According to D. L. Hadar
Contrary to neoconservative thinking, U.S. sanctions against Venezuela since 2018 have been disastrous for the Venezuelan people and counterproductive for policymakers in Washington. These unilateral sanctions have failed to oust autocratic President Nicolás Maduro from power. Instead, the “maximum pressure” approach has undermined U.S. energy security and given its rivals room to operate in the Western Hemisphere.
The purpose of sanctions is to signal dissatisfaction with the target state and its actions. In the case of Venezuela, they were intended to encourage regime change. In reality, the push for sanctions against Venezuela has had enormous humanitarian costs. Venezuela’s economy has been stifled; more than 7 million citizens have fled the country, fueling regional instability and exacerbating the crisis on the U.S. southern border.
The moral of the story, created by human rights advocates and their supporters, is that sanctions are supposed to make the citizens of a “pariah state” improve their lives. In reality, those who suffer the most — the politically weak and the economically poor — are the very people the Americans claim to protect.
Harsh oil sanctions have forced Western oil companies to leave the country, and the opponents have benefited. Much of Venezuela’s oil production has been diverted to China at a discount of $40 a barrel. Iran and Venezuela have signed nearly 300 economic cooperation agreements over the past two decades, and Russia is increasing its investment in the country.
There is, therefore, a strong case for lifting US sanctions on the country’s oil industry. Additional sanctions are unlikely to change the current political balance of power in Venezuela — quite the opposite.
Read also: