The biggest threat facing global stability is the escalating tensions between the US and Venezuela. An all-out war would be catastrophic. The rest of the world cannot afford to be ambivalent on the issue and must vocally condemn any overtures towards invasion. That is particularly true for global media, which will be judged by history for how it reports on the crisis.
The US has amassed a formidable force in the Caribbean over the past few months. This includes warships, aircraft carriers and as many as 15,000 troops. It’s the largest military build-up in the region since 1989’s invasion of Panama; the infamous “Operation Just Cause” that ousted de facto dictator Manuel Noriega.
US President Donald Trump’s pretext for the action is the crackdown on “narcoterrorist” cartels that are flooding the US with cocaine and fentanyl. Multiple strikes have been carried out on alleged drug boats and at least 80 people have been killed.
Scant evidence has been offered to prove that such a level of violence is commensurate with the threat that is presented. Indeed, most independent narcotics analysts agree that Venezuela does not represent an inordinate threat in Latin America when it comes to either drug production or distribution.
It is clear that Trump desires regime change. According to reports, over a phone call a few days ago, he went as far as giving an ultimatum to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro to leave office or else.
Maduro has been in power since the death of leftist icon Hugo Chávez in 2013. There is compelling evidence from observers that last year’s election was rigged in his favour. His main opponent fled, and now there can be no disputing that Venezuelans are living under an authoritarian government.
However, it should go without saying that acknowledging such a reality does not give the US the green light to pursue unprovoked acts of aggression in international waters.
The tension is escalating with every passing minute that the force remains in place. Murmurs are now becoming so deafening that a full-scale invasion might realistically be around the corner. Such a result would be disastrous to a world that is being torn apart by wars in Africa, the Middle East and Eastern Europe.
Trump is well-known for his bullying tactics. Some might even argue that they are effective in getting results in a geopolitical world burdened by bureaucratic, antiquated traditions. War would be entirely different; not just a betrayal to his America-first support base, but an annihilation of the global rules-based order.
With such a paper-thin casus belli, we have to ask: who would be next? Any country that is on Trump’s list of pariah states may well have legitimate cause for concern. That includes South Africa.
Continued aggression has to be met with appropriate levels of condemnation. There can be no prevaricating from media, think tanks, academia and anyone involved in the diplomatic space.
The US’s 2003 Iraq invasion is history’s great warning of the power of a spiralling, unsubstantiated narrative. Those who supported the war on the back of the non-existent evidence of weapons of mass destruction earned an indelible stain on their credibility.
There are positive signs that the support of traditional allies is different this time. The UK, for instance — a nation highly culpable in Iraq — has suspended intelligence co-operation in the Caribbean. Albeit quietly and without fuss.
In the halls of realpolitik, that tacit disapproval is important. But if the war machine plows on, there has to be more vociferous objections. We will all come to regret the alternative.
Also read:
SA supports Venezuela in standoff with US, says Ronald Lamola
US defence chief defends lethal strike on alleged drug vessel
Hegseth defends authorisation after deadly Caribbean strikes
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.