Nicolás Maduro’s dictatorship claims Venezuela has sovereignty over 70% of Guyana’s territory and called a referendum on the creation of a new state in the region | Photo: EFE/Carlos López
A dispute that has raged since the 19th century has grown more heated in recent months, raising fears that the world is facing another war, this time in South America.
With increasingly aggressive rhetoric and a referendum in which it plans to consult the population on measures, the Venezuelan government is increasing tensions in the dispute over sovereignty over more than 160,000 square kilometers of territory in neighboring Guyana west of the Essequibo River, which accounts for about 70% of the territory make up Guyana.
Caracas argues that the area is part of its territory because it was part of the Captaincy General of Venezuela during the colonial period.
After Spanish rule, the region was administered by the Netherlands from 1648 (long before Venezuela declared independence from Spain in 1811) and by the United Kingdom from 1814.
In 1899, a Paris arbitration award granted sovereignty over the region to the British Empire, of which Guyana was still a colony.
In 1962, Venezuela filed a lawsuit with the United Nations challenging the 1899 decision. In 1966, the year Guyana gained independence from the United Kingdom, the Geneva Convention was signed, establishing Guyanese control of the territory, but not acknowledging Venezuela’s objection. The dispute was supposed to be resolved within four years, but this did not happen.
Negotiations did not progress in the following decades and the dispute was put on hold during the government of Hugo Chávez (19992013), but Venezuela came back to present the demand after the American company ExxonMobil discovered large oil reserves in Guyanese in 2015 discovered the territorial sea.
In April, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), based in The Hague, Netherlands, rejected the arguments of Venezuela, which had given several written and oral reasons for asking the court to declare Guyana’s allegations “inadmissible” while the latter sought to do so had asked the court to “reject the preliminary objections” of Caracas and move on to the matter, which has not yet been decided.
In recent months, Nicolás Maduro’s dictatorship has criticized Guyana for “refusing dialogue” and holding a tender for oil blocks in the disputed territory.
This month, Venezuela played its most aggressive card yet, announcing a referendum scheduled for December 3 in which the population will have to answer whether they agree with five measures: rejection of the 1899 Paris Arbitration Award; support the 1966 Geneva Convention as the only valid legal instrument on this issue; not to recognize the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice to resolve the dispute; oppose Guyana’s exploitation of the region’s territorial sea; and the creation of the Venezuelan state of Guayana Essequiba in the region.
Given Chavista’s history of election manipulation and fraud, the outcome will certainly be what Maduro wants. As if the last question of the referendum was not enough to speak clearly about the annexation of 70% of Guyana’s territory, the Venezuelan dictatorship’s speech on the issue has become more bellicose.
At the end of September, the National Bolivarian Army of Venezuela (Fanb) stated in X that it “strongly reaffirms its commitment to the people in defense of the historic right to the Essequibo.” “We, the Bolivarian soldiers, will stand firm in the face of all insolence and aggression aimed at undermining peace,” the statement said.
Also on social media, Vladimir Padrino López, Venezuela’s defense minister, wrote that in addition to violating the 1966 Geneva Convention, Guyana has “granted concessions to transnational corporations in blocs that penetrate exclusively Venezuelan territories.”
“Thanks to Fanb’s vigor in defending our sovereignty, they can now be sure that they will receive an adequate, timely and legitimate response to defend what is ours. “Long live Venezuela!” López wrote.
Recently, Venezuela reiterated allegations that the United States intends to establish a military base in Guyana, something Washington and Georgetown have already denied.
Guyana, USA and international bodies respond
In a statement, Guyana’s government said the referendum and other actions by the Maduro regime could affect “the security of the State of Guyana and, by extension, the Caribbean region.”
Guyana’s authorities said the aim of Caracas was “nothing less than the annexation of the territory of Guyana, which constitutes a blatant violation of the most fundamental norms of the United Nations Charter, the Charter of the OAS.”
[Organização dos Estados Americanos] and international law”.
“Such a seizure of Guyana’s territory would constitute an international crime of aggression,” the statement said.
This month, Georgetown had already requested an explanation from the Venezuelan Embassy in Guyana on troop movements near the border between the two countries Caracas responded that the aim of these actions was to “curb illegal mining activities.”
US Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Brian Nichols condemned Venezuela’s escalation of hostilities in its dispute with Guyana.
“We strongly condemn the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela’s unprovoked and unjustified threats aimed at undermining the principles of good neighborliness and sovereignty, and we recognize Guyana’s right to welcome investors and develop its natural resources,” Nichols said .
In a note, the OAS criticized the referendum announced by Venezuela “because it is illegal under the Geneva Convention of 1966 and because similar abuses of this instrument in the recent past have served as a pretext to justify the worst actions between States,” including Crime of aggression.”
Venezuelan NGO Controle Cidadão noted in a statement that the “irreducible” tone of the governments of both countries and Venezuela’s decision to hold the referendum suggest that the dispute could lead to a military conflict.
“It is foreseeable that the deployment of military units of the Bolivarian National Armed Forces towards the Essequibo Front will increase, since the place of deployment has been determined by the military command. “The danger of an escalation of the conflict is currently latent,” he warned.
As a specialist, Maduro strives for internal goals
However, some experts do not believe that tensions between Venezuela and Guyana could escalate into a military confrontation.
In an interview with People’s GazetteMilitary analyst and retired colonel Paulo Roberto da Silva Gomes Filho said he did not consider that possibility and that Maduro’s “inflammatory rhetoric” and calls for a referendum on Essequibo “are consistent with the goals of the Venezuelan government’s domestic policy of uniting the public.” .” Opinion on a nationalist cause.”
He stated that Chavismo would have great difficulty waging war given the severe economic crisis in Venezuela.
“The available information shows that a large part of Venezuela’s military employment systems and materials are unavailable due to poor maintenance, which is certainly a reflection of the economic difficulties facing the country,” said Gomes Filho.
“It is very likely that there will be a shortage of ammunition as the main suppliers are concentrated in Ukraine and the Middle East. To answer objectively: I don’t believe that [a
Venezuela] have conditions [de entrar num conflito armado]“explained the military analyst.
Venezuelan partners Russia and Iran have already sold weapons to Caracas, such as recent shipments of Iranian drones, but Gomes Filho noted that both are struggling to provide “resolute” support to Venezuela due to the current wars in Ukraine and the Middle East.
However, the expert assumes that in the event of war the USA would certainly intervene to defend Guyana. “It would be a conflict in the Western Hemisphere around the Caribbean, an area that is critical to U.S. security,” he explained.
Infographics Gazeta do Povo[Clique para ampliar]