Venezuela to invade Guyana

I believe that might trigger a Monroe Doctrine (Roosevelt Corollary) response.

 

Oil rich region which was in dispute before intl tribunal declared it belongs to Guyana. Would be surprised to see Venezuela do this when the US just relaxed some sanctions on them to allow for oil exports

 

UN court bars Venezuela from altering Guyana’s control over disputed territory

Some more background…. Looks like Venezuela is holding a referendum Sunday to decide if it should annex 2/3rd of Guyana.

 

You are correct under the original Monroe Doctrine. That was why I cited the Roosevelt Corollary. Here is some of the relevant language to a case like this:

Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine

But, of course, that’s more of a tradition than anything else. I was just being tongue in cheek. I think the President would still need statutory authorization under the WPR to intervene, unlike in the event of, say, an attack on NATO.

 

That article highlights a concern I’ve had ever since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022: the normalization of conquest. If Russia gets away with keeping any of Ukraine, then we should expect more and more countries to start playing the insidious game of “That used to be mine, and I want it back!”

 

Some of us have a lot to lose there... just sayin'.

 

It’s a good point. It does seem just plain wrong that Russia might be able to pull that off.

I also think these kinds of actions must determined on a case by case basis. The thing about Ukraine is that they don’t seem to have many/any true friends. Crimea likely demonstrated that empirically, but it probably seemed like a reasonable guess even before then.

Say what you will about the US’ record of imperialism and failed interventionism, but the US makes a lot of friends. These can be viewed as “entangling foreign alliances”, but they certainly have a deterrent effect, not the least of which for the partner nation.

At this point, it seems like most non-African / Middle East nations have a powerful friend. I can’t imagine anyone invading nations like Mexico, South Korea, or Israel, due to their close relations with the US. And China seems to have the backs of many southeast Asian nations. Russia probably protects a nation like Bosnia.

But yes, it’s a good point that if there’s another Ukraine-like lone wolf out there, this now seems like a ripe moment to take a chance. Is Guyana such a nation? I would have thought the Monroe doctrine would have made this a clear no, but perhaps there is a chance the US public will just isn’t there to enforce it. However, if the US shows it will only arbitrarily enforce Monroe, that would certainly seem to risk the effect of which you are concerned.

 

Please elaborate on where we have a lot to lose?

 

Oh good, I’m getting bored with the three wars we’ve got going.

 

I take your point on the speed of the Crimean takeover. I also think there is a lesson with the current war. Even with all the support that Ukraine has been given during this more general invasion, not one country has officially joined Ukraine’s war efforts. If Iran came across Israel’s border, I think we can bet US boots would be on the ground in short order.

You raise an interesting point with the idea of US invading Mexico. A nation cannot expect protection from an invader if the invader IS their only friend. Presumably (and hopefully), we can ignore the significance of such hypotheticals, but I agree with your prediction of the result.

 

You keep your warm beer and bland food right where it is mister.

 

I think he was joking about pre revolutionary times.

 

I am not aware of any plans for a defense of Israel that includes ground troops. I’ve never been officially briefed on any such OPLAN or else I would not comment, but I’m pretty sure in the unlikely event we felt that Israel was struggling, our participation would be limited to air and naval support against, say, Hezbollah. Israel’s ground forces are more than sufficient to handle any or all of its neighbors in a conventional war.

A direct Iranian “invasion” of Israel is not really in the cards due to the tyranny of distance and Iran’s lack of a true expeditionary capability. They would have to sustain a sizable force through Iraq and Syria only to attack in the Golan, some of the best fortified territory in the world, all while facing punishing Israeli air support. No, the Iranian best course of action is to keep supplying proxies who will do the dirty work for them.

 

Could be. I thought there were a couple ways the remark could be interpreted, so I just wanted to clarify.