“In the face of atrocities, we must take sides. Silence encourages the tormentor” (Elie Wiesel)
The recent news of Nicolás Maduro's arrest undoubtedly brings a sense of relief to those of us who have observed the democratic deterioration and humanitarian crisis in Venezuela for years. It is the end of a dark, very dark cycle. Seeing the end of a regime that eroded institutions, persecuted dissent, and plunged a once-prosperous country into poverty is cause for celebration.
However, this enthusiasm should not blind us to the methods: rejoicing at the end of autocracy is not equivalent to signing a blank check for US intervention
My joy stems from the hope of will for Venezuelans. It is the satisfaction of seeing how fear ceases to be the main tool of social control. But that freedom will only be full and lasting if it is the result of popular will and an internal reconstruction process. The legitimacy of a new government cannot emanate from offices in Washington
I am deeply concerned about the state the country will be left in after the US intervention and, above all, what this reveals about the alarming weakness of the European Union.
The fall of a regime is only the beginning of a complex and difficult process, the transition to democracy, which implies overcoming major economic obstacles, social divisions, the need to establish independent and just institutions, political agreements, and the rule of law. A functional democratic system is not automatically created. A power vacuum emerges, a diversity of conflicts escalates (it doesn't seem easy to heal wounds and traumas from years of repression), and even a military regime…
History has taught us that interventions designed in Washington tend to prioritize its own geopolitical and commercial interests above the long-term social stability of the intervened country.
A nation under external tutelage runs the risk of not recovering its real sovereignty. The international community must accompany, not direct. It must sanction abuses, not impose rulers. The argument "the end justifies the means" is reckless: if we allow democracy to be exported by excessive external pressure, we weaken the very concept of national sovereignty.
The thorniest issue in this scenario is Europe's position. The European Union has once again shown that it does not have its own foreign policy. It should have been the balanced diplomatic force guiding a peaceful transition. Instead, it has chosen to nod along with everything decided in the Oval Office. By being incapable of proposing an alternative path, European leaders send a message of irrelevance to the rest of the world. Europe is obliged to wake up. Following the dictates of others makes them smaller and dispensable in the new world order
The fall of the satrap represents the collapse of a power structure that felt it owned the lives and destinies of millions. Defeating him is an act of liberation, but allowing another power to dictate the next path is simply changing chains
I'm glad, yes, because Venezuela deserves a respite from the ruthless Chavismo-Maduro cycle. But my support ends where interference begins…
The future of Venezuela belongs to Venezuelans, without saviors with foreign flags. Democracy is built from within.