The US Congress will not support the country's military intervention in the situation in Venezuela, said the chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs, Eliot Engel.
“The fact that the president is saber-rattling, and his hints that the option of American military intervention is not excluded, I am concerned,” said the representative of the Democratic Party during a committee meeting. “To everyone who sees us, I want to make it clear: the option of US military intervention is impossible.”
“Congress decides where and when to use the US military throughout the world, and Congress will not support military intervention in Venezuela,” Engel said.
"US military intervention is not an option."
Watch / read Chairman @ RepEliotEngel's full opening remarks at #HFAC's hearing on #Venezuela: https://t.co/b0MwBMBpe1pic.twitter.com/ZQfe4HWeVY
At the same time, he supported the recognition of Venezuelan leader of the National Assembly, Juan Guaido, by the “interim president” of Venezuela. However, during his speech, the chairman of the foreign policy committee of the lower house of congress noted that the sanctions imposed on the United States against the state oil and gas company PDVSA may have negative consequences.
“As for the new sanctions against PDVSA, I understand the need to exert pressure on Maduro, but the White House must weigh the potential consequences that these sanctions may entail for the Venezuelan people, if Maduro does not leave his post in the coming weeks,” Engel said.
In turn, Elliott Abrams, US special representative for Venezuela, who attended the meeting of the committee, responding to a relevant question from one of the congressmen, stated that Washington does not have proper grounds for military intervention as a method to resolve the Venezuelan crisis. He also said that the United States did not increase its military presence in Colombia.
At the same time, Abrams called the possible arming of opposition forces in Venezuela a “terrible idea” and called on the army of the Bolivarian Republic to support Guaido.
Abrams also said that the United States is holding consultations with the Russian side to resolve the situation in Venezuela, but these contacts have not yet led to any results. In particular, on the eve of Washington’s initiative, there was a telephone conversation between Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
According to the press service of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Lavrov warned Washington against any interference in the internal affairs of Venezuela, including the use of force. In turn, the State Department noted that the "peaceful transition to democracy" in the Latin American republic "is in the interests of both the United States and Russia."
Recall that the possibility of using the armed forces to resolve the Venezuelan crisis was not previously ruled out by both US President Donald Trump and opposition leader Juan Guayido, who said he would do “everything necessary to save human lives.”
In response, Democratic Congressman Roh Hannah warned Guaido against trying to get the United States to intervene in the situation in a Latin American country. He stressed that the decision on military intervention in this or that conflict is taken not by the president, not by the Ministry of Defense, not by military lobbyists, but by the Congress.
If the US should be involved in military conflicts.
Not the President.
Not neoconservative defense department officials.
Not defense contractor lobbyists.
Only Congress.
A week ago, Engel, the head of the foreign policy committee of the lower house of congress, expressed a similar point of view in an interview with the opposition’s appointed Venezuelan charge d'affaires in the United States, Carlos Vecchio. Then the congressman also sharply spoke out against possible military intervention in the Bolivarian Republic.
We will add that on February 13, members of the committee of the House of Representatives on Foreign Affairs also held talks in Washington with the Colombian delegation headed by the President of this Latin American country, Ivan Duque, who was one of the first to support Guaido.
Against this background, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro accused the United States of intent to occupy the country and take possession of its natural resources, and also accused opposition leader Juan Guaido of being careless about politics.
“This person, who believes that politics is a game and that he can violate the Constitution and laws as he pleases, will have to face justice and law sooner or later,” Maduro told Al-Mayadeen on Lebanese television.
Syrian option or the "Orange Revolution"
According to HSE professor, political analyst Oleg Matveychev, before using any troops, the US authorities will try to use all other means of pressure on the legitimate government of Venezuela.
“It is not very clear to whom to render military assistance. In Syria, for example, there were some rebels, then there is no such thing, and simply declaring war, starting an invasion without a serious reason is impossible. Such military intervention would look like an obvious violation of international law by the United States. So they will flood this situation with money, ”the expert believes.
The interlocutor of RT also did not rule out that in Washington they could block the export of oil from Venezuela and the supply of certain products to the country. However, in this case, other international players and allies of Caracas may well prevent a complete blockade of the republic, noted Matveychev.
In turn, the associate professor of the faculty of world politics at Moscow State University. Lomonosov Alexei Fenenko expressed the opinion that the intervention in Venezuela is not as easy as it may seem.
“To do this, you need to have an extensive database system in the region. The only possible ally for the United States is Colombia, in whose territory such troops can be deployed. This requires the necessary preparation for at least 2-3 months to create the appropriate grouping for a full-scale invasion, ”he said.
As an example, the political analyst led preparations for the invasion of Iraq in 2003, for which the Americans spent seven months. Thus, if the US authorities succeed in reaching an agreement with Congress and it still comes about a military invasion, then they will need several months to deploy the necessary grouping.
“Can Americans do it with someone else's hands?” Given that they have few allies here (except Colombia, whose army is rather weak), the only thing the Americans can do is to go for the Syrian option, ”Fenenko noted.
“That is, arm the opposition, try to create some kind of civil conflict and then intervene in it. It all depends on how much the army remains loyal to the Maduro government, ”the expert added.
However, at this stage, as stated by high-ranking representatives of the Congress, there is no talk of arming the opposition. In conclusion, Fenenko did not rule out the option of the Orange Revolution, when Maduro “trivially fears to use force to quell unrest and tries to leave, transferring power to the transitional government.”