Venezuela's Disputed Esequibo Territory

Political Maneuvers and Regional Concerns

The ongoing dispute over the Esequibo territory between Venezuela and Guyana has historical roots, and it remains a matter of national consensus in Venezuela to regain control of this disputed area. However, recent actions by the Maduro regime have sparked concerns over ulterior motives. Notably, the announcement of a referendum by Jorge Rodríguez, president of the regime-imposed National Assembly, came after Maria Corina Machado's victory in the opposition's recent primaries, potentially aimed at diverting attention from her prominence in the campaign.

The referendum questions were ambiguous and raised implications, including the appointment of authorities to govern the territory, possibly indicating future actions. The Venezuelan opposition was divided in its response; while some figures like Capriles, Rosales, and other independent candidates participated in the referendum, Maria Corina strongly disapproved, citing its counterproductive nature and its potential impact on the legal strategy in the ongoing case at the International Court of Justice. Interestingly, the Court rejected Guyana's plea to suspend the referendum just days before its occurrence.

The referendum took place on December 3rd, with a majority of the questions receiving an affirmative "Yes" from over 95% of voters, as claimed by the CNE, the electoral body appointed by the dictatorship. Nonetheless, analysts and political figures questioned the accuracy of the 10.43 million reported voters, challenging it against the observed voter turnout on the referendum day. It's noteworthy that the same electoral body will oversee the proposed presidential elections in 2024.

Guyana has criticized the consultative referendum as provocative. Beyond Maduro's political maneuvering to divert internal attention, the actions of Guyana have been deemed abusive and dangerous. Guyana has unlawfully granted mining and oil concessions in a disputed territory, encroaching even into maritime areas that rightfully belong to Venezuela, crucial for the access to the Atlantic Ocean from the Venezuelan state of Delta Amacuro. Recently, Guyana's President, while denouncing provocation in court, himself, dressed in military attire, entered the disputed territory with troops, established camps, and raised the country's flag in a confrontational and risky move.

The Maduro regime, in addition to this referendum, has focused on campaigning and aligning with influential allies such as China and Russia. China has explored cooperation for strategic resource exploration, while Russia signed a cooperation agreement with Venezuela, in response to what the regime claims as a U.S. Southern Command deployment near the disputed area. However, considering ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and Israel, an escalation in South America is least desirable for the U.S. and the world. The heightened military mobilization, with Venezuela and Guyana moving troops to the border, alongside Brazil, raises global concerns.

In my personal opinion, any military action resulting from this conflict would not be solely dependent on the directly involved countries, Venezuela and Guyana. Venezuela, despite significant arms investment, lacks logistical capacity for armed conflict, and Guyana's army, with only 45,000 soldiers, stands much lower than Venezuela's. Both depend on their allies for any confrontational scenario.

In conclusion, all Venezuelans are committed to affirming sovereignty over the Esequibo territory. Regional stability hinges on international advocacy for respect of the 1966 Geneva Agreement, calling for a diplomatic solution agreed upon by both countries. Guyana must cease unilateral resource exploitation and military base establishments until a solution is reached. Exploiting Venezuela's internal political turmoil for territorial gains undermines the possibility of an agreement and violates established norms.

Julio César Rivas