Month: January 2019

With federal prosecutors expected to rest their case against Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman on Monday, lawyers for the accused Mexican drug kingpin have given few clues about how they plan to counter three months of testimony by more than 50 government witnesses.

Among the tough choices they face are whether to call their own witnesses to try to undermine the prosecutors’ evidence, and whether Guzman should take the stand in his own defense. One of his attorneys said on Friday that they would not reveal the names of any witnesses unless they decided to call them.

“Similarly, we will not disclose Joaquin’s plans about testifying until the time comes to inform the court,” Guzman lawyer Eduardo Balarezo said in a statement.

Guzman, 61, the alleged leader of Mexico’s Sinaloa Cartel, was extradited to the United States in 2017. He has been on trial since November on charges of trafficking vast quantities of cocaine, heroin and other illegal drugs into the country.

Prosecutors have called more than a dozen former cartel members to testify against him.

The main defense argument, as put forth by Guzman lawyer Jeffrey Lichtman in his opening statement, has been that the real leader of the Sinaloa Cartel is Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada, and that Zambada bribed the Mexican and U.S. governments to frame Guzman.

Guzman’s lawyers have discussed multiple potential witnesses with prosecutors in open court, and have filed a motion suggesting they might call an inmate in the U.S. prison system, but they have not publicly revealed any names.

Defendants in criminal cases are under no obligation to call any witnesses. Many defendants in organized crime cases do not, said defense lawyer Steven Boozang, who defended Boston mafia boss Francis “Cadillac Frank” Salemme in a murder trial last year. He said the decision depends on what exonerating evidence is available.

“It has to be reliable,” he said. “It has to be truthful.”

Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor, said it could make sense for a defendant to call witnesses if they could offer the jury an alternative explanation of the evidence that proved a defendant’s innocence. But he said such witnesses can backfire if their testimony is not convincing.

Lichtman said evidence for the defense’s contention that Zambada framed Guzman would emerge from the prosecution’s own witnesses, but such testimony largely failed to materialize.

Multiple witnesses described Guzman as either the boss of the cartel or an equal partner with Zambada. The most explosive allegations about bribery came when one witness said Guzman paid $100 million to former Mexican president Enrique Pena Nieto.

Pena Nieto has denied taking any bribes.

In many cases, Honig said, the only viable defense strategy is to seek to undermine prosecution witnesses who have pleaded guilty to crimes and agreed to cooperate.

“Tell the jury, ‘You just heard a bunch of tales from a bunch of lying criminal scoundrels who simply want to please the government, and my guy is their meal ticket,'” he said.

Guzman’s lawyers have sharply interrogated cooperating witnesses about their own criminal histories, which have included convictions not only for drug dealing but also murder plots, tax evasion, money laundering and forgery.

In Guzman’s case, the strategy may have limits. Much of the evidence against him is intercepted electronic messages in which Guzman himself appears to discuss drug deals, and his lawyers have not so far challenged their authenticity.

Boozang said Guzman’s lawyers were sure to discourage their client from testifying himself, which would let prosecutors cross-examine him.

“Putting on the defendant, it’s almost never done,” Boozang said, adding that the prosecution “would most likely have a field day” with Guzman.

But the alleged cartel boss may ignore his attorneys.

Numerous witnesses have described him as boastful and impulsive.

In recent years, Guzman has courted publicity, seeking to make a movie about his life and giving an interview to actor Sean Penn for Rolling Stone magazine in 2015. In a Brooklyn courtroom, he could find his biggest stage yet.

 
…

U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration on Sunday lifted sanctions on aluminum giant Rusal and other Russian firms linked to oligarch Oleg Deripaska, despite a Democratic-led push in the U.S. Congress to maintain the restrictions.

Earlier this month, 11 of Trump’s fellow Republicans in the U.S. Senate joined Democrats in a failed effort to keep the sanctions on Rusal, its parent, En+ Group Plc, and power firm JSC EuroSibEnergo. But that was not enough to overcome opposition from Trump and most of his fellow Republicans.

Advocates for keeping the sanctions had argued that Deripaska, an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, retained too much control over the companies to lift sanctions imposed in April to punish Russia for actions including its annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea, efforts to interfere in U.S. elections and support for Syria’s government in its civil war.

Some lawmakers from both parties also said it was inappropriate to ease the sanctions while Special Counsel Robert Mueller investigates whether Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign colluded with Moscow.

But in its statement on Sunday, the U.S. Treasury Department said the three companies had reduced Deripaska’s direct and indirect shareholding stake and severed his control.

That action, it said, ensured that most directors on the En+ and Rusal boards would be independent directors, including Americans and Europeans, who had no business, professional or family ties to Deripaska or any other person designated for sanctions by the Treasury Department.

“The companies have also agreed to unprecedented transparency for Treasury into their operations by undertaking extensive, ongoing auditing, certification, and reporting requirements,” the department’s statement said.

Deripaska himself remains subject to U.S. sanctions.

Trump administration officials, and many Republicans who opposed the effort to keep the sanctions in place, said they worried about the impact on the global aluminum industry. They also said Deripaska’s decision to lower his stakes in the companies so that he no longer controlled them showed that the sanctions had worked.

Rusal is the world’s largest aluminum producer outside China. The sanctions on the company spurred demand for Chinese metal. China’s aluminum exports jumped to a record high in 2018.

Trump denies collusion, and Moscow has denied seeking to influence the U.S. election on Trump’s behalf, despite U.S. intelligence agencies’ finding that it did so.

Deripaska had ties with Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign manager. Manafort pleaded guilty in September 2018 to attempted witness tampering and conspiring against the United States.

 
…

Federal employees are going back to work after the longest government shutdown in U.S. history ended late last week. VOA’s Michael Bowman reports, President Donald Trump signed a bill funding the government for three weeks, meaning the threat of another shutdown persists with the president and congressional Democrats still at odds over funding for wall construction along the U.S.-Mexico border.
…

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urged the international community to support the Venezuelan people and recognize the interim government of opposition leader Juan Guaido as he stands up to disputed President Nicolas Maduro.

“Now it is time for every other nation to pick a side,” Pompeo told the U.N. Security Council during a rare Saturday morning session. “No more delays, no more games. Either you stand with the forces of freedom or you’re in league with Maduro and his mayhem.”

Several European governments, including Britain, Spain, Germany and France, said Saturday they would recognize the 35-year-old Guaido as president if no election is called within eight days.

The United States requested the Security Council meeting. Pompeo was accompanied by his newly appointed special envoy for Venezuela, Elliott Abrams.

Pompeo called the Maduro regime an “illegitimate mafia state” and criticized countries including Russia, China, Iran and Cuba for supporting him.

Russian envoy Vassily Nebenzia shot back that regime change is “a favorite geopolitical game of the United States,” and he asked Secretary Pompeo directly whether the Trump administration plans to militarily intervene in Venezuela.

“Does that mean that the United States is ready to use military force against a sovereign state under a bogus pretext?” Nebenzia asked. “It is here in this room that we need to hear a clear answer: whether Washington intends once again to violate the U.N. Charter?”

Pompeo offered no response at the meeting and sidestepped a reporter’s question about it during a brief interaction with the press, saying he would not speculate on what the U.S. would do next.

Venezuela held presidential elections on May 20, 2018. Many voters boycotted, saying the polls were not free and fair. Several opposition members also were prevented from running. Incumbent president Maduro won with nearly 70 percent of the vote, but the results have been challenged both domestically and abroad. He was sworn in for a second six-year term on January 10.

On January 23, the democratically-elected National Assembly — which is controlled by the opposition — declared Maduro’s rule illegitimate. Invoking constitutional provisions, National Assembly leader Guaido declared himself interim president until there are new elections.

Maduro has accused Washington of instigating a coup d’état and told U.S. diplomats to leave the country. His foreign minister traveled to New York for the Security Council meeting.

Minister Jorge Arreaza told the council that despite Washington’s intervention and tweets from Secretary Pompeo and Vice President Mike Pence that he said incited and support the opposition and urge security forces to defect from Maduro, his government is still willing to talk to Washington.

He also dismissed the eight-day deadline from the Europeans.

“Europe is giving us eight days?” Arreaza asked with incredulity. “Where do you get that you have the power to establish a deadline or ultimatum to a sovereign people?”

He also took a swipe at Washington for past interventions in Iraq and Libya and the Trump administration’s recent announcement that it will pull its small military force from Syria.

“You recall what happened with Saddam Hussein or [Moammar] Ghadafi. Despite all assurances, they were killed,” he noted. “The United States is withdrawing forces from Syria, are they going to try to start a new war in Latin America? In Venezuela? We are not going to give them that satisfaction.”

Several Latin American countries sent envoys to the meeting.

Peru, a Security Council member, said it has been directly affected by the exodus of some 3 million Venezuelans fleeing the violence and humanitarian crisis. It has received 700,000 refugees.

Colombia, which has taken in more than 1 million Venezuelans, sent its foreign minister.

Carlos Trujillo asked the council to help his country address the refugee crisis and support the delivery of humanitarian aid to Venezuela. He also appealed to the council to protect opposition leader Guiado and members of the national assembly. He urged new free and fair elections.

But other Latin American countries, including Bolivia and Cuba, came to express support for Maduro.

The United Nations political chief Rosemary DiCarlo warned council members that the situation is “cause for serious concern.”

“The protracted crisis in the country has had a grave impact on the population, with high levels of political polarization, growing humanitarian needs and serious human rights concerns,” DiCarlo said.

On Friday, U.N. human rights chief Michelle Bachelet called for talks to defuse the political tensions in Venezuela, saying that the situation “may rapidly spiral out of control with catastrophic consequences.”

Fern Robinson contributed to this report.

 
…

Three militia members convicted of taking part in a foiled plot to massacre Muslims in southwest Kansas were sentenced Friday to decades in prison during an emotional court hearing in which one of the targeted victims pleaded: “Please don’t hate us.”

U.S. District Judge Eric Melgren sentenced Patrick Stein, the alleged ringleader, to 30 years in prison and Curtis Allen, who drafted a manifesto for the group, to 25 years. Gavin Wright, who authorities said helped make and test explosives at his mobile home business, received 26 years. The plot was foiled after another militia member alerted authorities.

Melgren dismissed defense attorneys’ request that he take into the account the divisive political atmosphere in which the men formed their plot to blow up a mosque and apartments housing Somali immigrants in the meatpacking town Garden City, about 220 miles (355 kilometers) west of Wichita, on the day after the 2016 election.

“We have extremely divisive elections because our system is to resolve those through elections and not violence,” Melgren said.

Immersed in right-wing media

Stein’s attorneys have argued that he believed then-President Barack Obama would declare martial law and not recognize the validity of the election if Donald Trump won, forcing militias to step in. Stein’s attorneys noted that during the 2016 campaign, all three men read and shared Russian propaganda on their Facebook feed designed to sow discord in the U.S. political system.

Attorney Jim Pratt told the judge that for years Stein had immersed himself in right-wing media and commentators, who normalized hate. But Melgren was openly skeptical, telling Pratt: “Millions of people listen to this stuff, whether it comes from the left or the right.”

Somali immigrants testify

Prosecutors presented video testimony from some Somali immigrants who were the targets of the bombing. In one clip, Ifrah Farah pleaded: “Please don’t kill us. Please don’t hate us. We can’t hurt you.”

Allen, 51, choked up as he addressed the judge, prompting his attorney to step in and finish reading a prepared statement in which Allen offered “my sincere apologies” to anyone who was frightened and asked for their forgiveness. But Stein, 49, apologized only to his family and friends, and the judge noted when sentencing him that, unlike Allen, he had shown no remorse.

Wright, 53, apologized to the court, saying the plot is “not who I am.” He also apologized to the immigrants who lived at the apartment complex. The judge later said Wright’s courtroom statement showed he was still in denial about what he did, adding that he did not buy that there was any remorse on Wright’s part.

Melgren sentenced Stein to 30 years for conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction and 10 years for conspiracy against civil rights. He sentenced Allen and Wright to 25 years for conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction and 10 years for conspiracy against civil rights. Those sentences will run concurrently. Wright also got an additional year to be served consecutively for lying to law enforcement, bringing his total sentence to 26 years.

The judge told all three men that the planned attack was worse than the Oklahoma City bombing because the Garden City plot was motivated by hatreds of race, religion and national origin.

Plot thwarted

The Kansas plot was thwarted when militia member Dan Day tipped off authorities to escalating threats of violence. He testified at the men’s trial last year that Stein started recruiting others to kill Muslim immigrants after the June 2016 mass shooting at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, by a gunman who had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State group.

Recordings that prosecutors played for jurors last April portrayed a damning picture of a splinter group of the militia Kansas Security Force that came to be known as “the Crusaders.”

Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker in a news release called the sentences “a significant victory against hate crimes and domestic terrorism.”

“These defendants planned to ruthlessly bomb an apartment complex and kill innocent people, simply because of who they are and how they worship,” FBI Director Christopher Wray said.

The sentencing hearings for the men came a day after two members of an Illinois militia known as the White Rabbits pleaded guilty in the 2017 bombing of a Minnesota mosque, admitting they hoped the attack would scare Muslims into leaving the U.S. No one was injured in that attack.
…

The United States and the Taliban may have agreed on a plan for American troops to leave Afghanistan, sources privy to the development told VOA Saturday. In return, the insurgent group has given assurances that no international terrorist groups would be allowed to use Afghan soil to threaten America or any other country in the future.

The understanding is the outcome of nearly a week of intense, uninterrupted dialogue between U.S. and insurgent representatives in Doha, Qatar. Representatives of the host government and Pakistan also have been in attendance.

The sources told VOA they expected the two negotiating sides to announce the withdrawal plan by Monday at the latest, if all goes as planned. The U.S. drawdown plan would require the Taliban to observe a cease-fire. Both the withdrawal and the cease-fire, however, will be “limited and conditional.”

Sources did not rule out the possibility that President Donald Trump might announce and give details of the final agreement with the Taliban at his State of the Union speech, whenever that is scheduled. 

The U.S. special representative for Afghanistan reconciliation, Zalmay Khalilzad, has been leading the American side in what observers describe as an unprecedented engagement between the two adversaries in the 17-year-old war.

Still work to do

Khalilzad tweeted late Saturday that after six days in Doha, he was headed to Afghanistan for consultations.

“We have a number of issues left to work out. Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, and ‘everything’ must include an intra-Afghan dialogue and comprehensive cease-fire,” he said.

Khalilzad described his meetings in Doha as “more productive than they have been in the past” and added that the two sides had made “significant progress on vital issues.” He did not elaborate and said the talks would resume shortly.

Late Saturday, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a tweet, “Encouraging news from @US4AfghanPeace (Khalilzad). He reports significant progress in talks with the Taliban on #Afghanistan reconciliation.”

He added later, “The U.S. is serious about pursuing peace, preventing #Afghanistan from continuing to be a space for international terrorism & bringing forces home. Working with the Afghan gov’t & all interested parties, the U.S. seeks to strengthen Afghan sovereignty, independence & prosperity.” 

Shortly after Khalilzad’s tweets, the Taliban issued their own statement, saying the negotiations “revolving around the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan and other vital issues saw progress.” 

“The policy of the Islamic Emirate [the Taliban] during talks was very clear — until the issue of withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan is agreed upon, progress in other issues is impossible,” the group noted.

But the issues under consideration are of “critical nature and needed comprehensive discussions,” the group said.

The Taliban added that the two sides would share details of the Doha meetings and receive guidance from their “respective leaderships” before they reconvened to discuss “unsolved” matters to find an “appropriate and effective solution.” The Taliban statement did not explain further.

Sources told VOA they believed the agreement on a conditional and limited withdrawal and cease-fire would give both sides an opportunity to test the waters “without taking too huge a political risk.” 

Pakistan takes credit 

Officials in Pakistan took full credit for persuading the Taliban to engage in the dialogue at the U.S. request.

“Pakistan’s success is that it has sincerely and faithfully diverted the recent positive environment and energy in its relations with the U.S. to the complete benefit of the Afghan peace process, and Afghanistan as a whole,” a senior official told VOA as the talks progressed in Doha.

Islamabad insists a peaceful Afghanistan is key to Pakistan’s future security and economic stability as well as those of the region in general. 

Pakistani officials believe any agreement at this stage will help bridge the trust gap between the U.S. and the Taliban and will “add much needed political capital” to Washington’s account to achieve the ultimate goal of peace in Afghanistan. This agreement may prove an important asset in later, more serious stages of negotiations, they said.

Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan’s nascent government, which has made resolution of the Afghan conflict its top foreign policy priority, sees continued U.S. involvement in Afghanistan reconstruction as key to the future security and economic stability of the region.

“This political reconciliation must succeed. … We wish that the U.S. leaves Afghanistan as friend of the region, not as a failure,” Pakistan army spokesman Maj. Gen. Asif Ghafoor stated prior to the Doha talks.

Afghan president’s outburst 

It is not clear whether the Taliban have agreed to talk directly with President Ashraf Ghani’s national unity government in Afghanistan, an administration that critics say remains fragile, is marred with political controversies and suffers from “disunity.”

The Taliban have so far refused to engage with the Afghan government in a peace process, dismissing it as an illegitimate entity and an “American puppet.”

Speaking during the World Economic Forum this week in Davos, Ghani for the first time publicly criticized the Khalilzad-led peace effort and indicated the Afghan government might not accept any possible outcome of the Doha talks.

Ghani warned that any truce the U.S. signs with the Taliban must pave the way for direct talks between his government and the insurgents to decide all issues, including foreign troop withdrawal.

“There’s discussion, but this discussion needs to be shared back. A discussion that does not involve the region, we will not trust,” Ghani said when asked whether the talks in Qatar were nearing a breakthrough.

“If we don’t get all the pieces right, one piece alone doesn’t suffice,” he added. 

During his interaction, Ghani also revealed that since he took office in late 2014, Afghan security forces have lost more than 45,000 personnel while battling the Taliban. The United Nations continues to document record levels of civilian casualties in its annual reports. Millions of others have been made refugees within Afghanistan, and the warfare discourages many more from returning from refugee camps in Pakistan and Iran.

Aside from the humanitarian consequences of the fighting, it has cost the United States nearly $1 trillion while its military has lost nearly 2,500 personnel. The presence of 14,000 American soldiers means Washington will continue to pay around $45 billion annually to sustain operations if peace talks fail to produce desired results.

An American university research report released late last year noted that the Afghan war had killed about 150,000 people, including government forces, insurgents, U.S. and personnel of the NATO-led coalition. The U.S.-led military invasion stemmed from terrorist attacks on American cities in September 2001 that were plotted by al-Qaida, allegedly out of its bases in Afghanistan.  
…

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has appointed foreign policy veteran Elliott Abrams to be U.S. envoy to Venezuela, tasked with helping “restore democracy” to the South American nation. 

Pompeo made the announcement Friday afternoon in Washington, ahead of a special session of the U.N. Security Council on Saturday. Pompeo said Abrams would travel with him to the meeting, which was initiated by the United States.

Pompeo said the United States thinks “every country ought to recognize” National Assembly leader Juan Guaido as Venezuela’s interim leader, as the U.S. does. He called disputed President Nicolas Maduro a “cruel dictator” and said he had caused much devastation for the people of Venezuela. 

Pompeo said the U.S. hoped Venezuela would have free and fair elections to designate a new leader. He also vowed that U.S. diplomats in Venezuela, ordered out of the country by Maduro on Wednesday, would be protected while in Venezuela. He said the U.S. government was taking “all appropriate measures” to ensure their safety. He declined to give details on those plans. 

Earlier Friday, U.N. rights chief Michelle Bachelet called for talks to defuse the political tensions in Venezuela, saying that the situation “may rapidly spiral out of control with catastrophic consequences.” 

In a statement, Bachelet called for an independent investigation into the violence that has killed 20 people and resulted in the detention of more than 350 in protests over the past week. 

“Any violent incident resulting in death or injury should be subject to an independent and impartial investigation to find out whether there was excessive use of force by the authorities, or if crimes have been committed by members of armed groups, whether pro-government or otherwise,” she said.  

“More than 3 million Venezuelans have fled the country. Many millions of others are living in totally miserable conditions,” she added. “This is, at heart, a crisis of governance, and it is the responsibility of the country’s leaders to put an end to this disastrous situation.”  

​Diplomatic rift 

On Wednesday, Maduro said he was ending diplomatic relations with the United States in response to U.S. President Donald Trump’s announcement that the U.S. was officially recognizing Guaido as Venezuela’s interim leader after Guaido swore himself into office. 

Trump bluntly warned Maduro on Thursday that “all options are on the table” if there was not a peaceful transition to democracy in the South American country. 

Also Thursday, 16 of the 34 nations in the Organization of American States recognized Guaido as interim president of Venezuela.  

Pompeo urged members to oppose the “illegitimate” Maduro and pledged to make $20 million available for humanitarian assistance to Venezuela. 

“All OAS member states must align themselves with democracy and respect for the rule of law,” the top U.S. diplomat said. 

Meanwhile, the State Department ordered nonemergency personnel to leave Venezuela, but it is not closing its embassy in Caracas. 

The department said it was ordering the evacuation for security reasons, and that U.S. citizens should “strongly consider” leaving the country. 

​More sanctions possible 

White House officials emphasized that Trump was not ruling out any response, such as a naval blockade or other military action, if Maduro unleashed violence against protesters or took action against Guaido. 

Several nations have joined the U.S. in recognizing Guaido as Venezuela’s interim president, including Canada and 11 of the 14 members of the newly formed Lima Group of Latin nations, among them Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala and Peru. 

French President Emmanuel Macron called Venezuela’s elections “illegitimate” in a tweet on Thursday, and saluted the bravery of Venezuelans demanding freedom.   

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned Thursday that the situation in Venezuela could descend into “disaster” if the country’s main political rivals failed to reach an agreement. 

Warnings from Russia, China 

But officials in Russia, one of Venezuela’s biggest allies, reacted with anger Thursday at the United States and other Western nations for backing Guaido, accusing them of interfering in its internal affairs. Russia’s Foreign Ministry warned the United States against any military intervention, saying such a move would have “catastrophic” consequences.  

China urged the United States to stay out of the crisis. Beijing and Moscow have extensive economic interests, having loaned Caracas billions of dollars. 

Bolivia, Cuba, Iran and Syria also issued statements throwing their support behind Maduro. 
…

The coalition of Latin American governments that joined the U.S. in quickly recognizing Juan Guaido as Venezuela’s interim president came together over weeks of secret diplomacy that included whispered messages to activists under constant surveillance and a high-risk foreign trip by the opposition leader challenging President Nicolas Maduro for power, those involved in the talks said.

In mid-December, Guaido quietly traveled to Washington, Colombia and Brazil to brief officials on the opposition’s strategy of mass demonstrations to coincide with Maduro’s expected swearing-in for a second term on Jan. 10 in the face of widespread international condemnation, according to exiled former Caracas Mayor Antonio Ledezma, an ally.

To leave Venezuela, he sneaked across the lawless border with Colombia, so as not to raise suspicions among immigration officials who sometimes harass opposition figures at the airport and bar them from traveling abroad, said a different anti-government leader, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss security arrangements.

Building consensus in the fragmented anti-government coalition proved to be an uphill battle. The opposition has for years been divided by egos and strategy, as well as a government crackdown that has sent several prominent leaders into exile, making face-to-face meetings impossible. Others inside Venezuela were being heavily watched by intelligence agencies, and all were concerned about tipping off the government.

Encrypted text messages

Long sessions of encrypted text messaging became the norm, the opposition leader said. A U.S. official said intermediaries were used to deliver messages to Guaido’s political mentor and opposition power broker Leopoldo Lopez, who is under house arrest after he tried and failed to lead a mass uprising against Maduro in 2014. The U.S. official spoke on condition of anonymity out of security concerns.

Despite Guaido’s personal assurances in Bogota that he would declare himself interim president at a Jan. 23 rally coinciding with the anniversary of the 1958 coup that ended Venezuela’s military dictatorship, the suspense lasted until the hours before the announcement, said a Latin American diplomat from the Lima Group who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media. Some moderate factions were left in the dark or wanted to go slower, worrying that a bold move would lead to another failure for the opposition. In the end, those differences were smoothed over internally, without any public discord.

“This is the first time in at least five years the opposition has shown an ability to come together in any meaningful manner,” said a senior Canadian official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk publicly.

The decision to confront Maduro directly was only possible because of strong support from the Trump administration, which led a chorus of mostly conservative Latin American governments that immediately recognized Guaido.

It was no small diplomatic feat, given the mistrust of the U.S. in Latin America due to the painful memories stemming from U.S. military interventions in the region during the Cold War. The tough-handed approach drew bipartisan support, with two of the Senate’s most senior Democrats, Dick Durbin and Bob Menendez, offering praise.

Trump’s stunning remark

The watershed moment was President Donald Trump’s stunning remark in August 2017 from the steps of his New Jersey golf club that a “military option” was on the table to deal with the Venezuelan crisis.

In the weeks that followed, Trump went on to strongly condemn Maduro in his address to the U.N. General Assembly as well as quietly press aides and some Latin American leaders about a military invasion of the country.

From then on, countries in the region realized they had a partner in the U.S. willing to tackle a crisis that had been years in the making but which previous U.S. administrations had chosen to play down because of limited national security implications, said Fernando Cutz, a former senior national security adviser on Latin America to both President Barack Obama and Trump.

For some, especially Mexico, which was renegotiating NAFTA, adopting a more aggressive stance was also an opportunity to gain leverage in bilateral relations with the Trump administration. 

“Trump has personally sparked a lot of this,” said Cutz, now with the Cohen Group, a Washington consulting firm. “Literally in every interaction that he has had with Latin American leaders since taking office, he brings up Venezuela. That has forced a lot of hands.”

On Jan. 4 — a day before Guaido was sworn in as national assembly president — foreign ministers from 13 nations of the Lima Group, which doesn’t include the U.S., said they wouldn’t recognize Maduro’s second term.

That set off a scramble at the White House to make sure it wasn’t being left behind, said a former U.S. official and congressional staffer who was in close contact with the national security council. Both spoke on the condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the administration’s planning.

Playing a key role behind the scenes was Lima Group member Canada, whose Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland spoke to Guaido the night before Maduro’s searing-in ceremony to offer her government’s support should he confront the socialist leader, the Canadian official said. Also active was Colombia, which shares a border with Venezuela and has received more than 2 million migrants fleeing economic chaos, along with Peru and Brazil’s new far-right President Jair Bolsonaro. 
…

Potential Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg said Friday that Donald Trump’s presidency “cannot be helped” and was “dangerous” for the country.

The former New York City mayor also described the partial government shutdown, now at a record 35th day, as “a complete failure of presidential leadership.”

The billionaire businessman said that for fellow New Yorker Trump, “the art of the deal is simply cheating people and not caring about how badly they get hurt and now he’s doing it to the American people.”

Bloomberg also told a meeting of the Democratic Business Council of Northern Virginia that he thinks “it’s clear that this president, at this point, cannot be helped.”

The remarks by Bloomberg, a former Republican who registered as a Democrat only last fall, were some of his toughest against Trump since Bloomberg’s speech to the Democratic National Convention more than two years ago. Back then, Bloomberg warned of the prospect of a Trump presidency: “God help us.”

Bloomberg reflected upon that 2016 speech repeatedly on Friday, and he went further, suggesting that the government shutdown has proved that his initial warning about Trump was correct.

“The presidency is not an entry level job. There’s just too much at stake,” Bloomberg said. “And the longer we have a pretend CEO who’s recklessly running this country, the worst it’s going to be for our economy and our security.

He added: “This is really dangerous.”

Bloomberg’s warm reception at the business-friendly audience highlighted the chief political challenge should he enter the 2020 race. Liberal activists, who like to attack what they call “corporate Democrats,” play a far more prominent role in the primary process than do the kind of business executives who gave him a standing ovation Friday.

One of the most prominent early Democratic candidates, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, has warned against the role of billionaires in the presidential primary process.

Bloomberg tried to make the case for both capitalism and a centrist candidate, suggesting that Democrats don’t need to choose between “energizing the base” and “pragmatic leadership.”

Asked about his 2020 intentions, he acknowledged that he has “a good life” and can make a difference even if he doesn’t run.

“Having said that, I don’t like walking away from challenges.”
…