Philosophers from Immanuel Kant to George Santayana warned that history repeats itself because we fail to heed its lessons. So it is with the Trump administration and its plan for regime change in Venezuela. Even if it succeeds in ousting Nicolás Maduro, the result will almost certainly mirror the failures of Afghanistan and Iraq under the Bush and Biden administrations.

The road to forced democratization is littered with failed U.S. initiatives. While some point to post-World War Two Japan and Germany as success stories, those cases were extreme exceptions that required vast resources, long occupations, and geopolitical conditions that do not exist today. The more common outcome is failure. Intervention rarely produces the stability or democracy that policymakers promise.

Even when regime change succeeds militarily, democratization often fails. History provides a long list of examples. The Johnson administration’s intervention in the Dominican Republic produced turmoil instead of stability. The United States failed to dislodge Ho Chi Minh, failed to topple Fidel Castro, and achieved only short term victories in Afghanistan and Iraq that collapsed into prolonged instability and regional upheaval.

Ousting a dictator, no matter how brutal, does not guarantee that what follows will be democratic or legitimate. The United States, after nearly 250 years, still struggles with its own democratic norms and rule of law. Those struggles are being tested right now by the administration that criticizes Venezuela for actions some argue it is emulating domestically. Maduro is without question a repressive dictator, and Chávez before him dismantled a functioning democracy and replaced it with authoritarian rule dressed in empty leftist rhetoric.

Maduro has rigged elections, jailed opposition figures, stacked the courts, and shredded constitutional restraints. No one should excuse this behavior. Yet the Trump administration has neither the capacity nor the vision to build a stable democratic system in Venezuela. Removing Maduro may be militarily achievable, but it could also ignite a civil war or justify even harsher repression by the regime.

Even if regime change occurs, the question remains: what comes next? Democracy is not built overnight, and the record in Iraq shows how long and costly such efforts become. Destabilizing Venezuela will only entangle the United States in another prolonged engagement. Trump may imagine himself an heir to the Monroe Doctrine, believing the United States can dictate outcomes across the hemisphere, or he may simply covet Venezuela’s vast oil reserves.

Another possibility is arrogance, which past administrations shared when they believed intervention could manufacture democracy through force. Yet these efforts fail far more often than they succeed. History does not bend simply because a president wills it to. In pursuing this course, the Trump administration is preparing once again to repeat the failures of the past.

The first time a tragedy unfolds, it is heartbreaking. The second time, it becomes a farce. If Trump follows this path, Venezuela will become his farce, his albatross, and the inevitable result of refusing to learn the lessons history has already taught.

The post Venezuela, History, and the Futile Quest for Regime Change appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This post was originally published on CounterPunch.org.