several other countries around the world, are considered to be against the law. In her 2022 report, Alena F. Douhan, the UN special rapporteur on unilateral coercive interventions, observed that nations and companies were cautious about the US sanctions, fearing retaliation, which prompted them to extend their cooperation or face secondary penalties.
Since 2015, the US’s underhanded maneuvers have cost Venezuelans tens of billions of dollars in losses. These actions have been a real slap in the face to the Venezuelan people, forcing over six million individuals to pack their bags and leave the country.
There is a delicate distinction between punishing political enemies and disqualifying individuals who advocate for and even invite a foreign power to invade their country.
The governments denigrate their adversaries by accusing them of being agents of a foreign power, and even the US is no exception. US Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, for instance, recently labeled those who were protesting Israel’s genocide against Palestinians as agents of Russia and insisted that the Federal Bureau of Investigations oversee their activities. Nevertheless, Machado has publicly advocated for the US to launch an invasion of Venezuela, an action that is considered unlawful in every nation.
The US’s cherry-picked opposition
While on the rest of the issues, they do not have a unanimous stand, the Venezuelan opposition parties have two things in common. They all support the US and share a common determination to remove President Maduro from office.
In 2008, leaders representing a dozen political parties convened under the Democratic Unity Roundtable and decided to jointly contest the national election from a common platform and form a unity government if they won to effectively challenge the country’s economic and political issues.
In reality, the US orchestrated the formation of an opposition alliance, comprising various conflicting political forces, intending to challenge the ruling government under President NicolĂĄs Maduro. Currently, prominent figures include Maria Corina Machado and Freddy Guevara, the presidential candidate of the combined opposition in the recent election who advocated for democratic transition and reform.
Project Venezuela (Proyecto Venezuela), a Venezuelan center-right political party, is part of an opposition alliance. Another opposition party is the Radical Cause (La Causa ĐŻ), a minor left-wing political party.
Un Nuevo Tiempo is a center-left party that received 11% of the vote in the 2008 regional elections. Leopoldo LĂłpez, the former Mayor of Chacao, founded Justice First, a center-right political party, and Popular Will. The party won 14 out of 167 seats in the Venezuelan National Assembly.
Vente Venezuela is another part of the opposition alliance based in Caracas, the capital city. The National Electoral Council has not granted Vente Venezuela’s registration as a political party. MarĂa Corina Machado Parisca is the head of his party. The Fearless People’s Alliance is an opposition alliance. In the 2000 Venezuelan parliamentary election, the party won one out of 165 seats in the National Assembly. Similarly, Democratic Action (AcciĂłn DemocrĂĄtica, AD) is a social democratic and center-left political party established in 1941.
