Sophie Marineau, Université catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain)
Countries or international organizations regularly enact sanctions against individual states. But how can the effectiveness of these measures be evaluated?
Latin American history shows that sending out troops to quell unrest is a perilous move even in strong democracies. Usually, protesters die. Sometimes, the end result is authoritarianism rule.
If anyone can convince the Maduro government and the Venezuelan opposition to come together to fight COVID-19, it’s the Pope. But the Church’s power to negotiate an emergency deal is limited.
If Brazil can find an efficient, pragmatic way to welcome, protect and integrate hundreds of thousands of forced migrants arriving at its border, so can more affluent states.
In the last century, several South American countries faced coups, military dictatorships and social uprisings. Despite economic improvements in recent years, the continent remains mired in unrest.
Progressives are leading in the presidential elections of Argentina, Uruguay and Bolivia, bucking the region’s recent rightward trend. But there are lessons in the failures of leftists past.
Citing national security, Ecuador, Peru and Chile have all made it harder for Venezuelan migrants to enter the country, and xenophobia is rising across the region – even in more welcoming Colombia.
The devastating costs of economic sanctions on Venezuela are being ignored or disregarded. So too is the lack of a legal basis for international intervention.
Venezuela’s most famous political prisoner, freed from house arrest by soldiers who turned against President Maduro, now faces arrest after leading an April 30 rebellion against Maduro’s government.
Visiting Scholar, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University; Director of Studies at the Changing Character of War Centre, and Senior Research Fellow, Dept. of Politics and International Relations, University of Oxford