last month president barack obama announced a fresh batch of economic sanctions on the beleaguered venezuelan government of nicolas maduro for, the ‘intimidation of political opponents’. obama went on to say that venezuela poses ‘an extraordinary threat to the national security of the u.s.’ The language used by the president seems to be quite fantastical, given that the venezuelan regime(according to the white house) can barely feed it’s own people.
caracas is in crisis, and its over reliance on oil taxation means that when prices collapse, as they have, the Venezuelan economy takes a whack. the government under both chavez and maduro have, no doubt been guilty of human rights violations and have actively engaged in the suppression of civil society. however these indiscretions pale into insignificance when compared with the u.s.' role on the continent. the 1973 coup d’etat that brought the murderous general augusto pinochet to power, or ronald reagan’s funding of the raping, pillaging contra militias in nicaragua in direct defiance of congress. america’s record of interference in central and south america is staggering and only a fool would contend that obama’s interest in human rights is genuine. just take a look at the middle east where obama and foreign secretary john kerry welcomed the fraudulent election of former army chief abdel fattah al-sisi in egypt. sisi had just ousted egypt's first ever democratically elected president and was in the process of rolling back the partial liberalisation induced by the arab spring. Furthermore, obama’s continued support for the theocratic monarchy in saudi arabia, who administer justice with the koran in one hand and the sword in the other is further evidence of washington's selective interpretation of the human rights.
the u.s. has history in venezuela. in 2002 it funded and trained opposition groups who temporarily forced the then president hugo chavez from office, at the barrel of a gun. despite this ardent display of aggression the truth is that u.s. soft power in south america is in terminal decline. brazil is top-dog in the hemisphere, with chinese investment also increasing rapidly. unilateral displays of power from washington only hastens this deterioration and contradict earlier sentiments of goodwill, like the gradual normalisation of relations with cuba. many years ago a young senator from illinois even made the point that sanctions on cuba had the effect of impoverishing the mass of the people whilst consolidating Castor’s grip on the country. sanctions on cuba, and iran for that matter allowed castro and the ayatollah to foster a siege mentality. they were able to effectively tell their people that their poverty and suffering was a direct consequence of yankee imperialism, and solidify their own authority by acting as a bulwark against it. It was for this reason that obama, to his credit, reversed the decades long policy of sanctions and blockade on cuba and has began the process of normalising relations with a state which, for some time, has posed no threat to the u.s.
hostility towards venezuela was not the only course of action available to the president. there was an opportunity to work with other south american countries to resolve the crisis. For some time now the tide has been turing against venezuela, with allies in the region growing frustrated at the ineptitude of the maduro government. daniel wilkinson, the managing director of americas watch, which has been sharply critical of venezuela since at least 2008, said: “until very recently, most countries in the region were reluctant to say anything about venezuela. if this is just U.S. sanctions, and the u.s. is doing it on its own, then it’s much easier for venezuela to play the victim card. that’s why it’s really important for the u.s. government to be working with other democratic governments in the region to make this more of a collective.” alas the advice of mr wilkinson has not been heeded and obama has instead endeavoured to pursue a foreign policy of militant unilateralism.
with congress falling entirely into republican hands and obama’s chances of significant domestic reform extremely limited, foreign policy was thought to be the only viable way for the president to build a legacy. unfortunately he seems to be operating with the same combination of incoherence and heavy handedness that most of his recent predecessors have specialised in.
No comments:
Post a Comment