A majority bloc of the Venezuelan opposition is preparing to dissolve the so-called interim government of opposition leader Juan Guaidó, in a controversial move described as a logical step by some, but that others see as an error that will end up benefiting the Nicolas Maduro regime.
The move against Guidó is supported by more than two thirds of the 112 deputies who originally appointed him as interim president of Venezuela after declaring that Maduro was illegally holding power after committing massive fraud during the 2018 presidential election. While the opposition leader held no real power inside Venezuela, his appointment as Venezuela’s legitimate leader was recognized by the United States and nearly 50 other nations.
The vote to ratify the dissolution of the interim government is scheduled for Thursday, but sources within the National Assembly said the process could extend until Friday or even next week, given that some deputies were requesting on Wednesday to postpone the proceedings.
“It is necessary for us to talk more” and to reach a consensus before ratifying the elimination of the “interim government,” said opposition leader Juan Pablo Guanipa after meeting with political leaders, academics and representatives of civil society.
The Miami Herald reported in October that three of the four main opposition parties had decided to dismantle the interim government, considering that the political platform had already outlived its usefulness even though Guaidó continued to be recognized as the legitimate president of Venezuela by an important segment of the international community.
In October, the White House confirmed that it continued to back Guidó, but said the U.S. government would not interfere in the internal struggle for the leadership of Venezuela’s troubled opposition and that it would respect any decision that was finally made.
For some international observers, the Venezuelan opposition leadership is preparing to make a big mistake.
“It’s nonsense,” said Antonio de La Cruz, senior associate of the Americas program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank. “It will end up in the coronation of Maduro because by eliminating the interim presidency what they are going to do is leave behind a de facto government.”
That will be the case because there won’t be any legal basis supporting what the opposition is about to do, in contrast to Guaido’s appointment, which was based on constitutional articles that provided for the National Assembly to appoint the president of the legislative body as the interim president of the country in cases where the president is removed from office.
The leaders of the three opposition parties behind the initiative think that what they are about to do will continue to have the same degree of international support that Guaidó had, but they are mistaken, De La Cruz said.
Guaidó urged Venezuelans on Tuesday to express their rejection of the proposal to modify the “transitional statute” in order to eliminate the interim presidency, noting that this is essential to protect the assets abroad of the South American country from the regime’s efforts to take them back. These assets include about $1 billion in gold bullion held in the vaults of the Bank of England as well as the Citgo refinery in the U.S.
But leaders of the three parties willing to dissolve the interim government — Acción Democrática, Primero Justicia and Un Nuevo Tiempo — dismissed that argument.
“With the reform of the statutes that governs the transition to democracy, the protection of the assets abroad of the Venezuelan state are guaranteed. These will never reach the hands of the regime. We have verified it with our international allies,” they said in a statement.
Those who argue in favor of the dissolution of the interim government emphasize that it has outlived its intended purpose and that it must be eliminated so the opposition can move on to new ways to fight the regime, especially given Guaido’s low levels of popular support.
“Venezuelans are already pretty fed up with the interim government experiment and it is natural for the opposition to start looking for ways to reconnect with a population that is increasingly skeptical and distant from the political class,” said Geoff Ramsey, program director for Venezuela from the think tank Washington Office on Latin America.
“The opposition is realizing the importance of adopting a more realistic strategy... than continuing to insist that it is a government when it does not control the territory, nor the state institutions,” he added.
However, others believe that the decision to remove the interim government could have serious negative repercussions for the efforts to regain democracy and affect U.S. policy towards the Caracas regime, particularly in regards to the future of Venezuelan assets abroad.
Eddy Acevedo, chief of staff of the president of the Wilson Center, said that despite the reiterations to the contrary made by the deputies who aspire to remove Guaidó, the decision in the end could threaten Venezuela’s ownership of Citgo’s assets.
“It is very sad,” Acevedo said. “It is a decision of the Venezuelans and Washington will respect the leaders they choose.... but this will put at risk the control they have over the assets,” because they have been supported by judges overseas who have ruled in favor of the interim government, given that it is recognized by the United States and other countries.
With the disappearance of the interim government, those assets will immediately be at risk, he said.
“As soon as this decision is made, the creditors of Venezuela (whose debts have been defaulted by the regime) are going to step out and try to freeze some of these assets, and the judges are going to then find themselves in the dilemma of having to decide what the structure in Venezuela is,” Acevedo said.
