Why is the OAS so divided on Venezuela?

Despite hours of discussions, members of the Organization of American States ultimately failed to pass a resolution calling for greater transparency in Venezuela’s elections.

The bone of contention: an independent verification of the results. This when the United States said that the data shows that Edmundo Gonzalez clearly won.

This is what Brian Nichols, the State Department’s Western Hemisphere official, said:

“There is no going back. We have the minutes from more than 80% of the polling stations in the election.”

Eleven countries, including Brazil and Colombia, abstained. The reasons? Venezuela’s absence from the organization and, above all, the government’s willingness to wait for the publication of the electoral results.

Benoni Belli, Ambassador of Brazil to the OAS, stressed its importance:

“An essential step towards transparency, credibility and legitimacy of the election results.”

Faced with yet another failure to reach an agreement within the OAS, experts are wondering whether the organization has lost its relevance, particularly when it comes to Venezuela.

According to Professor José Carrasquero of Miami Dade College, there are several reasons.

“Lula and Petro are more on the ideological side of Maduro, although they do not behave like Maduro, and then there is the issue of the countries in the Caribbean, they are small countries that have historically depended on the oil supplied to them by Venezuela.”

For Professor Manuel Rayran of the Externado University of Colombia, not all countries agree on how the OAS acted in past situations and on the positions taken by its secretary, Luis Almagro. In addition…

“Venezuela has not been a member of the organization since 2017, and so, let’s say that issuing a resolution or approving a resolution by the OAS will not have any direct effect on Venezuela either.”

Analysts consulted by the Voice of America emphasize the relevance of the OAS as a forum for discussion, but today, it does not have the tools to deal with extreme situations, such as that of Venezuela.

Guillermo Cochéz, former ambassador of Panama to the OAS, believes that:

“Mexico, Brazil and Colombia did not commit to this resolution because that would disqualify them as mediators of a solution.”

In addition, the former ambassador believes that the OAS…

“…it has only a symbolic value, but it has no coercive value to say, well, we approve this and we are going to send a battalion to Venezuela to carry out what should be done in Venezuela. That does not happen.”