Caracas, Venezuela — To foreign governments, international media, and Washington policy circles, María Corina Machado is marketed as Venezuela’s “last hope for democracy.” Inside the country—and across much of Latin America—critics describe something very different: a political figure whose career is defined not by ballots or constitutional reform, but by coups, sanctions, and repeated efforts to bypass popular sovereignty altogether.
This is not a dispute of narratives. It is a matter of record.
Elite Origins, Elite Politics
Machado is not a product of grassroots struggle. Born into immense wealth and educated in elite institutions, she entered politics from the top down, not the bottom up. Critics argue this background is reflected in her agenda: dismantling social protections, rejecting redistribution, and aligning Venezuela’s future with foreign economic and political interests rather than domestic consensus.
From the outset, her politics have not centered on winning over the electorate—but on neutralizing it when it stands in her way.
April 2002: The Coup That Dissolved the Constitution
Machado’s public record is inseparable from one of Venezuela’s darkest moments.
On April 12, 2002, during the short-lived overthrow of President Hugo Chávez, the coup government issued the Carmona Decree, which dissolved the National Assembly, dismantled the Supreme Court, and suspended the constitution entirely.
Machado signed the decree.
This fact is uncontested. The decree did not call for elections. It replaced constitutional rule with executive power by fiat. Critics argue that no later rhetoric about “rule of law” can erase that signature—or the political worldview it revealed.
NGO Politics and Foreign Funding
After the coup collapsed, Machado did not abandon extra-institutional politics. She changed form.
In 2003–2004, she co-founded Súmate, an NGO presented abroad as an election-monitoring organization. During a period of heightened U.S. pressure on Venezuela, Súmate received foreign funding and played a central role in the 2004 recall referendum against Chávez.
Critics inside Venezuela describe Súmate not as neutral civil society, but as a parallel political actor—one operating without electoral accountability while actively contesting national power. Machado would later move seamlessly from NGO leadership into elected office, blurring the line between “democracy promotion” and partisan strategy.
Winning Elections, Rejecting Them
Machado entered the National Assembly after winning election in September 2010. Yet while occupying an elected seat, she repeatedly dismissed the legitimacy of the very institutions she served in.
In 2012, she declared publicly:
“This regime cannot be fixed. It must be removed.”
Critics point to the contradiction: participating in elections while arguing that elections no longer matter when outcomes are unfavorable.
2014: “La Salida” — Power Without the Ballot
The rupture became explicit in February 2014, when Machado emerged as a leading advocate of “La Salida” (“The Exit”)—a strategy aimed at forcing President Nicolás Maduro from office outside the electoral calendar.
Her words left no ambiguity:
“This is not about elections. This is about ending the regime.”
The campaign resulted in months of violent unrest, dozens of deaths, economic disruption, and deepened institutional paralysis. Critics argue La Salida formalized Machado’s long-standing position: when elections fail to deliver power, street pressure, sanctions, and international isolation must replace them.
Foreign Representation and Constitutional Breach
On March 21, 2014, Machado accepted appointment as Panama’s alternate representative to the Organization of American States, using the platform to denounce Venezuela’s government abroad.
The consequence was immediate: she was removed from her National Assembly seat for violating constitutional provisions that bar elected officials from representing foreign governments.
Machado framed the episode as persecution. Her critics argue it was a deliberate constitutional violation designed to internationalize domestic politics and invite external pressure.
Parallel Governments and the Abandonment of Sovereignty
Between 2017 and 2019, Machado openly endorsed unelected “transition authorities” and parallel governments—structures that relied on foreign recognition rather than Venezuelan votes.
In 2019, she stated:
“We must do whatever is necessary to remove this usurpation.”
To critics, this confirmed a consistent doctrine: constitutional order is acceptable only when it delivers the desired outcome.
Sanctions as Strategy, Civilians as Leverage
Across interviews from 2017 through 2023, Machado repeatedly urged harsher international sanctions.
“Pressure must increase until the regime falls.”
Even as sanctions contributed to shortages of food, medicine, fuel, and basic services, she maintained that civilian suffering was a necessary cost of political change. For millions of Venezuelans, critics argue, this was not leadership—it was economic siege rebranded as moral urgency.
Disqualification Is Not Martyrdom
Machado’s political bans, imposed between 2015 and 2023, are often portrayed abroad as proof of authoritarian repression. Inside Venezuela, many see them as the foreseeable result of chronic legal violations, foreign entanglements, and refusal to respect constitutional limits.
Rather than focus on legal remedy alone, Machado urged supporters to delegitimize elections, boycott institutions, and treat permanent instability as a political strategy.
A Record, Not a Rumor
To her supporters, María Corina Machado is courageous.
To her critics, the record is unmistakable:
2002: Signed a decree abolishing the constitution
2014: Promoted removal of government without elections
2014–2023: Advocated foreign pressure over national sovereignty
Repeatedly: Endorsed extra-constitutional paths to power
What emerges is not a democrat constrained by law, but a political actor who abandons the constitution the moment it obstructs elite control.
For a country exhausted by sanctions, polarization, and instability, critics argue Machado offers not renewal—but a permanent state of conflict: regime change without democracy, economics without mercy, and power without accountability.
No comments:
Post a Comment