‘There was no regime change’ -Venezuela’s ex-FM Jorge Arreaza on US kidnapping raid
An exclusive interview with President Nicolas Maduro's former Foreign Minister on the shocking January 3 US raid on Caracas, and where Venezuela goes now that its leader is abducted.
By Max Blumenthal
In an exclusive interview with The Grayzone’s Max Blumenthal, Venezuela’s former Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza discusses the January 3 US military raid on Caracas that resulted in the kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores and the killing of as many as 100 people.
Arreaza argues the operation violated international law, the US Constitution, and head-of-state immunity, calling it “barbaric.” He insists Maduro and Flores were in a secure location and were defended by guards who “gave their lives,” but that US technological superiority made resistance ineffective.
He rejects claims that Maduro was betrayed internally, dismissing them as psychological warfare designed to sow division, and insists the military and Chavista leadership remain unified.
According to Arreaza, "there was no regime change," as Vice President Delcy Rodríguez assumed the presidency, and the government continues to function normally, with schools reopening, oil production continuing, and public order intact. He points to the stability as a demonstration of the strength of Chavismo and the resolve of its popular base. Without this movement in place, he argues that Venezuela would face civil war or collapse similar to Libya.
Arreaza portrays Acting President Rodríguez as a deeply loyal and courageous Chavista leader. He says the government’s top priority is securing the release and return of Maduro and Flores through legal challenges in U.S. courts, blasting the charges against them as bogus and arguing that Maduro’s immunity should compel his release.
While condemning Trump's threats and demands—such as severing ties with China, Russia, Cuba, and Iran—Arreaza maintains that Venezuela remains open to negotiations with the United States, but only on the basis of sovereignty, international law, and mutual respect. He frames the broader conflict as part of a historic struggle between the "Donroe Doctrine" of US dominance and Latin American independence rooted in the Bolivarian ideology.
What most folks do not understand:
Here is why President Trump can do it. Our Government has been "restricting" our Constitution since the Civil War- by use of Emergency Rule. All Executive orders and the War powers act are covered by Emergency rule. Wilson WW1, Roosevelt WW2, Korean War, Vietnam War...........
No, the Constitution wasn’t officially suspended in 1933. But it was gagged, blindfolded, and tied to a chair while the federal government handed itself sweeping emergency powers and redefined “freedom” into a kind of bureaucratic improv comedy routine.
See:
https://archive.org/stream/senate-report-93-549/senate-report-93-549_djvu.txt
https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1079&context=iustitia
https://apnews.com/be18b8619cde4658a418dda4f416968a
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R45618.pdf
You need to take a closer look at the historical record.
See 93d Congress 1 ,1st Session7i j ,SENATE Report No. 93-549. Then The National Emergencies Act of 1976
"Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared
national emergency. In fact, there are now in effect four presidential proclaimed states of national emergency:
A Brief Historical Sketch of the Origins of Emergency Powers Now in Force _" A majority of the people of the United States have lived all of their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years, freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency. The problem of how a constitutional democracy reacts to great crises, however, far antedates the Great Depression. As a philosophical issue, its origins reach back to the Greek city-states and the Roman Republic. And, in the United States, actions taken by the Government in times of great crises have — from, at least, the Civil War — in important ways shaped the present phenomenon of a permanent state of national emergency. "
"Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens."
Venezuela will be free.
Palestine will be free.
Will the USA be a free democratic society?
Yet to be determined.