“Esta Maduro o Vencido”– Is it Ripe or Expired–Venezuelan Life Before and After Dictatorship

Nicolas Maduro is a man who bears an ironic heritage– his last name translates to “ripe” in Spanish, a definition which contradicts the raw reality of Venezuela’s generational instability.  According to democratic standards, Nicolas Maduro had expired his time in office about a decade ago, and his international capture under the Trump administration led to a world uncertain about Venezuela’s new identity. 

Nicolás Maduro Moros was born on November 23, 1962, in Caracas, Venezuela. Before becoming a dictator, Maduro was a union leader and a bus driver, consolidating his political reputation before rising into the ranks of Hugo Chavez’s political regime in 1999. Venezuela was considered one of the richest countries in the world prior to  the 1970s, its economic growth rate reaching 7.7% by 1970. However, its identity as a “petro-state,” or an extreme dependence on fossil fuel income, reached its shelf-life in 1978. Hugo Chavéz ignored the expiration dates of the culminating resource curse and intensified price controls and the nationalization of the country’s falling industries. Boris Muñoz, a journalist who interviewed Maduro in 2003, later commented on the transition of power between Chavez and Maduro, “[Maduro] was very loyal, and he was a very good surrogate for Chávez's wishes and whims.” Maduro was the face of the United Socialist Party and a strong candidate of chavismo; an ideology combining 21st century socialism, anti-imperalist patriotism, and populism, a common combination of factors that bolstered the charismatic personality cult under Chavez and Maduro. The “wishes and whims” were the deathbed to democracy– Chavéz handpicked Maduro as Venezuela’s next leader in 2013, but not before the country ultimately collapsed synchronously alongside the recession of oil prices. 

Nicolas Maduro’s regime came with the typical characteristics of autocracies: mass incarcerations of his opponents, protests claiming the special election after Chavéz’s death were rigged, an economy heavily burdened by the collapsing oil prices and declining industrial production. In a Washington Post article in 2017 analyzing the paradox between a reduction of imports and a decrease in farming production, authors Mariana Zuñiga and Nick Miroff report on the country’s current state: “With medicines scarce and malnutrition cases soaring, more than 11,000 babies died last year, sending the infant mortality rate up 30 percent, according to Venezuela’s Health Ministry.” The Venezuelan head of the health ministry published these statistics. She was fired two days later. Circulations of a dictatorship and public protests against Maduro’s abuse of power intensified between 2016 and 2017. In response, Maduro de-legitimized the National Assembly and “subordinated most of the cabinet to a military general, and the administration created an increasing number of barriers to the opposition’s effort to conduct a recall referendum.” 

Democratic institutions have consistently perceived autocratic leadership as a strategic threat, especially considering the powerful influence of the Democratic Peace Theory and its powerful presence in global institutions following the impacts of the Cold War. However, there are some laws and leaders which have chosen to forego the “peace” aspect of the theory and justify the means with violent ends. During the 1970s Venezuela began to undergo a significant economic collapse, simultaneously the United States began to undergo a strategic constitutional framework. The 1973 War Powers Resolution “provides that Congress can pass a resolution directing the president to remove U.S. forces from ‘hostilities’ that have not been authorized by Congress.” Through this, the Trump administration attempted to shield itself from legal repercussions as well as publicly defending its actions by accusing Maduro of transporting drugs– primarily fentanyl and cocaine– into the States “‘emptying his prisons and insane asylums’ and ‘forcing’ its inmates to migrate to the US.” However, these attempts have an expiration date as well– the Constitution allows the Congress to declare war, not the president himself, and “as far back as 1801, the Supreme Court said that the Constitution vests in Congress the whole powers of war” — or the sole prerogative to decide when, where, and against whom to use offensive force.” Responses to Trump’s illegal actions have been tumultuous, especially within Venezuela. According to an anonymous protestor, loyalists who have been flooding the streets in support for Maduro’s return are there by force and supporters even receive a bonus of $150 on top of their monthly salary. 

Public policy expert, Tahina Montoya, explains how “Venezuela has become a case study for how the United States, hemispheric partners, and adversaries respond [to political changes], with critical implications for regional norms, security cooperation, and broader hemispheric security.” Venezuela also serves like a possible mirage to countries such as Cuba or Nicaragua– according to Phil Gunson in the International Crisis Group, “Toppling the 67-year-old dictatorship in Cuba might be next, according to Trump himself, a prospect that has led to anxiety there and in neighbouring Caribbean countries, which fear a wave of instability.” Other voices are hopeful for a democratic transition but require removals of economic sanctions and political suppression. In absence of an autocracy, Venezuelans are advocating for a reduction in the cost of living, improvements in healthcare and job opportunities; culminating to a 68% consensus towards a democratic election within the next year. During the transitional period, Delcy Rodriguez has changed the structure of the current cabinet by "dismantling the military hierarchy” and removing General Jorge Márquez, a figure vital to Maduro’s political campaign who controlled the Ministry of Housing, Energy, and Telecommunications. 

Venezuela’s story under Nicolas Maduro prompts an ongoing question: is this a nation that has matured to a state of democracy, or are its political movements still raw and exposed to the nature of a transitioning regime? The dictatorship of Nicolás Maduro reflects the expiration date of democracy, an overextension of power that soured the country’s democratic institutions and economic stability. Venezuela is calling for reform and fair elections, indicating that the nation itself is not “vencido” (expired) and instead indicating a possibility of reaching madurez– ready, at last, for renewal beyond dictatorship.