The journey through transitions
By: Luis Beltrán Guerra G. - 22/02/2026
Share:
In the previous essay, we referred to the mandate “Release the political prisoners,” “from the guardian, the US government, to the guardian, the Venezuelan government,” a mandate which the “interim government” in Caracas decided to implement through a legal text entitled “Law of Amendment and National Reconciliation.” The procedure established in the law must be followed, though it is not easy to outline. Grammatically, “the government” apparently used the transitive verb “to amend,” a verb, incidentally, that is rarely used in common parlance.
The interim president, a lawyer and therefore knowledgeable in both Venezuelan and foreign law, given her mixed education in Venezuela and other countries, seems to have reviewed the lessons regarding guardianship and, particularly, the limits of guardianship as it relates to the mandates of the person exercising it. The person in charge of presidential power, as learned as she sounds, felt she could interpret the "tutorial request" and that it was her responsibility to determine "the rule or method for implementing it." That is, Ms. Delsy resorted to the third definition that the Dictionary of the Royal Spanish Academy (DRAE) attributes to "order," an "ancient noun that, according to linguistic experts, comes from Latin (ordo, inis)." The acting President, therefore, seems convinced that she has the discretion to interpret the mandates of the "US government," since the latter are not subject to any rule, but rather to the judgment of a person or authority.
The “Venezuelan crisis,” it should be remembered, led by the US from January 3, 2026, but without disregarding the events of a few weeks prior, and which ended up being called “Absolute Determination,” remains complex, both in terms of analyzing, qualifying, and accepting circumstances that demand a breadth commensurate with the event and its consequences. In the context of this prima facie, orthodox assessment, understood, therefore, as one nourished by tradition and given that “the co-government regime (Washington/Caracas/Caracas/Washington)” is now a reality, it would seem to make sense, as we attempt in this essay, to cross-reference some ideas regarding “The Transition of Transitions,” grammatically, a jumble, that is, like reading “an obscure language due to the confusion of ideas.” But it is also useful in considering the relevance and duration of the chapter and, very particularly, where it will lead us and under what political and governmental modality. Complexities that continue to cause concern.
In this context, it is important to consider that the alternatives, which cannot be ignored, that certain governments have used to seize power in other countries have shaken fundamental conceptions inspired by the highest, the supreme, the unappealable. First and foremost is “sovereignty,” that is, “the power that the State has to guide its own course, without any condition other than its own will,” or, as emphasized in important texts, “a substantive, supreme, unappealable, irresistible, and even exclusive power, which makes it extremely difficult to share, much less expropriate.” The intervention in Venezuela is just one more in a series of interventions that history also reveals, justified by the urgent need of the “intervening nation,” a cause that could be legitimized by a broad interpretation of the “right to self-defense,” recognized as universal in almost all constitutions and in texts explaining human rights. The intervening country, given the argument that its legitimacy is essentially personal and not that of entities like the State, would allege—as it seems to have already done, albeit indirectly—that the "Lance of the South" / "Operation Absolute Determination" justifies its actions in exercising its right to defend its citizens against the harm caused by drug trafficking activities fostered and carried out by Caracas. It sounds as if "the North" has invoked a "state of necessity," the basis of which, as written, is "the preservation of the overriding interest," that is, "the mental health of Americans."
In light of the foregoing, it seems quite appropriate for a "republic" to have the legitimacy to react, even militarily, if another republic uses its government to the detriment of the former and of acceptable laws and rules of coexistence. This appears to be the US plan, to be implemented through the "co-government" it has imposed in Caracas. This chapter could also be likened to "cohabitation," a term used, as we read, "to designate, within parliamentary regimes, the government exercised by a head of state of one political tendency and a head of government of the opposite." Typical of parliamentary regimes.
The prominent Venezuelan Beatrice Rangel, Minister in the second government of President Carlos Andrés Pérez and member of the Board of Directors of the Inter-American Institute for Democracy, makes a series of important considerations regarding the current relationship of the US with Venezuela, as a result of the “cohabitation” between Washington and Caracas. “To state,” says the Caracas native, “that the current situation in Venezuela is atypical is, moreover, obvious. It is under a regime of ‘protectorate’ by the US, directed by Delcy Rodríguez, a member of the cabinet headed by Nicolás Maduro. She adds that Rodríguez governs along with the rest of those who continue to be part of the aforementioned ‘administration.’” Academic Rangel acknowledges that the US has used the same methodology in Panama (1903-1936), the Republic of Panama (1905-1924), Haiti (1915-1924), and Nicaragua (1912-1933), and points out that with respect to Venezuela, the procedure (protectorate) will take a considerable amount of time, far exceeding Donald Trump’s presidential term. We believe this would be the case even if he were to govern for a third time.
The author of “This Journey Through Transitions” believes that Professor Rangel is correct, both in her account of what happened and regarding the continuation of the “tutorship.” We do not presume to suggest that the enlightened and competent Venezuelan would admit that it is very likely that Delcy Rodríguez’s appointment will last as long as necessary until the end of the “regime of limited or shared sovereignty” established by the current US government.
The circumstances lead us to wonder whether or not it is likely that Delsy Rodríguez will reach the end of the "guardianship" and could even be a candidate for the Presidency of Venezuela.
The answer was recently offered by Giulio Cellini Ramos, a young man from Margarita Island and a member of the Primero Justicia party. A law graduate from UCAB, he serves as the student representative on the University Council. Cellini's proposal hinges on the possibility of a definitive understanding between politicians, both from the government and the opposition, for the sake of building a democratic and thriving Venezuela, even more so than the one experienced under the 1961 Constitution.
It makes you want to shout, "Of course it's possible!"
«The opinions published herein are the sole responsibility of its author».