menu_open Columnists
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close

Leo Varadkar: The end of Maduro is welcome. The way it happened is not

15 0
08.01.2026

LAST UPDATE | 4 hrs ago

NICOLÁS MADURO AND Hugo Chavez who preceded him, destroyed Venezuela. Twenty years ago, Venezuela’s economy and living standards were comparable to those of many European countries. Today, its economy is in ruins and up to eight million people, almost a quarter of its population, have left.

Most fled to the United States, Europe and other parts of Latin America, resulting in both a brain drain and capital flight from the country. The population increase from this migration has put real pressure on some Spanish-speaking countries in a way we can understand.

Revolutionary socialism, once implemented fully and faithfully, often turns to oppression to survive. And bit by bit, people’s rights and freedoms in Venezuela were taken away. Most Venezuelans boycotted the last congressional elections, and the presidential elections are widely accepted to have been rigged, with Maduro beaten 2:1 by his opponent Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia in independent counts. He was the candidate of the opposition, as Nobel Prize winner María Corina Machado was barred from running.

I, for one, am glad that Maduro has been deposed. But how it happened matters.

This is not the first time that the US has overthrown or captured a foreign leader. Grenada was invaded by Reagan following a communist coup, prompting a rare tussle between the UK and the US. George HW Bush invaded Panama and arrested that country’s leader, Manuel Noriega. In both cases, democracy was quickly restored.

The US has been here before. George Bush Snr sent troops into Panama to capture the dictator, Manuel Noriega in 1989. Alamy Alamy

Saddam Hussein was toppled by an international coalition led by George W Bush, and Gadaffi removed from power in Libya with the help of NATO warplanes ordered by Obama. Regime change in those countries did not turn out so well, resulting in civil war, death, destruction and millions of refugees.

What’s different this time is how blatant it is. There is no claim that military action is necessary to protect the world from weapons of mass destruction. No........

© TheJournal