Letters to the Editor, January 6th: On Trump and Venezuela, the power of newsprint and a walking wonderland

Sir, – It is to be hoped that the forced removal of Venezuela’s president Nicolás Maduro from his, in name only, democratically elected position as president of Venezuela proves to be a positive development for the people of that country.

US president Donald Trump has acted decisively in removing Maduro citing the need to protect US citizens from the ravages of international drug trafficking and proclaiming the liberation of the Venezuelan people from a failed dictatorship.

There will be very few lamenting that fate has caught up with Maduro, if not everyone can be comfortable with the extra judicial nature of the US administration’s actions.

As with all things Trumpian, however, his future actions and not his words will determine the authenticity of his bona fides in removing Maduro.

He has been explicit in detailing his plans to have US oil interests lead the drive to maximise future revenues from the country’s vast oil reserves.

Some of these revenues will be used, according to President Trump, to recompense America for its historic lost investment in the Venezuelan oil industry when it was nationalised under the Perez presidency in 1976.

Nor has he been circumspect in citing the Western hemisphere as a priority area of US interests, even referencing a US policy – the Monroe doctrine – from the 19th century that claimed the region as the US’s sphere of influence.

The extent to which Venezuela’s citizens are allowed to determine their own political future and the manner in which the enormous untapped wealth of the country’s natural resources are used for the benefit of its people, as opposed to supporting an isolationist Maga agenda, will be the future barometer of Trump’s current actions. – Yours, etc,

GERRY PRIZEMAN,

Clontarf,

Dublin 3.

Sir, – I have no sympathy whatsoever for Nicolás Maduro or for the corruption and repression that define his rule in Venezuela.

But opposition to authoritarianism should not require us to abandon consistency, international law, or basic intellectu