Yes, Elections Do Have Consequences

With the failure of US President Trump to achieve the promised peace settlement between Russia and Ukraine, despite his boast of an almost instant cessation of hostilities and an agreed settlement, and faced with the embarrassment of the blatant genocide, including by starvation in Palestine, the US government seems desperate for a diversion.

At times like these when the going gets rough, it is always, in the thinking of the warmongers who occupy the positions of power in the White House, a call to arms. Pick on a country which refuses to be subservient to US demands, start a propaganda war aimed at winning public support on an emotive issue, hurl the threats and prepare to bomb and blast into oblivion.

This time, in the opinion of the warmongers, there seems to be an alignment of stars. It is well known that the Trump administrations have always been hostile to Venezuela because it refuses to toe the line as many Latin American regimes do. Venezuela, first under the late President Hugo Chavez, and now under President Maduro, has taken the line of solidarity with governments in the western hemisphere which refuse to bow to the dictates of foreign capital. There is also a huge boon if one could overthrow the Maduro government, for Venezuela has massive oil, gas and mineral reserves, then the oil barons and Wall Street can look forward to rich rewards. Previous attempts have not succeeded but the campaign has not stopped, including seizing Venezuelan foreign reserves, and even handing some over to US lackeys, paraded as alternative governments.

The Trump administration even took the extreme step of placing a bounty on the head of President Maduro, US$25 million for information leading to his capture.

With no credible fish on the line, the bounty has been doubled, a supposed line of credibility established – the old line of yet another US “war on drugs” and without credible proof, warships have been dispatched to the southern Caribbean, supposedly to end this drug scourge.

It is well-known that Guyana and Venezuela are locked in a territorial dispute dating back to British colonialism, which has reached the halls of international disputes bodies. With the discovery of massive oil and gas reserves offshore from the hotly disputed province of Essequibo, claimed by both states, the US has not hesitated to throw in its huge military weight behind Guyana, rather than using its considerable influence to try and arrive at a peaceful dispute settlement. The British government, which caused the dispute in the first case, conveniently looks the other way.

The ball has been thrown into the court of Caribbean nations with their limited resources. Not surprisingly, the English-speaking Caribbean has always backed Guyana in the territorial dispute, but such is the growing level of maturity and statesmanship in the region, that CARICOM, in spite of Guyana being a founding nation, has chosen to take the route of peaceful resolution. Even when matters seemed to be getting out of hand some years ago, it took the mature initiative of our own Prime Minister Gonsalves, as then head of CELAC, the Latin American and Caribbean grouping of states, to get both sides not to resort to hostilities and to seek a peaceful resolution.

But the dispute has not gone away and Venezuela with its strong anti-imperialist foreign policy, its support for and solidarity with Cuba, its initiatives to use instruments such as ALBA to assist CARICOM and other developing states, continues to be viewed as a thorn in the side of US imperialism.

Above all, Venezuela has massive oil, gas and other mineral resources which makes it less reliant on foreign capital. The bounty of the overthrow of the Venezuelan regime is too good a prize to be ignored. Military action has always been a solution for rapacious elements in the US foreign policy and military establishments.

But Venezuela, while not a match for the US war machine, is a far cry from Grenada, a victim of US invasion in 1983, and the circumstances are today very different. So, while some of the more rapacious elements in the US administration openly talk of “regime change” in Venezuela, the military action is being sugar-coated by calling it a “war against drugs” and President Maduro branded as being personally involved, including ties with the Mexican Sinaloa Cartel and terrorist elements.

The “war against drugs” is an old US propaganda trick aimed at winning support from law-abiding citizens. Not just in the USA but in the hemisphere, and worldwide as well. The problem is that if the drug problem has reached such a stage as to warrant military action against alleged suppliers in Latin America, what about the importers and distributors in the biggest market, the USA? Why is there no comparable action in that regard?

CARICOM, even with its size limitation, lack of resources and military might, poses a problem to US military ambitions. In this regard the leadership of the grouping and its cohesion are vitally important. There is already a firm CARICOM commitment to the Caribbean remaining a Zone of Peace.

Disputes, whether territorial or otherwise must be solved by peaceful means. If the military option is to be pursued, then CARICOM must be undermined from within.

What better way than the “democratic” path, to get leaders elected who, like the current Prime Minister of T&T will buck the trend.

She might have come out in the open. Who knows what lies in store for elections in Jamaica, Guyana, SVG and Saint Lucia to name the others in the line-up?

After all, elections do have consequences.

_ Renwick Rose is a Social and Political commentator.