Venezuela and the Americas: Restoring Strategy, Resilience, and Sovereignty

Stability and economic prosperity in the Western Hemisphere are not merely geographical concerns but strategic and moral imperatives for the United States. Venezuela, once a regional beacon of prosperity and democracy, now exemplifies the devastating consequences of unchecked tyranny.

Under its authoritarian regime, political freedoms have been obliterated, its economy pillaged, and its people terrorized. The Venezuelan dictatorship long ago has ceased to be a regional concern in the Andean region—it is a hemispheric and global threat. Venezuela’s alliances with transnational criminal networks, Russia, China, Iran, and many other rogue actors have become a vector of instability that must be neutralized.

Dealing with the Venezuela crisis requires not just action but a complete reevaluation of U.S. strategy in the region. Tyrannies are treated, or should be treated, differently in practice. Why has that gone out the door with Venezuela? This distinction lies at the heart of why recent policy efforts toward Venezuela appear to have failed.

Treating its regime as if it operates within the norms of democracy ignores the brutal reality that it is a police state, sustained not by consent but by coercion. To engage effectively, we must abandon strategies that presume the existence of democratic institutions and instead confront the regime’s tyrannical nature head-on.

America needs to abandon the legal and political fiction that Venezuela is a democracy where free elections are possible. The regime controls voting processes, the media, and even grassroots organizations, turning elections into tools of repression. Publicly endorsing opposition leaders only targets them for detention, exile, or worse.

By continuing to treat Venezuela as if it operates within the norms of democracy, the U.S. legitimizes the regime’s charade. We can use U.S. taxpayer funds in a better, more effective manner. For example, it is a given that Venezuela is a police state. As such, the opposition is not a democratic movement but a resistance movement. This fundamental mischaracterization has impeded effective policy for years. Resistance movements require different support than traditional opposition parties, and failing to acknowledge this distinction has left Venezuelans vulnerable while emboldening the regime.

As a Republican and advocate for an “America First” foreign policy long before it was popular to do so, I, and many other Republicans who do not speak up for fear of who knows what, are deeply concerned about the inconsistencies in our approach to Venezuela and the broader region.