Home | About | Donate

A Peaceful, Democratic Solution to Venezuela's Crisis Requires Fact-based Analysis and Advocacy

A Peaceful, Democratic Solution to Venezuela's Crisis Requires Fact-based Analysis and Advocacy

Washington Office on Latin America

The following is a response to this "Open Letter to the Washington Office on Latin America About Its Stance on the US Effort to Overthrow Venezuelan Government," signed by more than 120 academics and Latin American experts published earlier this week on Common Dreams.

This group is NOT unaligned. They receive the bulk of funding from Foreign Governments and or Private Donor foundations all of which have a vested interest in promoting Capitalism. I can only ask them why they think these foreign governments and foundations have the right to dictate to another Country that it should have new elections when the election of Maduro was deemed fair by all international observers?

The bulk of this groups funding is from European nations. The equivalent would be African Nations and Corporations calling on France to have new elections because of the rioting and protests that happen in France.

As far as I can see this just another group that wants to topple the duly elected Government of Venezuela as they hide behind the cover of Human rights wherein they only differ from the US Government in how it done. More White Guys demanding other Countries only have Governments the White Guys approve of.

I am open to being corrected.

3 Likes

As an add to the post above. Note Rubio calling for Venezuela to be destabilized which a process that in fact happened under the Obama administration. When the Government of Venezuela reacts to these destabilization efforts groups like WOLA jump in claiming the need to defend Human rights.

Given the History of Western Governments hi-jacking various NGO’s to promote their own self interest in other Countries, I remain very suspicious of WOLA…

3 Likes

More lies about Maduro. Trump apologists.

2 Likes

If simply talking to Assad makes one an “Assad Apologist” then promoting Trump’s narrative to justify his coup, even if one objects to the military intervention for which the narrative exists to manufacture consent, makes one a “Trump Apologist.”

From now on I will call all those who support the CIA narrative what they are: Trump Apologists. That includes Nancy Pelosi and other members of the fake Resistance.

1 Like

The WOLA seems to be confused here: In 2014 they called for dialogue and Maduro refused to accept making concesssions to the opposition? What the hell?
Ah, hello in there… Maduro won the election in 2013 by 1.5% over Capriles. He won and received about 8 million votes. There was a 71% participation rate, as well. Pretty good contest.
Even though this election was observed by int’l organizations and deemed clean of any shenanigans; and over 50% of the ballots were audited to appease the losing party, Capriles and his allies refused to accept the results. And, started a small internal war, with lots of outside help, in Venezuela which has been ongoing and intensifying for 5 years now.
Why, oh why WOLA, would Maduro and his party have to make concessions after winning the last clean election of Venezuela, held in 2013? What on earth are you talking about?
The rest of your nonsense flows from the lies about the first election of Maduro. Building a counter-argument for intervention in Venezuela’s gov’t based on entirely false premises is called " bullshit " outside of the halls of power. Or, you could call it disingenuous, to be polite.
However, when we’re talking about breaking laws, creating chaos, subverting int’l norms and potentially killing millions of people for energy and gold, I prefer and see a need to call out the b.s. at the street corner level. To me, that’s called " making it real ".

2 Likes

The article never answered the most important question: Why should we interfere in the internal affairs of another country? The principal of non-interference in the affairs of other countries is one of the founding principals of the United Nations charter. The writers appear to want us to disregard that principal but they do not explain why. They complain that the letter by their colleagues is all about the United States. But that is what non-intervention is all about. It targets those countries that want to intervene in the internal affairs of other nations in an attempt to uphold the principal of non-intervention. You cannot uphold that principal while attempting to interfere.

2 Likes

It is amazing that WOLA is even trying to paint themselves as a neutral party in this problem in Venezuela.History tells of the CIA involvement to topple duly elected presidents,Like in Chile[Salvador Allende},Guatemala{Jacobo Arbenz},Honduras,Irak{regime Change} ,Afganistán{regime change},Siria,Libia{regime change} and the latest in Yemen as an accomplice with Saudi Arabia.My question to WOLA is,Would it be ok if China and Russia would invade the US and put a leader more of their liking and willing to allowed International corporation back in to sell our precious natural resources and take the profits somewhere else just because the US has more than 40 millions of people living under the poverty level,Millions without health care because it is not affordable?,Thousands of people sleeping in the streets.??? .Nobody has the right to interfiere in the affairs of other countries.

1 Like