Opposition and Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

In previous posts I have been following the trend by part of the opposition denouncing a conspiracy behind National Assembly appointed President Juan Guaidó. These conspiracy claims generally take the form of accusations that Guaidó has been “unwilling” to clearly call for an international intervention in the Venezuelan crisis, and instead has participated in the Norwegian mediated dialogue (now on indefinite hold). According to this sector of the opposition, Guaidó and other main opposition party leaders, are either betting on a smooth cohabitation with Maduro, or have been outright bought by the regime.

Political analyst Juan Manuel Trak (@juanchotrak) aptly summarized the circular and self-fulfilling character of these arguments:

“Fake News manual by @PanAmPost_es and @EmmaRincon

1. Invent a possible scenario

2. Claim that the scenario does not come true because there is a conspiracy by others

3. When the scenario does not come true (self-fulfilled prophecy) claim that you were right the whole time and the conspirators are to blame

4. Repeat the same thing all day long”

The Panam Post Juan Manuel Trak is referring to is a Miami based news outlet linked to the sector of the opposition supporting these conspiracy theories about Guaidó and the main opposition parties.

Emmanuel Rincón (@EmmaRincon) recently published a piece in the Panam Post titled “Why It’s Time to Close the Guaido Chapter in Venezuela” stressing the claims that the Venezuela regime is behind the recent unrest in Latin America, and admonishing Guidó for participating in negotiation efforts, calling for the appointment of a new electoral arbiter and for new elections.

Trak was commenting on this Twitter post by Emmanuel Rincón:

“In Venezuela there was no military intervention because Guaido’s envoys sold to the US the theory that Maduro would panicky and flee by only using threats. The North Americans made the mistake of believing this, thus the failure of April 30 and Trump’s mistrust of Bolton.”

Further down a long Twitter thread Rincón claims that the military invasion of Venezuela was considered by Trump, but that he was unwilling to commit US troops to put into power a “soft-Chavista” regime of the opposition led by Guaido and the main parties in the National Assembly, who “are corrupt (and also socialists).” The main evidence for this claim, according to Rincón, is historical: South Vietnam fell, and the Vietnam War was lost at least in part because of the corrupt character of South Vietnam officials. Trump has learned the lessons from that war and will not make the same mistake in the Venezuelan case. “Ultimately,” finishes Rincón his thread, “the US will not move its pieces while a corrupt group, contrary to US ideological interests, holds power. It’s not me saying this, this is not an opinion, this is the weight of history.” By a group holding power Rincón is not referring to Maduro and his government, but to Guaidó and the parties backing him.