A regional, sovereignty‑centered analysis for Caribbean readers

Why the Caribbean Is Paying Attention

Across the Caribbean, elections are more than political rituals—they are expressions of sovereignty, stability, and survival. Small states depend on transparent governance to maintain legitimacy at home and credibility abroad. When a major regional partner like Venezuela faces a disputed election, the ripple effects reach every Caribbean shore.

The 2024 Venezuelan presidential election has become one of the most contested in modern hemispheric history. The Venezuelan government declared Nicolás Maduro the winner. The opposition claimed the opposite. Many countries—including the United States, Canada, several Latin American governments, and some Caribbean voices—expressed doubts about the credibility of the results.

For Caribbean people, the question is not just academic. Venezuela is a neighbor, a PetroCaribe partner, a member of regional institutions, and a country whose instability has already shaped migration, energy policy, and regional diplomacy.

So the central question becomes: Is there credible evidence that Maduro stole the election?

This article examines the facts through a Caribbean lens—one that values sovereignty, fairness, and the right of nations to choose their own path without coercion.

1. Why Caribbean Nations Care About Venezuela’s Election

Caribbean states have long balanced relationships with both the United States and Venezuela. Many benefited from PetroCaribe, which provided concessional oil financing that supported social programs, infrastructure, and energy security.

At the same time, Caribbean governments value:

• Non‑interference
• Respect for sovereignty
• Regional stability
• Democratic legitimacy

A disputed election in a major neighbor raises concerns about:

• Migration flows
• Energy security
• Regional diplomatic fractures
• The credibility of hemispheric institutions
• The precedent it sets for electoral transparency

Caribbean leaders cannot ignore a crisis of legitimacy in a country that has historically been both a partner and a source of regional tension.

2. What the Official Venezuelan Results Claimed

Venezuela’s National Electoral Council (CNE) announced that Maduro won with just over 51% of the vote. But the CNE did not release the usual polling‑station‑level results—something that is standard practice in Venezuela’s electronic voting system.

This lack of transparency immediately raised alarms across the region.

The Carter Center, the only major international observer allowed into the country, later stated that the election “did not meet international standards” and that the results “did not reflect the will of the Venezuelan people.”

For Caribbean nations that pride themselves on clean, verifiable elections, this was a serious red flag.

3. What the Opposition Presented

Opposition poll watchers collected roughly 80% of the official tally sheets (actas) printed directly from voting machines. These actas are the backbone of Venezuela’s electoral system.

According to the opposition:

• Edmundo González won 67% of the vote
• Maduro received far fewer votes than reported
• The CNE’s refusal to publish its own actas was unprecedented

The opposition published thousands of these actas online, inviting independent verification.

For Caribbean observers accustomed to transparent vote tabulation, the opposition’s evidence was significant.

4. What International Observers Found

4.1 The Carter Center

The Carter Center’s assessment was blunt:

• The election was not democratic
• The CNE violated Venezuelan law by withholding results
• The process lacked transparency and fairness
• The opposition’s actas were credible

For Caribbean nations that often rely on international observers to validate their own elections, this finding carries weight.

4.2 United Nations Human Rights Bodies

The UN Human Rights Committee issued an emergency order instructing Venezuela not to destroy electoral materials—a rare intervention that signals deep concern.

4.3 Organization of American States (OAS)

The OAS documented:

• Pre‑election repression
• Media censorship
• Intimidation of opposition poll workers
• Lack of transparency in vote counting

4.4 Regional Governments

Latin American governments such as Argentina, Uruguay, Costa Rica, and Panama refused to recognize the results. Some Caribbean governments expressed concern but stopped short of outright rejection, reflecting the region’s tradition of non‑interference.

5. Evidence of Manipulation and Fraud

5.1 Withholding of Results

The CNE’s refusal to publish polling‑station‑level results is the strongest indicator of irregularity. In Venezuela’s system, these results are normally available immediately.

5.2 Confiscation of Actas

Reports indicated that security forces:

• Confiscated actas
• Raided opposition offices
• Arrested individuals who tried to publish results

The UN’s intervention underscores the seriousness of these allegations.

5.3 Statistical Red Flags

Independent analysts found:

• The opposition’s actas were internally consistent
• No evidence of tampering within the dataset they had
• But the missing 15–27% of actas—controlled by the government—prevented full verification

5.4 Pre‑Election Repression

Human‑rights organizations documented:

• Bans on opposition candidates
• Restrictions on media
• Misuse of state resources
• Intimidation of activists

Caribbean nations, which generally maintain competitive multiparty systems, recognize these as serious violations.

5.5 The “Cyberattack” Claim

The government claimed a massive cyberattack delayed results. Experts found this implausible, noting that hacking all voting machines simultaneously would be nearly impossible.

6. What Maduro’s Government Claims

The government insists:

• The election was free and fair
• The opposition fabricated actas
• A cyberattack caused delays
• International criticism is part of a foreign conspiracy

However, the government has not provided:

• Polling‑station‑level results
• Machine‑generated actas
• Evidence of the cyberattack

Without transparency, these claims remain unverified.

7. Is There Proof Maduro Stole the Election?

7.1 Is there evidence of fraud?

Yes.
Multiple credible sources documented:

• Withheld results
• Intimidation
• Pre‑election repression
• Violations of electoral law

7.2 Is there proof the official results are false?

There is strong evidence, but not complete proof.
The opposition’s actas show a different outcome, but the missing actas prevent full verification.

7.3 Is there proof Maduro stole the election?

There is compelling evidence of manipulation, but the government’s refusal to release data prevents absolute confirmation.

In democratic systems, the burden of proof lies with the state. By withholding results, the government undermined its own legitimacy.

8. What This Means for the Caribbean

Caribbean nations must navigate this crisis with care, balancing:

• Respect for sovereignty
• Commitment to democratic norms
• Regional stability
• Energy and economic interests

8.1 Sovereignty Matters

Caribbean states have long resisted external pressure—whether from Washington, London, or elsewhere. Any response to Venezuela must reflect that tradition.

8.2 Democracy Matters

Caribbean elections are generally transparent, peaceful, and credible. The region has a moral interest in upholding those standards.

8.3 Stability Matters

Venezuela’s crisis affects:

• Migration
• Energy markets
• Regional diplomacy
• Security

8.4 Caribbean Unity Matters

The region is strongest when it speaks with one voice. Venezuela’s crisis tests that unity.

9. Conclusion: A Caribbean Perspective on a Regional Crisis

After reviewing the evidence, several conclusions emerge:

• The 2024 Venezuelan election did not meet international standards.
• The official results lack transparency and credibility.
• The opposition’s actas strongly suggest a different outcome.
• International observers documented serious irregularities.
• Absolute proof is impossible without access to the missing actas.
• Caribbean nations must balance sovereignty with democratic principles.

For the Caribbean, the issue is not choosing sides between Maduro and the opposition. It is defending the principles that small states rely on:

• Transparency
• Rule of law
• Respect for the people’s will
• Regional stability

The Caribbean has always been a moral voice in the hemisphere. How the region responds to Venezuela’s crisis will shape its role in the Americas for years to come.

By TL Neckles