Categorizing LACs' Loyalties In The Midst Of The Hybrid War Coup Attempt In Venezuela

The Venezuelan government faces the task of countering these attacks and allegations while bolstering its democratic security without falling into a trap that could lead to further destabilization.

What is unfolding in Venezuela after its July 28 elections is not a natural occurrence but a meticulously planned attempt at destabilization and regime change. While the CIA plays a pivotal role in orchestrating these events, it is striking to see the Latin American right wing, represented by Milei and Bukele, and the pseudo-left, embodied by Lula and Boric, all in unison aligning themselves against a genuine left-wing movement in the region. The article categorizes various LAC countries' stances on Venezuela’s election results contrasting them with the ideological stances of each state to demonstrate that it is erroneous to believe all left-wing governments show solidarity with one another in the region as there are degrees of separation between them. 

The geopolitical landscape of the Latin American and Caribbean region is witnessing a Hybrid war coup attempt and info war campaign against Venezuela's government in the middle of its electoral process. This coup effort is synchronized with María Corina Machado Parisca as the head of the opposition calling the elections a fraud and citing documents facilitated by the CIA-linked company, along with violent mobs on the ground terrorists attacking people and infrastructure, while on the diplomatic front the “soft left” LAC states, particularly Brazil’s Lula and Chile’s Boric, Colombia's Petro among others, have joined the US hybrid war coup against the Bolivarian state. 

Against All Enemies

The Venezuelan state must neutralize the violence without causing casualties, as any loss of life would be exploited and put out of context by the same hybrid warfare machinery to blame the government. This requires a strategic and calculated democratic security approach that focuses on safeguarding the well-being of its citizens while thwarting external attempts to destabilize the country de facto countering the hybrid war. By employing non-lethal tactics whenever possible, Venezuela can effectively confront these external threats and protect its sovereignty without falling into the trap set by those seeking to provoke conflict.

The supposed evidence that Venezuelan opposition leaders and their foreign allies have cited to justify this fraud claim is an exit poll produced by a firm closely linked to the US government. These assertions are primarily rooted in an exit poll conducted by Edison Research, a firm with known ties to the CIA and involvement in state propaganda efforts in countries like Ukraine, Georgia, and Iraq. However, the Venezuelan opposition will not present evidence because their intention is to generate doubt and uncertainty. The Venezuelan government now faces the task of countering these narratives and allegations while bolstering its democratic security without falling into a trap that could lead to further destabilization. 

Following the recent elections in Venezuela, other countries have extended their congratulations to Nicolás Maduro on his victory. Each of these nations, having their own diplomatic reasons, has acknowledged Maduro's victory. On the other hand, several other countries have outright not recognized Nicolás Maduro's victory while a third group has opted to wait until the waters clear. Venezuelan Foreign Affairs Minister Yvan Gil announced on July 29 a decision to sever diplomatic ties with seven Latin American nations thus initiating the withdrawal of its diplomatic staff from Argentina, the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, Panama, Peru, Uruguay, and Chile in response for these nations publishing a joint statement rejecting the re-election of President Nicolas Maduro. There is talk in the media that a second joint statement is in the works, which will be released soon by Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico with them undoubtedly playing the role of the good cop, while the countries of the first joint statement play the role of the bad cop.

The U.S. Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, expressed grave doubts about the authenticity of the results, suggesting they may not truly represent the Venezuelan electorate's choice. Meanwhile, Chile's President, Gabriel Boric, questioned the credibility of the results, insisting on verifiable outcomes and stating Chile's refusal to recognize any unconfirmed results. Ecuador's President, Daniel Noboa, highlighted the broader regional struggle against authoritarianism, framing the election as another instance of political power being wielded to undermine the populace's aspirations. President Nayib Bukele called the election a “fraud” in which the “official result has no relation to reality.” For his part, Mexicos President Andrés Manuel López Obrador demanded the OAS to keep its nose out of Venezuela's presidential election, because that is interference, and the OAS does not represent anyone. Meanwhile, Argentina's President, Javier Milei, outright rejected the legitimacy of Maduro's victory, denouncing it as fraudulent and assuring Venezuelan citizens of Argentina's support and open doors.

Lula for his part even though his nation is the B in BRICS has been preprogramming audiences against Maduro for the last month. Lula even misrepresented what Maduro said recently about how the country would descend into a civil war due to the pro-US forces of Corina attempting to wipe the Chavistas out, but Lula twisted the meaning to signify that Maduro was threatening the opposition. This strategic misinterpretation by Lula along with other governments is indicative of Brazil's tactical stance to sabotage the stability of Nicaragua, Cuba and Venezuela as part of the US strategy to resist the multipolar systemic transition to multipolarity. On July 22 was quoted as saying “Maduro needs to learn that when you win, you stay. When you lose, you leave", while on the surface the sentence seems logical and good, it's actually intended to preprogram the reader with Maduro as a force that you must be wary of, and that does not know how democracy works. Lula's criticism of the Venezuelan president days before the elections is a clear sign of election interference. 

Degrees Of Differentiation 

Latin American and the Caribbean geopolitics is not as straightforward as many believe, instead of a regional left vs right mentality, we have an array of competing interests shaping the region. It would be more exact to divide LAC nations into 4 categories for the purposes of this analysis,1) the pro-US right, 2) the pro-US “soft left”, 3) the pro-sovereignty “hard left” and the last category of 4) a pro-sovereignty right. To this day there is not a pro-sovereignty right-wing government in the region so this last category won't be used. The reader has to keep in mind that the administrations of these states change with time, but as of July 2024 they can be categorized as follows. 

The pro-US rightwing LAC governments typically align with American policies and neoliberal ideologies, often seeking economic and security benefits from this alignment. Argentina Milei, Peru’s Dina Bolude, Costa Rica’s Rodrigo Chaves, Dominican Republics’ Luis Abinader, Panama’s José Mulino, Paraguay’s Santiago Peña and El Salvador’s Bukele,

On the other hand, the pro-US “soft left” may share certain ideological leanings with the right – specifically when it comes to attacking the next category – though they often adopt a more moderate stance, balancing national interests with cooperative ties to the US as least optically. These countries would be Brazil's Lula, Chiles Boric, Colombia's Petro, Guatemala’s Bernardo Arévalo, and Ecuador's Daniel Noboa.

The pro-sovereignty left, distinct in its prioritization of national autonomy and often resistant to US influence, represents a commitment to self-determination and regional solidarity. This category underscores the aspiration for a more equitable international order that respects the sovereignty of LAC nations. These leaders are Nicaraguas’ Daniel Ortega, Cuba's Miguel Díaz-Canel, Bolivia's Luis Arce and Honduras’ Xiomara Castros. And lastly the pro-sovereignty right-wing governments in the region which are non-existent.