Key stories for the week, brought to you by Lindsey Zhao and the Red Folder team.

Reading for the sake of reading sucks. Telling yourself to read to win a round is nice but ineffective. This condensed news brief helps you understand current domestic and international issues, analyze the news, and gives you opportunities to read more.

Publishing since January 2024. 

It’s super surprising that Nicolás Maduro isn’t competing at the 2024 Paris Olympics because he would definitely take home the gold medal in running … a country into the ground. Since he became president of Venezuela in 2013, Maduro’s policies have led to one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world. A majority of Venezuelans live in poverty, GDP has crashed by 75% since 2014, and inflation is still extremely high at over 50% (though down from 10 million percent in 2019). These dire economic conditions, combined with Maduro’s repressive policies, have led almost 8 million Venezuelans to flee the country in recent years. 

Under pressure from the United States and incentivized by the lifting of some sanctions on Venezuela’s battered oil sector, Maduro agreed to hold presidential elections on July 28th, 2024. The election campaign was marred by violence, threats, and the arbitrary disqualification of leading opposition candidate Maria Corina Machado. Although, the Maduro regime did allow former diplomat Edmundo González to run in Machado’s stead. 

In a post-election analysis, the Carter Center concluded that the election “did not meet international standards of electoral integrity and cannot be considered democratic.” Regardless, the Venezuelan National Electoral Council (CNE), which is controlled by allies of Maduro, declared him the winner, saying the socialist incumbent earned 52% of the votes with 97% of ballots counted but refusing to release the full results (spuriously blaming a conveniently-timed cyberattack). However, Maduro’s victory has been widely discredited by international organizations, with numerous investigations by The New York Times, Associated Press, Washington Post, and political science professor Dr. Walter Mebane of the University of Michigan all finding that Edmundo González overwhelmingly defeated Maduro by a margin of 66% to 31%. The opposition has even published the results on a public website. The United States has also recognized González as the winner. Humiliated and embarrassed by the opposition, Maduro has refused to face the facts. His arrogant defiance of voters could cost Venezuela the easiest opportunity for change. González and Machado have promised to restore democracy and the rule of law, boost the private sector, invest in oil production, promote green energy, and a variety of other reforms to revive Venezuela’s moribund economy. Despite González’s overwhelming victory, Maduro has refused to concede defeat and instead cracked down on protests, imprisoning over 2,000 people and killing 22.

Venezuela’s descent into an authoritarian nightmare is heartbreaking, and the shameful hypocrisy of its tormentors is stark and glaring. In scenes reminiscent of Orwell’s 1984, images of Maduro’s predecessor Hugo Chávez’s eyes are plastered around the country, reminding the people just who is in charge. But hope is never lost, drawing inspiration from Venezuela’s national anthem, “Glory to the brave people who shook off the yoke … And if ever despotism Raises again its voice, Then follow the example That Caracas gave.” Now, 200 years after the anthem’s author penned these words, Caracas is once again controlled by a brutal dictator. With Maduro refusing to accept the result, the key question facing the US and liberal democracies across Latin America and the world is how to liberate the Venezuelan people from Maduro’s grasp. This will be the most difficult step in Venezuela’s transition to democracy. There are two ways Maduro can leave office: Peacefully or Violently.

Considering the violent route, Dr. Shannon K. O'Neil, senior fellow for Latin America studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, analyzes the idea of a US-led military coalition to overthrow Maduro and concludes that such an effort would be disastrous, counterproductive, and likely end in failure for a multitude of reasons. As a start, to even have a chance of success, an intervention in Venezuela would require over 100,000 soldiers given the sheer size of the country and large population. A poorly-organized coup failed completely in 2020 because it lacked significant support. Such a significant force would be a significant strain on US military resources at a time when the military is already overextended and facing numerous strategic demands and challenges across the world. Actively opening up a new conflict in Latin America would be horrifically irresponsible. Even if the US could muster such a force, it would be unwelcome. A 2019 poll found that 54% of Venezuelans oppose a foreign military intervention and only 35% support one. If a century of US intervention in Latin America and around the world (e.g. Middle East) has taught us anything, it’s that regime change and military operations must be organic and significantly originate from the citizens of a country, not a foreign power. Operationally, a military intervention would also demand a Herculean logistics system. Venezuela’s infrastructure is barely functional, forcing US troops to basically self-supply and travel on poor roads, vulnerable to guerrilla attacks. Also, armed pro-Maduro gangs known as “colectivos” would pounce the moment US troops stepped foot in Venezuela. The geography of Venezuela is also a challenge: rainforest and mountains make military movements very difficult.

A multilateral force might fare better, but there is likely no appetite for that in Latin America. Colombia, Brazil, Mexico, and Chile all have leftist leaders who have shown sympathies toward Maduro and would oppose putting their own troops in danger to support a mostly-American led effort. The only significant country with an anti-Maduro leader is Javier Milei’s Argentina, but it is currently gripped by a massive economic crisis as Milei’s shock therapy takes hold, presenting little public willingness to extend men and material for a far-removed foreign folly. The military, which is instrumental to keeping Maduro in power, has continued to prop up his regime. The Venezuelan attorney general, a key Maduro loyalist, has even launched a criminal investigation into Machado and González based on fabricated changes of insurrection. China, Russia, Iran, and Cuba, all countries with at least some degree of regional or international military and economic influence, have stridently backed the Maduro regime and recognized the Salt Bae supporting, steak snacking autocrat as the 2024 election’s winner. To cap it all off, even election winner Edmundo González declared his opposition to any violence, saying, “It would be against my principles and against my lifelong record to advocate any violence, let alone a coup d’état.”

Regrettably, the most realistic way to reach a democratic transition in Venezuela is that Maduro and his powerful allies must concede defeat on their own accord, peacefully. No other method will work because Maduro is simply too powerful. A significant body of academic research supports the idea that effective regime change must be internal from the regime itself. Between 1950 and 2012, nearly two-thirds of the 473 authoritarian leaders who lost power were removed by government insiders, according to an analysis by Erica Frantz, a political science professor at Michigan State University who studies authoritarianism. Maduro has tried to prevent this scenario by dividing power between various military and intelligence agencies that check each other and maintain a stable structure to keep him in power. Over 25 years of rule has allowed Maduro’s party, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV), to gain control of nearly every relevant institution: the Supreme Court, the Office of the Attorney General, the National Assembly, media outlets, the electoral authorities, and the armed forces. Venezuela’s armed forces, with approximately 150,000 members, are split between the army, navy, air force and national guard. There is a national police force and a national militia — partly made up of Maduro supporters with little to no training — that can be called in to take up arms in an emergency. There are also the colectivos and three separate intelligence agencies that surveil the opposition and one another. This complex web of agencies and division of power has served Maduro well in the past for many reasons, chief of which is that top leaders have every incentive to keep supporting Maduro in spite of undeniable opposition victories. Maduro has wielded corruption masterfully, relying on an extensive system of patronage to purchase loyalty by giving senior military officers lucrative government positions and control over natural resources like oil, gold, and even allowing some allies to traffic drugs for personal profit. In the context of how awful this is, one must give Maduro some credit for being a brutally effective dictator. Of course, that does not excuse in any way his massive human rights violations and countless crimes, but it does put into perspective how difficult it will be to dislodge him from power. 

To explore how the US might persuade Maduro to relinquish control, we must examine his incentives and goals. Over 400 years ago, Shakespeare argued, “Th’ abuse of greatness is when it disjoins remorse from power,” meaning that when powerful people act without a sense of guilt, it is a sign that they have abused their power. Indeed, Maduro has certainly done just that, padding his pockets with ill-gotten profits, 100% guilt-free. But more than just money, power provides protection to Maduro and his cronies. For top leaders of the regime, losing power means they will immediately become subject to numerous criminal investigations by the United States and international organizations stemming from their countless human rights violations and narco-trafficking. Maduro and his allies would likely serve long prison sentences for their numerous crimes. Certainly, they would not like to spend the remainder of their days jailed in conditions that make Satan blush in shame. In short, Maduro and his top allies must be offered a way out that allows them to keep their freedom and lead lives of relative comfort. Aesop’s Fables got it right when they concluded that gentle persuasion achieves much more than brute force. The sad but simple truth is that Maduro will not be removed from power unwillingly. The US and our allies simply lack the means to force regime change. We have thrown everything but the kitchen sink to try and remove Maduro from power. Targeted sanctions aimed at regime officials? Failed. Oil sanctions to starve the government of resources? Failed. Easing sanctions as an incentive to hold free elections? Failed. Put a $15 million reward on Maduro’s head? Failed. Support opposition leader Juan Guaidó? Failed. All efforts have been unsuccessful because Maduro (as pointed out in the previous paragraph) has too much powerful institutional and international support to be removed. 

There is historical precedent to support a peace-based proposal. As Venezuelan nonprofit leader Roberto Patiño points out, South Africa and Chile both had peaceful transitions to democracy by offering an off-ramp to leaders of the old regime. For example, South Africa gave amnesty for perpetrators who admitted their crimes. But, I will controversially contend that in this case, the opposition must be willing to go further. Currently, Maduro and his allies have no reason whatsoever to accept any loss of their power because they know that it is extremely likely they can maintain control after the furor over the election subsides. Western democracies have to contend with numerous domestic and international challenges, leaving little capacity to invest in Venezuela. The US elections are happening in less than 100 days, riots grip the UK, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine continues, the Middle East crisis keeps escalating, and China maintains its aggressive pressure on Taiwan. In short, the countries most likely to support the opposition are overextended and distracted. Maduro is betting (probably correctly) that he can simply wait this crisis out. The opposition needs to both weaken the Maduro regime to the greatest extent without resorting to violence and offer a deal sweet enough that Maduro will jump (think enhanced carrots+sticks). Now, I will break down some possible carrots and sticks.

Stick 1: Divide the Maduro coalition

Despite Maduro’s overwhelming control on all the levers of power, his base of support is not ironclad. About 75% of Venezuelans want a change in leadership. Even in former strongholds, Maduro’s support has eroded due to his catastrophic economic mismanagement and hyperinflation eroding the value of government subsidies and welfare. Recent polling suggests that 10% of even the most ardent Maduro supporters are open to considering what change might mean. The opposition should take advantage of these rifts in Maduro’s coalition to gather support from disillusioned backers of the regime.

Stick 2: Keep protesting

Despite Maduro’s arrest of more than 2,000 protestors, it is critical that the opposition keep their forces energized and active. Even in dictatorships, perception matters. The opposition must show other Venezuelans, the regime, and the international community that an overwhelming majority of people want Maduro to step down and demand democracy. The 66% of people that supported González can take advantage of strength in numbers and protect together to reduce the risk of punishment. These methods are empirically proven to work. A study by Harvard’s Erica Chenoweth showed that over the past several decades, 57% of nonviolent resistance campaigns around the world led to democracy, while only 6% of violent campaigns did. By continuing to protest, the opposition can keep its momentum alive and have the capacity to resist Maduro even if the rest of the world cannot contribute much.

Carrot 1: Incentivize the military to force Maduro from power

Many low level soldiers are frustrated with the military top brass’s continued support for Maduro’s repression of their fellow countrymen and want to see a change too. Low wages and a lack of economic opportunity affects the military just as much as ordinary civilians. While top military leaders continue to support Maduro, foot soldiers could be persuaded to switch sides if they were offered immunity from prosecution in exchange for backing the opposition. In fact, González and Machado have announced they are prepared to include the military in their transition to democracy. González, a former diplomat, is particularly poised to play a crucial role. He can apply his skills of unity and empathy to persuade some segments of the military to switch sides. It is true that top generals have a significant financial incentive to stick with Maduro, but if a significant portion of the military changes sides, that provides pressure for top generals to stop supporting Maduro and for the dictator himself to negotiate with the opposition.

Carrot 2: Offer a comprehensive power sharing agreement

This is the most important suggestion and the one most likely to be successful. For all of Maduro’s wily maneuvers, if he loses the support of his generals and officials, it’s over. Dr. Francisco Rodríguez, a professor at the University of Denver, explains that a power sharing deal between Maduro and the opposition could provide a way for Edmundo González to take power while allowing Maduro’s camp some level of influence. Here too, there is historical precedent. In Poland, communist dictator Wojciech Jaruzelski shared power with the pro-democracy Solidarity movement for a period, allowing Poland to transition into a full democracy, joining NATO in 1999 and the EU in 2004. Returning to Venezuela, the US should support adopting a similar proposal. It would be in the opposition’s best interest to be realistic and be willing to make concessions. Some control over Venezuela is better than none. In fact, the US State Department even laid out a Democratic Transition Framework for Venezuela. However, a deal today would likely have to be more favorable to Maduro to persuade him to accept. Based on Dr. Rodríguez’s article and adding my own analysis, here are some basic principles:

1. The opposition and economic experts gain control over economic and energy policy, including passing a budget, managing oil exports, and more. The state-owned oil company PDVSA must also be purged of corrupt and incompetent Maduro loyalists and replaced with skilled technical experts. Major Western oil companies like Chevron can play a role here in working with the new PDVSA executives to provide technical expertise and equipment in exchange from gaining licenses to extract some oil from Venezuela’s vast reserves. Oil companies have a unique incentive for Venezuela to be stable, as Maduro’s repeated threats and potential invasion of Guyana’s oil-rich Essequibo region directly jeopardizes ExxonMobil and Chevron’s highly prized oil fields in the region. European oil companies too, should help, boosting their profits and helping wean the continent off of Russian oil. As long as the profit is reasonable for both Venezuelans taxpayers and the companies, a public-private partnership would give the struggling PDVSA the initial support it needs to start operating independently and generate more money for Venezuela. With the necessary investments in infrastructure and personnel, PDVSA can once again be the engine that powers Venezuelan prosperity. A new profitable PDVSA can bolster Venezuela’s economic fortunes by delivering increased funds to support paying off foreign debt, investing in crumbling infrastructure, expanding welfare and social services, and more. With the opposition in control of the budget, it can ensure that funds are responsibly allocated and well spent. Then, the US can lift all sanctions on Venezuela. One analysis suggests that Chevron alone could pump 110,000 more barrels per day of oil, increasing government revenue by $11 billion USD and boosting GDP by 10%. This money would be a game changer. In fact, some of this could even be given to regime elites to compensate for their lost ability to exploit natural resources and cushy government jobs. The opposition’s message to Maduro supporters should be one of reconciliation and cooperation. People are a lot more likely to support you if you make it worth their while. Here, wide ranging economic reforms must take place once sanctions are gone. Rule of law and private property must be protected, two key pillars of a stable economy sorely missing from Venezuela right now. This would lead to more private and foreign investment over time, boosting the economy and creating a virtuous cycle of growth, similar to formerly communist countries in Eastern Europe.

2. All jailed political dissidents should be released following a transparent process overseen by both Maduro and the opposition, but with fair and impartial judges.

3. Maduro and his supporters should be allowed to keep some key positions such as controlling the security and interior ministries. Maduro himself should be given an important leadership role in the new government both to incentivize him, but also to allow him to continue as leader of the socialist revolutionaries. If Maduro is out of the picture, all his subordinates will jockey for power and chaos could grip the country. It’s a lot easier to negotiate with 1 person instead of 10. Let’s keep it that way. Also add a caveat that Maduro’s forces can no longer detain, arrest, and jail people at will. New courts with fair and impartial judges must be established. US and EU legal experts, well-respected international jurists, and others can play a big role in this process. Overall, a 50-50 split of key government positions is ideal.

4. All criminal prosecutions of Maduro and his allies should stop and President Biden and other leaders should offer pardons/immunity to Maduro and his allies in exchange for their agreement to this deal.

5. As a broad overview, a power sharing deal would allow Maduro and his allies to keep some power, not face prosecution and jail time, and oversee a Venezuela that is prospering once again. To implement such an agreement, the US, EU, UN, ICC, other international organizations, key opposition leaders like Machado and González, Maduro and other regime leadership, as well as Latin American leaders, must all commit to the process. The leftist leaders of Brazil, Colombia and Mexico are especially important here, as they all have a vested interest in keeping Venezuela stable to stem migration into their own nations and prevent total violent collapse. They are the most persuasive people to convince Maduro to accept such a deal as they are cut from the same ideological cloth as Maduro and have credibility as rejectors of Western influence. Leftist leaders should embrace such a deal for several reasons. First, their own commitment to democracy is being put to the test; allowing Maduro to continue his dictatorship reeks of hypocrisy. Second, practically speaking, supporting Maduro has not worked out well for them, with millions of Venezuelans migrating to their countries even with Maduro in power. Third, long-term, a regime dependent on drug traffickers, violence, and repression to maintain power is not a recipe for success. A democratic, stable, and prosperous Venezuela would benefit their counties too, both from more economic trade and security cooperation between their counties, but also gaining a reliable and influential ally to advocate for regional interests on the global stage, not to mention access to affordable energy in a cost-of-living crisis.

6. New free and fair elections with international observers, a transparent voting and results process, and observation by both Maduro and the opposition, should take place for the presidency and National Assembly within 1 year. All parties will be allowed to run and all candidates will be unbanned. Using the 2024 presidential election as a barometer, it’s likely that 1/3 of the country are die-hard Maduro fans, and thanks to their votes, Maduro’s party will retain some degree of influence over the political process. With restored legal immunity given to National Assembly members, political pardons, and amnesties, Maduro and his allies will be able to spend their days in comfort and security and hold some power while the opposition can finally enact the will of the Venezuelan people and put the country on the path to prosperity. 

No doubt, many will ardently object to these proposals because they (rightfully) demand that Maduro and his cronies must be held to account for their horrific crimes against Venezuelans. However, rabid passion should ultimately yield way to rational practicality. The best way to improve the lives of the Venezuelan people is to pave the way for Edmundo González to become president and start enacting reforms. To put it bluntly, at the worst case, I would much rather let a small group of people get away with crimes (no matter how horrible) in exchange for uplifting millions of Venezuelans trapped in the chasm of poverty rather than dogmatically pursue justice that probably won’t result in anyone getting held accountable. That’s a lever to the trolley problem I’m pulling any day. There can and should be good faith debate about the specific provisions of a power-sharing agreement, but recognize that almost all of the commentariat, including myself, lead comfortable lives in developed Western countries, insulated from the hellish conditions millions of Venezuelans have to brave on a daily basis. Consider the children in Caracas who are forced to scavenge the trash for food and ask yourself: Is a vague sense of “justice” more valuable than their lives and futures? As difficult as it is, we must all put the interests of the Venezuelan people above any desire for revenge. True justice cannot be delivered if Maduro is still ultimately in power and Venezuelans are still suffering.

Of course, all this might fail and Maduro could simply dig in, ramp up repression, rely on support from his allies, and wait for international pressure and attention to subside, thus entrenching himself in power for the near future. But if millions of Venezuelans can wait hours in line to vote, and Edmundo González and María Corina Machado can put their lives on the line to liberate their people from oppression, the international community owes it to Venezuelans to do everything in our power to support them. “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” proclaims The Washington Post. Given Venezuela’s continued rolling blackouts, this is especially prophetic. I hope that our collective conscience is worth more than cheap sloganeering. Only if all of us commit to keeping the flames of democracy burning so strong that they cannot be snuffed out, will the Venezuelan people ever see the dawn of a brighter future.

The Equality in Forensics News Brief is brought to you by Lindsey Zhao and the News Brief Team:

• Sasha Morel

• Roshan Shivnani

• Rowan Seipp

• Paul Robinson

• Amanda-Lesly Miranda

• Alex Ramirez

• Anthony Babu

• Daniel Song

• Rohan Dash

• Charlie Hui

• Ella Fulkerson

• Justin Palazzolo

• Ruhaan Sood

• Evelyn Ding

• Robert Zhang

• Sahana Srikanth

• Meera Menon

• Boyana Nikolova

• Andy Choy

Interested in becoming a contributor? You can apply to join our staff team here.