Venezuela’s ‘Chavismo’ movement faces a crossroads after US attack

Will US intervention divide Venezuela’s ‘Chavismo’ movement?

In Venezuela, the ‘Chavismo’ movement is at a crossroads, faced with a choice between accepting and resisting the US’s demands on its government.

Caracas, Venezuela – In the sprawling Caracas neighbourhood of 23 de Enero, towering apartment blocks rise from the hillside, each one a burst of colour. But Wilmar Oca, a 20-year-old university student, pauses beneath one squat, white building.

Before her stretches a mural depicting an oval-faced man in a red beret: the late Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez.

For Oca, Chavez and his legacy have transformed this neighbourhood. Once riddled with crime and drugs, 23 de Enero now hums with a sense of opportunity, she explained.

“I feel I have a commitment to Chavez in everything I do,” Oca said proudly.

But the political movement Chavez founded, Chavismo, is now facing the greatest test of its 27-year history.

Since 1999, Venezuela has been led by socialist leaders: first Chavez, then his hand-picked successor, Nicolas Maduro.

But on January 3, the United States attacked Venezuela and abducted Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. Maduro’s former vice president, Delcy Rodriguez, has since agreed to cooperate with US demands.

That runs afoul of one of the basic tenets of Chavismo: opposing what its leaders describe as US imperialism in Latin America.

Now, members of the Chavismo movement are confronting a dilemma. Supporting Rodriguez’s government means entering into an uneasy alliance with the US and its interests.

But for Oca and others, what happened on January 3 was akin to a kidnapping.

“We feel like our mum and dad have been taken away from us,” Oca said of Maduro and Flores. “They’re like parents to my generation — and we want them back.”

Some Chavistas, though, see the attack on January 3 as an opportunity for a political reset, one that holds possibilities for economic growth.

It’s a situation that finds the Chaviso movement wrestling with the conflicting pressures of resistance and pragmatism, ideology and survival.

“What you see instead is a movement adapting to circumstances — above all, to stay in power,” said Phil Gunson, a Caracas-based analyst at the International Crisis Group, a think tank.

Fraying US-Venezuela bonds

The Chavismo movement was not always in conflict with the US.

In fact, at the outset of his presidency in 1999, Chavez travelled on a goodwill trip to New York City, where he rang the bell at the stock exchange and attended a baseball game between the Mets and the Blue Jays.

But in the following years, relations between the US and Venezuela rapidly soured.

A charismatic figure with a popular following, Chavez spearheaded a movement that promised participatory democracy, social programmes and wealth redistribution.

Chavez also pledged to break from the corruption of the past, when Venezuela was closely aligned with the US. He had dubbed his project the Bolivarian Revolution, in honour of the 19th-century hero who liberated Venezuela and other Latin American countries from colonial rule.

Tensions surged as Chavez forged partnerships with longtime US adversaries like Cuba and China. The US, meanwhile, was openly critical of Chavez’s bid to consolidate power and nationalise Venezuela’s industries.

Then came the 2002 coup attempt against Chavez’s leadership. Chavez blamed the US. Though Washington denied participation, it chided Chavez for moving in the “wrong direction”.

Over time, Chavez’s movement took on a distinctly anti-imperialist tone. Chavez regularly described the US as “the empire,” and in 2006, he famously called then-President George W Bush “the devil”.

“The president of the United States, the gentleman whom I refer to as the devil, came here talking as if he owned the world,” Chavez told the United Nations General Assembly.

When Chavez died in 2013, his vice president, Maduro, took his place. Under Maduro’s leadership, analysts like Gunson say Venezuela drifted deeper into authoritarianism.

To this day, Chavista loyalists remain in key political and military positions, whereas few opposition leaders are left in power. Many have gone into exile, fearing arrest and violence.

Since Maduro’s removal, however, there have been questions about the future of the Chavista government.

The US has threatened to “run” Venezuela. US President Donald Trump has also warned Rodriguez, the interim president, that he expects compliance with his demands, including access to Venezuelan oil.

“If she doesn’t do what’s right, she is going to pay a very big price, probably bigger than Maduro,” he told The Atlantic magazine.

Still, Gunson believes that Trump’s decision not to dismantle Venezuela’s government was strategic.

“Venezuela is like an unexploded bomb. You can’t just take a hammer to it or throw it off a cliff,” Gunson said. “You have to take a screwdriver and a pair of wire cutters and slowly dismantle it. If you choose the wrong wire, it could just go off.”

The Trump administration has outlined a three-phase plan for Venezuela’s future: stabilisation, economic recovery and, eventually, political transition.

‘We felt our hands were tied’

But even three months after Maduro’s abduction, Chavistas are still grappling with the prospect of US-led changes.

In the 23 de Enero neighbourhood, the 3 Raices Foundation, a Chavista group, has held workshops to explain why the government is negotiating with the US after decades of heated rhetoric.

Jonsy Serrano, a member of the group’s communications team, explained that the meetings have served as a kind of “catharsis” for frustrated Chavistas, who felt their government was given little choice but to comply.

“There was anger, rage and we felt our hands were tied,” Serrano said as he sat in a room full of Chavista memorabilia, including a statue of Chavez and a superhero doll of Maduro.

“At one point, a fellow revolutionary general came and distributed weapons,” he recalled. “But the question was: What were we going to do?”

With Maduro gone, Serrano said many members realised the need to maintain calm. But that does not mean their anxiety has entirely subsided.

Still now, he has observed a mix of emotions, from outrage to frustration to sadness. Many feel ready to take up arms to defend “la patria”, the homeland.

“We don’t want violence, but we are prepared for war,” Serrano said.

“There are indeed warriors here, willing to defend the revolution and the homeland. We know what we are going to do and where we need to go if needed.”

Some Chavistas have received military training to become “milicianos”, volunteer militia members. Others have formed “colectivos”, neighbourhood groups linked to paramilitary violence and human rights abuses.

The 3 Raíces Foundation has what it calls a “security” wing, and critics often categorise it among the country’s “colectivos”.

But Serrano believes his group is, first and foremost, a social movement. He also argues that supporters of Chavismo have largely moved away from a more militarised approach.

“We’ve matured a lot in that regard. For us, diplomacy and conversation are paramount,” he stressed. “We are negotiating with a gun to our heads — but we still have to negotiate.”

A new economic partner?

Libertad Velasco, a Chavista who grew up in the 23 de Enero neighbourhood, was only a teenager when Chavez came to power.

She went on to become one of the founding members of the youth wing of Chavez’s party, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV). Eventually, she became the head of a government agency to expand access to higher education to members of vulnerable communities.

Still, Velasco described the period after Maduro’s abduction as a sort of awakening.

“It’s like we’re looking at ourselves without makeup,” Velasco said. “Now, everything is laid bare, revealed in its purest state, and we are beginning to recognise ourselves again.”

Since the US attack and Maduro’s removal, Velasco has thought deeply about her “red lines”: the ideals she feels should not be violated under the new government.

Standing up against invasive foreign powers remains one of her top priorities.

“I refuse to be colonised,” Velasco said. “For me, we shouldn’t have relations with Israel, and abandoning anti-imperialism is non-negotiable.”

Yet Velasco does not believe that the Venezuelan government has crossed that line yet. Rather, she is open to the prospect of the US as a trading partner to Venezuela, paying for access to its natural resources.

“It is a customer who should pay market price for the product they need. If Venezuela must act as a market player to lift people out of suffering, I can go along with that,” Velasco said.

But it is unclear whether that is happening. Critics point out that the Trump administration has demanded greater control over Venezuela’s natural resources. It has even claimed that Chavez stole Venezuelan oil from US hands.

Already, Venezuela has surrendered nearly 50 million barrels of oil to the US, with the Trump administration splitting the proceeds between the two countries.

Rodriguez, Venezuela’s interim president, has also agreed to submit a monthly budget to the US for approval.

Among Chavistas, there remains debate about whether the relationship with the US is beneficial or exploitative.

But economic recovery is an overwhelming priority for many Venezuelans of all political leanings. Under Maduro, Venezuela entered one of its worst economic crises in history. Inflation is currently at 600 percent, and living standards remain low.

Many Chavista loyalists blame US sanctions for their economic woes. Yet, analysts credit a combination of factors, including declining oil prices, economic mismanagement and pervasive corruption.

Delia Bracho, 68, lives in a district of Caracas called Caricuao, where water is delivered just once a week. Once a committed Chavista, she said her faith in the movement has faded.

Today’s movement, she explained, has been “ruined”, and she no longer wants anything to do with it.

“It’s like when you put on a pair of shoes,” she said. “They break, and you throw them away. Are you going to pick them up again, knowing they are no longer useful?”

Despite her initial fear after the US intervention, Bracho said she now feels cautiously optimistic that Venezuela might change for the better.

“It’s not that everything is fixed, but there is a different atmosphere — one of hope.”