US-EU humanitarian invasion of Venezuela

Venezuela has been a focal issue in the international news for more than a week now as the US tries its best to dismantle regimes that can become a global lead to burst its “hegemonic” bubble (or it hopes). They engineered the Arab Spring where US foundations provided illicit funds to the opposition against Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak or a Syrian opposition whose leader was raised from the dead in Texas.

The Syrian opposition initiated armed resistance against the regime of Bashar al Assad resulting in a civil war which gave the NATO occasion for military invention under the excuse of “saving trapped civilians.” The Syrian scenario became convoluted when the ISIS came into the picture as a second front. Thus, Assad asked Russia to provide the counterbalance to a threesome of contending domestic actors — the Syrian government, US “opposition” and the ISIS.

Drawing parallels with Syria has to stop there because the US has realized that its Washington-created opposition in Venezuela could not or should not initiate armed resistance for many reasons — different regional contexts in the Middle East and Caribbean, the consolidation of President Nicolas Maduro’s army and the weakening political hegemony of the US to stage a quick invasion, etc. Instead, it has crafted a diplomatic scenario that can create a justification for an invasion.

US National Security Advisor John Bolton’s originally planned military incursions at the Colombian border in the west and the Brazilian border in the south. It turned to be militarily unfeasible despite the 5,000 Special Forces commandos he had envisioned on his scratch pad.

Special envoy Elliot Abrams assigned to see through the plan to engineer the downfall of Maduro and capture Venezuela implemented the first phase which was the US-Europe diplomatic intervention to recognize the self-proclaimed president followed by the next phase which is the humanitarian invasion.

A flotilla of ships bringing food and medical supplies will likely be complemented with an array of US warships which will supposedly provide protection against the Venezuelan armed forces. This is a modern Trojan horse ploy which is meant to neutralize Venezuelan defenses and pave the way for a “righteous invasion.”

And the excuse for invasion is the so-called humanitarian assistance that the US and its media handlers peddle. The pretender interim President Juan Guaido now parrots the call and asks for aid. (Or probably this is all the opposition really wanted to get food and other aid, one asks).

Starting with the $30 million that US President Donald Trump bandies around, a number of European countries have started to rise to the US call for a humanitarian invasion. How ironic is this ploy — the US engineers an economic blockade and financial garrote to starve the Venezuelan economy and people and then the Western powers now promise aid,

I call this an invasion because the US and the rest of the rich Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development nations have now conflated humanitarian and development assistance with military assistance and action. While the UN agencies do their very best to provide and coordinate this assistance, they have to reckon with the US military whether in the Middle East, Mindanao or elsewhere.

The Maduro government rejects this humanitarian invasion because it is a clear pretext to bring in aid accompanied by a large US military escort and probably with the participation of the military forces of its Colombian and Brazilian allies. It has to step gingerly to neutralize the ploy while thwarting military action. The Venezuelan people can also be mobilized to work hand in hand to thwart this ploy.

On the other hand, the UN should respect Venezuelan sovereignty by not allowing itself to be used by the US and European countries in the name of humanitarian relief. We can expect that China and Russia will not allow this diplomatic offensive that is patently interventionist and provocative.