President Nicolas Maduro was hand pick to succeed President Hugo Chavez, when Chavez died on 5 March 2013 from the struggle against cancer. Maduro became the President of Venezula.He took over the “Bolivarian Mission” task started by the Late President Hugo Chavez. During the reign of President Hugo Chavez, the government nationalized many industries. President Chavez was a socialist and anti-neoliberal who viewed the neoliberal model created a rise in poverty, a deterioration of social conditions, and heightened inequalities(b). The country’s economy was export depended on oil production, which accounts for 86% of all exports. In addition, he initiated a social program funded by the high price per barrel of oil. The situation worsened during President Maduro’s presidency when in 2014 price of oil prices fell from $100/bbl to $40/bbl. Thus, Venezuela was no longer able to support its massive social programs. His presidency has been affected by hyperinflation, shortage of food, lack of medical service, unemployment, crime, and mass emigration to Columbia and Brazil.
Maduro also faced political deadlock in the country. In 2017 Maduro established a new Venezuelan Constituent Assembly replacing the opposition majority National Assembly. His 2018 election victory was not considered legitimate and not accepted by the United States, Canada, Germany, France, and many more countries. The United States considered Juan Guaido as the legitimate President of Venezuela. There is a general understanding between Maduro and the opposition, as stated by Guaido’s deputy foreign minister, Isadora Zubillaga admitted:” The reality is that we must talk. We were not able to wipe them out, and they were not able to wipe us out either. There are present negotiations between the Maduro government and the opposition. Vice President Delcy Rodrígue’s brother Jorge Rodriquez, top Chavista, shared a photograph of himself shaking hands with the chief negotiator for Venezuela’s opposition, Gerardo Blyde, signaling the reactivation of stalled talks designed to bridge the country’s toxic political schism.
There are possible changes in the United States policy toward Venezuela compared to the Trump era “maximum pressure” policy, which used harsh sanctions to try to topple Maduro. The Current President, Maduro, has survived severe sanctions against his government at the expense of ordinary Venezuelans who faced a shortage of food, shelter, and economic opportunity.
The willingness to negotiate between Maduro’s government and the opposition and the United States’ change in policy has lifted the hope of the end of suffering for the Venezuelan people. At the same time, the opposition welcomes the lifting of sanctions against the Maduro government by the international community. However, the opposition cautioned the United States not to provide too much concession without the penalty of not meeting the expectation set during negotiation.
The present outreach by the United States toward Venezuela stems from the need for Venezuelan oil to offset the lack of oil created by sanctions against Russia. Washington is willing to work with the Maduro government and encourage negotiation with the opposition. Maduro also found this an opportunity to gain the desperately needed new markets for its oil and access to western refineries, banking systems, and investment. Venezuela also benefits since the Russians are selling oil to China at a much lower price than Venezuela, thus losing significant export to its principal market. The question is, how would Maduro react to the change in policy from Washington?
Works Cited
a)By Tom Phillips, Patrick Winour, and Julian Bonger in Washington
“Maduro glimpses political lifeline as US rethinks Venezuela policy.”
The Cuban Missile Crisis of Oct 1962 was a direct and dangerous confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. The establishment of the communist government in its U.S. backyard and Castro nationalizing all US-operated businesses in Cuba. The danger of other Latin countries following the lead of Cuba became a concern in Washington. Thus the United States launched numerous operations to regime change in Cuba(1).
Although the Pay of Pig invasion failed, Castro feared that the United States would continue its goal to remove him from power. It led to July 1962 secret agreement between Soviet Nikita Khrushchev and Fidel Castro to place Soviet missiles in Cuba to deter any future invasion. On routine U.S. Airforce U-2 spy plane surveillance over Cuba, the U.S. intelligence discovered evidence of a Soviet -arms buildup in Cuba, including Soviet IL-28 bombers. As a result, on September 4-1962, President Kennedy issued a public warning against introducing any offensive weapon into Cuba. However, despite the warning on October 14, 1962, US U-2 aircraft on surveillance over Cuba took several pictures showing sites for medium-range and intermediate-range ballistic nuclear missiles (MRAMS & IRBMS) under construction in Cuba(2).
In Washington D.C., the secretary of Defence and the head of all armed forces are meeting on the Cuban Crisis. As a result, the secretary of Defence put forward two plans to the President. The first plan will use Polaris ballistic missiles from the Turkish coast against Soviet targets before they hit Cuba. The second plan was to hit the target in Cuba, and the Soviet Union then attacked Jupiter missiles and knocked them out. But President Kennedy wanted to avoid confrontation with the soviet union as far as possible. Therefore, the President was seized with the idea of removing Turkish-based US missiles for the Soviet Union to remove their missiles from Cuba. (3).
On October 22, 1962, John F Kennedy announced the discovery of missiles in Cuba and the imposition of quarantine on Cuba to the nation. Meanwhile. Khrushchev responded to Kennedy’s speech by interviewing William Edward Knox. The interview between Knox and Krushchev lasted for three hours. Their Soviet leader said that the Soviet ships were unarmed, the blockade was “illegal, “and the United States” is now unable to take over Cuba.” Furthermore, Khruschev states that the Soviet Union had anti-aircraft missiles in Cuba and ballistic missiles with both conventional and nuclear warheads. It would never be activated except in defense of Cuba and only on personal instruction from Khrushchev(4).
However, after President Kennedy’s speech, Soviet Leader Nikita Khrushchev ordered his missile-carrying ships to turn around on the morning of October 23, except those ships close to the Cuban coast. The action of Khrushchev was the first step in de-escalating the possibility of war between the Superpowers. There was an intense negotiation between Kennedy and Khrushchev. As a result, the Soviet Union agreed to dismantle their offensive weapons in Cuba and return them to the Soviet Union in exchange for a United States public declaration and agreement not to invade Cuba again. In addition, the United States secretly agreed to remove its missiles deployed to Turkey against the Soviet Union. The United States kept the naval quarantine until November 20, 1962. Thus, It led to the end of the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Work Cited:
1)Footnote: Revolutionary Turn, Cuba Revolution
2)history.state.gov The Cuban Missile Crisis, October 1962
nsarchive.gwu.edu The Cuban Missile Crisis @ 60. Nuclear Crisis lasted 59 days, Not just 13.
Document used for the paper (3)” Notes Taken from Transcripts of Meetings of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, October-November 1962, “Secret, Notes made in 1976 and typed in 1993.
(4)Roger Hilsman (INR) to Secretary of State Dean Rusk, “Khrushchev’s Conversation with Mr.W.E.Knox, President Westinghouse Electrical International, Moscow, October 24, “SECRET, October 26, 1962.
It is the portrait of Emperor Maximilian, who was born on 6 July 1832. He was ArchDuke of Austria. He was married to Carlota, a Princess of Belgium(a). Maximillian was invited by Emperor Napolean III and the Mexican conservative to become the Emperor of Mexico in 1863. He accepted the offer of the Mexican throne, believing that the Mexican people had voted him their king. But in reality, the request resulted from a scheme between conservative Mexicans, who wanted to overturn the liberal government of President Benito Juarez, and the French emperor Napoleon III desired to incorporate Mexico into his sphere of influence(b).Nevertheless, ArchDuke accepted the offer and arrived in Mexico in 1864. The conservatives and the French army welcomed him. The country had two competing groups contesting to represent the Mexcian nation: the liberal forces of Juarez and forces loyal to the crown, backed by the French military.
Upon the arrival of Emperor Maximillian, he declared a political amnesty for all liberals who wished to join the Empire. This move made him win over moderate liberals such as Jose Fernando, Ramirez Jose Mario Lanza, Manuel Orozciu Berra, and Santiago Vidcurri. He prioritized reforming his ministers and the Imperial Mexican Army. To the dismay of conservatives and the church, Emperor Maximillian upheld several liberal policies proposed by Juarez. He held the same view as Juarez concerning reforming the powerful Mexcian church and the powerful colonial institution(c). The laws included in the Reform law were land reforms, religious freedom, and extending the right to vote for all people. In addition, he continued Lerdo Law which prohibited elites, the Roman Catholic Church, and indigenous communities from holding title to a large swath of land.
It created friction between the Conservative supporters and Emperor Maximillian. The Conservatives sought a leader to defend the Mexcian colonizers’ tradition—the one who would protect their land and support their monopoly on trade. Maximillian was more progressive and aligned more toward liberal policy.
The final blow for Maximillian came from the French. The French were growing concerned about the rising power of Prussia and persistent United States pressure to remove their military presence from Mexico. The French eventually withdrew their troops from Mexico. Emperor Maximillian failed to delay the french withdrawal from the country. Maximillian faced the reality of the French army’s exit and his loss of support from the conservatives. He had left with barely a couple of thousand loyalist soldiers. He was no match against the forces of Benito Juarez, the President of Mexico. He was ultimately defeated and captured by troops loyal to Jaurez. He was executed on 19 June 1867 by President Benito Juarez as a message against any new idea of invading Mexico by the great powers of Europe.
Although, Maximillian held a view similar to Jaurez. He supported various reforms enacted by the former liberals and Juarez President. He also enacted laws and invested in the development of the country. However, he faced the neighboring United States of America, which was against any presence of European power in his backyard. The opposition from the Liberals was strong, and the United States backed them. The conservative found him more liberal and was shocked that Maximillian would not support the continuation of laws favoring the conservative hold on the country. It was a period when most Mexicans moved away from the notion of Empire or Royalty in Mexico. His reign was possible only due to the presence of the French army and the loyalist conservative. When he lost their support, it ended the Last Emperor of Mexico.
Work Cited:
a))Maximilian, Emperor of Mexico hrc.contentdm.oclc.org b)Maximilian, archduke of Austria and emperor of Mexico Britannica.com c) Footnote: Benito Juarez(1806-1872) Against powerful Church and colonial institution.
The picture describes life in the early Americas and the first contact with Spanish explorers. This single portrait reflects three different images, illustrating three stories about the Americas. Starting with the initial image, it shows us the mighty Indian emperor with his army. The second image shows Spanish explorers’ conflict with the natives, and the last appearance shows people working in the mines.
The image at the bottom of the portrait shows the procession of the Indian Emperor. He is sitting on his throne, carried by his servant and followed by his warrior, holding bows and arrows. These images reflect the life of the Aztec emperor Moctezuma. The picture displays the mighty emperor Moctezuma visiting the mines in his kingdom and anxious to meet Spanish Explorers. Here Moctezuma is keeping watch on foreigners. His spies inform him of the movement of Spanish explorers. Aztec emperor Moctezuma is curious and eager to meet these foreigners. The portrait conveys Moctezuma welcoming the Spanish explorer Hernan Cortez. Like Moctezuma, the picture shows the king wearing the crown with the scepter. The warriors follow him to receive the Spanish explorer. As Montezuma, the emperor, through his procession, conveys the message that Spaniards were guests in his capital. “Each one performed a ceremony which they practice among themselves; each placed his hand on the ground and kissed it,” [1] wrote Cortes. This way, Montezuma welcomes Hernan Cortes to his empire.
The second image shows the Spanish explorer coming ashore where they face suspicious native Americans. There seems to be a physical conflict between the Spainards and the natives. There are lives lost on both sides. The natives believed the arrival of Spanish explorers would threaten their survival. However, the native with a bow and arrow is no match for the Spanish explorer’s advanced firearm. Just as ,”In 1519, a small group of Spaniards under the leadership of Hernan Corte’s landed on the Caribbean coast of what is now Mexico, in the territory of the Aztec Empire” [2]. This picture conveys two messages. First, it was the beginning of the end of the Aztec empire under Montezuma, and the second message the arrival of Spanish explorers in the new world, followed by the arrival of European settlers in the Americas.
The third image shows people in hundreds working in the mines. Yet again, it is not clear what they are digging. The picture does not confirm whether they are indigenous people fulfilling their Mita or enslaved people from other Americas. This portrait could mean two things. The first description is that these are enslaved people working in the mines, and the second is that indigenous peoples of the Aztec empire or colonial Latin America fulfilled their colonial Mita. Historian Kris Lane defines Mita as” a Hispanicized revival of the Inka corvee, or mit’a (literally ‘turn’).[3] .Either way, people get exploited, whether they are indigenous or enslaved people
The portrait shows us the past of Latin America. The various kingdoms of the Americas. The mighty Aztec and Inca empires. Their unique culture and tradition of the indigenous people of America. The arrival of Europeans on the shore of this great continent. The destruction of the native empire and its culture. Here Spaniards brought their culture, beliefs, and faith. This new land became a multicultural and multi-racial land of Spaniards, Mestizos, and Black and Indigenous people. Latin America has created its unique culture and tradition mixed with African, Indian and Spanish. Thus, making Modern Latin American.
Works Cited:
Camila Townssend “World Collide in Tenochtitlan” Problems in Modern Latin American History: Sources and Interpretations, edited by James A. Wood and Anna Rose Alexander, 3-7. 5th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2019.
Lane, Kris. “Assessing Indian Labor in Quito.” In Problems in Modern Latin American History: Sources and Interpretations, edited by James A. Wood and Anna Rose Alexander, 7-12. 5th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2019
