The return of María Corina Machado

By: Ricardo Israel - 07/06/2026

She will soon travel, if she isn't already on her way. In a way, she has never truly left the country, since everything she has done abroad has been focused on Venezuela, but now it is her physical return—timely and necessary, moreover. Everything indicates that she could gain very little from her time abroad, while in her country the opposition needs to build a mass presence, which it currently lacks and which probably only she can achieve. This is especially true in a context where Delcy Rodríguez is already speaking and making decisions as a candidate, given that the type of transition Venezuela is experiencing is characterized by the fact that Chavismo has survived and will undoubtedly be a (nearly) permanent factor during the transition, making it the rival to beat.

María Corina Machado (MCM) has already announced her return several times, and as is logical she has said that she will coordinate it with the U.S., most likely Marco Rubio, and the timing is related not only to that fact, but also to understandable security reasons, since, in this Washington protectorate, the dictator left, but the dictatorship still remains.

So, which Venezuela is MCM returning to? What is he returning to?

The fundamental objective is to push forward what is lacking in the Venezuelan transition: a roadmap that includes a timetable for democracy, starting with setting a date for elections. Although the details are unknown, there must undoubtedly be a plan, debated and agreed upon within the leadership, and also communicated to the White House. Therefore, all this columnist should do is reiterate what has been present in every successful transition.

The analysis of the Venezuelan transition must begin by acknowledging that MCM plays a special role, enjoying the support and trust of her people, a level perhaps unmatched since Mandela. Her leadership acts as a conduit, not an obstacle. While successful transitions share common traits, they are all unique, and Venezuela is proving to be no exception. Many changes have occurred in the country since January 3rd, and it is certainly not the same Venezuela it will be in 2024, when MCM became the leader of the democratic transition, securing her own victory in the primaries and Edmundo González's victory at the polls.

Their initial challenge will be maintaining this special relationship, since the changes Venezuela has undergone may have also changed Venezuelans, who today might prefer stability over change, as has happened in other transitions. Undoubtedly, MCM's presence will be a catalyst for the current situation of cornering democratic forces, in which the dictatorship keeps them by maintaining the initiative. Therefore, MCM's first task is to increase the opposition's relevance, which is currently neither considered nor has any weight in the decisions being made, whether by the Chavista regime or imposed from Washington, particularly regarding oil.

Therefore, first, to achieve a modification of the above, it will be key that MCM is received by a crowd in Caracas, one of the largest the country has ever seen, before starting her national tour, because in the most successful transition experiences, the relevance of the democratic opposition always increased noticeably as did its presence in the streets, as an element of general conviction that the future belongs to democracy and that the regime is in the process of handing over power, for which it is not enough to say it, but it must be felt as such, including in Washington.

Secondly, after that mass mobilization, MCM must have a mobilizing element that can be none other than something that the Venezuelan transition, unlike others to date, lacks: a democratization calendar, including a date for elections, which, although tentative, can act as a brake on government arbitrariness. It is also worth remembering the importance that dates acquired in the primaries and the July 28 elections, in relation to which there was an enthusiastic popular mobilization, which has not been repeated.

Third, and hopefully the US support and commitment to this is already in place—something that will mark a turning point—MCM should be received by Delcy at Miraflores Palace and by her brother at the National Assembly, with all due respect, to begin a dialogue on the transition on equal terms. These images will be crucial in convincing Venezuela that democracy is a serious matter, as is the end of the dictatorship. It is essential that MCM not waste her energy in fruitless conversations; these meetings should yield immediate results, such as the release of all political prisoners, including military and police officers, as well as the dissolution of repressive agencies and the end of armed groups.

Fourth, to begin to be consulted on decisions as important as oil and changes in the country's economic and political model, both by the US and by the Chavista government.

Fifth, they must earn a place they currently lack, not only through increased street mobilization, but also by acting as the legitimate government they are. This requires appointing spokespeople in every important area—a kind of shadow government—to disseminate democratic proposals and curb government abuses. This must also include ongoing dialogue with the U.S. embassy, including publicly disagreeing when necessary, starting with crucial issues like the future of oil, a luxury the ever-obliging Rodríguez brothers do not have. Similarly, MCM must open a channel of communication and meet frequently with the judiciary and future electoral authorities, attend Parliament as often as needed, and, as the government elected in 2024—whose election was stolen—engage in dialogue with China and Russia, including the issue of debt, which is very important to them. They also wrapped themselves in the national flag to denounce the occupation the country suffered under the Cuban dictatorship and to raise the issue of the money that Havana must return. Finally, they initiated talks with Guyana regarding the territorial dispute left as a legacy of Chavismo.

All of the above is not to lose prominence, but quite the opposite, to gain it, since MCM's statements reflect the same thing that emerged in the Panama Manifesto from an opposition sector, in the sense that he is returning, among other reasons, to negotiate a "serious and responsible" transition in Venezuela with the government and also with the U.S.

A return to the presidency would be incomprehensible if someone else were to lead the negotiations with the regime, and this person would be expected to advocate for “freedom, transparency, and sovereignty” as prerequisites for finally holding clean elections. This role is irreplaceable, as is its public nature, since it is also necessary to secure a US commitment to guaranteeing a timeline. The range of possibilities also includes the possibility that Washington's priorities may shift; ultimately, the US must commit to respecting whatever the timeline may be, given that this is a regime that has failed to honor any commitments in the past—not even the one in Barbados in 2023 when it deceived the Biden administration, which then failed to react.

MCM's message must be both optimistic and realistic. Setting a date for the presidential election provides a goal, not only to travel the country, but also something concrete enough to connect with a loyal citizenry tired of empty slogans. Furthermore, any agreement must be aimed at restoring republican institutions, as these are the framework that enables a true democracy.

Every agreement may contain the three phases of stabilization, recovery and transition itself of the Trump-Rubio proposal, but never, in any successful transition were they seen as successive, mechanical phases, but it was always accepted that from some point on they became parallel, for example, from the setting of an itinerary and dates of the election in which the people were consulted.

What more is needed besides realistic will? We must not forget the hopes placed in MCM, as someone who will ensure respect for the commitment that all personal ambition within the political class, however legitimate, must be postponed for the sake of Venezuela. That is to say, an ethical commitment, to which the political class must contribute the always necessary self-criticism, which has been lacking in this painful ordeal that has lasted far too many years. It would also be beneficial to incorporate something else that has been missing: a better understanding of other transitions, at least the most successful ones, not so much to repeat what was done there, but to avoid harmful mistakes.

The above is necessary, since a transition is a process where commitments are acquired that are not always pleasant and some renunciations, as they know in Chile negotiating with Pinochet, or in Spain with those who were part of Francoism, as also happened in South Africa with those who came from Apartheid.

Realism is inherent in any transition process, characterized by making the best decision within the realm of possibility, where principles serve as a moral compass. Because these principles are few, yet significant and visible, they always point toward ethical conduct. Part of this basic realism is recognizing MCM's leadership, as well as acknowledging that Delcy will manipulate the political and economic process to her advantage, given her status as a candidate.

Hence the importance of guiding proposals with principles, as has been the case in other transitions under similar, though not identical, circumstances. Thus, while most successful transitions clearly established that the economic system should be market-based, democratic forces always incorporated a focus on distributive benefits for the most vulnerable and an ethical commitment to poverty reduction. However, the market should also aim for growth, otherwise Venezuela would face obstacles to the return of many emigrants. Furthermore, a lack of economic growth hinders a healthy democracy, given the expectations it creates. Therefore, one of the most difficult decisions for any first government in a democratic transition is how to manage unrealistic expectations.

Agreements on basic principles that serve as guidance at the multiple levels at which a transition develops are necessary not only in the economic sphere but also in the political sphere, since there is a deserved nostalgia for Venezuela's democratic past, but at the same time there has been insufficient elaboration on how to move towards a better democracy than the previous one, towards a democracy of quality.

When compared to other countries, including Spain, which only entered democracy for the first time in its history in the 1970s, there is reason to feel pride and nostalgia for the democracy of the past. However, there must also be more proposals, or at least more agreements, on how to achieve a quality democracy—one that is at least better than the one criticized by Uslar Petri, who blamed the Punto Fijo Pact (1958) for its decline. Despite changes in government, the Pact hindered the emergence of a true alternative to power, leading to the deviation from democracy known as partyocracy. Today, it is both possible and desirable to aspire to a democracy that is at least better than the one that elected Chávez, and that is committed to combating corruption.

There is a justified celebratory nostalgia for the past, as exists in sectors of the Cuban exile community, but it does not help the transition, where the memory of what was achieved must go hand in hand with ensuring that the fact that a long and cruel dictatorship was the consequence of the ease with which Chávez deceived the country, including business and intellectual sectors, is not repeated.

Too many things have happened in Venezuela since January 3rd without MCM's involvement. These aren't things that have impacted or brought her down, but they've nonetheless passed her by. And that's the point. MCM is returning not only to be part of the transition, but also to win the elections. Upon her return, she can do anything but be a token opposition figure, as that's a direct path to irrelevance, a luxury she can't afford. She must negotiate while simultaneously undermining the legitimacy of those who hold power without having been elected.

MCM must do the above with Delcy, his rival, and pressure Washington to cooperate, even if this may require bypassing them at times and talking directly with the oil companies about the rules they need to be able to invest, and that in the Venezuelan future only democratic legitimacy can guarantee, exactly what those CEO executives told Trump at the White House.

Realism dictates accepting that Delcy may be gaining strength and that time is on her side, so MCM must go on the offensive. Above all, she must avoid something that has occurred in some transitions: overconfidence, taking an election for granted prematurely. This happens in democracies as well as in transitions. MCM is returning to change the narrative surrounding the Venezuelan process, taking advantage of Delcy's newfound confidence, which has led to her travels abroad, including her trip to The Hague where she wrapped herself in the nationalist flag—further evidence that she is already campaigning. Therefore, the only reasonable course of action is to avoid overconfidence and accept that transitions always bring new surprises.

MCM has a special role, one that no one else could fulfill today. First and foremost, it will be vital to ensure that the new electoral legislation, without any loopholes, allows the millions who were forced to leave the country to vote. That vote guarantees victory today, which is why the Chavista regime, still in power, will undoubtedly do everything possible to prevent it. We don't know what tomorrow holds, so transitions can be won or lost day by day. Hence the need for democratic forces to take center stage, a role they currently lack. Furthermore, the same kind of commitment is not seen in the US today as was shown in Europe, for example, to the transition to democracy in countries that were communist, some of which lack the tradition that Venezuela possesses in this regard.

Hence the importance of having a clear idea of how complex transitions are, since what happened in the former USSR and in Eastern Europe offers many lessons, of how some countries fared better than others in their democratization process, and how in some cases, such as that of Russia itself, the Communist Party has maintained relevant electoral representation to this day, despite its past.

On the other hand, the duties awaiting MCM also include being prepared to govern, in addition to the problem of keeping the US interested in the country after the presidential elections, on issues other than oil.

The experience of other transitions demonstrates the difficulty of the return of those forced to emigrate, given the challenges of a mass return due to the passage of time, the fact that children have been born in other countries, issues related to healthcare and pensions, and the sacrifice of relinquishing legitimately earned positions in employment, academia, or successfully established businesses in the host country. From this, the need arises to prepare special legislation with appropriate incentives, especially considering that Venezuelan exiles have settled in much of the world, with notable differences in the development of the countries that have received them.

This is just one example of the problems awaiting the first elected government, and few issues resonate with families as much as this one. MCM returns to lead the democratic forces in Venezuela, a leadership that must be protected, because there is no other leadership today. With Maduro, the U.S. delivered a decisive blow against the mafia. Now, the democratic opposition needs to deliver another decisive blow to the democratization process, one that finally convinces the military, police, and judges who remain loyal to the dictatorship.

MCM returns to all of this, a journey that also has another dimension. Therefore, it is fitting to recall part of the well-known poem Ithaca by the Greek poet Constantine Cavafy (1863-1933), in the sense of a journey that is also emotional, an inward journey, in this case, into her own heart:

“Always keep Ithaca in your mind. Getting there is your destiny.”

@israelzipper

Master's and PhD in Political Science (University of Essex), Bachelor of Laws (University of Barcelona), Lawyer (University of Chile), former presidential candidate (Chile, 2013)

«The opinions published herein are the sole responsibility of its author».