Venezuela’s crisis began after Hugo Chavez died in 2013, and Nicolás Maduro won the presidency on promises to continue Chavez’s legacy. The “Chavistas” are supporters of the United Socialist Party (PSUV) and Chavez and Maduro’s efforts to use Venezuela’s oil revenue to reduce inequality. The opposition contends, however, that the party is dismantling democratic institutions and mismanaging the economy. Their economic decisions have plummeted the country’s economy, and Venezuela is currently facing soaring inflation and a rampant black market that has incited increased corruption. In the midst of economic troubles, Maduro has also taken steps to control more and more of the government by undermining the National Assembly whenever he can.

In late July, President Nicolás Maduro chose to replace the National Assembly by convening a National Constituent Assembly. The National Constituent Assembly is an “elected temporary parliament that has the mandate to draft or reform the Constitution.” Maduro invoked article 347 of the Constitution allowing this to happen, but many fear that it will override the National Assembly, the only governmental sector that is not controlled by Maduro. Although Maduro made the decision to create a National Constituent Assembly that writes a new Constitution, he cannot oppose the constitution that results from the Constituent Assembly. Many believe this new Constituent Assembly is “null, and its acts are illegal and unconstitutional”, though it is slowly replacing the democratically elected National Assembly.

The government has discriminated against protestors that do not agree with Maduro, many of whom believe that Maduro is running a dictatorship and do not agree with his moves to consolidate his power across all branches of government. Residents fear protesting with the opposition, as they may starve without the help of the government’s CLAP program, which provides food sacks to poorer areas of Venezuela. While protesting, many people have been put in jail and some have been killed, including many teenagers. For example, a university student named José Gregorio Hernández Carrasco was detained and tortured in May 2016, two days after attending an anti-government demonstration. Various other leaders, such as mayors, who align with the opposition have gone into hiding or fled the country.

When people hear about the human rights and political crises occurring in Venezuela, they often wonder how they can help or believe their opinions on the subject don’t matter – but they do. As Americans, we can help people in Venezuela in many different ways. First, we can let our elected representatives know that we care about this issue. You can call the Capitol Switchboard at (202)-224-3121 and connect with your Senators’ and Representative’s offices directly, or find their offices information online, complete with direct office numbers and addresses. Another action you can take to help is boycotting companies owned by the Venezuelan government, such as the gas station Citgo. Although the conflict has been simmering for years, it is only recently coming to America’s attention, so we must act in order to help Venezuelans as they advocate for their rights.

–

Erica Yeagley is a junior at Terre Haute South Vigo High School in Indiana. She is a member of the STAND chapter at her school and enjoys volunteering throughout her community.

At the most basic level, Venezuela suffers from an economic crisis.  It stems from poor management of money, exacerbated by the fact that oil, which has recently seen a sharp decline in prices, makes up 90% of its economy. This has led the value of the Venezuelan Bolivar to decrease by more than 99% since President Maduro came to power in 2013. The Bolivar is currently worth less than 10 American cents. The government is only digging itself deeper into debt by printing more currency, which costs more to print than it is worth in circulation.

This economic crisis has harshly manifested itself in the lives of the Venezuelan people. The Venezuelan people face food shortages, periodic blackouts, and unmatched levels of inflation. With the economy in shambles, families cannot get back on their feet, and the government cannot provide enough aid to sustain their people. 11.9% of children in affected areas suffered from acute malnutrition in April, and the number is on the rise. Food is not the only thing that the Venezuelan people are missing. They are also in desperate need of medicine, missing 80% of the medical supplies they need to receive adequate care.

The current state of affairs begs to question — what is the Venezuelan government doing to address these issues? President Maduro has been largely insensitive about his country’s food crisis, saying, “We need to reduce extreme consumption….”. Government officials have also stopped aid from entering the country and simply keep the food and medicine in the packages to themselves. To make matters worse, the government has put new restrictions in place that would prevent household items, like Neosporin, from being brought into the country. All of this is part of the government’s overall prioritization of maintaining power over the citizens rather than ensuring the prosperity of its people.

Venezuela is a democratic country, but in recent years, President Maduro has been consolidating power in what many see as a transition into a dictatorship.  In response, those Venezuelan citizens who can remotely afford it and are willing to take the risk have engaged in numerous protests.  Over the past four months, these protests have become violent, leaving more than 100 people dead so far. Many protesters face imprisonment, with high-profile opposition leaders being taken from their homes in an effort to instill fear in their followers.

The humanitarian crisis facing the Venezuelan people has left them suffering — from grief, from disease, from oppression — but it has also shown the world what courage looks like. Despite numerous obstacles in their lives, the Venezuelan people endure, and they deserve help. The world needs to support them with the material resources and political might that are so critical for their survival. It will take focus and commitment to help the Venezuelan people, but the world must be ready to embrace it.

It is imperative that the world act now, as impoverished countries are more susceptible to civil war, especially countries like Venezuela that are already facing bitter protests and turmoil.  The instability associated with conflict often worsens humanitarian crises and creates a cycle that is nearly impossible to escape, even with the aid of other countries. It can give rise to more conflict with no set government entity or enforcement of peace agreements once a conflict has been resolved. This is one of the reasons why there is conflict in Sudan today — after a series of conflicts, peace agreements and ceasefires were not upheld. Throughout the world, conflict and mass atrocities would be much easier to prevent and resolve if addressed when such problems first appear.

Venezuela needs assistance now if it is to avoid further turmoil, loss, and grief.

–

Mira Mehta is a writer and a student at Westfield High School.  In her spare time, she enjoys running on the cross country team.  This is her first year as a member of the Communications Task Force at STAND.

Anyone who has paid attention to Burma in the past five years has noticed great progress. Since the 2007 “Saffron Revolution,” the government has notably released hundreds of political prisoners, allowed contested elections, and opened itself up to civilian rather than military rule. Noted opposition leader and totem to democracy Aung San Suu Kyi, once under house arrest, now participates in the Burmese House of Representatives.

President Obama spoke on Burma’s transition at his commencement speech at West Point, describing the move from an “intractable dictatorship” to a nation of political reforms.  Burma has become much closer with the United States under the Obama administration, exchanging the first ambassadors and visits by leadership to both countries in decades. Such is a victory for diplomatic relations with Burma. The President went on to say:

“We’re now supporting reform and badly needed national reconciliation through assistance and investment, through coaxing and, at times, public criticism. And progress there could be reversed, but if Burma succeeds we will have gained a new partner without having fired a shot — American leadership.”

Of course, a commencement speech is going to be at least somewhat optimistic, but the President simplifies what are fairly pervasive problems in Burma. Recently, with the expulsion of Doctors without Borders and declining conditions in refugee camps forBurma’s Rohingya Muslims, western media has likened them to “concentration camps.” Just days ago, several reporters were sentenced to 10 years on hard labor for reporting on possible chemical productions facilities. Furthermore, Burma’s constitution still holds that one-quarter of the parliament seats in the country are reserved for military, a reminder that the old regime may not be entirely ready to relinquish leadership to democratic opposition.

One Burmese democracy advocate told the Washington Post that she thinks, “liberalization is over and the regime doesn’t want to give power through democratic elections.” Congressmen and women have also voiced concerns about the country’s commitment to human rights and humanitarian practices. The White House and State Department are caught between the need to make friends abroad and being self-appointed harbingers of democratic governance. The two objectives are seemingly at odds, and yet one is less likely to happen in the long-term without the other.

As Burma becomes more strategically important for a foreign policy pivoting East, our constituency will face both challenges and opportunities. While the State Department may have to choose its human rights and humanitarian battles, weighing them against political, economic, and diplomatic factors, the United States leadership will also enjoy a closer relationship with Burma’s government. As this relationship deepens, the impact of American political and diplomatic decisions on Burma will likewise deepen. In this way, our advocacy on Burma means more moving forward than perhaps it ever has.