THE recent US government military surge vis-a-vis Venezuela, including the USS Gerald R Ford and the most advanced warplanes, has generated fears of a potentially dangerous escalation. President Donald Trump has said the operation was aimed at cracking down on drug trafficking and alleged that Venezuela is a conduit for such activity. Drug trafficking is certainly an issue, but the size and purpose of the military presence indicate a much grander goal: a regime change. A 鈥榳ar on drugs鈥� that the United States has actually embarked on, however, is a ramping up of efforts to destabilise the government of Venezuela and its president Nicol谩s Maduro with potentially catastrophic regional consequences.
The Trump administration officially justifies its actions by claiming the need to fight against the flow of illegal narcotics, such as fentanyl and cocaine, coming from Venezuela. The president has said that Venezuela is a key transit point in the trade, calling the government a 鈥榥arco-terrorist鈥� regime waging a war on the border of the United States. In this story, American military interventions are justified as essential to defending US citizens and ending the illegal drugs.
But the facts belie such an extreme assertion. Cocaine ships through Venezuela, but the global drug trade does not generally centre around it. Experts note that some 94 per cent of fentanyl that is smuggled into the United States comes from Mexican cartels, not Venezuela. And besides, the cocaine carried through Venezuela mostly goes to Europe and West Africa, not the United States. This undercuts the administration鈥檚 argument that Venezuela is an existential threat to American security. The out-of-proportion military retaliation, including the F-35B fighters, MQ-9 Reaper drones and B-52 bombers, does not match the drug-running problem. It is part of a much larger geopolitical mission that goes beyond fighting drug trafficking.
Indeed, there can be no doubt that drug trafficking is a problem, but the true goal lurking behind the US military presence in Venezuela seems more about achieving a regime change. The Trump administration鈥檚 rhetoric and practice reveal this to be the real objective, with the drugs claim providing for a useful pretext.
One of the key proponents of this agenda is senator Marco Rubio, who has repeatedly labelled Venezuela鈥檚 government a 鈥榥arco-terrorist鈥� regime. Rubio鈥檚 characterisation of Venezuela into that of a rogue state paves the way for actions against Venezuela which stretch far beyond counter-narcotics. The senator鈥檚 remarks are consistent with the more general effort to undermine Maduro鈥檚 government, an objective many in the Trump administration have openly expressed support for.
The CIA has also conducted secret missions in order to weaken the Maduro government, particularly targeting the Venezuelan military. These are operations that indicate an intention to weaken the government, not just stop drug trafficking. This is not just about going after bad guys. The United States is also involved in a wider attempt by the Trump administration to foment a regime change and unrest in Venezuela and, perhaps, even unseat Maduro and replace him with an entity that is more friendly to US interests.
Ramping up its military options in Venezuela is fraught with perils, legal and ethical, and regional stability.
The US military plans for Venezuela bring much in the way of legal and ethical baggage. It is extrajudicial execution to destroy drug-running vessels on the high seas. Legal experts have sounded the alarm about a lack of congressional authorisation for such military action and a president who is unilaterally taking steps that sidestep the constitutional checks on the use of force. 鈥溾�橭ne of the norms that govern military intervention is being eroded and the global order will be disordered.鈥�
The military escalation also risks destabilising the region as a whole. Venezuela, under Maduro, is taking the US threat seriously and has increased its military power substantially with Russian-made anti-aircraft missiles and militias. Thousands of well-trained fighters reportedly stand ready to fight against a foreign presence. The United States has already had encounters with Colombian forces, including raids in which some strikes accidentally killed Colombians. The region is also more polarised than ever and the US military鈥檚 activity has exacerbated its relationship with Colombia complicating matters even more.
The danger of a quagmire in Venezuela is real. A long military intervention could leave Colombia in something like a low-intensity conflict with guerrillas, paramilitary troops and rebel factions like the National Liberation Army. The situation might quickly get out of hand, with the United States sinking into a long war that would sap resources and fan tensions throughout Latin America.
Back home in the United States, people are increasingly worried about just how legal and what kind of hell will break loose following the Trump administration鈥檚 latest move. High-profile members of the Congress, including senator Rand Paul and senator Lisa Murkowski, have expressed opposition to the president鈥檚 military strategy. Their complaints focus on the absence of congressional oversight, a clear mandate for military action and the risk of further violence breaking out across the region. That Trump can simply overlook the necessity of formal war declarations seems to betray a frightening degree of disregard for constitutional limitations on military power and for the place of the Congress when it comes to questions of war.
The US military role in Venezuela, purportedly for counter narcotics operations, is unmasking itself as a regime change strategy. While the problem of drug trafficking is real, it does not justify the huge military build-up now in place. The United States needs to change its approach, prioritising diplomacy over war. To try and change a regime through force very seldom works and usually creates the instability. Instead of going further down this dangerous road, we can work with a region where the United States has strategic partners to address issues related to Venezuela and move towards peace, stability and cooperation rather than militarisation.
听
Shahriar Ibne Hasan Nehal is a student of international relations in the University of Chittagong.
