• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Moisés Naím",
    "Francisco Toro"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "South America"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Democracy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Why Nicolás Maduro Clings to Power

Maduro has no clue how to reverse any of the multiple crises he has set off. At this point, the goal of staying in power is just to be in power.

Link Copied
By Moisés Naím and Francisco Toro
Published on May 30, 2018

Source: Atlantic

It’s difficult to describe the state of Venezuela today without coming across as a little hysterical. Phrases like “zombie movie set” and “post-apocalyptic hellscape” keep turning up in the accounts of recent visitors, who are staggered to see a society reach the levels of decay normally associated with wartime, but without a war.

In an engrossing recent account, The Wall Street Journal’s Anatoly Kurmanaev—who reported out of Caracas from 2013 until a few weeks ago—compared the nation’s state unfavorably with the Siberia of his youth in the 1990s:

Venezuela’s collapse has been far worse than the chaos that I experienced in the post-Soviet meltdown. As a young person, I was still able to get a good education in a public school with subsidized meals and decent free hospital treatment. By contrast, as the recession took hold in Venezuela, the so-called Socialist government made no attempt to shield health care and education, the two supposed pillars of its program.

The statistics of Venezuela’s implosion are at once mind-blowing and somehow not quite up to the task of expressing the full horror of what’s happening there. In a country that had been Latin America’s beacon of peace, stability, democracy, and development throughout the second half of the 20th century, about two-thirds now report involuntary weight loss due to hunger. Out of those who reported losing weight, the average loss was approximately 20 pounds last year.

That, amid all this, the sitting president was recently returned to office with 68 percent of the vote stands as its own sick joke. The election, it nearly goes without saying, was rigged. The opposition boycotted it, and virtually every large democracy and the organizations that represent them slammed it as grossly undemocratic and refused to recognize it: the EU, the U.S., Canada, the G7, every large country in Latin America. The measure of Venezuela’s democratic implosion is the list of countries that did recognize it: Cuba, Russia, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and Iran. Even Syria’s Bashar al-Assad took a break from his war to send Maduro a congratulatory message.

The surprise, in a way, is less that Nicolás Maduro won “reelection” (the scare quotes are sadly mandatory here) than that he wanted another term in the first place. A former bus driver and Cuban-trained hard-line Marxist operative, Maduro has been painfully out of his depth ever since he took over the presidency following Hugo Chávez’s death in March 2013. Five years later, he has no achievements of any kind to show for his time in office, save for managing the considerable feat of hanging on to power through a crisis that would’ve seen off any leader even slightly interested in his people’s well-being.

Maduro plainly has no clue how to reverse any of the multiple crises he has set off, and is reduced to recycling the same promises he has been making and failing to keep for years now. His “campaign” this year centered on the claim that another term is all he needs to defeat the shadowy economic conspiracy he incongruously blames for hyperinflation and economic collapse. And how does he propose to do this? By doubling down on the rigid price controls and uncontrolled money printing that, economists of all stripes agree, are the actual cause of hyperinflation and economic collapse.

The total absence of credible new policies with an adamant refusal to acknowledge the scale of suffering his policies continue to cause are now the regime’s defining characteristics.

So why does he want to keep a job that’s so plainly beyond him?

The reality is that for Nicolás Maduro and the clique around him, the goal of staying in power is just to be in power. Nothing more. Because at this point he’s dug himself into a hole so deep, the alternative to a presidential palace is very likely a jail cell. Or worse.

The ghost of Manuel Noriega, the former Panamanian dictator, hangs heavily over any discussion of Maduro’s future. Like Noriega, Maduro runs a regime knee-deep in the drug trade, and one that has been the subject of intensive DEA surveillance for years. Two of the first lady’s nephews were convicted in the United States last year of offering undercover DEA agents 800 kilograms of cocaine for sale during a sting operation in Haiti some years back. Maduro’s vice president, Tareck El Aissami, is designated a drug kingpin (technically a “Specially Designated Narcotics Trafficker”) by the United States Treasury Department. Whatever role Maduro himself played in this trade, it’s very likely U.S. investigators have the evidence on it. That Noriega died last year while still in custody after three decades in a variety of jails on three different continents is not a fact that will have escaped Maduro.

And drugs are just the beginning. Maduro and members of his inner circle are now under international sanctions for a dizzying variety of misdeeds. Over the years, regime members have been accused of gross human-rights abuses, big-time money laundering, Olympic-level bribery and embezzlement, aiding Hezbollah, sanctions busting in Iran, large-scale environmental crimes, allegations of false imprisonment, torture—the list goes on and on. In February this year, the prosecutor at the International Criminal Court announced that her office had launched a preliminary examination into human-rights abuses in Venezuela committed since 2017. Before it’s all said and done, Maduro could conceivably find himself on the dock in The Hague, Milošević-style.

All of which goes a long way towards explaining why a man who visibly has no idea what he’s doing is so determined to hang on to power. He’s scared. He has good reason to be scared.

A generation ago, it would’ve gone differently. A long tradition guaranteed a soft landing to washed-up autocrats suddenly needing to spend more time with their families. Uganda’s notorious Idi Amin ended his days quietly in a compound in Saudi Arabia, far from power but living in relative luxury. The Filipino dictator Ferdinand Marcos spent his golden years sipping cocktails in Hawaii and Guam; Zaire’s Mobutu Sese Seko wound up in Morocco and Haiti’s “Baby Doc” Duvalier on the French Riviera. Time was when even the worst of the worst could be entreated to leave power with the promise of a nice villa and a bulging bank account. That’s over.

Conversations about Maduro’s fate usually include some speculation about Cuba as a place of exile. It’s easy to see why: Cuba’s been by far the regime’s most important ally. In fact, “ally” doesn’t quite do justice to the deep bond between the two governments: The Venezuelan revolution sometimes feels like a wholly owned subsidiary of the Castro regime, with tens of thousands of Cuban trainers, advisers, and spies embedded into the very core of the Venezuelan state, and no decision of any import made without consulting Havana first. Earlier this month, for instance, the Reuters reporter Marianna Párraga revealed that even as its economy and oil industry collapse, and even though the government lacks the hard currency to import critical medicines, Venezuela has been buying oil on international markets to ship to Cuba on concessional credit terms: a hugely valuable source of revenue for the Cuban regime.

And this points to the problem with the Cuban luxury-exile scenario: Keeping Nicolás Maduro in power is far too valuable to the Cubans for them to aid his exit. Saudi Arabia’s grand strategy never depended on keeping Idi Amin in power in Kampala in the way that Cuba’s strategy demands keeping Maduro in place. But Venezuelan oil and diplomatic support are a key survival strategy for the Cuban regime. If there’s a scenario in which the Cubans would permit his exit, Maduro would swiftly transform from asset into bargaining chip in the Cubans’ eyes. Who’s to say they wouldn’t trade him away to the United States in return for relaxing aspects of the trade embargo, for instance?

A quiet retirement at home is out of the question for a leader who has done so much damage to so many people: The specter of prosecution would always loom. Even if he could handpick a trustworthy successor willing to extend elaborate guarantees, he’ll be hard-pressed to forget  that Chile’s General Augusto Pinochet spent the last years of his life battling prosecutions at home and abroad.

In fact, it’s difficult to conceive of a credible exit plan that Maduro—relatively young at 55— would trust to safeguard him two or three decades into the future. Much better to trust the protection of Venezuela’s grandiloquently named National Bolivarian Armed Forces—increasingly just a Praetorian Guard with all the arms and intelligence capabilities of a nation-state.

Nicolás Maduro clings to power because he’s trapped there. Every alternative arrangement sounds like prison to him. That being the case, he’s not so much governing Venezuela anymore as using the state as a protective cocoon: His one last alternative to a life behind bars.

This article was originally published in the Atlantic.

About the Authors

Moisés Naím

Distinguished Fellow

Moisés Naím is a distinguished fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a best-selling author, and an internationally syndicated columnist.

Francisco Toro

Francisco Toro is executive editor at CaracasChronicles.com.

Authors

Moisés Naím
Distinguished Fellow
Moisés Naím
Francisco Toro

Francisco Toro is executive editor at CaracasChronicles.com.

Political ReformDemocracyNorth AmericaSouth America

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Photo of Balen Shah taking a selfie with a group of Nepali adults and children.
    Article
    A New Generation Takes Power in Nepal

    The incoming government has swept Nepal’s election. The real work begins now.

      Amish Raj Mulmi

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Is France Shifting Rightward?

    The far right failed to win big in France’s municipal elections. But that’s not good news for the country’s left wing, which remained disunited while the broader right consolidated its momentum ahead of the 2027 presidential race.

      Catherine Fieschi

  • Residents and protesters chant national songs and raise their fists as they gather for a civil society rally demanding the resignation of President Andry Rajoelina and paying tribute to the victims of the protests in Antananarivo, on October 13, 2025
    Article
    How Anger Over Corruption Keeps Driving Global Politics

    As public anger over corruption drives protests, election outcomes, and regime change around the world, the Donald Trump administration is disconnecting U.S. policy from this defining feature of global politics.

      • McKenzie Carrier

      Thomas Carothers, McKenzie Carrier

  • Commentary
    Sada
    Digital Dissent in Morocco: A Sociological Analysis of the Generation Z Movement

    From anime heroes to online gaming communities, Morocco’s Gen Z is building a new protest culture. What does this digital imagination reveal about youth politics, and how should institutions respond?

      Abdelilah Farah

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    After Ilia II: What Will a New Patriarch Mean for Georgia?

    The front-runner to succeed Ilia II, Metropolitan Shio, is prone to harsh anti-Western rhetoric and frequent criticism of “liberal ideologies” that he claims threaten the Georgian state. This raises fears that under his leadership the Georgian Orthodox Church will lose its unifying role and become an instrument of ultraconservative ideology.

      Bashir Kitachaev

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.