America
Coup d’état plan in Venezuela orchestrated with the US support

Atilio Boron is an Argentine sociologist, political scientist, professor and writer. PhD in Political Science from Harvard University, who closely follows the political and geopolitical realities of Latin America and the world. On July 29, one day after the presidential elections were held in Venezuela, I met with Boron, in the lobby of the Gran Meliá hotel in Caracas, where part of the more than 1,000 international and national observers were staying. The electoral observers were invited by different institutions of the Venezuelan State to participate in the democratic event of the year in the Caribbean country.
By the time I conducted the interview, on Monday afternoon, a good part of the streets of the Venezuelan capital were filled with demonstrators, most of them protesting peacefully, demonstrating their disapproval of the result of the electoral elections on the 28th of July, when the majority of Venezuelans who exercised their right to vote elected the current president Nicolás Maduro for a new term (2025-2031).
However, in parallel, a group of masked people moving in blocks of several dozen motorcycles began to violently take control of the city. Literally, Caracas began to burn and other cities in the country joined the protests, which had stopped being democratic and peaceful and turned into a civic Coup d’état with mercenaries paid by the Venezuelan and international extremist right.
In this context of growing tension and uncertainty, we interviewed the Argentine intellectual, who was also in Caracas as an international observer of the Venezuela election process. Days later I met again with Atilio Boron to complete the interview that was initially truncated. These are some of his impressions about what is happening in Venezuela today, a country under siege and at war, according to our interviewee.
Please, could you give us a balance of what happened in Venezuela the day after the re-election of Nicolás Maduro?
The balance I can give you is that the Carter Center, a renowned American institute, has been in Venezuela for more than two weeks, carrying out an evaluation of the Venezuelan electoral system. The Carter Center has said that the Venezuelan electoral process has the necessary conditions of reliability, transparency and honesty, and that they have not detected anything that has caught their attention, that is, they have not found any flaw in the system that, as of there, allows the popular will to be distorted or twisted. This is what this expert institute in electoral processes has declared about the presidential elections in Venezuela.
On the other hand, we have seen how, in front of more than 1,000 national and international observers – and after a demonstration of unquestionable force of the majority will of the Venezuelan population that achieved the re-election of President Nicolás Maduro with more than 6 million votes – violent and undemocratic sectors of the Venezuelan opposition are plotting an attempted coup d’état, something they have been announcing for some time.
The most fascist and retrograde expression of the Venezuelan opposition, led by María Corina Machado and company, has not only instigated, provoked, promoted, but has financed violent groups that live outside the law to generate chaos on the streets. They take advantage of the other part of the population that – after years of US blockade and suffocation – has suffered and endured needs of all kinds. This part of the population, whose electoral choice was not Nicolás Maduro, is exercising its legal and legitimate right to protest, and for the most part it is doing so peacefully.
However, the leaders of the opposition that came in second place in this electoral race, that is, that is called to be the majority opposition force to the Chavista government, launched a coup plan to ignore the Venezuelan electoral authority, the National Electoral Council (CNE), and to ignore the popular will. Are these the political actors who claim to be the democratic opposition to the government? It is nonsense to think that they really want the best for the Venezuelan people. They have always played at destabilization and unconstitutionally overthrowing the Chavista governments, once again they have demonstrated it, their plan is different.
In conclusion, an international operation was mounted to ignore the victory of Nicolás Maduro. I have been in the profession for almost half a century and I would dare to say that I have never seen such a coordinated and systematic effort by the right and the international extreme right, supported by the hegemonic media in Latin America and the world. But no one has been able to prove fraud, because there has been no fraud. The Venezuelan opposition obtained a non-negligible proportion of votes, 5 million votes is an important number, but it is located in the historical statistics of votes, both those obtained by Chavismo and by the opposition, represented by 9 presidential candidates who faced each other Nicolás Maduro, although the most prominent opposition figure was Edmundo González, of the Venezuelan extreme right.
Do you consider that what we are seeing in the streets is spontaneous?
Not at all, it is absolutely planned, as I said it is a coup plan, orchestrated and with US support, as is usually the custom and as history has painfully demonstrated in Latin America and other regions of the world. Edmundo González, the buffoon candidate, and María Corina Machado had claimed fraud long before the presidential elections were held in Venezuela. They prepared the ground to make an indisputable fact questionable: the strength of democracy in Venezuela and the anti-fraud protection of the Venezuelan electoral system.
As I said, the Carter Center, which we cannot say is a Chavista institute, has also said that the Venezuelan electoral process is one of the most complete and secure in the world. There is no way for the results to be manipulated in favor of one candidate or another, since it has countless security locks. Well, but the opposition continued to support that idea, the idea of fraud, to reach this moment with arguments – most of them unfounded – that could light up the streets and give the image they were looking for, Venezuela in flames rejecting Nicolás Maduro. The objective is to erase from the mind the legacy of Chávez, of the Bolivarian Revolution and hand the country over to imperial and corporate interests.
Do you think Western sanctions have had an impact on these socio-economic problems?
I say that the opposition has spread mostly unfounded arguments, because in Venezuela there are real economic and social problems, low salaries, lack of certain goods and services in an important part of Venezuelan society. In this regard, I believe that President Nicolás Maduro was wrong when he said that this was a fight between good and evil. I believe that the Venezuelan president should have called, or summoned, spoken to that sector that negatively affects him in Venezuelan society, but it is a democratic sector and has suffered the effects of the United States economic sanctions. If this sector does not feel included, or feels attacked by the current government, it may take an attitude of not wanting to dialogue and this can have many consequences such as, for example, the increase in Venezuelan migration to other countries and regions of the world, as has already happened.
However, I want to reaffirm that what María Corina Machado, Juan Guaidó, Leopoldo López and other Venezuelan opposition figures have done, calling for military intervention and increasing economic sanctions against their own country, in the United States or in any other country of the world, the world would have very serious criminal consequences.
Regarding Venezuelan immigration, it is known that an uncertain number of several million Venezuelans had to migrate to many parts of the world. How have the country’s socio economic problems affected support for Maduro?
I think migration in Venezuela is a drama. Whether there are three, four or five, no matter how many millions have emigrated, is a drama because people do not want to leave their countries. There are other places where there may be less attachment, but Venezuelans have an enormous attachment to their country and their way of life and, therefore, all those people who are abroad are suffering just as their families are.
Let’s imagine that outside of Venezuela there is the minimum number, 3 million Venezuelans, there are 3 million families with people abroad and that obviously must have affected the electoral result, especially if they have not known how to transfer or communicate that the well-being they are experiencing Venezuela is going to continue. And I believe that one of the opposition’s desires has been precisely to try to stop this economic well-being that had already brought back 150,000 people in the Return to the Homeland Mission, a public policy that was responsible for the return of emigrants.
In a short horizon, 150,000 people have returned to Venezuela, a significant number, and it is given in the moment of economic recovery that the country was experiencing. I assume that, if this growth continues, some speak of figures of 7% of the GDP, I believe that the probability that more Venezuelans will return is very high and there also the Maduro Government will have to show that those who expelled that enormous number of Venezuelans were the US government with their sanctions and that those who returned them, the Venezuelans, to the country have been the Bolivarian government, because if they are not able to make that understood as well, I believe that this vote can become a rebound effect.
Do you think that if the opposition came to power, it would expel the Chavistas from the State, in line with Western and pro-Western demands?
I believe that the arrival of the opposition to power would be a catastrophe, because the Venezuelan opposition does not defend liberal principles, they do not respect those who do not think like them, they have a patrimonial conception of Power and State, they believe that Power belongs only to them and I think that they would govern as owners of a farm.
And that is what also makes many leaders say that the opposition cannot win unless it assumes its democratic principles, because it is going to set everyone on fire. That is why even people like Javier Milei have said be careful, be careful because what María Corina Machado implies is crazy, not only for Venezuela, but it is crazy for the entire region.
If it turns out that the opposition won the elections, well, everyone would have to accept it. But of course, since it is not the case that on top of that a person who promises revenge, fire and ashes, on top of that, does not want to recognize the winning result of Nicolás Maduro, these are all elements outside the slightest logic of common sense.
Is Maduro still a popular leader for the Venezuelan people?
Nicolás Maduro is in communion with those 6 million people who voted for him last Sunday, July 28. There is credibility, there is a people absolutely in communion, even those who may have voted for Nicolás Maduro without agreeing with the policy. I think that when they voted for him, they trusted that he was better than the opposition and, therefore, they gave him a vote of confidence.
If this is added to the people who have already recovered levels of proximity, trust, and sympathy, such as those that Commander Chávez had at some point, I believe that it is also a positive element so that in the coming years a new direction that really makes this claim of a new Venezuela very anchored in the 21st century true.
America
Israel’s nuclear arsenal used as a tool of blackmail, says expert

John Steinbach of the Hiroshima Nagasaki Peace Committee detailed the hidden aspects of Israel’s secret nuclear program during a panel hosted by the Schiller Institute. Steinbach asserted that Israel’s nuclear arsenal is not merely a defensive tool but a mechanism of blackmail, primarily used to coerce other nations, particularly the US, into adopting its preferred policies.
John Steinbach of the Hiroshima Nagasaki Peace Committee of the National Capital Area detailed the history and current status of Israel’s clandestine nuclear weapons program at an online panel organized by the Schiller Institute titled True Citizens of Every Nation Demand Peace.
Steinbach emphasized that Israel’s nuclear arsenal extends beyond the “Samson Option”—a doctrine aimed at global destruction if Israel’s existence is threatened. He described it as an active tool of blackmail used to compel other nations, particularly the US, to act in line with Israeli interests.
Steinbach stated that Israel currently possesses between 100 and 500 advanced thermonuclear and neutron bombs. He also noted that Israel has a sophisticated delivery system, including Jericho 1, 2, and 3 ballistic missiles capable of reaching the US east coast and beyond Moscow, as well as at least six nuclear-capable Dolphin-class submarines supplied by Germany.
‘The real goal is to coerce the US’
Citing author Israel Shahak, Steinbach explained that the primary goal of Israel’s nuclear program is to “freeze the status quo in Israel’s favor,” a policy specifically targeting the US.
Steinbach quoted Francis Perrin, the former director of France’s nuclear program, who said, “We thought the Israeli program was aimed at making the Americans do what they wanted.”
Steinbach noted that this coercive policy was first blatantly applied during the 1973 war. “The Israelis threatened to use nuclear weapons unless the US carried out a massive airlift,” he said. “Kissinger and Nixon reluctantly complied, the airlift took place, and the world was put on nuclear alert.”
Nuclear program origins and French collaboration
Steinbach explained that the foundations of Israel’s nuclear program were laid by David Ben-Gurion with the vision that the Holocaust should never be repeated. A young deputy minister, Shimon Peres, was appointed to lead the program, with Ernst Bergmann serving as its scientific head.
The program gained significant momentum in the mid-1950s with a research reactor acquired from the US, and Steinbach highlighted the collaboration with France that began during the same period.
“Israel was a full partner in the French program. We must understand that the Algerian tests in the 1950s and early ’60s were actually joint Israeli-French tests,” Steinbach assessed. He added that France also assisted in the construction of the Dimona reactor, knowing it was a plutonium production facility despite being publicly presented as a civilian research reactor.
The mock facility that deceived Kennedy
Steinbach mentioned that US Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy were strongly opposed to Israel acquiring nuclear weapons and were highly suspicious of the program. He described the deception Israel employed when Kennedy demanded an inspection:
“Israel took extreme measures. When the inspectors arrived, everything they saw was a complete sham. They were never shown the real parts of the Dimona complex; they were shown a mock-up. The inspectors went back and reported that the facility was for civilian purposes.”
Steinbach added that Kennedy was determined to stop the program but was assassinated shortly thereafter.
US presidents ignore intelligence reports on Iran, says ex-CIA analyst
Vanunu’s revelations changed the game
Steinbach emphasized that while Israel pursued a policy of “nuclear ambiguity” for years, everything changed when Mordecai Vanunu, a technician at Dimona, leaked photographs and documents to the Sunday London Times. The conclusions reached by Manhattan Project bomb designers Frank Barnaby and Ted Taylor, who reviewed the documents, were shocking.
“They estimated at the time that Israel possessed nearly 200 nuclear weapons,” Steinbach said. “More importantly, they determined that Israel had not only atomic bombs but also hydrogen bombs and miniaturized nuclear weapons that could be easily paired with warheads. This was a massive failure for the intelligence community.”
Steinbach also mentioned that joint nuclear tests were conducted with South Africa, that most of the uranium for the program was sourced from South Africa, that yellowcake uranium was supplied by Germany, and that there is strong evidence of enriched uranium being smuggled from the Numec facility in Pennsylvania, US.
‘IAEA has become a nest of spies’
In his concluding remarks, Steinbach sharply criticized the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), arguing that the organization has been “hollowed out and become a nest of spies.”
“This situation has fatally undermined the credibility of the IAEA, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), and the United Nations,” he stated.
Steinbach claimed that Egyptian diplomat Mohamed ElBaradei was an honest IAEA director, but the US deliberately had him removed, transforming the agency into its current state.
America
US presidents ignore intelligence reports on Iran, says ex-CIA analyst

Former CIA analyst Ray McGovern has claimed that the assassination of John F. Kennedy was linked to the president’s opposition to Israel’s nuclear program. McGovern stated that a key figure of the era, James Angleton, spied for Israel to conceal the program and that US intelligence reports confirming “Iran is not developing nuclear weapons” have been ignored by the president.
Speaking at an online panel organized by the Schiller Institute, former CIA analyst Ray McGovern asserted that the assassination of former US President John F. Kennedy was directly connected to his opposition to Israel’s nuclear weapons program. McGovern, who served in the CIA from 1963 to 1990 and chaired the National Intelligence Estimates in the 1980s, described the CIA’s Counterintelligence Chief at the time, James Jesus Angleton, as a spy who covered up Israel’s nuclear activities.
During his speech at the Schiller Institute’s panel, titled True Citizens of Every Nation Demand Peace, McGovern noted that since 2007, the US intelligence community’s reports concluding “Iran is not working on a nuclear weapon” have been deliberately disregarded by the current administration. He emphasized that this situation calls into question the very reason for the CIA’s existence.
The Kennedy assassination and the ‘Potemkin Village’ conspiracy
McGovern recalled that Kennedy was vehemently opposed to Israel’s nuclear program and was determined to stop it. He identified James Jesus Angleton as the individual who controlled all matters related to Israel within the CIA at that time. “His name was James Jesus Angleton. There is concrete evidence of his involvement in the Kennedy assassination,” McGovern said.
McGovern alleged that Angleton assisted in creating a fake “Potemkin village” at Israel’s Dimona nuclear facility to mislead US inspectors. “When the inspectors returned, they said, ‘This place looks quite clean.’ That’s because Angleton and his Israeli comrades had built this Potemkin village,” he explained.
Intelligence community has held the same view since 2007
McGovern stressed that the US intelligence community has reported with “high confidence” every year since 2007 that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons. He pointed out that this view is not limited to analysts; former CIA Director William Burns also confirmed this fact just before leaving his post.
McGovern quoted Burns as saying, “I want to reiterate that Iran is not working on a nuclear weapon. Furthermore, our intelligence-gathering capabilities are so comprehensive that if they were to start working on a nuclear weapon, the West would know about it almost instantly.”
‘The President doesn’t listen to intelligence’
Despite these concrete reports, McGovern stated that the president does not listen to the intelligence. He recalled Donald Trump’s dismissive words regarding his own intelligence chiefs: “I don’t care what they say.”
McGovern urged the public to show Trump over the next two critical weeks that “supporting the Zionist genocide is unacceptable,” calling on people to “do whatever is necessary to ensure Trump doesn’t get caught in this mousetrap.”
‘The CIA’sexistence should be questioned’
McGovern also expressed his own hesitations about the continued existence of the CIA. He said he had resisted calls to dismantle the agency because its analysts, at the very least, stood firm in telling the truth about Iran.
However, he noted that the president’s dismissal of even this single correct stance raises serious doubts about the agency’s future. McGovern concluded, “How will honest analysts feel when the president says, ‘I don’t care what they say’? Perhaps there is no hope left for the CIA.”
America
US to require foreign students to make social media profiles public for visas

The US Department of State has announced that foreign students will be required to unlock their social media profiles, allowing US diplomats to review their online activities before they can obtain educational and exchange visas. Those who fail to comply will face suspicion from US officials for concealing these activities.
The new guidance, released by the State Department on Wednesday, instructs US diplomats to conduct online presence reviews, searching for “any signs of hostility towards US citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles.”
In a separate cable obtained by Politico, diplomats are also instructed to flag “advocacy, aid, or support for foreign terrorists and other threats to US national security” and “support for illicit antisemitic harassment or violence.” The screening for “antisemitic” activities aligns with similar directives issued by US Citizenship and Immigration Services, a part of the Department of Homeland Security, and has been criticized as an effort to suppress opposition to Israel’s war in Gaza.
The State Department’s new checks target students and other visa applicants in the F, M, and J categories, which cover academic, vocational, and cultural exchange programs.
“American citizens expect their government to make every effort to make our country safer, and the Trump administration is doing just that,” a senior State Department official stated, arguing that Marco Rubio “is helping to make America and its universities safer while bringing the State Department into the 21st century.”
The Trump administration had suspended the issuance of new student visas late last month while it considered new social media screening strategies. The US has also subjected Chinese students to special scrutiny amid tense negotiations over tariffs and the supply of rare earth metals and minerals to the United States.
The State Department’s directive has allowed diplomatic missions to resume interview programs for educational and exchange visas but added that consular officers will subject all F, M, and J visa applicants to a “comprehensive and detailed review.”
“To facilitate this review, all applicants for F, M, and J nonimmigrant visas will be asked to change the privacy settings on all their social media profiles to ‘public’,” the official said. “Strengthening the social media review will ensure that we properly screen every individual who wishes to visit our country.”
-
Diplomacy1 week ago
Former diplomat warns forcing Iran out of the NPT is the greatest danger
-
Middle East3 days ago
US to launch major bombing campaign against Iran this weekend, Hersh reports
-
Opinion2 weeks ago
European defense autonomy and Germany’s military role enter a turning point
-
Middle East2 weeks ago
Netanyahu’s government survives no-confidence vote as Haredi crisis is delayed
-
Asia2 weeks ago
Japan, US showcase B-52 bombers in nuclear deterrence dialogue
-
Diplomacy1 week ago
Former CIA analyst says Israel used ceasefire talks as a trap
-
Middle East6 days ago
Iran targets Mossad and Unit 8200 in missile attack on Tel Aviv
-
Middle East7 days ago
Iranian missile attack causes heavy damage across Israel