Dealing with Operation Southern Spear

Many Guyanese are understandably concerned about the outcome of the newly named “Operation Southern Spear”, in which, starting in late August, the US has deployed a massive naval force in the Caribbean, ostensibly to interdict narco-shipments from Venezuela to the US. At least 22 small boats have been blown out of the water; 83 persons were killed and 2 captured. But the concern arises not just from the legality of the action – the US Administration insists the attacks are permitted because they are engaged in “non-international armed conflict” with “designated terrorist organisations” – but also from signals from US spokespersons, starting with President Trump, that the ultimate aim of the operation is regime change in Venezuela.
As a small state in the international world order, while we have a vested interest in supporting a peaceful resolution of the crisis, we have to acknowledge the reality that the multilateral institutions which undergirded that order are in a state of flux, and this has introduced a large element of unpredictability which we as a small state have to deal with. As such, while for instance we have supported Caricom’s call that our region remain a “zone of peace”, we have to confront the present realpolitik ethos of the US that gives short shrift to such concerns in what they have declared to be “their hemisphere”. As the Greeks concluded millennia ago, there is no point in a small state agonism about morality since, “as the world goes, right is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”
China, as an ally of Venezuela that has credible aspirations to challenge the US post-WWII hegemony, has given lip service opposition to the US actions by reaffirming platitudes about peace and multilateral institutions but shows no sign of becoming involved. Russia, also an ally which had supplied most of Venezuela’s military materiel, has answered Venezuela’s call for assistance by at best possibly sending its supersonic Oreshnik missiles but no interventions. Brazil, the strongest Latin American power, had echoed China’s line.
The US actions, therefore, will be guided by the Trump Administration’s reading of their domestic reactions. Their naval build-up concedes that the old strategy of sanctions, elections or wooing military leaders has been abandoned after repeated failures. But as we have stated repeatedly, while President Trump cannot afford to reinforce the mocking TACO (Trump Always Chickens Out) label given after his position on tariffs, he also would not want to launch a scaled-up repetition of the 1989 invasion of Panama to remove General Noriega, also accused of narco-trafficking like Maduro. Americans are in no mood for body bags returning home as a result of a large force taking on house-to-house mopping-up operations after confronting Venezuela’s 100,000-plus armed forces. The option on the table is most likely bombings with ship-launched or drone missiles of strategic locations supporting a Special Operations raid to assassinate Maduro and his upper echelon leadership or at least foster defections in the latter. The present US warnings on aircraft being in Venezuelan airspace signal that this option might be imminent.
It is possible, but unlikely, that the pressure may convince Maduro to participate in a transition to a Government that involves the opposition and members of his PSUV party. However, because of a host of reasons – the fragmented opposition; the rentier military establishment refusing to step aside; the presence of numerous armed groups – colectivos, sindicatos, FARC and ELN guerrillas, empowered cooperatives, etc. – even such a transition will not be peaceful.
What this means for us is that in any scenario that will unfold, the turmoil in the country will create a new tsunami of “refugees” into surrounding countries, including Guyana. But this time there will be a significant number of operatives who had forcefully supported the Maduro regime and would be fearful of retribution. These can become the core of violent non-state terrorist groups operating domestically and towards any new Venezuelan regime.  As such, we repeat our calls for securing our borders that have been described as “porous” even after our half of Ankoko was seized in 1966 and we have now experienced terrorist bombings in GT.
While we trust in God (and zones of peace), let us tie our camel.