The Wrong Message: U.S. Sanctions on Venezuela
The Wrong Message: U.S. Sanctions on Venezuela
Venezuela: The Twilight of Maximum Pressure
Venezuela: The Twilight of Maximum Pressure
Commentary / Latin America & Caribbean 3 minutes

The Wrong Message: U.S. Sanctions on Venezuela

The U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s decision to seek sanctions against Venezuelan officials allegedly involved in violence or human rights violations is problematic and may prove counterproductive. Sanctions will only reinforce the claims of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro’s government that it is the victim of an imperialist plot. The sanctions are opposed not only by the two respected senators who sensibly voted “no”, but also by the principal Venezuelan opposition coalition, the Mesa de Unidad Democrática (MUD), and many independent Venezuelan leaders.

Venezuela is certainly suffering a grave crisis. It’s true too that outside help is needed – polarisation between the two sides runs so deep that they are unlikely to resolve their differences alone, as International Crisis Group has highlighted in its new report. A dialogue begun in mid-April between the government and the opposition, with facilitation by the regional Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) and the Vatican, still lacks credibility – particularly for the opposition, which has virtually frozen its participation. A major push from Venezuela’s international partners – both in the region and beyond – is essential. But this must be built upon clear goals and a consistent strategy to achieve them.

Economic and political sanctions are only ever likely to work as tools to serve a wider diplomatic strategy, anchored in a full understanding of the political context. The Maduro government was democratically elected – albeit imperfectly, given doubts over vote tallying during the most recent presidential polls – and represents many Venezuelans. MUD leaders, for their part, have always emphasised that a political exit from the crisis, even if involving profound reform, must still fit within the framework of Venezuela’s constitution. U.S. sanctions – which are not tied to UNASUR’s mediation in Caracas and are unlikely to enjoy support in the region – appear designed less to advance a settlement in Venezuela than to play to a strand of U.S. public opinion.

The dialogue facilitated by UNASUR and other actors, including the Vatican, should continue. Of course, it must be clear too that it can’t drag on forever. So far the government has shown little desire to ease polarisation or disavow the hardliners in its ranks who continue to label the opposition as “putschist”. Nor has it yet accepted that the dialogue must be more than a simple conversation. It must be the basis for serious negotiations in which both sides make concessions.

The hardliners aren’t only on the government side though. Opposition radicals argue that the only solution is to overthrow the regime; they call loudly for all possible sanctions. This is not the stance of the majority of the opposition, its moderate leadership, or many respected Venezuelan figures. But the extremism of some offers easy justification to the government to refuse reform.

Venezuela faces an extremely serious economic decline and one of the continent’s most alarming crime waves. It needs to be united to tackle these challenges. Restoration of separation of powers is essential. Direct measures should include the appointment of independent persons, agreed on by both sides, to the Supreme Court, the attorney-general’s office and the office of the ombudsman, whose current mandates have expired or soon will. The pro-government militias known as “colectivos” must be disarmed, as should other unofficial armed groups. To do this, both sides need to feel confident that whatever emerges from the talks, they will be safe from retaliation.

It would be naïve to think the Venezuelan government will offer concessions voluntarily and based only on good faith. The international community – neighbours, regional powers and partners outside the region – must press the parties to forge agreements that are not about strengthening one side or the other but restoring the rule of law and protecting human rights. UNASUR must push harder and more cleverly: without a clear structure and schedule the dialogue risks shifting daily based only on the prevalent political mood. Nor can multilateral institutions, like the United Nations, ignore the crisis. They should make available to those involved their technical expertise in structuring such dialogue, and if it stalls, consider nominating an international facilitator to advance it or supervise fulfillment of whatever accords are reached.

Unilateral U.S. sanctions serve none of these goals. Quite the opposite: they risk trapping Latin America again in a jaded anti-imperialist debate, deepening polarisation on the continent and paralysing its response to the gravest crisis of the Western Hemisphere.

Subscribe to Crisis Group’s Email Updates

Receive the best source of conflict analysis right in your inbox.