The U.S.’s attempt to change the regime in Venezuela in an anti-democratic manner before the eyes of the world has confused us all. I intend to confuse you further. Let us push the mind beyond its boundaries to produce something right.
I will say that there is a different factor involved in the U.S.’s interventions in states’ internal affairs, their national sovereignty, and the people’s will: letting its enemy live.
Allow me to explain, so we can be confused together.
The US always needs an enemy
The U.S. likes to gather the people around its state by frightening them. What it terms as "national security" actually corresponds to the psychology of life security, which is humanity's greatest concern.
There is always an enemy, and it is said that it threatens U.S. national security. Thus, efforts are made to legitimize everything the American state does from invasions to coups, and from illegal wiretapping of the public to covert murder. When national security is in question, anything goes; everything is permissible for the U.S.
This is why the U.S. always prefers to exist with its enemy and remain standing with the strength it draws from it. It is thanks to that enemy that it scares its people but gathers them around its state. It is thanks to that enemy that its economy thrives and becomes profitable. It is also thanks to that enemy that it realizes its imperialist aims.
Hence, the U.S. provides ample but covert support to its enemy to allow it to live. This changes only when it expires.
Why didn't it topple Saddam in 1991?
Saddam Hussein is the most typical example of this. Saddam was a U.S. ally until he became its enemy with the invasion of Kuwait. Iraq was invaded with the first Gulf War in 1991, but for some reason, Saddam was not toppled. Interesting, is it not?
The U.S. never gave a satisfactory explanation for this. However, thanks to Saddam, it formed a bloc of allies for itself in the Middle East. It built bases and sold weapons to its allies so that they could protect themselves against Saddam.
Thanks to Saddam, the U.S. built the hegemonic structure it wanted in the Middle East, and hence ensured Israel's security as well. It is clear why it did not topple Saddam, right?
When Saddam was no longer a useful enemy, and a new enemy was found in place of him, he was killed with the second Iraq war.
Regimes would have changed if the US hadn't intervened
There are two things I am certainly sure of.
Had there been no foreign intervention, Iran and Venezuela - the two countries the U.S. calls its chief enemies - their governments would have been changed by their people due to their own internal problems and corrupt regimes.
Last year the uprisings in Iran reached such serious dimensions due to the economic crisis that my Iranian expert friends said that there will be a major collapse in the country, and as a matter of fact, that the Revolutionary Guards would stage a coup.
Whenever U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu released a message for the people of Iran to switch the regime, the incidents instantly stopped. The people of Iran stopped demonstrations instantly to avoid being an "American agent," or an "Israeli supporter." The U.S. increased fortification in Syria and Iraq due to the Iran threat. It continued to sell millions of dollars’ worth of weapons to dozens of Arab countries, primarily Saudi Arabia.
What is certain is that had Trump not tweeted regarding Venezuela and started an operation against this country, the people there were going to replace the government anyway. That is the great extent to which matters had gotten.
Now, Maduro continues to remain in power by resisting against American imperialism. As for the U.S., by pointing to Maduro as a threat, it established alliances with other Latin countries; it strengthened its fortification in Latin America, which it considers its "backyard."
The US creates its enemy and lets it live
North Korea is in the same situation. There has been no single intervention of North Korea, which has been pointed to as the "greatest danger and enemy" for years. However, thanks to this, it settled in the Pacific, pushed China, and formed a huge alliance circle there. It sold billions of dollars’ worth of weapons to all its allies, primarily South Korea and Japan, due to the "North Korea threat."
U.S. economy is built on the war industry and technology. They both require an ally and an enemy. This is why the U.S. generally creates its own enemy and allows it to live. Then when it is done, it throws them in the trash.
Will everything I wrote allow us to derive the theory that "There is a covert alliance between the U.S. and its enemies"? Let us allow our minds to be completely confused and you can think about it.