Welcome to New Middle Ages
The strike on Venezuela is a field test of the ideas written
into the National Security Strategy: the Western Hemisphere is our backyard and
our priority.
Much, however, will depend on who comes to power next. If
the replacement turns out to be a figure from the opposition, the country may
drift into a condition of poorly governed semi-disintegration, a kind of Latin
American Libya. If power ends up in the hands of the military, and Washington
manages to reach arrangements with them, the outcome may look somewhat more
stable.
At the same time, it is reasonable to assume that the very
fact of such a coercive operation will inevitably deepen polarization across
South America. American imperial behavior and the attitude toward it have long
served as one of the region’s political litmus tests.
The method itself is also a test run for other ideas that
Trump articulated back during the Iran Israel war, when he threatened personal
retribution against the Iranian leadership. Heads of state are now being
quietly removed from the category of protected figures. They can be eliminated,
abducted, taken hostage. Welcome to a new Middle Ages.
Of course, one could say that Gaddafi too was eliminated,
and Allende as well, albeit by other hands, and Castro was targeted repeatedly.
But doing it this openly and this briskly is something altogether new.
Domestically in the United States, the collapse of the
Venezuelan regime to some degree strengthens Marco Rubio, since fighting the
Chavistas has long been his personal political crusade. A failed operation, by
contrast, would likely have strengthened Vance, the most consistent
isolationist in the current field, close to the MAGA activists who insist on
the principle of not getting involved. However, even Vance respects American
dominance in the Western Hemisphere and the Monroe Doctrine, so it is hard to speak
of deep internal divergence here.
Political pressure, then a rapid strike, then disengagement.
All according to the Vance Doctrine.