[ad_1]
NPR’s Ayesha Rascoe talks to Eduardo Gamarra, professor of politics and worldwide relations at Florida Worldwide College, in regards to the historical past of U.S. intervention in Latin America.
AYESHA RASCOE, HOST:
The U.S. has lengthy inserted itself in Latin American politics, from army interventions in Mexico and Panama to supporting armed rebellions and army dictatorships. A number of administrations have seen the area by way of the lens of the Monroe Doctrine. That is a doctrine that establishes the U.S. because the dominant world energy within the area. So how do yesterday’s occasions in Venezuela slot in with this historical past? We’re joined now by Eduardo Gamarra. He is a professor of politics and worldwide relations at Florida Worldwide College. Good morning.
EDUARDO GAMARRA: Good morning. Thanks for having me.
RASCOE: The U.S. is not new to interfering in Latin America, however the seize and removing of a sitting president, like we noticed yesterday, it appears to be one of the vital aggressive and overt examples of U.S. interference. Like, what’s your response?
GAMARRA: Properly, it is definitely a unique type of intervention. I assume the one parallel is Manuel Antonio Noriega in 1989. Nonetheless, the clear distinction is that we’re not recognizing Maduro because the president of Venezuela. We’re calling him a narcotrafficking terrorist. However on the identical time, we’re recognizing now, because the legit transitional president of Venezuela, we’re recognizing Delcy Rodríguez, the vp. So we’ve got an fascinating contradiction there. If the president was illegitimate, what makes the vp legit and the particular person who’s going to proceed?
RASCOE: Properly, President Trump mentioned yesterday, the U.S. will run Venezuela till a transition of energy can happen. Is there any historic precedent for that? And is that even attainable, on condition that the U.S. proper now would not have a army or diplomatic presence inside Venezuela?
GAMARRA: Properly, appropriate. And maybe, you realize, it is vital to return a few hundred years when the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine was in place. The US invaded Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic, invaded Haiti. It additionally basically ran Cuba. However in every of these circumstances, there was a U.S. army occupation of these international locations. On this case, it is very fascinating as a result of there isn’t any army presence, though the president advised us yesterday that there may very well be an extra army intervention if issues do not go the best way he foresees them. However for the time being, we’re basically counting on this vp and basically the identical regime. So on this sense, there was no actual regime change in Venezuela as a result of we’re counting on Delcy Rodríguez and the entire crew that has, in reality, been working Venezuela with Maduro for the final decade.
RASCOE: Once you take a look at the general historical past of U.S. involvement in Latin America, how do you assess the outcomes, each for U.S. pursuits and for the individuals of Latin America who in the end dwell with the implications of the U.S. actions?
GAMARRA: Properly, you realize, it is fascinating as a result of over the past twenty years, most of us, analysts particularly, have been typically complaining in regards to the lack of consideration that america was giving to Latin America. Aside from the warfare on medicine, aside from the very sturdy bonds with Colombia, for instance – proper? – the U.S. was largely absent within the area. The main target was elsewhere. However this administration has not solely redefined the Monroe Doctrine beneath now the Trump corollary, however is actually saying that we – that that is the important thing space of curiosity for – to america. And this aligns with a shift towards the precise of many international locations in Latin America by way of electoral processes – Milei in Argentina, Kast in Chile, and so forth., proper?
RASCOE: Do you assume that is good or unhealthy?
GAMARRA: It is sophisticated, and the worth judgment at this stage is troublesome as a result of we do not know what the outcomes will likely be. What, to me, is placing about Venezuela is that, in reality, there was no regime change, and our pursuits are largely pushed by the pursuits of the oil firms that the president has been largely supportive of.
RASCOE: That is Eduardo Gamarra from Florida Worldwide College. Thanks a lot for becoming a member of us.
GAMARRA: Thanks.
Copyright © 2026 NPR. All rights reserved. Go to our web site phrases of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for additional info.
Accuracy and availability of NPR transcripts might range. Transcript textual content could also be revised to appropriate errors or match updates to audio. Audio on npr.org could also be edited after its unique broadcast or publication. The authoritative report of NPR’s programming is the audio report.
[ad_2]
