Opponents show a shotgun they snatched from police during a demonstration in Caracas, May 3, 2017. Photo: Carlos GarcĂa Rawlins/Reuters.
By MisiĂłn Verdad – Jul 9, 2023
With the beginning of 2023 also came the warning that Venezuela could experience an escalation of demonstrations with the potential to evolve into a scenario of pressure and conflict over the Bolivarian Government via union agendas.
Such a scenario was announced by the Wilson Center report analyzed in depth through this outlet when, in January, protest points began to be formed by sectors of the national teaching profession regarding the salary issue and the economic conditions of the country in general, together with other groups and “civil society” actors, including NGOs, trade unions, and related organizations.
In what it describes as a roadmap for reassembling the US strategy on Venezuela, the Wilson Center admits that there must be a combination of “pressure and concessions,” with the understanding that the latter implies sitting down with the Venezuelan government to negotiate conditions for a “transition,” a favorite political adage of a certain opposition sector identified with the actions and rhetoric for “regime” change.
The pressure, in this case, and according to the track record of recent years, is associated with street mobilizations under an organized violent aegis (as in 2014 and 2017) accompanied by foreign measures in the economic, financial, and commercial fields. It is already a classic move in the US hybrid warfare strategy manual.
Although the events of January and part of February did not escalate to a national destabilizing situation, pressure mechanisms were being developed which, with undisclosed objectives and purposes, and although incipient and still somewhat disintegrated in the street, must be viewed as elements of this conflict.
A similar scenario was announced by President Nicolás Maduro on consecutive days that he warned of a plan to lead Venezuela again to violence, to a time of intolerance, of confrontation, of useless conflict, of division among Venezuelans. “We will not allow it,” said Maduro on his program, Con Maduro+, on Monday, July 3. The next day, the president promoted numerous key generals, admirals, and military personnel of the Bolivarian National Armed Forces (FANB).
Pdte. @NicolasMaduro denunció que está en marcha un plan para llevar a Venezuela de nuevo al tiempo de la violencia, la intolerancia, del conflicto inútil y la división entre los venezolanos. pic.twitter.com/Q2ak5xgW78
— Prensa Presidencial (@PresidencialVen) July 4, 2023
While it is true that the three main US think tanks (Atlantic Council, Center for Strategic and International Studies, and Wilson Center) that focus on Venezuela and have influence in the White House decisions admit the failure of the “maximum pressure” campaign launched during Donald Trump’s administration, all agree that a line of pressure on the Venezuelan government must be maintained, perhaps in order to refloat US interests, whenever these are violated, or when the political situation reaches a stalemate—as is currently the case, and has been for months.
Taking into consideration the recommendations of the aforementioned think tanks, the scenario that President Maduro has mentioned would be led again by the US.
Criminal Sanctions: Washington Extends Authorization of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Exports to Venezuela
Civil society as an opportunity
In September 2022, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) presented  a report detailing its plan for “support to the democratic transition” in Venezuela. This plan refers to “three areas to promote opposition unity and press for improved electoral conditions,” assuring support to the “interim government” (which collapsed last January), but also stating that it would support the initiative of primary elections for the subsequent participation of the opposition in the 2024 presidential elections.
In this way, USAID openly admitted that it would support the formation of an anti-Chavista candidate to run in elections that it describes as “not free” and expressed its intention to finance media and NGOs in the name of “civil society.” However, nongovernmental organizations also serve as vehicles for the manufacture and organization of a critical mass for the conflictive scenarios that have been carried out since last January. All this under the assumption that the conventional political parties have lost popularity and do not function as assets that can be used against state institutions.
Since last year, the NGO movement has been growing in terms of calls and dissemination. Both the US government and the European Union have been directly involved in street actions, festivals, and cultural demonstrations led by NGOs, in a sort planned coexistence of interests crossed with trade union agendas.
With NGOs, any conflict agenda has a support that translates into the support of operators in the field, the media accompaniment of the perpetrators, and the constant feeding of the criminalizing dossier against the state. Their “non-governmental” character places them in opposition to official institutions, but it is also a distinctive feature of these recipients of foreign funding. In fact, earlier this year, Mision Verdad  reported and analyzed the fact that the United States approved the largest amount of financial funds for NGOs in Venezuela, using these entities as a screen behind which its interventionism operates.
In short, “civil society” operates as a political and investment opportunity.
Breeding ground
The Venezuelan economy reported ups and downs again  in the first semester of 2023, a scenario that could be politically exploited to manage social discontent. The material bases for a new scenario of conflict would be laid. The blockade continues to be the main factor on the current state of the economy, producing difficulties for financing from foreign capital and to carry out fundamental imports to the national industries. The United States continues to have the upper hand in this sector; therefore, the dialogue and negotiation table in Mexico was of utmost importance for the purpose of increasing the volume of capital for social and purely economic purposes.
The White House, thus, reinforces the discomfort and discontent with the decision of not having complied with the  second partial agreement  signed at the end of 2022 between the government and the United Democratic Platform and instrumentalizes it to strengthen the challenging conditions in the economic section.
The infrastructure problems in the public services, in the salary issue, and regarding the supply of gasoline and diesel throughout the country are intimately associated with the breach of the agreements negotiated at the end of last year, which, after all, is related to the application (and overcompliance) of the coercive measures emanating from the US capital.
These are $3.2 billion that were planned to be spent in different areas of the national life, when the priority is to attend to the most significant social and economic impacts on the Venezuelan population as a consequence of the expansive and generalized use of illegal “sanctions”: economic and salary limitations, difficulties in the access to food, reduction in the availability of vaccines and other supplies in public health centers, as well as failures in the educational, hospital, and electric infrastructures.
The president of the National Assembly and head of the governmental delegation for the dialogue in Mexico, Deputy Jorge RodrĂguez, commented last June that more than one billion dollars would have been destined to the National Electric System, in addition to other projects related to issues listed in the previous paragraph.
The United States does not relinquish of the reins of the blockade, and the opposition that represents it is subordinated to the needs and interests of the foreigner, among them, to continue feeding the unrest in Venezuela. The scenario denounced by President Maduro has a direct link with the conditions imposed—a breeding ground for a possible escalation.
Non-Aligned Movement Reiterates Support for Venezuela Against US Blockade
The international arena
With the deployment of tours, trips, and agreements signed by President Nicolás Maduro and the main Venezuelan officials in Eurasia, Africa, and Latin America, a new moment of relevance for our country in the international arena is confirmed.
Venezuela’s role in the world dynamics is elevated by its crucial role within the energy equation, as an OPEC member and a major player in the Western Hemisphere. The Treasury Department’s issuance of licenses to the Venezuelan oil industry has a direct impact on Venezuela’s ability to stabilize the oil market on this side of the world.
However, the measures taken by the Euro-Atlantic axis as a reaction to the war in Ukraine to limit the scope of Russian energy in the Western markets have resulted in a revival of Venezuela’s international role, which President Maduro has been able to take advantage of, thus raising the stakes and contributing to the stabilization of the market without the need for a framework of dialogue and negotiation between the parties and swelling the coffers of the state in the absence of the fulfillment of the agreements signed in Mexico.
The fact that the profile of President Maduro, and Venezuela in general, is growing in the international arena should not be an element that particularly pleases the political decision makers in the White House. Therefore, a new agenda of conflict would be ideal for the country to enter into a destabilization dynamic that would put the brakes on the Venezuelan ascendancy abroad.
An escalation of pressures and conflicts on the ground would undoubtedly place the focus on the internal situation at a favorable moment for the government due to its presence in forums, meetings, and high-level summits in different parts of the world.
Although President Maduro’s actions on the global stage were carried out in order to overcome the difficulties of the blockade, a sector of the US establishment seeks ways to reinforce the mandate of “sanctions” and revive the “maximum pressure” campaign carried out by the Donald Trump administration.
Numerous Republican Party senators, led by Idaho representative Jim Risch, supported a bill last March named the Venezuelan Democracy Act, with which it is intended to condition the parameters to manage the architecture of “sanctions” towards a context of greater pressure and imposition of an unfavorable situation for the country, against the grain of the current dynamics of the White House around the issuance of licenses in the energy field.
An escalation towards a conflict in the streets of Venezuela could be explained by all these variables that restrict the possibility of a national scenario of stability and development. The game remains deadlocked with the United States and the opposition, opening a channel for another possible scenario of political violence, as President Maduro has warned.
With additional translation by Orinoco Tribune
