The decision to honor MarÃa Corina Machado is an opportunity to promote a peaceful end to Venezuela’s repressive regime.
The Nobel Peace Prize, awarded this past Friday to Venezuelan opposition leader MarÃa Corina Machado, recognizes the struggle for democracy, even when the path to achieving it seems more obstructed than ever. The award comes at a time of maximum tension in Venezuela, a country facing not only an internal political crisis, where authoritarianism has undermined fundamental human rights, but also external threats to its stability and sovereignty.
The Nobel Prize transcends symbolism. It is a reaffirmation of the need to respect the rule of law, the demand for justice and the importance of speaking out against totalitarian intimidation. In these areas, Machado has fought on the front line, even after she was forced into hiding to escape Chavist persecution for trying to lead an opposition. Unlawfully barred from seeking public office, Machado endorsed diplomat Edmundo González Urrutia for president, who emerged victorious according to election records submitted by his campaign. Yet despite no contrary evidence, and a great deal of anger from both Venezuelans and the wider international community, Nicolás Maduro declared himself the winner and has remained in power. Since then, and without fleeing the country, Machado has fended off threats from the authorities and maintained her commitment to organizing. Despite internal differences and her more radical past, today she represents the idea of a society seeking reform through a tireless struggle for democracy.
Machado’s Nobel Prize is even more significant in light of recent U.S. military actions near Venezuela. The Trump administration, unsuccessful in its pursuit of this coveted award in favor of one of its strongest Latin American allies, has deployed fighter jets and destroyed ships allegedly linked to drug trafficking, killing dozens of people and stoking regional tensions, in turn aggravating domestic issues. The crisis in Venezuela calls for clarity about what role international actors can and should play. It does not call for the undermining of national sovereignty, nor escalation that only multiplies the number of victims. A Nobel Prize that rewards peace should be viewed as a warning against military overreach, whether from within Venezuela or from the outside, and as an invitation to resolve confrontation through political and diplomatic means.
Recognizing Machado reflects a moral agenda: the defense of sovereignty, yes, but within the domain of international law; the demand for justice, but without revenge; the pursuit of change, but without force. It is also a reminder that the international community, too, carries greater responsibility. This Nobel Prize demands that we act prudently, without weaponizing repression or violence for short-term gains. It also calls on us to support with deeds, not just words, the institutional mechanisms that permit democratic solutions. It is not enough to condemn authoritarianism; democratic transition must be accompanied by guarantees, credible observation and political and humanitarian support.
Machado receives the Nobel Peace Prize at a time of heightened tension. We must hope that this well-deserved award does not serve as a means of confrontation, but as an opportunity to amplify the voice of the Venezuelan people who are demanding an institutional, peaceful and legitimate solution. The most pressing challenge is not facilitating the victory of one faction, but rather the reconstruction of conditions whereby Venezuela can hold reasoned debate, reach agreements, and correct its course.
MarÃa Corina Machado recibe el Nobel en un momento de máxima tensión. Hay que confiar en que este merecido galardón no se convierta en una bandera de confrontación, sino en una oportunidad para reforzar la voz del pueblo venezolano que reclama una salida institucional, pacÃfica y legÃtima. El desafÃo más urgente no es la victoria de una facción, sino la reconstrucción de las condiciones para que Venezuela pueda dialogar, acordar y recomponer su rumbo.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link
.
The message is unmistakable: there are no absolute guarantees and state sovereignty is conditional when it clashes with the interests of powerful states.
The message is unmistakable: there are no absolute guarantees and state sovereignty is conditional when it clashes with the interests of powerful states.