It is a commonplace idea that, in war, the first casualty is the truth. Certainly, as soon as an armed conflict begins, different interested versions of events emerge, each offering interpretations that alter the facts to suit the convenience of the parties involved in the conflict.
A humanitarian crisis also gives rise to self-serving narratives that seek to legitimize different actors, especially those who bear responsibility for creating the crisis itself, and those who strive to preserve it because they derive some form of benefit from it.
These narratives tend to be grandiose and pompous. They never uphold ordinary, simple values. Thus, it is difficult to count the number of times Nicolás Maduro has proclaimed his “firm commitment to world peace,” his “love of peace.” Yet within that discourse there is no mention of the relentless repression against political dissent, nor of the repeated torture that has commonly followed forced disappearances. Two opposing realities confront each other in the public sphere, but the narrative proclaiming Maduro’s love of peace possesses resources and spokespersons that the reality experienced by those suffering the ruthless arbitrariness of power, the selective application of the law, and the abuse of a legislative branch that acts only to execute the orders of the executive, could never dream of having.
In this way, the power exercised by Hugo Chávez and later inherited by Nicolás Maduro regarded the separation of powers and adherence to the national constitution as obstacles to the aims of the revolution they defended. In this view, the law is a “bourgeois” law. No one explained to them that the law—whether bourgeois or proletarian—is designed to regulate the course of social relations and to be obeyed.
Within the discourse of power, the constitution was paradoxically transformed into a highly useful propaganda tool: while illegal expropriations were carried out, electoral fraud committed, and the population subjected to conditions of hunger, millions of pocket-sized copies of the constitution were printed, with lettering too small to be read, turning it into a symbol of a new legality derived not from the articles contained in the little book, but from the hand that frantically waved it before television cameras day after day.
The contempt for the rule of law shown by Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro, and now by Delcy Rodríguez, lies at the root of the humanitarian crisis afflicting the country. The collapse of public health indicators, the routine disregard for the independence of the Central Bank, the decades-long neglect of the legally established requirements for appointing officials to positions requiring technical expertise, and the violation of electoral legislation, to cite only a few examples, are not random events. All of this, combined with the budgetary strangulation of public institutions led by opposition leaders elected by citizens, the suppression of free expression, and the closure of media outlets, are not isolated incidents. They are the necessary components for keeping a population subdued through humanitarian crisis. The poor, occupied with obtaining a box of subsidized low-quality food and prevented from demanding their rights, become the perfect foundation of power.
This is the structure inherited by Delcy Rodríguez, and she shows no signs of wanting to change it. On the contrary, arbitrariness remains the norm. A clear example is the case of Alex Saab. Here, the regime’s level of cynicism reaches new heights. Saab was granted Venezuelan nationality, internationally promoted as a diplomat, and later appointed minister. Now, at Washington’s request, through the same magical process by which he was once made Venezuelan, he has now been “de-Venezuelanized” and placed on a plane to the United States in the midst of something that is neither a deportation nor an extradition: it is a de facto measure.
Venezuela’s current situation is extraordinarily complex. The illegal “removal” of Maduro, who exercised power illegitimately, has taken place, while the interim administration, itself threatened with another removal, has chosen to blatantly ignore the constitution. The international community must remain alert to developments in Venezuela. Only a return to respect for the rule of law can lead to democracy and the overcoming of the humanitarian crisis that continues to devastate the country.