During these last weeks, we have been able to verify how many so-called ‘democrats’ have not doubted in positioning themselves at the forefront of the western world, to shout out loud, as if it were a brilliant discovery, that Nicolás Maduro is a dictator, and Juan Guaidó, the person in charge of calling general elections as soon as possible. We will agree that Maduro has not only led Venezuela to the most deplorable misery, but does not seem to have any interest in abandoning power to offer its citizens a pleasant future. On the other hand, Guaidó personifies the shortcomings of his opponent: he is a fair man and concerned for the common good of the nation.
In Spain —and this is not surprising— the leaders of two political parties —the self-appointed democrats, as mentioned above— have pounced on the conflict, and have not wasted any time to declare their support for Guaidó. It is not so clear if this behaviour is due to the fact that, spontaneously, they have understood that the advent of justice does not admit delays, or if it is only a pre-campaign tool to present themselves as authentic democrats —even given the fact that when this happened the elections had not been announced yet. The Government of Pedro Sánchez reacted with a little more parsimony although, in the end, he succumbed to pressures from the opposition. After a few days, the Executive offered an eight-day extension for Maduro to call elections. If that did not happen, Spain would immediately recognize Guaidó as president in charge of calling them. Sanchez’s words sounded like an ultimatum that, in fact, eventually was proven as such when the term expired without Maduro leaving office.
However, despite the fact that it has international support —including economic support— Guaidó does not have the necessary means and, therefore, the power to carry out his just and generous claims. The only result that has been derived from the explicit rejection of Maduro has been his adoption of a more aggressive position, which acts directly against Guaidó’s interests, which, it seems, are those of Venezuela, not of the U.S. Does anyone really believe that the US cares about Venezuela, beyond the potential economic interests that it sees in it, after punishing Latin American countries with taxes and barriers?
Knowing that Maduro is a dictator, it was not very difficult to foresee that he would oppose everything that cast doubt on his power. Well aware of his hatred for the U.S., parts of Europe and Spain, who came up with the idea of recognising Guaidó as legitimate, as if it was a magical thing? This is what has caused Maduro to have banned the entry of humanitarian aid to cover the basic needs of the population, that the cities remain dark due to the power cuts, and even the possible detention of Guaidó. At this point, the only thing that, from a domestic standpoint, can save Venezuela from an even greater catastrophe is that the military abandons Maduro, or that the people rise up in arms. On the other hand, from an international dimension, there could be a military intervention, but that would violate international law.
The rejection of the West to Maduro has led him to adopt a more aggressive position, which acts against the interests of Guaidó
Today’s politics is far from deep reflection, and acts through an immediacy in which resolutions flow. Such behavior directly threatens justice, no matter how fair the action taken might be. The decision-making process has been not very quiet in this case: immediate results have been sought, through spontaneous and untimely ideas. R. J. Palacio wrote in his work Wonder that “when you can choose between being right or being kind, choose to be kind”. In a situation of famine, injustices and deaths, it is difficult to opt for the second alternative. But it has been proven that, seeking to be right, however honest the goal is, the crisis has not improved, but quite the opposite. Perhaps —or not— a kind approach would tame the situation, and help the Venezuelan people recover from what has been taken away from them for so long. This does not denying or stating the truth —because sooner or later it will be revealed— but about how we get there. The question is not when Venezuela will be finally free, but how.