Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has been re-elected to lead the country until 2025. In the recent presidential elections, he received more than 69 percent of the votes. But the controversy around Maduro still continues in and outside Venezuela – mainly because of the U.S.' "close interests" in the country.Since Maduro's predecessor Hugo Chavez adopted a more Bolivarianist and anti-imperialist discourse, and took some courageous steps like nationalizing Venezuela's monopolized energy companies, the country went through a number of coup attempts backed by the U.S.
The U.S. is again disturbed by the situation in Venezuela as Maduro has followed in Chavez's footsteps and insisted on the same policies. The country has set an example for the other countries in the region that are colonized by the U.S.
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently condemned the Venezuelan election claiming it was rigged. "The U.S. condemns the fraudulent election that took place in Venezuela on May 20. This so-called ‘election' is an attack on constitutional order and an affront to Venezuela's tradition of democracy," he said in a statement.
So, how does the U.S. justify its intervention in the domestic affairs of another independent, sovereign nation?
One of U.S.' major talking points was the low voter turnout in the election. Officials put the figure at 46 percent, which is actually very close rates observed in many European countries, with the exception of Turkey, where voter turnout is generally around 85 percent. As for the U.S., only 54.9 percent of Americans cast ballots in the last presidential election.
In the Venezuelan presidential election, all the candidates competed freely whereas foreign observers and U.S.-backed dissident media outlets in the country carefully observed the election.
Current president Maduro received around 5,800,000 votes, his nearest rival Henry Falcon received 1,820,000, while Javier Bertucci got 925,000 and Reinaldo Quijada got 34,614 votes.
It seems that these results are more reliable than that of the U.S. presidential election, which has been marred by claims of Russian meddling.
We all know that the baseless accusations against Maduro and his administration are the product of U.S. efforts to justify its intervention in the country's internal affairs.
Even if there were doubts over the election, it is only obvious that different international organizations would be quick to slap different sanctions. But no state has the right to declare the results, refusing to obey them illegitimately or by ignoring international law and diplomatic practices.
But this is the U.S. From the Far East to Latin America and Africa to Europe, everywhere is like its backyard. It is the one who sets the rules.
For instance, if you are a client like Saudi Arabia, which purchases weapons worth billions of dollars annually and prefers dollars over its national currency, even the monarchy would be regarded as a democracy by the U.S. and Uncle Sam would abruptly turn a king into an elected and esteemed politician.
On the other hand, as for the countries with long-established democratic regimes like Venezuela, even using the euro in foreign trade is enough to declare them dictators. You can be declared a dictator in one night even though you are a democratically elected politician.
But it cannot go on like this forever. The U.S. hegemony, prevalent since World War II, is no longer sustainable – neither for the U.S. itself nor for the other countries.