The Trump Administration has begun revoking the visas of several Venezuelan MPs seated by the Maduro government, while ruling out any dialogue with President Maduro. Officials also condemned the idea of mediation within Venezuela.
This comes amid efforts by European Union and Latin American leaders who
are trying to resolve the Venezuela crisis with diplomacy and
mediation. The US criticized those efforts, saying the world needs to
unite behind a demand for unconditional regime change.
Elliott Abrams declared the “time for dialogue with Maduro has long
passed,” and that the US now wants everyone to accept Juan Guaido as his
replacement. He added that foreign countries must only deal with
Guaido’s would-be government, and not the de facto government.
Navy Admiral Craig Faller, the head of US Southern Command, says that the military is fully prepared to protect US
diplomatic personnel and facilities in Venezuela if necessary. He added
that the Venezuelan military leadership remains loyal to Maduro.
I guess the peace president has decided Maduro must go……..
Still peacefully, so far.
Resorting to legal gamesmanship is more Trump’s preferred way of doing things than Bolton, whose bug this really is. Bolton would sooner just have someone(s) shot or bombed and make things far worse.
The escrow accounts Guaido is supposed to be using for U.S. aid, still haven’t been set up. The regime change is already skidding.
What’s peaceful about sanctions ? What’s legal about illegal sanctions ? If you think the CIA hasn’t already been in there spreading violence all over that country you need to do some more research.
Don’t conflate intimidation with the outright mass killing that is war.
Seriously, how you think about war matters, the legal definition of war under international law (UN GAR 3314) is different from the colloquial sense.
Prior to nuclear weapons, yes, sanctions were an ‘act of war’, which meant, you were ‘legally’ entitled to declare war under just war theory or international law. There’s still that nuance of war being an option, not a default. An act of war does not mean entering the condition of war if you don’t want to.
Syria was outright invaded by the U.S., an act of war, but they have not declared war, nor has the U.S.. The U.S. would under international law officially be the aggressor, Syria, militarily obliterated.
Neither side and especially their allies wants to deal with the consequences of that, so a condition of open war is not declared and overt conflict between official forces avoided or kept to an absolute minimum.
Any CIA violence in-country appears indistinguishable from the already high levels of criminal violence that really doesn’t need CIA help. The CIA would be more concerned with fostering contacts and networking without inviting retaliatory violence.
Sanctions are literally economic warfare.
Yes, but there’s usually no shooting and direct killing in an economic war. Obama began the sanctions war against Venezuela after the preceeding Bush hard and soft regime-change attempts didn’t stick.
Trump inherited that war, and owns it now. Or rather Bolton does.
Contrary to frantic media reports, Venezuelans aren’t starving and have no TP. Government shops stock basic essentials the free market can’t.
Venezuela does have a huge crime and corruption problem magnified by hyperinflation. Whatever left the country produces, likely finds better prices outside the country any way it can.
However, prior to Chavez-Maduro, Venezuela was far worse off as a U.S. client state with massive engineered wealth disparity and non-diversified economy based solely on oil exports to the U.S..
Also – who appointed Bolton, a known saber rattler and warhawk, to his national security position? Who got Elliott Abrams back in the mix? Trump.
No, Mork, not Trump, it was the Trotskyists who appointed Bonkers Bolton, a well known saber rattler and warmonger, to his national security position; and it was the same Trotskyists who got Elliott Abrams back into the mix. Trump, unfortunately, is a figurehead, as Israel’s corrupt PM – Bibzy Nutty&Yahoo – who calls the shots. He runs US foreign policy.
Who gets to fire them if they fail?
I’m all for helping them fail and dropping the Trump on them.
Legally, Maduro is Venezueala’s President, and a fair amount of moral weight flows from that. Maduro still operates within the Venezuelan Constitutional process, and that sovereign legal bulwark, the Venezuelan Constitution, may be the real target.
https://www.constituteproject. org/constitution/Venezuela_2009.pdf
The Venezuealan Constitution (1999/2009) definitely finds no grounds for Guaido’s Presidential claim. The National Assembly at best undertook symbolic action that is not legally binding. Seeking foreign support to materially enforce this claim, may be in violation of the Constitution under Title IX: Constitutional Reforms, Chapter 3, Article 349.
Article 349 states: “… The existing constituted authorities [e.g., National Assembly] shall not be permitted to obstruct the Constituent Assembly in any way.”
The NA may only advise the CNA (Chapter I, Section 1, Article 187.2). Claiming Guaido should be President the way the NA has, is an unusually strident and unconventional amendment and revision proposal-by-example and best left at that.
Article 349 is probably the main clause justifying Maduro’s rule. Maduro has Constituent Assembly support; removing him is obstructing the CNA. A truly impartial Supreme Tribunal (Supreme Court) would still have to rule in favour of President Maduro. There is no other interpretation.
Guaido was only elected President of the National Assembly by that body (Chapter I: National Legislative Power, Section 2, Article 194), not by separate popular national election (Chapter II: National Executive Power, Section 1, Article 228). Guaido has no national mandate.
Provisions for head of state removal and replacement are outlined in Chapter II, Section 1, Article 233 and Chapter IV, Section 2, Article 74, covering National Executive Power and political Rights and Popular Referenda, respectively. Conflicts over electoral process are not listed.
Indirectly, ‘abandonment of his position’ could be argued as ‘abandonment of the responsibility to run fair elections’. However, arresting crooked opposition leaders could be seen as policing fair elections.
The NA President may only become National President under one narrow circumstance; within the period when Venezuela is between legal Presidencies AND the elected President is permanently unavailable to serve. President Maduro was the incumbent and inaugerated January 10. Guaido staked his claim January 23, 13 days too late in addition to Maduro being fit to serve anyway.
Guaido’s so-called presidency began January 23 and would last 30 days until February 22. Waiting out Maduro then holding the mandatory election will certainly take more than 30 days. An extralegal Constitutional crisis is then created over interim Presidential extensions or renewals beyond 30 days in failure to hold a new election.
Removing Maduro is justified only under Under Article 350 “Right to overthrow government” wherein “The people of Venezuela, true to their republican tradition and their struggle for independence, peace and freedom, shall disown any regime, legislation or authority that violates democratic values, principles and guarantees or encroaches upon human rights.” This is more a referral to the referendum process than arbitrary revolt or coup, though.
Recall of elected officials is covered under Section 2, Article 74. When Maduro’s term is half completed, three years from now, 20% of the registered electorate may initiate a referendum to revoke his mandate.
Deputy Guaido may find himself recalled by his own constituecy if 20% of them are Maduro supporters; hals his term has already expired. Maduro supporters could in theory recall the entire NA by individual constituency where 20% Maduro support exists. Most would simply be re-elected, and have immunity for actions undertaken as deputies, though this maybe could be tested in a Venezuelan U.S.-gate inquiry modeled after Russiagate.
Western countries don’t want to wait three years, but have no standing. Advocating coup – abusing courts of public opinion, a complicit NA, and/or arm-twisting and tricking the Venezuelan military – would break the legal continuity of the Constitution.
It’s about the access China and Russia are gaining in South America.
Part of the MAGA process is to run them out of there and that’s why the MSM and neocon/neoliberal factions support it.
The only chips we have to play is to back off Russia’s border with NATO which we broke a treaty to do in the first place.
The guard at the economic ladder is changing and we will surely pay for it. The elite have been using the poor to fight their battles and suffer their consequences for centuries.
Let’s just hope their useful idiots don’t get carried away and take us all out.
There was no “treaty” broken, but verbal promises were.
True, Mackinder casts his shadow here. Neither Russia or China can easily operate in Venezuela either. The economy is more or less crashed by hyperinflation, a kind of economic A2AD for all sides.
The smart move is to leave it alone, but the neocon way is to smash what they can’t have so no-one can have it.
The Eurasians can’t be seen as weak, especially on a straightforward moral issue like Venezuelan sovereignty. There may be no geopolitical tradeoff against the Ukraine, and, its not like the U.S. government could be held to any deal once they get what they want.
Also, back when China’s cardboard tiger wasn’t singed by Trump’s opposition-escalated trade war, they were making overtures to Latin America for inclusion into OBOR. That’s an unforgotten red flag challenge to the Munroe Doctrine for every U.S. nationalist bull in Washington.
https://www.reuters. com/article/us-chile-china/china-invites-latin-america-to-take-part-in-one-belt-one-road-idUSKBN1FB2CN
There’s also the oil question; the U.S. doesn’t need any for the immediate to close medium future, its all about market share for the time being so long as the price is crashed. However, Venezuela does have 20% of the world’s proven reserves.
Bolton will be feeling the pressure for a win, and that’s a problem as he hasn’t so far proven to be a very smooth operator.
“Maduro still operates within the Venezuelan Constitutional process”
He stopped doing that long ago.
It’s not possible to combat a well financed 5th column without trampling a constitution. The function of the 5th column is either to succeed at regime change, or to propagandize the efforts to combat it.
That may be the case. I was simply commenting on the fact that Maduro did in fact “trample the constitution.” When he couldn’t get the constitutional legislature to give him his way, he had his stacked supreme court unconstitutionally overrule it, then tried to replace it with a constituent assembly which would rubber-stamp what he wanted.
Did he have to do that to combat a 5th column? Maybe so. But he did in fact do it.
Hugo Chavez fought the very same 5th column for over a decade and never once trampled the constitution. He risked his life in the process which is what a good leader does. Maduro may be a victim of American imperialism but that doesn’t mean he’s not also a world class assh*le. His Dengist style market socialist reforms have been a disaster. There are plenty of Chavistas in the streets that hate Maduro nearly as much as Guaido.
We all know , WP said so.
You’re mistaking gaming the Venezuelan Constitution with departing from it. Maduro is playing by Chavez’ resistance playbook, his 1999 Constitution.
Article 349 is clear; the Constituent National Assembly may not be obstructed in any way. When the National Assembly became obstructive they were held in contempt by the Supreme Tribunal and stripped of any remaining power.
The National Constituent Assembly was a clever provision that seems to have anticipated U.S. capture of the National Assembly. When convened, the NCA becomes the supreme lawmaking body. (Title IX: Constitutional Reforms, Chapter III: National Constituent Assembly, Articles 347-350). The nationally elected Executive can completely override over regionally elected [foreign-sponsored] constituencies.
To compare with the U.S., Hilary won the popular vote but Trump the regional vote, which is prioritized by the Electoral College. The U.S. elites are city-based, the Venezuelan elites, large landowners.
The U.S. seems to be smarting from two gotchas;
They spent the last decade or so ‘democracy building’ to capture the National Assembly, only to find the NA was a hollow institution, and, the U.S. seems to realize they can never overcome the Venezuelan popular rural-urban split, thanks to Chavista domination of the urban poor.
So the Empire has reverted to overt regime change. Remarkably though, the U.S. apparently still has to operate within Venezuelan law, gaming Article 233 with a poor reading of it to proclaim Guaido ‘Interim President.
A correct reading of the Venezuelan Constitution, finds no support for compradors like Guaido or any foreign usurpers.
Gosh, I wonder why Justin disabled comments on his brilliant analysis that this is all just a giant extra-clever charade Trump is using to humiliate the neocons.
Perhaps JR is obeying the ” no dialogue” order from Herr Spanky.
It goes back to the “conservative order” established after the defeat of napoleon. The powers that run things can never accept the success of a socialist leaning government and will crush it anywhere it exists
“Time for dialogue with Maduro has long passed.” What sickening hypocrisy. The only “dialogue” with the neo-cons is “do what we say, or else sanctions, sanctions and more sanctions.
The real democracy at last? Ignore all mediation , legal leaders, any form of talks and just put our guy in so our corporations can profit. We really care so much for the people of Venezuela that we will give them our stooge (Greedo Macrobama) and forget about anyone who disagrees. MAGA!!!!
Good article on the clowns we have in the admin conducting “foreign policy” if that is what it is:
http://www.unz.com/freed/pussy-john-bolton-and-his-codpiece-mustache/