Nicolás Maduro and his allies are at a critical juncture with two potential paths: either continue to use violence to maintain power or negotiate a way out.
Circumstances are likely to get worse before they get better. But descent into a full-fledged dictatorship is not inevitable. It is in the United States’ interest to work with partners in Latin America and the united Venezuelan opposition to ensure a transition of power in the coming months.
Since the July 28 election, the Maduro regime has turned to its tried-and-true strategy of repression and deceit. Ignoring international demands for transparency, Maduro has failed to back his allegation of a “terrorist attack” on the electoral system. The official results declaring Maduro as president remain unverified.
Instead, Maduro has involved the Supreme Court — a body notorious for its lack of independence, which does not even have the legal authority to review the voting tallies. The court’s validation of the dubious results from the also-discredited National Electoral Council is a stark example of using undemocratic institutions to legitimize electoral fraud and extend Maduro’s grip on power.
Maduro’s response to dissent has been brutal, in keeping with expectations from a regime implicated in crimes against humanity. Since the election, 20 people have been killed, hundreds have been detained, and others have disappeared or suffered abuse in custody.
The government is actively working to stifle popular support for the opposition. This includes issuing threats via social media and deploying armed pro-government groups to intimidate lower-income neighborhoods that once backed the government.
In response, a clear international consensus has emerged. Along with the U.S., countries such as Argentina, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Panama and Uruguay have formally recognized Edmundo González as the legitimate president-elect. Many other democracies have demanded a transparent and verifiable audit of the electoral results, underscoring widespread skepticism surrounding the official tallies.
At first glance, the call to recognize González as the legitimate president appears to be a rerun of the Venezuelan opposition’s 2019 campaign to endorse Juan Guaidó as interim president. However, the current situation is markedly different.
The 2019 interim presidency was bolstered by international support and access to Venezuelan assets held abroad. Despite these factors, the Maduro regime retained power and never relinquished control of key institutions. It continued to receive a degree of international recognition, thanks to its controversial election “victory” from the previous year.
In 2018, evidence of electoral fraud was readily apparent, with the elections widely criticized as neither free nor fair. But this time, the opposition’s almost immediate reporting through meticulous organization, witness testimonies and comprehensive evidence-collection has created a compelling case: With the votes tallied from 81 percent of the voting center, González had secured 67 percent of the vote, while Maduro obtained only 30 percent.
Independent audits have corroborated the opposition victory, confirming that millions of Venezuelans mobilized to vote for change.
This time, the issue is not about endorsing a parallel government, but about standing up against blatant electoral fraud and affirming the will of Venezuelans. The crux of the matter is supporting a genuine transition of power to the only government that legitimately deserves to take office in January.
There are noteworthy parallels between the situation in Venezuela, Guatemala’s August 2023 election and the January inauguration of Bernardo Arévalo. In particular, the Guatemala case highlights the importance of combining domestic civil society mobilization with active international engagement.
The global community united with Guatemala’s democratic forces to press for a peaceful transfer of power, countering efforts to prevent Arévalo from taking office by the economic elites who dominated various institutions within Guatemala.
Venezuela’s corruption, abuse and lack of independent institutions put in on a whole other level. However, Guatemala’s bumpy road to Arévalo’s presidency shows that even in the face of a corrupt government that concentrates power, it is possible to envision change.
If democracies in the Americas could rally behind the will of the Guatemalan people beyond political polarization in the region, why can’t they do the same for Venezuelans?
For governments like Brazil, Colombia and Mexico to play a constructive role, the starting point for any conversation with Venezuelan authorities should be upholding the true will of the Venezuelan people. Double standards would not bode well for the future of democracy in Venezuela and would help the Maduro regime buy time.
In Venezuela, such a transition requires a political negotiation that will take place in the coming months. Even if the Maduro regime attempts to manipulate the negotiations to stay in power as he has before, it can be different this time around.
The outcome will hinge on the opposition’s ability to remain united, taking advantage of Maria Corina Machado’s political capital since she won the primary election (she was subsequently thrown off the ballot by the Maduro-controlled high court) and her ability to connect with ordinary Venezuelans, including many former supporters of the regime.
A second factor is whether the people of Venezuela will be able to continue to protest in the face of growing repression. While democratic leaders in the region — especially in Brazil, Colombia and Mexico — equivocate about whether to condemn the Maduro regime’s undemocratic tactics, the window is closing. Venezuelans’ liberty suffers with each day of delay.
Finally, it remains to be seen whether the international community can articulate a viable political way off-ramp for those in power. It will be essential to think outside the box and look at how to provide legal incentives to those implicated in serious crimes, ranging from human rights abuses to corruption, drug trafficking and money laundering.
For the first time in years, the democratic Venezuelan opposition remains united on a common path. It will be essential for the region to come together to contribute to a united regional response as it did in the case of Guatemala. This requires standing by the Venezuelan people, firmly calling on the regime to stop the repression and not playing into its expected strategy of buying time through internal institutional processes that make a mockery of justice.
Rebecca Bill Chavez, Ph.D. is president and CEO of the Inter-American Dialogue and Tamara Taraciuk Broner directs the organization’s Peter D. Bell Rule of Law Program.