RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Kinzer writes: "Deposing the government of Venezuela has become an urgent goal of American foreign policy."

Protests in favor of opposition in Venezuela. (photo: Fernando Llano/AP)
Protests in favor of opposition in Venezuela. (photo: Fernando Llano/AP)

Trump Is Strangling Venezuela With Sanctions - and It's Not Working

By Stephen Kinzer, The Boston Globe

28 March 19


eposing the government of Venezuela has become an urgent goal of American foreign policy. Our chosen method is economic strangulation. Through a series of decrees and proclamations, we have effectively imposed a trade embargo on Venezuela. We have pressured other countries to stop buying Venezuelan oil and warned shipping companies not to transport it. The next step, according to reports from Washington, may be to complete Venezuela’s isolation from the global banking system by forcing American credit card companies to stop doing business there.

As these sanctions escalate, the lives of ordinary Venezuelans become steadily worse. Food and medicine are in short supply, inflation is raging, and living standards have collapsed. Government corruption and mismanagement fuel this freefall, but fiats from Washington have decisively accelerated it.

Dozens of times over the course of our history, the United States has set out to overthrow a foreign government. We used to do it the old-fashioned way: military invasion. In Venezuela, though, that is not an appealing option. Venezuela is the size of Texas and might be just as difficult for an invading army to subdue. The logical alternative is covert action. Unfortunately, it too has become less effective as a regime-change tool. Leaders we would like to overthrow have learned lessons from past covert operations. They protect themselves more carefully than our earlier victims did, and build closed societies in which there are fewer independent power centers that covert operatives can penetrate.

With an invasion of Venezuela impractical, and covert action ineffective so far, the United States has adopted a third approach: economic sanctions. Venezuela is hardly the first country upon which we have imposed this punishment. Nor is it the first where sanctions have contributed to cataclysmic social decay. Our unfolding campaign in Venezuela, however, shows how fully this tool has become America’s preferred means of warfare. It is based on a stark calculation: if we can push enough ordinary people deeply enough into hunger, disease, and poverty, they will rebel against their leaders and give us the regime change we want. Human suffering is not a regrettable side effect of sanctions, as it is in conventional warfare. It is the goal. Since the end of the Cold War, sanctions have become America’s heart-wrenching weapon of choice.

Although our leaders like to use the phrase “targeted sanctions,” in most cases that is about as honest a formulation as “clean coal.” By starving economies of resources and markets, sanctions throw masses of people out of work and devastate the lives of countless families. The rationale behind them is as old as the idea of besieging cities: drive people to desperation and they will ultimately do your bidding. That is our plan in Venezuela. American sanctions are intended to send a clear message. We are telling Venezuelans that they will live in ever-intensifying pain until they somehow rid themselves and us of President Nicolas Maduro. Every time something happens that makes their lives worse, we cheer. After a power outage cut off electricity to most Venezuelans for more than 24 hours, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo gloated in a tweet: “No food. No medicine. Now, no power. Next, no Maduro.” Our Venezuelan president-in-waiting, Juan Guaidó, helpfully added a promise: “The light will arrive with the end of the usurpation.”

Is a foreign policy based on inflicting widespread human misery justifiable? Yes, its promoters could argue, because the goal of sanctions is to force the collapse of a bad government and allow the emergence of a better one. Yet even those who wish for President Maduro’s overthrow must ask themselves whether there should be limits to the amount of suffering that must be imposed on ordinary people in order to achieve a political result. The United States rarely observes such limits. Our practice is to keep sanctions in place until we secure our objective, regardless of the human cost. This principle was most memorably enunciated by Secretary of State Madeleine Albright when she was asked about the death of half a million Iraqi infants and children during the 1990s, which the United Nations attributed mainly to American sanctions that prevented the importation of medicine. The purpose of those sanctions was to weaken President Saddam Hussein, and Albright famously replied, “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price — we think the price was worth it.”

Beside the moral question is the political one: do sanctions work? Evidence suggests that they do not. The two countries that the United States has sanctioned for the longest time, Cuba and Iran, have defiantly survived over generations without changing their behavior. Rather than crush the target countries, sanctions often force them to become more self-sufficient. They develop ingenious networks of licit and illicit trade. As the United States wields sanctions more widely, regimes we target have perfected the art of sanctions-busting. Making people suffer might be justifiable if it served a larger purpose. Punishing entire nations for the misdeeds of their leaders, however, often leaves behind deep-seated anger while failing to achieve its intended result.

Email This Page your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+4 # Rodion Raskolnikov 2019-03-28 12:38
Good point. Sanctions are a shotgun blast. They destroy everything in front of them. Generally, that means the most vulnerable people and those who cannot protect themselves.

In the 1990s, the UN reported that US sanctions against Iraq had caused the death of 1.2 million people. 540,000 of these were children under 12 years of age. When asked about this US secretary of state Madeleine Albright said, "We think it is worth it." So the death of 1.2 million people is OK just as long as US policy is followed.

The US government is the outlaw of the world. It is the Rogue State.

The US must stop its sanctions against every nation right now.
+2 # revhen 2019-03-28 12:53
Is it the socialism of Venezuela or the sanctions on oil production, etc. by the US create the problems we are seeing?
+7 # indian weaving 2019-03-28 12:55
Reasonable discussion except the last line:

"Punishing entire nations for the misdeeds of their leaders, however, often leaves behind deep-seated anger while failing to achieve its intended result."

Sorry but the USA invades economically not due to "misdeeds of their leaders", but to own the place - regardless of any leader's legitimacy or morality - good or bad - irrelevant to the USA when they want what you have. Why would this statement close the article when it was not directly addressed earlier.
+9 # Farafalla 2019-03-28 13:32
Saudi Arabia’s MBS violates more human rights in a weekend than Maduro could ever do in a lifetime. Saudi Arabia is actively intervening in neighboring counties with military action, resulting in starvation and disease in the pooorest country in the region, Yemen. Saudi Arabia funds terrorist wahhabism in the region, assassinsates journalists, and attacked us on 9-11. Saudi Arabia brutally repressed the aspirations of its own people. So, let’s embargo Venezuela!
+1 # Rodion Raskolnikov 2019-03-29 05:45
FF -- great post. You are right on the mark. There is no humane principle behind US foreign policy.
+7 # Anne Frank 2019-03-28 14:21
We need for Venezuela to invade the U.S. and restore democracy.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.