Connect with us

AMERICA

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

Published

on

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

Trump appoints Gaetz as Justice Secretary, Gabbard as Intelligence Chief

Published

on

U.S. President-elect Tulsi Gabbard has begun making new appointments to her cabinet, with former President Donald Trump taking to social media to announce these prominent selections.

Trump confirmed the appointment of one of his most loyal supporters, Matt Gaetz, a Florida Congressman, as Secretary of Justice. Gaetz, known for his strong conservative stance, has been at the center of various investigations, and some Republican senators have voiced reservations about his nomination.

“Matt will end gun-grabbing, secure our borders, dismantle criminal organizations, and restore Americans’ faith and trust in the Department of Justice,” Trump said in a statement.

Attorney General under scrutiny

Trump defended Gaetz’s record, citing his outspoken defense during previous investigations, where Gaetz actively opposed what he referred to as the “Russia hoax.”

In June, the House Ethics Committee launched an investigation into Gaetz over allegations of sexual misconduct, drug use, and obstruction of justice. Gaetz has denied any wrongdoing and has consistently maintained his innocence. The Justice Department spent two years investigating claims that Gaetz engaged in inappropriate conduct with a minor and violated federal sex trafficking laws. However, in 2022, the department closed the investigation without filing charges.

Israel lobby reacts to Gaetz’s appointment

Gaetz’s appointment has stirred reactions, particularly within the Israel lobby in the United States. In 2018, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Republican Jewish Coalition criticized Gaetz for inviting Charles Johnson, a known Holocaust denier, as his guest to the State of the Union address. Johnson had publicly expressed doubts about the Holocaust, controversially claiming that “only 250,000 died of disease” rather than 6 million Jews.

Gaetz denied that Johnson was a Holocaust denier, telling BuzzFeed: “He’s not a Holocaust denier and he’s not anti-Semitic. He’s a provocateur. I should have vetted him better before inviting him to the State of the Union; I regret that I didn’t. I take responsibility for that.”

Former Democrat Tulsi Gabbard to lead Intelligence Agency

In addition to Gaetz’s nomination, Trump announced former Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard as the Director of National Intelligence.

“For more than two decades, Tulsi has fought for our country and the freedoms of all Americans,” Trump stated. Gabbard, a former representative from Hawaii, served in the National Guard and held her House seat from 2013 to 2021. In 2022, she left the Democratic Party and became an independent before aligning with the Republican Party. “She is now a proud Republican!” Trump added.

Gabbard gained national attention during the 2020 Democratic primaries. In 2017, she traveled to Syria and controversially remarked that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad “is not an enemy of the United States,” explaining that her visit aimed to “see and hear directly from the Syrian people.”

Continue Reading

AMERICA

Trump continues to fill his cabinet with Israel supporters

Published

on

President-elect Donald Trump continues to shape his cabinet, set to take office in January. Trump has nominated South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem to lead the Department of Homeland Security. She will work closely with Border Czar Tom Homan to “secure the border and ensure that our American homeland is safe from our enemies,” Trump stated.

Kristi Noem, a devout Christian and the first woman elected governor of South Dakota, is now in her second term. Reflecting on her leadership in South Dakota, Trump highlighted Noem’s dedication to border security: “Kristi has been very strong on border security. She was the first governor to send National Guard troops to aid Texas during the Biden Border Crisis—a commitment she’s upheld eight times.”

Noem has faced criticism for controversial remarks suggesting South Dakota’s indigenous tribes benefit from the drug cartel industry. This statement led to her being banned from all nine reservations in the state.

Although not a border state governor, Noem has consistently taken a tough stance on immigration. In 2010, she supported an effort to block the Obama administration’s lawsuit against Arizona’s immigration law. During Trump’s first term, she called for punitive actions against sanctuary cities that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities.

Noem is also known as a strong supporter of Israel. Earlier this year, she signed a bill mandating that the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism be used in discrimination investigations. The bill, titled “Ensuring the Safety of God’s Chosen People,” garnered praise from former Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz, who called Noem a “true friend of Israel.”

In March 2024, Noem faced a lawsuit from Travelers United, a consumer advocacy group, after endorsing a Texas-based cosmetic dentist without disclosing a financial relationship. Travelers United claimed Noem had begun “working as a social media influencer,” promoting services without transparency. Noem clarified on X (formerly Twitter) that she “never received any money” for these alleged endorsements.

New Israeli Ambassador Huckabee: ‘There is no such thing as a Palestinian’

Donald Trump announced that Mike Huckabee, former Arkansas governor, will serve as U.S. ambassador to Israel. A long-time ally of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Huckabee has consistently supported Jewish settlers and backs Israel’s claim to annex parts of the occupied West Bank.

“Mike Huckabee loves Israel and the people of Israel. He will work tirelessly for peace in the Middle East,” Trump stated. Huckabee, an evangelical pastor and host on the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN), is a staunch defender of Israel’s historical rights in the West Bank and believes in Israel’s right to annex this region.

Fox News host Hegseth tapped to lead Pentagon

Trump’s selection of Fox News host and former military officer Pete Hegseth as head of the Pentagon surprised many. Hegseth, a vocal America First proponent, lacks traditional government or Pentagon experience, sparking discussion on Trump’s unconventional choice.

“Pete is tough, smart, and a true believer in America First. With Pete at the helm, America’s military will be great again, and our enemies will take notice,” Trump remarked.

Though Hegseth’s selection deviates from Trump’s other traditional security appointments, he has gained Trump’s respect through his book, The War on Our Warriors, which criticizes left-wing attitudes toward U.S. troops. Hegseth is a decorated Army combat veteran and former CEO of Concerned Veterans for America, a group funded by the Koch brothers that advocates for outsourcing veterans’ healthcare.

Hegseth also garnered Trump’s favor through his advocacy for the pardons of service members convicted of war crimes, including 1st Lieutenant Clint Lorance and Major Mathew Golsteyn.

CIA appointment: Ratcliffe’s anti-Iran stance

John Ratcliffe, former Director of National Intelligence, has been appointed CIA Director, reinforcing Trump’s hardline stance against Iran. Ratcliffe replaces Bill Burns, who led Biden’s attempts to broker ceasefires in Gaza.

An outspoken critic of Biden’s foreign policy, Ratcliffe has accused the administration of downplaying intelligence on Hamas to avoid escalation. He argues that deprioritizing Middle Eastern intelligence has left the U.S. vulnerable to terrorist threats. Ratcliffe also alleged Iranian interference in the 2020 election, accusing the regime of trying to “foment social unrest” in the U.S.

Continue Reading

AMERICA

Ukraine offers natural resources to win Trump’s support

Published

on

The Ukrainian government’s “victory plan” for the incoming Donald Trump administration seeks to influence the US president-elect by highlighting potential business deals, access to raw materials, and troop deployments.

According to The Financial Times (FT), Ukrainian and European officials report that Ukraine’s allies in Europe and the US, including senior Republicans, are consulting on how best to propose initiatives that encourage closer cooperation with Kyiv rather than cut essential aid to the country.

These proposals stem from concerns among Ukrainian and European officials that Trump may move quickly toward a peace deal with Russia, potentially jeopardizing Western support for Ukraine.

Two of the ideas reportedly presented to Trump are outlined in Volodymyr Zelensky’s “victory plan.” They were later presented to the Ukrainian president during his meeting with Trump in New York in September.

One proposal suggests replacing some US troops stationed in Europe with Ukrainian forces after the war ends. The other, initially conceived by Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, proposes sharing Ukraine’s critical natural resources with Western partners, according to sources involved in drafting Zelensky’s plan.

A source familiar with the meeting said Trump expressed interest in these two points.

Ukrainian business leaders are also in talks with the government about granting Trump “investment screening” powers that would allow him to select who can do business in the country. An insider described this concept as “ABC—anybody but China,” a stance believed to resonate with Trump.

Certain Ukrainian industries, particularly those relying on Chinese technology and materials like telecommunications, could transition to US suppliers, potentially attracting Western investment. While still in its early stages, some business leaders close to the presidential administration believe this idea could appeal to Trump.

After Trump’s re-election last week, Zelensky reported a “great” first phone call. However, officials in Kyiv and its allies worry the US could reduce military support when Republicans take office in January.

Officials added that Ukraine and its allies fear Russian President Vladimir Putin, strengthened by Russia’s battlefield successes, may “drive a hard bargain” and pressure Washington into a peace deal favoring Moscow.

A person involved in drafting Kyiv’s proposal remarked, “The first to blink loses this game. Putin thinks he is on a winning track and can secure everything he wants.”

Meanwhile, European officials are concerned about being excluded from Trump-led negotiations and lacking influence over any potential solutions that could impact European security in the medium term.

Western allies have reacted somewhat indifferently to the “victory plan,” especially regarding the call for NATO membership for Kyiv and advanced weapons support.

An individual involved in the planning stated that Ukraine began drafting its proposals over the summer “to establish our narrative before Trump establishes his.”

Long frustrated by President Joe Biden’s reluctance to escalate military support, Kyiv hopes Trump will find the points specifically tailored for him compelling.

“The level of dissatisfaction with the Biden administration had reached a point where they felt it was time for change, and that this change [to Trump] could be beneficial,” the source said.

Oleksandr Merezhko, chairman of the Ukrainian parliament’s foreign affairs committee, described the offer to the incoming US president as “a strategic move to demonstrate that Ukraine is not a burden on the West.”

“Trump wants to be a winner, not a loser. To be a winner, he needs to show Putin his place,” Merezhko added.

Sources also indicate that Kyiv aims to “appease the Trump camp” by replacing Oksana Markarova, its ambassador to Washington. Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson had called for Markarova’s dismissal after she organized an all-Democrat visit to a US munitions factory for Zelensky in September.

Former Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba was reportedly offered the post but declined.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey