U.S. Expels Venezuelan Envoy After Chavez Ousts U.S. Navy Officer

United States State Department ^ | 2-3-2006 | US State Department

[Thanatos]

U.S. Expels Venezuelan Envoy After Chavez Ousts U.S. Navy Officer

State Department describes action as appropriate response to Chavez's decision

By Lauren Monsen
Washington File Staff Writer

Washington -- In response to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's February 2 decision to order the expulsion of a naval attaché at the U.S. Embassy in Caracas, the United States has declared Jeny Figueredo Frias, a diplomat at the Venezuelan Embassy in Washington, "persona non grata."

The dispute, which further exacerbates tensions between the two countries, began with Chavez accusing U.S. naval attaché John Correa of espionage.  The U.S. Embassy forcefully has denied the charge and objected to Correa's expulsion.  Speaking by telephone to a New York Times reporter on February 2, U.S. Embassy spokeswoman Salome Hernandez said: "None of the [U.S.] military attachés in Caracas was or is involved in inappropriate activities."

In ordering the expulsion of Correa, Chavez also threatened to order the detention and removal of other U.S. military personnel on espionage charges.  "If accredited military officials continue with the espionage, we will imprison them; we will order them thrown out," he said.

Scott McCormack, spokesman for the U.S. Department of State, commented on Chavez's action -- and the U.S. response -- while briefing the press February 3.  In declaring the Venezuelan diplomat "persona non grata," the United States is allowing her 72 hours to leave the country, he said.  Although the United States dislikes engaging in diplomatic tit-for-tat, McCormack said, "the Venezuelans are the ones who initiated" the incident, and U.S. officials felt that a commensurate response was in order.

At the same time, "we have no particular quarrel" with the people of Venezuela, said McCormack.  "Our issue rests with the way the Venezuelan government has governed.  It has, we believe, governed in a nondemocratic way.  That is the issue.  We have had concerns about Venezuela's activities in the hemisphere."

Despite ongoing tensions, the Bush administration still hopes to forge a productive partnership with Venezuela on areas of common ground, McCormack told reporters.  "We stand ready to work with the Venezuelan government on a variety of different issues," he said.  "We have a positive agenda for the hemisphere.  We stand ready to work with them on counternarcotics efforts," for example.

"So it's not a matter of left-of-center, right-of-center -- of the political orientation of the particular government," said McCormack.  "It has to do with their actions and their behavior, and that's where we have expressed our concern."

For additional information on U.S. policy, see Venezuela.

Created: 03 Feb 2006 Updated: 03 Feb 2006

[BenLurkin]

Questions for our FR naval experts:

Could a 'war' with Venezuela be won with nothing more than a blockade of sea and air commerce?

Could that be accomplished with a single carrier group?

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

Yeah, pretty much, with a full carrier battle group and a few well-placed and well-supported SEAL teams.

[Billthedrill]

Tit-for-tat diplomatic expulsion is commonplace among enemy nations. That's the road the current government of Venezuela is traveling.

[river rat]

These South American countries have a long history of revolt and assassination....

Chavez should be a strong candidate to get whacked before he creates a situation that will lead to a lot more deaths and destruction...

Personally, I don't care who whacks him...

Semper Fi

[sasportas]

Wouldn't this depend on how much of an air force Chavez has? Your scenario sounds like it would be a head to head contest between our Naval carrier aviators and their air force. I think they are supposed to have a fairly large air force.

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

Not particularly. One can have a large air force in terms of numbers, but if one does not know how to use it, or if your pilots are not adequately trained in combat tactics, then it is pretty much useless. Venezuela does have an Air Force http://www.scramble.nl/ve.htm that includes twenty-one vintage F-16s and some French Mirages. But Chavez's mouth has caused him some supply and maintenance problems http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1556187/posts. Therefore, I suspect that Venezuela's Air Force would not last very long against an American carrier battle group (or two).

Also, do not forget that the U.S. Navy can launch several hundred Tomahawks with various types of warheads to hit Venezuelan airfields well before Chavez could even get his Air Force into the air. This is all theoretical, of course, but a likely scenario I think if we ever had to put Venezuela's military down without invading the country.

Fortunately, it may not ever come to that since Venezuela's military does have close ties to the U.S. military, and many Venezuelan officers apparently are sympathetic to the U.S, as suggested in this piece http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1565908/posts.

Also, Chavez is apparently going to drive Venezuela's oil economy into the ground by grossly overspending on his military http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1561885/posts, and so I suspect that his days are numbered from within, one way or the other, and he doesn't even know it.

[sasportas]

Thanks for a very thorough response. FR is definitely the place for learning. I have learned so much here since I became a freeper.

[jecIIny]

No modern war has ever been won by blockade alone. It's doubtful that Venezuela's neighbors would support our war. If they support Venezuela then the blockade would be ineffective. And this would have very serious economic consequences world wide with the cut off of oil. Look for gas to hit about $4+ a gallon overnight. You also need to consider what pretext we will use for war. "We don't like the guy." is not likely to fly in the world community. It could provoke a severe backlash in the Organization of America States. Bottom line this is not an option at present