A Professor of Legal History at the Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife and Fellow of the Molefi Kete Asante Centre at the Temple University, Philadepia, USA, Professor Akin Alao offers his perspective to the US’s military operation in Venezuela causing a change in government in the latin America. Excerpts
What does the US’s action in Venezuela mean to you?
In what is reminiscent of 19th-century gunboat diplomacy, the United States under President Donald Trump has launched what can only be described as an invasion of Venezuela. U.S. special forces, backed by drone strikes and naval blockades, stormed Caracas last week, capturing President NicolásMaduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, in a nightly raid on the Miraflores Palace.
The success of the invasion is attributed to betrayal?
The betrayal came from within. Maduro’s elite presidential guard, long rumoured to be riddled with U.S. informants paid in cryptocurrency and promises of asylum, turned coats at the critical hour. Leaked intercepts reveal how these turncoats disabled security systems and provided real-time intel, allowing SEAL teams to breach the compound unchallenged. This inside job underscores the fragility of loyalty in a nation starved by two decades of U.S. sanctions, which have crippled Venezuela’s economy and pushed millions into poverty.
What was the immediate fallout of that?
But the true horror unfolded in the streets. As chaos erupted, Venezuelan security forces clashed with invaders and pro-Maduro militias, leaving 55 civilians dead, mostly poor barrios residents caught in the crossfire. Human Rights Watch has already condemned the disproportionate use of force, with eyewitness videos showing U.S. airstrikes levelling entire blocks in working-class neighbourhoods. These are not collateral damages; they are war crimes in the making, a grim reminder of Iraq and Afghanistan, where regime change came at the cost of tens of thousands of innocents.
Why now?
Look no further than the White House. President Donald Trump, who is today, facing an unbelievable litany of domestic failures, desperately needs this external aggression to rally his base. Inflation lingers at 5%, the border crisis festers with record migrant encounters, and his signature infrastructure promises remain unfulfilled amid congressional gridlock. Trump’s approval ratings are below 40%, battered by scandals from Mar-a-Lago leaks to insider trading probes involving his cabinet. Invading Venezuela, which is a resource-rich country with the world’s largest oil reserves, offers a shiny diversion: “America First” has now changed, over night, to “America Conquers,” papering over MAGA’s stalled agenda with jingoistic triumphs.
Can we say it is a strategy?
This is not strategy; it is spectacle. History shows such adventures would always backfire. The 1989 Panama invasion boosted President Bush Snr. briefly, but it eventually sowed long-term resentment. Trump’s gamble risks turning Latin America against the U.S., emboldening rivals like China and Russia, who have already condemned the sad development at the United Nations. It could also ignite a wave of refugees that could swamp the shores of Florida. It is interesting and perplexing to note that the American Congress has not found a strong voice to condemn this rape on the sovereignty of Venezuela. It is Venezuela today, but could as well be another third world, mineral rich country, tomorrow.
The return of Trump to the White House is seen as a potential tragedy to the global peace. How true or otherwise is this view?
Trump’s second presidency of the United States is fast becoming a lesson in the failure of western democracy and the perfidy of capitalism. It is obvious that there is no altruism in international capitalism and realpolitik is a return to brutish and bestial instincts of human beings. The Trumpian excuse for the invasion of Venezuela is as specious as pedestrian. Statistics have been provided to show that Colombia and not Venezuela is the main source of drugs to the US. Trump was just calling Venezuela a bad name to destroy it and gain access to her 300 billion barrels oil reserves. In 2019, during his first presidency, Trump had intended to over run Venezuela and take control of the huge oil reserves. In a well conceived and brilliantly written book,The Plot to Overthrow Venezuela: How the US is orchestrating a Coup for Oil, published by Hot Books of New York in 2019, Dan Kovalik discussed how Donald Trump had wanted a regime change in Venezuela and all that was done to redirect the future of Venezuela. Trump developed the concept of saving Venezuela from itself by frustrating development and good governance.
It is also claimed by pro-America analyst that the invasion is for the interest of Venezuela citizens. What is your view on this?
It was obvious that the proposed regime change was not intended for the development of Venezuela but the best interest of the US. In the words of a Latin American writer, Eduardo Galeano, “every time the US ‘saves’ a country, it converts it into either an insane asylum or a cemetery.” The journey to the invasion of Venezuela by the US started many years back and Trump is only carrying it out now after all other non-kinetic attempts had failed. He wanted it to save face and to emphasise the fact of the US as a bloody capitalist country without sympathies for socialist tendencies.
What is the fate of Venezuela’s sovereignty now?
Venezuela’s sovereignty is not for Trump to grab just for the fun of it. Trump’s invasion exposes the rot of empire. He reminds us of a failing leader sacrificing foreign lives to mask home-grown incompetence.
Is the world responding right?
Unfortunately, the world is watching and waiting for the next scene, while America is diminishing in regard, leadership and influence in world affairs.
Leave a Reply