Regime Tweaking, Not Regime Change, Is What The US Just Achieved In Venezuela, by Andrew Korybko

This is one of the more plausible hypotheses that has emerged from yesterday’s incident. From Andrew Korybko at korybko.com:

This refers to keeping the targeted state’s power structure in place but after some (at times significant) changes that advance the meddling state’s interests.

Some critics of the US’ “special military operation” in Venezuela claim that it didn’t succeed despite President Nicolas Maduro’s capture since the “Chavismo deep state” that he presided over remains in place. This refers to the explicitly ideological elements of his country’s permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies but can be expanded to include governors and trade unions among other groups. The point is that removing Maduro from the political equation didn’t result in regime change.

That’s true, but the premise that US wanted to achieve such a goal is debatable since Trump 2.0 is comprised of figures who’ve criticized previous regime change operations for destabilizing their regions and leading to unpredictable consequences that ultimately harmed US interests. It’s therefore plausible that they never intended to forcibly carry out regime change in Venezuela due to concerns that a civil war might follow, which could engender a large-scale migrant crisis and destroy energy infrastructure.

Rather, the immediate goal can be described as regime tweaking, which refers to keeping the targeted state’s power structure in place but after some (at times significant) changes that advance the meddling state’s interests. In the Venezuelan context, the US forcibly removed Maduro so that he’d be replaced by his Vice President Delcy Rodriguez, who Trump publicly expects to “do what we want” (likely at Marco Rubio’s direction). That’s arguably what he meant by “running the country” till its transition is complete.

Continue reading