Ana Ayuso: "It is possible that there were betrayals of Maduro in the US attack against Venezuela"

BarcelonaThe United States has made good on its threat and attacked VenezuelaThey have also captured the country's president, Nicolás Maduro. Caracas has already labeled the attack an "imperialist aggression" and called for "armed struggle." What consequences could the arrest of Hugo Chávez's successor have? Will the Venezuelan government hold out without Maduro, or will it be forced to cede power to the opposition? We spoke with Ana Ayuso, a senior researcher at CIDOB specializing in Latin America.

Where does the Venezuelan government stand now?

— We don't know to what extent it will be able to withstand this. Tensions within the executive branch are possible. Maduro was the one who held the cabinet together, and now three sectors or power blocs within the government may become more pronounced. On one side, there is Vice President Delcy Rodríguez and her brother, who are the closest to Maduro. On the other, we will have to see how weakened Vladimir Padrino, the Minister of Defense, emerges from the attack, given that today's operation is a resounding success for the US. Furthermore, another faction that may rise up and demand a stronger voice is that of Diosdado Cabello, the Minister of the Interior, Justice, and Peace, who belongs to the most hardline and authoritarian wing of Chavismo.

Is Chavismo fractured?

— They all support Maduro and serve the same interests. It depends on many factors. For now, however, it's true that the appearances they've made this morning haven't been joint. Each one has appeared separately, and this is unusual.

To what extent may the US have had internal collaborators in Venezuela?

— There have certainly been reports. That doesn't necessarily mean there was anything organized within the military. In fact, I find that hard to believe, because in Venezuela, power within the armed forces is highly fragmented, precisely to prevent anyone from organizing a revolt. It's one of the most closely monitored and controlled sectors. But for this operation to have been carried out, with such precise attacks and managing to remove Maduro from the country without major fighting, it's clear there were infiltrations by US intelligence. It appears to have been a very well-planned operation, and it's possible there were some betrayals, because Maduro was under intense surveillance.

Has the Maduro government lost control of the country?

— A few weeks ago, it seemed to have social and military control of the country, but now, with Maduro fallen and the army quite disoriented, the regime is much weaker than it appeared. Therefore, the government might opt for negotiations to relinquish power and manage a transition. Everything depends on what happens in the coming hours. We must pay close attention to how the mid-level military commanders react, the Defense Minister's ability to maintain the situation, and also how the Venezuelan people react.

What is the US seeking with the attack and capture of Maduro?

— Trump said Maduro's days were numbered, and so it was. In the call Trump and Maduro held at the end of November, the Venezuelan leader offered to step down, according to some reports. But the condition was that Vice President Delcy Rodríguez assume power and that the military remain under government control. Trump rejected it. The US pressure strategy and events like this demonstrate that the White House's objective is a change of government in the country. What we don't know is whether the US has a plan to replace the government.

It is a move that is in line with what the US has done in the rest of the continent.

— Yes, until now Trump has directly supported allied candidates in electoral processes in other Latin American countries, which is a form of political interference. But today the US is crossing a new red line with an armed intervention. However, the idea is the same: to install governments aligned with Washington's interests in the region, since the White House, in its renewed national security strategy in November, is aiming for US hegemony over the entire continent.

Several countries have warned that the attack violates international law.

— This operation highlights the US's disregard for international law when it conflicts with its interests. Washington has demonstrated its military power and its ability to use it as it sees fit. However, while this strategy might work in the short term, it's not always possible to achieve everything through force in the long run. Allies are also necessary, particularly in international trade. Tariffs, when it comes down to it, also have negative consequences within the US, and trade agreements with other countries are essential.

How might this attack affect Latin America?

— We'll have to see how each country reacts, but the fracture in the region could become even more explicit.