The time for indifference on Venezuela is over

The time for indifference on Venezuela is over
BY JORGE G. CASTANEDA
MAR 27, 2015

For the last 15 years, Venezuela has been mired in crisis, characterized
by wasteful government spending, rampant corruption, growing
authoritarianism, relentless human-rights violations and now economic
collapse.

But beyond the occasional sharp word from the late President Hugo
Chavez, the periodic expropriation of a foreign company without adequate
compensation, and some minor meddling in the elections of neighboring
countries, the crisis barely registered abroad. This is no longer the case.

Earlier this month, U.S. President Barack Obama officially classified
Venezuela as an "extraordinary threat to the national security and
foreign policy of the United States," and ordered sanctions against
seven officials, thereby stoking bilateral tensions.

But while the crisis in Venezuela undoubtedly has far-reaching
implications, the precise motivation behind Obama's decision remains
unclear.

One possible explanation stems from the enduring passivity of
Venezuela's regional neighbors toward its plight. Countries like Brazil,
Mexico, Chile and Colombia have remained largely silent in the face of
recurring abuses by Chavez and his successor, Nicolas Maduro, including
the imprisonment of opposition leaders, repression of public protests
and media censorship.

Obama may be trying to force these countries to choose sides: either
support Venezuela explicitly or support the U.S. in opposing its
leaders' policies.

More important, Obama could be trying to drive a wedge between Venezuela
and Cuba at a time when the Cuban leadership is keenly interested in
improving its relationship with the U.S. As it stands, Cuba will sink
without Venezuela — unless, of course, it finds another lifeline. The
U.S. — which in placing itself in direct opposition to Venezuela has
also highlighted the country's fragility — may be an increasingly
appealing option. And, indeed, many experts anticipate the eventual
normalization of Cuba-U.S. relations, despite short-term political
obstacles.

Maduro has not taken Obama's affront lightly. Employing the age-old
tactic of exaggerating the threat of external aggression — in this case,
from what Maduro, like Chavez before him, refers to as the "empire" — to
justify internal repression, he has compelled the legislative assembly
to enact a law enabling him to govern temporarily by decree.

To reinforce the image that a U.S. invasion may be imminent, Maduro has
mobilized the army and militia for war maneuvers. Last year, when Panama
requested that the Permanent Council of the Organization of American
States dedicate a regular meeting to the Venezuelan crisis, Maduro
severed diplomatic relations for four months, accusing the Panamanians
of joining the U.S. in an "open conspiracy" against him.

This approach has helped Maduro obtain the support of the Union of South
American Nations — a new regional bloc that issues harmless
pronouncements. But he is not done yet.

He is now preparing to transform the upcoming Summit of the Americas in
Panama — which Obama and, for the first time, Cuba's Raul Castro are
expected to attend — into a rhetorical witch hunt against "Yankee
interventionism" in his country.

Maduro seems to hope that such agitation will impede efforts by Obama
and Castro to begin normalizing relations at the summit.

As it stands, it is possible that they could meet bilaterally to
negotiate the establishment of embassies in each other's capitals, with
the U.S. potentially even removing Cuba from the list of countries that
it counts as supporters of international terrorism.

But, with the U.S. engaged in such a severe political confrontation with
Venezuela, progress would effectively require that Cuba abandon its
unconditional support for the Venezuelan regime. Given Cuba's
desperation to attract investment, tourism and trade, such an outcome is
certainly plausible.

Of course, Cuba is not the only country facing the stark choice between
intervention in Venezuela and support for Chavismo. Countries like
Brazil, Mexico and Chile — all of which back neither alternative, and
have rightly applauded the detente between Cuba and the U.S. — must also
consider their options ahead of the Panama summit.

Will these countries' leaders join Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega, Bolivia's
Evo Morales, Ecuador's Rafael Correa and Argentina's Cristina Fernandez
de Kirchner in supporting Maduro, backing Obama into a corner in Panama?
Or will they disable the trap Maduro is trying to set, perhaps even
reprising Spanish King Juan Carlos I's 2007 outburst to Chavez: "Why
don't you shut up?"

Amid these questions, one thing is certain: Latin America's larger
countries cannot continue to ignore Venezuela's crisis. If the country's
economic collapse — the consequence of incompetent governance and the
sharp fall in oil prices — is not enough to spur them to choose a side,
Obama's extreme maneuver will be. Their time for indifference is over.

Jorge G. Castaneda, a foreign minister of Mexico from 2000 to 2003, is a
professor of politics and Latin American and Caribbean Studies at New
York University.

Source: The time for indifference on Venezuela is over | The Japan Times
- http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2015/03/27/commentary/world-
commentary/time-indifference-venezuela/?utm_source=rss&
amp;utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=time-indifference-venezuela#.VRWvZ_nF83Q