With the situation in Venezuela continuing to further destabilise the country, the idea of a military intervention supported by the US and criticized by Russia, increases the risk of war in the Bolivarian Republic.
This article explains the reasons why a military intervention would destabilize the country as well as Latin America itself.
It would delegitimise the opposition leader’s credibility
With the opposition leader trying to challenge Nicolas Maduro, the last thing he needs is a military intervention in Venezuela.
An interference of that nature will not benefit the Venezuelan people. Similar events happened in Iraq and caused the destabilization of the Middle East.
If Brazil, Colombia or the US intervenes militarily in Venezuela and Guaidó becomes the president, it would undermine his presidency and could cause a civil war .
This would make the government unable to stabilise the country because of different political factions that are against each other.
Moreover, the significant rise of cartels or criminal gangs and the political divide between the Left and the Right which is growing within Venezuela and other Latin American countries are concerning.
This situation should never include military options, but rather a Diplomatic Solution between Maduro and Guaidó.
Would worsen the humanitarian crisis
The current crisis caused a significant damage to Venezuela's economy and manifested itself in different forms: hyperinflation, food shortages, economic mismanagement, extreme levels of poverty, water shortages, mass unemployment, inequality and obviously, the sanctions placed by the US government under the Bush, Obama and the current Trump administration will only worsen the conflict.
By taking in consideration the factors mentioned above, a military intervention is a step in the wrong direction in solving the humanitarian crisis that is plaguing the country. It could cause even more food shortages, worsen inequality, cause casualties; an issue that is well known in Vietnam and Iraq. The US main priority would be occupying the oil fields rather than “deliver humanitarian aid”.
Could divide and destabilase the country even more
Politics in Latin America is divisive and volatile. The Left and Right wingers in Colombia, Brazil, Argentina as well as Venezuela often use violence as a tool to resolve a specific conflict.
The situation in Venezuela is not just economic but also social and political confrontation between Maduro Bolivarian supporters and the right-wingers as well as Guaidó supporters.
By taking these factors into account, the violence will continue even if Maduro is out of power or if Guaidó becomes the next legitimate president of Venezuela.
It is in the best interest of the US as well as other Latin American countries such as Brazil and Colombia, which oppose Maduro to not be tempted to do any military or regime change within the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela because it would be a Latin American version of Iraq which resulted in a power vacuum due to religious and political factions.
In conclusion, the process of conflict escalation is complex and unpredictable, therefore, a military intervention would not help in solving the crisis, instead it would exacerbate the situation even further, causing more food and water shortages, casualties, exacerbate the poverty rate, and deepen the ideological divisions between the left and right.
To solve this crisis, both parties in dispute must engage in a transparent negotiation and dialogue process with less interference from the US. However, President Trump is maybe thinking “take the oil” rather than solve the country's problems.