A spectacular reversal in the hot issue of Venezuela.
The president of the United States, Donald Trump, had a telephone communication with the leader of Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro, last week, as revealed by the New York Times.
This is an event that highlights the dead-end and diplomatically ambiguous strategies of Washington for dealing with Venezuela.
Despite the ongoing threats of military action and the reinforcement of US military presence in the Caribbean, this conversation raises questions about the possibility of a diplomatic channel or a strategic recalibration.
A strategically important conversation on 24/11
The telephone conversation between the two leaders, which took place on 24 November, is reported by sources close to the talks, who remain anonymous due to the confidentiality of the matter.
In this conversation, the possibility of a meeting between the two leaders in the United States was discussed, something that raises several diplomatic questions.
Despite the two sides agreeing not to proceed with a direct meeting for now, the fact that the discussion took place shows a different strategy on the part of the American government.
According to the same sources, the conversation between the two leaders was conducted in a particularly positive climate.
“If Trump agreed to speak with Maduro, following diplomatic protocols, it is because he recognizes him as president of Venezuela, regardless of any excesses or threats he launches.
Maduro is the authority in Venezuela, and that is not up for discussion at this point,” political analysts note.
It is noteworthy that the conversation came just a few days before the announcement from the US State Department, in which Maduro is described as a leading figure of a “foreign terrorist organization,” the well-known Cartel de los Soles, and it comes a few days after a series of military attacks in the Caribbean that were reportedly aimed at Venezuela.
Earthquake in the United States and the Pentagon with the revelation of the conversation
The news of the telephone communication triggered strong reactions in the United States, both from Trump’s political opponents and from his supporters.
For many Democrats, the idea of direct contact with Maduro causes concern, as the United States has long recognized the government of Juan Guaido as the legitimate administration of Venezuela and has condemned the “dictatorial” governance of Caracas.
The Democrats expressed concern that any rapprochement with Maduro may constitute a serious failure in the strategy of isolating Venezuela and may cause political confusion both inside the country and in the region.
On the other hand, the Republicans, although initially hesitant, began to view this move with a more positive attitude, since it may lead to a more effective solution to the Venezuelan crisis.
Some of them, such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, argued that US policy must remain firm in the demand for the removal of Maduro, but at the same time must consider other diplomatic options to avoid a full military escalation.
The telephone conversation not only highlights the diplomatic maneuvers of the Trump administration but also the growing pressure from public opinion and political confrontation regarding the handling of the crisis in Venezuela.
It is recalled that the overwhelming majority of American citizens are against US intervention in Venezuela, as is the MAGA movement that brought Trump to the presidency.
More than 70% of Americans are against a military intervention in Venezuela.
Absolute shock prevails in the American Pentagon, as the staff while preparing war maps now see the communication between Trump and Maduro as an opening toward peace.
Diplomacy and the threat of force, two parallel paths
The stance of the American government toward Venezuela remains ambiguous.
On one hand, the policy of threats and military actions continues, with the United States strengthening its military presence near Venezuela and preparing attacks against ships accused of drug trafficking.
On the other hand, the telephone conversations with Maduro show that Washington remains open to diplomatic contacts despite the military preparations.
The tactic of Washington, which includes parallel diplomacy and the use of military pressure, is not new for the Trump administration.
In 2017, for example, the possibility of military intervention in Venezuela had been expressed, while at the same time the United States tried to isolate the country diplomatically and support the opposition.
This “dual line” continues now, with the discussion about removing Maduro from power combined with ongoing threats of military action.
Maduro, despite international pressure and accusations of corruption and abuse of power, remains firmly in control, having supporters both inside Venezuela and on the international stage, such as Russia and China.
According to reports, Maduro had offered the United States a significant stake in Venezuela’s exploitable oil reserves in an attempt to reduce tensions and provide opportunities for American companies.
However, talks between the two sides were suspended in October 2024, when the United States imposed restrictions on economic and commercial agreements with Venezuela.
The role of Donald Trump and his administration in strategic choices
Donald Trump, although a leading figure in the strategy of pressure against Maduro, has recognized that removing the Venezuelan leader is not a simple matter.
Amid ongoing military pressure, Washington seems to be trying to open a communication channel for a “peaceful” resolution, but Trump’s moves, with reinforced US military presence in the Caribbean and with attacks on vessels, show that the goal remains the removal of Maduro, possibly through the use of force.
According to observers, US strategy may include a “diplomatic exit,” where Maduro would offer the Americans a peace agreement that would include his resignation or the transfer of power to a “government of national agreement” under the pressure of international developments.
The next steps, what is expected after the telephone communication
What remains to be seen is whether the telephone communication between the two leaders will lead to any significant change in Washington’s policy toward Venezuela.
Washington envisions a world without Maduro in power, but the political instability that could result from his removal has not yet been fully assessed.
The policy of “resolution through threat of force” may prove the most difficult and the most dangerous, while the hope for a “diplomatic exit” may collapse under the pressure of strategic interests and the dynamic external factors that remain up in the air.
The future of Venezuela therefore remains uncertain and entirely dependent on possible developments in the political scene and the decisions of the United States.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών