"Confusion and criticism: the Peruvian Government in the face of the crisis in Venezuela"

The recent controversy surrounding the Peruvian government's statements about the situation in Venezuela has generated a wave of criticism and confusion in both the political sphere and the general population. President Dina Boluarte, after a period of silence, has attempted to clarify the country's position, but her words have raised more questions than certainties. Despite her efforts to establish a coherent line, the contradictions are evident, and the lukewarm nature of her assertions has drawn reproaches from various sectors. The situation became more complicated following the departure of Javier González-Olaechea from the foreign ministry, a move that, according to Boluarte, should not be interpreted as a change in Peru's foreign policy. However, her avoidance of referring to Edmundo González Urrutia, the opposition candidate, as "the elected president" instead of "the opposition candidate" starkly contrasts with the recognition he received in previous administrations. This inconsistency has led to questions about the credibility of the government's claims. Boluarte has insisted that her administration will not be complicit in an "electoral fraud" and has demanded that Nicolás Maduro's regime present the election records, arguing that "he who has nothing has nothing to fear." However, the approach seems more rhetorical than effective, as the lack of explicit recognition of the new opposition leadership in Venezuela suggests an ambivalent stance that could harm Peru's image in the international community. The new foreign minister, Elmer Schialer, has also contributed to the confusion with his initial statements, where he implied that Venezuela's problems should be resolved by the Venezuelans themselves. By avoiding labeling the election results of July 28 as fraudulent and not openly condemning Maduro, his approach was perceived as a lack of firmness that has generated discontent among both the opposition and the public. Although Schialer has attempted to clarify his comments, asserting that his role is one of "discreet and patient diplomacy," his lack of clarity has led the Congressional Foreign Relations Commission to request his presence for explanations. This highlights how the lack of alignment in Peru's foreign policy can affect trust in the current administration. Prime Minister Gustavo Adrianzén has also faced criticism for his ambiguity regarding the Venezuelan situation. By stating that González has not been officially recognized as the elected president and reiterating the need for the election records to be presented, his words contradict the previous positions of González-Olaechea, who had recognized him. This inconsistency in the executive's message has raised concerns among legislators, who see it as a lack of commitment to democracy. Reactions to this situation have been swift. Congress members like Alejandro Cavero and Alejandro Muñante have described the government's stance as "lukewarm," arguing that the failure to recognize González Urrutia as the elected president is a slight against the Venezuelan people's struggle for democracy. This criticism underscores how internal politics and foreign policy are intrinsically linked, and how decisions in one sphere can ripple into the other. Boluarte's administration faces a significant challenge, as the credibility of her government is at stake. The international community is closely watching Peru's decisions in this context, and the lack of a firm stance could have repercussions for the country in terms of diplomatic relations and alliances. The possibility of being perceived as a country that turns a blind eye to democratic crises in the region is a risk that Boluarte and her team must take seriously. Ultimately, the current situation demands clear and decisive leadership. The ambiguity in the statements of government officials not only confuses the public but also undermines trust in the country's foreign policy. If Peru wishes to be a relevant actor in the defense of democracy in the region, it is imperative that its leaders speak out clearly and firmly in defense of democratic principles. In this context of uncertainty, the lingering question is whether the government of Dina Boluarte will be able to overcome the contradictions and find a unified voice that reflects the will of the Peruvian people and their commitment to democracy in the neighboring country. The answer to this concern will not only define her administration but will also have a significant impact on the future of the relationship between Peru and Venezuela.