How Donald Trump's plan in Venezuela responds to the specter of US interventions in Latin America

But Botero seemed to sum up the feelings of many Latin Americans when he spoke of the crisis facing Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro with opposition leader Juan Guaidó, backed by the United States and the US. dozens of other countries.

"Maduro is harmful, but invading a country and, above all, invading the United States, with its precedents, would turn this moment into a very dangerous moment," said the painter in the digital edition of the Spanish newspaper El País on Saturday .

In fact, US President Donald Trump's plan to put pressure on Maduro to quit, warning of a possible military option in Venezuela, met with a ghost: Washington's own history of speeches In the region.

The rejection of the idea of ​​a US military action in Latin America. It became clear this week when the Lima group – which supports Guaidó – baderted that "the transition to democracy must be conducted peacefully by the Venezuelans themselves".

"The opposition of Latin America to any military response is conditioned by the history of US interventions, as many have had serious consequences," said Alan McPherson, a professor of public health. history and director of the Center for the Study of Force and Diplomacy at Temple University in Philadelphia.

"You must be prudent"

Trump has publicly evoked the alternative of a military intervention in Venezuela since his freshman year at the White House.

"We have many options regarding Venezuela, including a possible military option if necessary," he told the press in August 2017, without giving further details.

"Maduro will leave now!" And "Maduro will help us": this is how the parallel concerts were held on both sides of the border between Colombia and Venezuela.

This unexpected warning appeared in the midst of a serious political, economic and social crisis in Venezuela after months of anti-government protests resulting in more than 120 deaths, injuries and arrests.

While Latin America was beginning to isolate Maduro, accusing him of systematically violating democratic rules and human rights, a clear regional rejection of Trump's "military option" proposed appeared immediately.

Different badysts felt that Trump's remarks could strengthen Maduro, who, like his predecessor Hugo Chávez, used the argument of an "empire" attack to reduce the ranks behind his socialist government.

None of this has prevented Trump from insisting up to now that "all options are on the table" in the case of Venezuela. Vice President Mike Pence repeated these words Monday in front of the Lima group.

But the idea of ​​a military intervention in the country of South America also does not seem to generate consensus among Pentagon veterans.

"The time has come for Maduro to leave, but the United States must be cautious, even if it is suppressing the population and arresting its opponents, an American invasion would provoke anger in the region and at the international level. " retired Admiral James Stavridis, former head of US Southern Command, in the digital edition of Time magazine last month.

He added that in all the places in Latin America that he had visited during his tenure, between 2006 and 2009, he had been reminded of "the history of US intervention".

A long list

Much of this story of interventions took place during the last century.

Between 1898 and 1994, there were at least 41 cases in which the United States achieved its goal of changing government in Latin America and the Caribbean: an average of one every 28 months, according to a study by the United States. Harvard University published in 2005.

This includes 17 examples of "direct" interventions, involving the use of military forces, intelligence officers or Washington government employees.

The list begins with the Spanish-American War of 1898 and ends with the dispatch of troops to Haiti in 1994 to restore constitutional government.

Between the two episodes are, for example, the CIA organized coup in Guatemala against Jacobo Arbenz in 1954 or the military invasion of Panama to capture the de facto leader, General Manuel Noriega, in 1989 .

On the other hand, 27 episodes of "indirect" intervention – in which the protagonists were local actors in every country with the support of the United States – include such cases as the coup of military state in Chile, which toppled President Salvador Allende in 1973.

"In almost all cases, US officials have invoked the interests of US security" For interventions, historian John Coatsworth noted in the study.

"In retrospect, it is now possible to dismiss most of these claims as implausible," he added, concluding that the interventions "generated unnecessary resentment in the region and questioned the commitment of the United States. United towards democracy and the rule of law in international matters ".

However, since the end of the Cold War, Washington's direct actions to change governments in Latin America seem more like the things of the past.

Therefore, experts believe that if Trump opted for a unilateral military intervention in Venezuela, this would mark a radical change in US policy. to the region.

"This has not been done since Panama or Grenada in the 1980s," says McPherson, author of the book Brief History of US Interventions. in Latin America and the Caribbean. "In addition, it would be the largest country that the United States invaded Latin America, eliminating Mexico in the mid-nineteenth century."

Up to now, the US has sought to weaken Maduro multilaterally, promoting a coalition of fifty countries – including several Latin Americans – that since last month has recognized Guaidó as interim president of Venezuela.

Options?

But Maduro remains in power, with the support of the Venezuelan army who, until now, has not heard the demands of Trump and his allies to support Guaidó.

USA He also convened two meetings of the UN Security Council this year to discuss the crisis in Venezuela last Tuesday. The third was called for Thursday.

However, divergences with the countries supporting Maduro, such as Russia and China, have so far prevented the council from reaching a consensus on possible solutions to the Venezuelan crisis.

The question of whether the next step in the US Army will be strengthened Saturday, when Maduro rejected the attempt to introduce humanitarian aid to Venezuela at the request of Guaidó, who considered a maneuver to overthrow him.

Clashes between Maduro's forces and opposition protesters have left at least four dead and dozens injured on Venezuela's borders with Colombia and Brazil.

If Trump maintains his multilateral approach, everything indicates that his pulse with Maduro could continue longer than his government expected.

And if Trump bets on "the military option", he may lose ground in the region.

Other options

Some badysts believe that there are alternatives.

"When people think of a military option (…), they think it's an invasion like that of Panama or Granada, and it's not necessarily like that, "says Stephen Donehoo, a former US military intelligence official. who served in Southern Command and is currently a partner of the consulting firm McLarty Asociados.

Donehoo says, for example, that air defense systems could be neutralized "with very little physical damage" in order to prevent Maduro and his team from controlling certain resources or using electronic systems to limit capabilities. of the government.

However, Stephen Kinzer, senior researcher at the Watson Institute for International Affairs at Brown University, believes that if Washington decided to intervene unilaterally in Venezuela without worrying about the response in the region, it would risk repeating the failures of the past.

"I do not think the United States is so impulsive," Kinzer told BBC World. "But it's a habit so deeply rooted that when we see things we do not like in Latin America, very old impulses arise."

BBC.