It is always interesting to observe different world affairs with the purpose of comparing them. What strikes right from the start is that double standards are used everywhere, every time and shamelessly. Take the case of Venezuela and Ukraine. The United States – and especially Secretary of State Marco Rubio – is hellbent on pressurizing Venezuela into submission by all means possible. The justifying argument is that President Nicolás Maduro is illegitimate, that he works in cahoots with Russia, that he sponsors socialism or – worse – communism, and that he turns a blind eye to narcotraffic into the United States. These points are enough for the Secretary of State to say that Venezuela ‘is a national security threat to the United States.’
Well, a mirror reflection of what Russia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov (Marco Rubio’s political counterpart) might say about Ukraine’s president, namely that Vladimir Zelensky is for more than twelve months illegitimate in his position, that he works in cahoots with the West and NATO (Russia’s avowed enemies), that he sponsors Banderites or – worse – Nazism, and that he turns a blind eye to bellicose and rabid anti Russian sentiment among Ukrainians. In a word, that Ukraine is a national security threat to the Russian Federation.
Just as Secretary of State Marco Rubio has only (as yet) advocated for military intervention in Venezuela, Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov does not need to do it since Russia is already militarily engaged in Ukraine. What the American secretary of state is after is – of course – legitimate, while what his Russian colleague says is – how otherwise? – dead wrong. The geographic difference is that the distance between Venezuela and the United States is much larger than that between Ukraine and Russia: the last mentioned border on each other. Still, the United States feels threatened, while Russia should not.
A simple question arises: why can Washington regard Venezuela as a national security threat to the United States while Moscow must not view Ukraine as a national security threat to the Russian Federation? We may easily envision possible explanations offered by CNN or the BBC. Why, Ukraine is a peace-loving, democratic country while Venezuela is neither peace-loving nor democratic. Ukraine certainly posed no threat to Russia: it was the other way round. The United States, though verbally threatening Venezuela on a regular basis, is of course not really threatening it, but issuing friendly admonitions or friendly advice, right? Furthermore, the United States is known worldwide for its political honesty and fairness while Russia is not. Rather, Russia is known for its aggressive policy and its duplicity. Nicolás Maduro is certainly not liked by Venezuelans, while Vladimir Zelensky enjoys enormous popularity. Marco Rubio is acting on sound political and moral principle while Sergey Lavrov – well – Sergey Lavrov acts on behalf of old Russian and Soviet imperialism in which land grabbing and regime change are inalienable parts.
Such is the case between Venezuela and the United States, but Venezuela is not the only one such case. Think about President Donald Trump threatening to bomb Mexico or send there troops in order to… stop the narcotraffic originating in America’s southern neighbour and stop drugs from being shipped to the States (rather than close and guard the borders…). Wow, if an American president can ponder military intervention in a neighbouring country because of the drug cartels operating there, why cannot his Russian counterpart ponder and then execute such military intervention in a country bordering on Russia? So much so that the Ukrainian Ukrainian case carries more gravity for Russia than drugs: Ukraine has been a hotbed of anti-Russian military and ideological activities, guided, sustained and supported by NATO specialists and advisors! What would Washington do if Venezuela, Mexico or any other Latin American country had military advisors from Russia and China? Yes, you guessed it right.
Why are things viewed through such diametrically different lenses? The best answer is provided by the household sentence coined by unforgettable George Orwell: all countries have the right to feel secure, but some countries have the right to feel more secure than others.
