In a climate of rising tension across South America, the Mercosur summit in Foz do Iguaçu, Brazil, became the stage for a heated debate over the United States’ growing military presence off the coast of Venezuela. On December 20, 2025, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva took a firm and public stand, warning that any US military intervention in Venezuela could spell disaster for the entire hemisphere and set a perilous precedent for the world.
“An armed intervention in Venezuela would be a humanitarian catastrophe for the hemisphere and a dangerous precedent for the world,” Lula declared, according to Keystone-SDA. His remarks, delivered before a gathering of South American leaders, echoed far beyond the summit’s walls, underscoring the gravity of the unfolding crisis.
The US military’s recent maneuvers have not gone unnoticed. A formidable assembly of warships, fighter jets, and troops has taken position off Venezuela’s coastline. Officially, Washington claims the operation is a crackdown on drug smuggling. But in Caracas, President Nicolás Maduro—long accused of authoritarian rule—fears the true aim is regime change. The specter of outside intervention has thrown the region into a state of unease, reviving old anxieties about sovereignty and foreign influence in Latin America.
Mercosur, the South American trade bloc, finds itself sharply divided over the US operation and Venezuela’s fate. The right-leaning governments of Argentina and Paraguay have voiced strong support for increased pressure on Maduro’s regime. “Maduro is a dictator and must go,” Argentinian Foreign Minister Pablo Quirno told La Nación before the summit, leaving little doubt as to Buenos Aires’ position. Paraguay’s Foreign Minister, Rubén Ramírez Lezcano, went further, emphasizing what he described as the threat to regional security posed by Venezuela’s government and calling for the release of political prisoners.
“The Venezuelan government poses a threat to regional security,” Lezcano insisted, reiterating Paraguay’s demand for greater democratic freedoms in the country. Such statements have only deepened the rift within Mercosur, whose members—Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay—have struggled to find common ground on the Venezuela question. Venezuela itself, once a full member, has been suspended from the bloc, reflecting the extent of its isolation.
The city of Foz do Iguaçu, the summit’s host, sits at a symbolic crossroads: perched on the border where Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay meet, and just a stone’s throw from the majestic Iguaçu Falls. Against this dramatic backdrop, leaders from across the continent gathered to grapple with a crisis that threatens not only Venezuela, but the delicate balance of power in the region.
For Lula, the risks of intervention far outweigh any potential benefits. His warning was clear and pointed: military action could unleash chaos, sending shockwaves through neighboring countries and upending decades of efforts to foster regional stability. “Armed intervention in Venezuela would be a humanitarian disaster for the hemisphere and a dangerous precedent for the world,” he repeated, according to multiple reports.
Yet, for others at the summit, the status quo in Caracas is untenable. Argentina’s government, led by a right-leaning coalition, has made no secret of its distaste for Maduro’s rule. Quirno’s blunt assessment—“Maduro is a dictator and must go”—captures a sentiment shared by many in the region who see Venezuela’s political crisis as a festering wound, one that can no longer be ignored. Paraguay, too, has called for action, with Lezcano stressing the need for the release of political prisoners and greater respect for human rights.
At the heart of the dispute is a fundamental question: Should the international community intervene in Venezuela’s affairs, or does such action risk plunging the region into chaos? The US, for its part, maintains that its military buildup is solely intended to combat drug trafficking—a scourge that has plagued the Caribbean and South America for decades. But skepticism abounds. Maduro’s government, already under intense economic and diplomatic pressure, views the US presence as a direct threat to its survival.
“Washington wants to force a change of power in Caracas,” Maduro has warned, voicing fears echoed by his supporters and some regional allies. The shadow of past US interventions in Latin America—often justified on grounds of security or democracy—looms large, fueling suspicion and resistance among those wary of a repeat scenario.
Mercosur’s internal divisions reflect broader ideological and political shifts across South America. While Brazil, under Lula’s leadership, has positioned itself as a voice for dialogue and restraint, Argentina and Paraguay have adopted a more confrontational approach. Uruguay and Bolivia, meanwhile, have taken a more cautious stance, wary of being drawn into a spiraling conflict.
The stakes are high. Venezuela’s ongoing crisis has already triggered a mass exodus, with millions fleeing economic hardship and political repression. Any escalation—whether through direct intervention or increased sanctions—could worsen an already dire humanitarian situation, sending new waves of refugees across the continent. “An armed intervention in Venezuela would be a humanitarian catastrophe,” Lula warned, his words resonating with those who remember the region’s turbulent past.
Yet, some argue that inaction is no longer an option. The continued detention of political prisoners, allegations of electoral fraud, and widespread reports of human rights abuses have convinced many that Maduro’s government must be held accountable. For them, the question is not whether to act, but how—and at what cost.
As the summit drew to a close, no consensus emerged. The Mercosur bloc remains split, with each member pursuing its own interests and priorities. What is clear, however, is that the crisis in Venezuela has become a flashpoint for broader debates about democracy, sovereignty, and the limits of international intervention in Latin America.
For now, the warships remain anchored off Venezuela’s coast, a stark reminder of the region’s unresolved tensions. Whether diplomacy or confrontation will prevail remains to be seen. But as leaders departed Foz do Iguaçu, the urgency of finding a peaceful solution was on everyone’s mind, lest the hemisphere be plunged into yet another chapter of turmoil and uncertainty.
