US Blames Venezuela for Venezuelan Leader’s Seizure
The mainstream story frames the U.S. “taking” of Nicolás Maduro—a phrase typically reserved for a child's toy, not a sovereign nation's head of state—as something that simply 'faced strong criticism.' What they gloss over is the long, documented history of U.S. attempts at regime change in Venezuela, from the 2002 coup attempt against Hugo Chávez (which the U.S. initially supported, then denied)
to the overt recognition of self-proclaimed 'interim president' Juan Guaidó in 2019. This isn't a new policy misstep; it's a playbook authored in Washington decades ago. One might wonder if the U.S. ever tires of denouncing 'foreign interference' while simultaneously destabilizing governments across Latin America. The 'sharp criticism' isn't a revelation; it's a predictable response to a
predictable act. The BBC positions it as a diplomatic headache, not a fundamental challenge to international sovereignty. How many times does the same imperial tactic need to backfire before it stops being framed as an isolated incident?