Nearly two centuries ago, President James Monroe introduced his doctrine of preventing European imperialism in Latin America.
Last week, President Trump surprised the world by recognizing Venezuela’s opposition-acting President Juan Guaidó.
The most surprising part about this? This was a very by-the-book intervention, but nothing about it felt “Trumpian.”
It’s rare when we get real news from a White House announcement and not a Twitter account.
After two years of foreign policy shake-ups including participation in negotiations with Kim Jong-Un and the Taliban, or treating Russia as an ally, United States intervention in Latin America is a familiar theme.
The United States toppled governments in Brazil, Guatemala and Haiti during the twentieth century, while failing in others.
And now, the United States has backed Guaidó the day before he declared himself the interim president.
But this foreign intervention reeks of failed American intervention around the world, and has no indications of helping.
The crisis in Venezuela has been steadily growing, even before President Hugo Chavez died in 2013.
The economy has all but collapsed and nearly 90 percent of the population live in poverty.
There are massive food and medicine shortages, while the government repressed the opposition, adding to the human rights crisis.
The incumbent President Nicolás Maduro won Venezuela’s 2018 presidential election, however it was widely denounced as fraudulent by the global community.
According to Deutsche Welle, Venezuela’s National Electoral Council disqualified most opposition party candidates, leaving no real challengers to Maduro.
Maduro’s campaign reportedly tried to buy votes, promising starving Venezuelans food in exchange for support at the ballot box.
They used state resources to run campaign events, which was a violation of the agreement signed before the election, per a United Nations report published on Jan. 26.
Before the election even took place, the Organization of American States and the European Union announced they would not honor the results of the election, calling for new elections to be scheduled in a fair and free manner.
The United Nations and other election monitoring agencies did not even bother sending election monitors to observe the Venezuelan election.
It was a surprise to no one that Maduro won the election with the lowest voter turnout in Venezuelan history.
American opposition to him is seemingly well justified on human rights grounds.
But since when has the Trump administration had a strong affinity for human rights abroad?
Speaking of rights, American intervention robs Venezuelans of their right to self-determination – one of the United Nations’ crucial principles.
It is the right of the Venezuelan people to determine their own political structure, without undue foreign interference.
A free and fair government created by the Venezuelan people themselves will be stronger than any government propped up by the United States.
We certainly don’t need to give Maduro and his supporters any further reasons to question the legitimacy of Guaidó’s rule.
It certainly doesn’t help that this intervention is being perpetrated by the same people who did it previously.
The newly appointed special envoy to Venezuela is Elliott Abrams, who was part of the Reagan administration.
Abrams helped install General Efraín Ríos Montt as leader during a 1982 coup in Guatemala.
Montt would later be found guilty of committing genocide by a United Nations truth commission – all the while being propped up by the United States financially.
While the United States cannot take back their recognition of Guaidó, we can avoid getting further entangled by not providing financial resources or military support.
We should only act in accordance with the United Nations.
The U.S. must take its hand out of Venezuela, before the situation further deteriorates.
If we think the current situation is bad, a civil war will be even worse.