Jorge G. Castañeda is a former foreign minister of Mexico and teaches Latin American studies at New York University. Carlos Ominami is a former economic minister of Chile and a former member of that country’s Senate.
Latin America must continue to avoid international war.
Consider the global context. In recent years, focused conflicts on other continents have given way to larger wars. The war between Russia and Ukraine has drawn intervention from all major powers in one way or another. The conflict in the Middle East, which initially pitted Israel against Hamas, threatens to transform into a war of large proportions. Armed conflicts with foreign interests are ongoing in Sudan, Yemen and Syria.
The Latin American and Caribbean region represents a notable exception — a self-declared “Zone of Peace” free from interstate wars. The last one in our region — the very short Cenepa War between Ecuador and Peru — took place nearly 30 years ago.
This containment is especially noteworthy, given our past as a region of potentially explosive international confrontations. This was the case during the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 and the Malvinas conflict between Argentina and Britain in 1982 — both cases involving external powers with nuclear capabilities.
But today, instability in Venezuela has reached the point where it could affect regional peace. Already beset by a decade of the highest inflation in the world along with escalating poverty, disease and crime — resulting in the flight of millions of Venezuelans from their homeland — the situation has been brought to crisis stage by President Nicolás Maduro’s refusal to accept his defeat in the July election.
Maduro is unyielding in his determination to begin a new term in office on Jan. 10 — just 10 days before the United States, with a long history of projecting power into Latin America, will inaugurate the winner of the November presidential election. No matter who enters the White House, there is a possibility of disrupting diplomatic channels between Washington and Caracas that are already minimal.
And these tense relations are likely to be aggravated by Russia’s typically opportunistic and provocative — vis-à-vis the United States — presence in the Caribbean Basin. Moscow, Venezuela’s main supplier of arms since the regime of Hugo Chávez, continues to strengthen its relationship with Maduro. If Russia faces more setbacks in its war with Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin might see Venezuela as a way to rattle the United States in its own “backyard” — and Washington has a history of forceful overreactions to such involvement in this hemisphere.
Going forward, Venezuela — with the most proven oil reserves in the world — will surely be at the center of any dispute over critical assets. This alone could put Venezuela at the core of global rivalry involving the United States, Russia and China. The potential of regional conflict has been exacerbated in recent years by the discovery of significant oil reserves in neighboring Guyana, a country with which Venezuela already has a border dispute. This year, the Biden administration announced plans to increase security assistance to the Guyanese government. Meanwhile, guerrillas of the National Liberation Army have expanded their Colombian revolution into Venezuelan territory. In short, the Colombia-Venezuela-Guyana arc is becoming an epicenter of intertwined potential crises.
And to all of this we must add the disruptive mass migration of nearly 8 million people who have fled Venezuela since 2014, with the number still rising.
It would be a monumental strategic mistake to let Venezuela become the theater of a militarized world competition. Preserving the “Zone of Peace” is a fundamental component for the maintenance and expansion of democracy in Latin America.
Any real, positive solution must emerge from Venezuelans themselves. Outside actors can provide ideas, initiatives and inducements; however, the formula should be homemade.
In this context, the great powers should respect this region’s right not to align with any of them; Latin America should make sure that regional leaders retain control of attempts to find a political, nonviolent path to change. Washington should follow the region’s lead, mainly by supporting the efforts to prevent a crisis that could spill across Venezuela’s borders.
The region should be able to act united, in favor of democracy, human rights, multilateralism and peace, especially regarding dilemmas that are its own. Clearly, Venezuela is one of them.