
Of course, the country’s circumstances today are different
than they were in 2002. Chavez was intelligent and well-liked by the masses;
Maduro is foolish and detested by them. Nevertheless, it would be ill-advised
for the U.S. to try to violently impose an unknown leader on the Venezuelan
people. The risk of retaliatory slaughters or civil war would increase
dramatically, and the humanitarian crisis might therefore be made worse rather
than better. Despite the undeniably wretched nature of the government in
Caracas, then, there are still persuasive reasons to oppose what would be a
unilateral U.S. intervention. (I take the objection that a U.S.-sponsored coup
would be a violation of international law seriously as well, but exploring that
topic would require an essay of its own.) If Maduro launches widespread
massacres of the opposition, or if regional governments decide to change their
posture, then the scales might be tipped in favor of intervention; currently
they are not.
More…
No comments:
Post a Comment