Memorandum on U.S. Foreign Policy Towards Venezuela’s Crisis

TO: President Donald Trump
CC: Mark Shirk
FROM: Foreign Analyst Trang Nguyen
DATE: April 2nd, 2018
SUBJECT: Foreign Policy Regarding Venezuela’s Crisis
Introduction
Venezuela’s economy has been severely hit by the decline in global oil since 2014. It directly impacted on the state’s ability to import the same quantity of food and medicine as in previous years. In other words, economic struggles have led to a humanitarian crisis, in which basic food and medicines for thirty million citizens are increasingly scarce. While Venezuela’s dictatorial regime has repeatedly rejected humanitarian aid from the outside, the country’s gradual collapse has caused 1.2 million Venezuelans to flee the country over the past two years. To prevent a refugee crisis across the Americas, the United States should seek regional consensus to provide humanitarian aid and continue to support Venezuela’s democratic opposition.

Problem statement
The humanitarian crisis will not just persist in Venezuela; it will, sooner or later, become a regional crisis if not addressed immediately. The International Monetary Fund estimates that inflation in Venezuela will reach 2068.5 percent by 2018.[1] Recent polls show that support for President Nicolas Maduro has reached record lows, with only 20 percent of Venezuelans approving of his leadership.[2] Moreover, many Venezuelan government officials are actively involved in international crime and are using state resources, including military assets or the state-controlled oil company to support illicit activities such as money laundering and drug smuggling.[3] In addition, Russia, Iran and China’s increasing presence in Venezuela should be sufficient to worry the United States. Therefore, Venezuela’s crisis and potential collapse should be a top priority for U.S. national security and measures should be taken to restore Venezuela’s democracy.

Policy Recommendations:
Economic sanctions have proved to be ineffective in weakening the corrupted government. Given that 95 percent of Venezuela’s export revenue comes from oil sold by the state-owned oil company, the sanctions not only hurt the government but also Venezuelans. Therefore, the United States should aim to aid the Venezuelan people and work to build consensus within the international community on the urgency of the Venezuelan humanitarian crisis.

 Solution 1: U.S. President Donald Trump needs to formally announce that Maduro’s government and its illegitimate Constituent Assembly process will not be recognized because of corruption and criminality. Given the regime’s history of oppressing its people and its refusal to hold free and transparent elections, international pressure has high chances of driving the much-needed transition to restore constitutional order in Venezuela. In other words, a statement from the President will send a clear message of support to Venezuela’s democratic opposition.

 Solution 2: The U.S should work with the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) and regional stakeholder to help those most affected by the crisis. A further collapse of Venezuela’s health system will affect neighboring countries like Colombia, Guyana, and Aruba. Moreover, the United States and the anti-Maduro opposition will not win the hearts and minds of Venezuelan by helping drive the country’s social safety net into the ground. Rather, they can work with U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the State Department to prepare a refugee policy implemented by nongovernmental and multilateral organizations working in the region.[4] This initiative could include building shelters, clinics, schools, warehouses, and other humanitarian infrastructure for the delivery of basic goods and services for families.

 Solution 3: It should be U.S. goal to build consensus within the international community to draw attention to the urgency of the crisis. The United States can urge the United Nations, together with the Organization of American States to step up and recognize this problem as a refugee crisis so that the world can turn the attention to it. They can also support multilateral organizations such as the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank, together with donor countries to provide financial support to countries receiving these refugees.

Conclusion
Although the Venezuelan government has refused to seek external actors to provide humanitarian aid, the United States can still work with neighboring countries and international organizations to prepare for a refugee crisis by creating multilateral or multinational refugee plans. At the same time, the U.S should also continue to pressure the Venezuelan government for policy and political change. These two initiatives will not only address the ongoing problems but also save the regional countries and the United States time and resources lest the Venezuelan government collapses.





[2]Venezuelans’ Approval of Leadership Remains at Record Low,” Gallup, May 20, 2016.


Comments

  1. UnknownApril 3, 2018 at 4:34 PM

    Great memo, Trang! I found your discussion on United States foreign policy regarding Venezuela to be very interesting and well-structured. I definitely agree with you that the United States must take action in the Venezuelan crisis, especially since it is very important to the United States to spread democracy and to help other nations in their times of need. However, do you think that the situation in Venezuela should be of most importance to the United States, considering recent concerns with North Korea and other nations might pose a bigger threat? You make a very interesting point about the fact that a further decline in Venezuela’s health system will eventually spread to surrounding countries, escalating the crisis even further. Therefore, I definitely believe that the United States can and should aid Venezuelans by providing them health care services and other forms of humanitarian infrastructure. Out of the three solutions that you present, which one do you think that President Trump might be most apt to carry out?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. UnknownMay 7, 2018 at 1:25 PM

      Thank you for your comment. I think the situation in Venezuela is not as urgent as North Korea and Middle East, but it shouldn't be too far on the agenda either. As a world-leading economy and political power, the U.S. is by no means just bystander to the issues in developing areas like Central America. Even if the U.S. does not want to deal with this alone, it should be U.S. goal to build consensus within the international community to draw attention to the urgency of the crisis.

      Delete
  2. UnknownApril 3, 2018 at 5:40 PM

    I think that your analysis of the situation in Venezuela is very strong. You do an excellent job of laying out different policy options available to the United States, and clearly stating which of these should be stressed and promoted by the United States. Furthermore, I very mush agree with your point that Venezuela should not be abandoned by the United States. I was wondering if you could expand a bit on what you meant by encourage the Venezuelan government to change. Are you suggesting that the United States to put pressure on the Venezuelan government to reform from within, or are you suggesting that the United States encourage a regime change within Venezuela? If the latter I would have to caution that. There are countless examples in the history of US foreign policy where the United States has promoted the overthrown of a political leader, only to face drastic consequences within that country. I believe that the promotion of health care and humanitarian services and gaining support from the international community should therefore be the leading initiatives regarding foreign policy towards Venezuela.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. UnknownMay 7, 2018 at 3:46 PM

      Thank you for the comment. I do believe the U.S. should encourage Venezuelans to reform from within the country, rather than backing any military group to overthrow the current government. However, I do believe that the U.S. should provide a support system both verbally and legally by granting political asylum for those who stand up against the government in Venezuela. Given the regime’s history of oppressing its people and its refusal to hold free and transparent elections, international pressure has high chances of driving the much-needed transition to restore constitutional order in the country.

      Delete
  3. UnknownMay 6, 2018 at 7:46 PM

    Your memo was a great read. I strongly agree with your conclusion for many reasons. Putting sanctions on the government only hurts the people of Venezuela and has little effect on the government itself. Controlling the refugee crisis should be the number one priority. If left unchecked, the refugee crisis could destabilize neighboring countries and give more openings for Russia and China to influence the region. By working with NGOs, we will be able to provide humanitarian aid to those that need it in Venezuela. We should help coordinate with the neighboring countries so that the aid can be distributed most effectively. The U.S. should continue to pressure the Venezuelan government to allow humanitarian aid to those who need it.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

U.S Foreign Policy towards Middle East

After World War II, the overriding concern of American foreign policy was finding a new way to check Soviet expansion and influence throughout the world. The Middle East, specifically, was a vulnerable target for the U.S. and Soviet Union after British and French colonialism. That said, US foreign policy towards the Middle East was not completely linear during the past century. Instead, it can be divided into two periods — during the Cold War and after the Cold War. During the Cold War, U.S. foreign policy was mostly a reaction to Soviet strength, position, and action. [1] After the Cold War, the Middle East — being considered as part of the Third World, was to be “exploited” for the needs of the industrial societies and to “fulfill its major function as a source of raw materials and a market.”[2] In other words, peace and oil have been the main focus of US foreign policy in the Middle East after the Cold War.  During the Cold War, the Soviet goal was to achieve strategic pari...
Read more

Memorandum on US policy on the Paris Agreement

TO: President Donald Trump FROM: Matt Fitzgerald DATE: April 29, 2018 SUBJECT: Memorandum on US policy on the Paris Agreement Introduction Climate change has been increasingly affecting Earth ever since the industrial revolution. Earth has been becoming warmer every month. Sea levels have been rising, and coastlines have been disappearing. Something needs to be done so that the effects of climate change do not become permanent. There have been many failed global attempts to decrease our carbon emissions, and many countries including the three largest polluters, the U.S., China, and India are reluctant to do so. Only one attempt looks promising to help start the trend towards using green energy. The Paris Accords might not be perfect, but it is a good start to the world using green energy. Option 1 Pulling out of the Accords will be a reckless long-term decision. The U.S. needs to be the leader of the free world. The U.S. is the largest polluter in terms of population. W...
Read more

Memorandum on United States Foreign Policy Regarding North Korea

Memorandum Memorandum on United States Foreign Policy Regarding North Korea To: President Donald Trump CC: Professor Shirk From: Foreign Policy Analyst, Victoria Hassan Subject: The North Korean Nuclear Arsenal Dilemma Issue: If not already, North Korea is very close to achieving nuclear armed international ballistic missile capability that is capable of reaching the United States and other regions of North America. Even to experts, North Korea’s motive and intentions for building up a nuclear arsenal have been quite unclear and unpredictable. Recently, there has been much debate as to whether or not the United States should take military action regarding North Korea’s reluctance to denuclearize the entire Korean Peninsula. However, U.S. military action and complete U.S.  inaction are not the only options for dealing with North Korea. Option 1: Trump-Kim Summit Peaceful Negotiations Avoiding military action and possibly the use of nuclear weapons agai...
Read more