Hyperinflation, astronomical prices, surging infant mortality, and political upheaval: that is the state of affairs in the world’s top oil-rich nation. Venezuela has neither food to feed its population nor critical medical supplies for its desperately ill. Infant mortality has increased by 30% and maternal mortality is up by 65% in 2016 alone, whilst homicide rates notoriously continue to soar. Venezuela tops the World Misery Index and has done so for years, perhaps its reputation as the most corrupt nation in Latin America has something to do with it. Hugo Chávez’, past president, bequest of a domestic economy almost entirely held hostage by unpredictable oil-revenue, mixed with a seismic drop in oil prices in 2014, has not bode well at all for the political environment in the country. In a disaster that has its roots in both Chávist economic policy and bad luck, the crisis seems to be getting worse.
In almost five months of protests, roughly 150 people have died, thousands more have been locked up for political reasons, including the leader of a prominent opposition party, Leopoldo Lopéz. Venezuelan authorities have reportedly gone beyond the use of tear gas and rubber bullets in order to quell protests to the use of ammunition and, per Amnesty International, torture. Venezuela risks heading down the path to civil war, a path that would be even more disastrous for its already desperate population. After the sham election of July 30th, sought by Maduro to tighten his grip on the little mandate he has left, this prospect looks alarmingly likely.
Clearly, Venezuelans are furious and the international community should be too. Venezuela’s crisis is a great threat to regional stability and the tens of thousands of Venezuelans fleeing to neighbouring countries is an immediate peril. Yet, what can be done and is there any alternative? A negotiated political settlement in which Maduro finishes his term as President ensures the release of political prisoners and free elections thereafter has already failed, but further attempts should be made nonetheless. At this late stage, a voluntary concession of power simply looks impossible and, with the backing of the military and Cuban security officials, Maduro looks strong. Moreover, there exists no unified or credible opposition and any succeeding President will have to tackle the country’s poisoned economic legacy. This will be no easy or popular task; Venezuela has already been branded a failed state.
From the epoch of Chávez until the Maduro regime now, the Venezuelan establishment has been a powerhouse for anti-Western, ‘anti-imperialist’ rhetoric. It is therefore unlikely that any overt criticism of Nicolás Maduro or general sanctions on the Venezuelan economy as a whole will lead to anything more than political ammunition and political instability. Targeted sanctions on the Maduro establishment are what is needed – sanctions that will disenchant the Maduro regime, not disfavour its victims. When Steven Mnuchin, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, announced that Maduro’s personal assets would be frozen, there was a step in the right direction. Nevertheless, Donald Trump’s threats to ban Venezuelan oil imports is set to do more harm than good. A new market would be found and those suffering under the regime would suffer even more in the interim.
The European Union and Latin American nations should follow suit and join in the effort to tackle the crisis by targeting Venezuelan officials, their assets and their freedom of movement. The less the upper echelons of Maduro’s regime reap from their position, the more a peaceful resolution is likely to emerge. Halting the general flow of cash to a state is never a wise way to bring or nurture peaceful domestic politics. Any solution will most likely entail distasteful diplomatic compromises in exchange for enduring stability and democracy. The alternative, however, could easily be a destructive spiral into civil war or dictatorship. As such, actors must favour intelligent concessional politics and targeted economic sanctions over a potentially destructive knee-jerk response.
