Historical lessons from Chile shape Venezuela’s defensive strategy.
Nicolás Maduro has ordered the mass distribution of rifles to civilians throughout Venezuela. These weapons will be distributed to cities, villages, mountains, coasts, plains, and borders. The government says the purpose is to defend sovereignty, national security, and the population itself. Approximately eight million Venezuelans already serve in state-organized civilian militias sworn to protect against internal or external threats. Maduro framed this move as a response to potential U.S. intervention or attempts to destabilize the government.
(Maduro orders more rifles for workers’ militias across Venezuela, preparing the Bolivarian Militia to join the military in resisting any U.S. attack)
The historical example of Salvador Allende in Chile in 1973 is widely cited by analysts. Allende refused to arm civilian supporters before a U.S.-backed military coup overthrew his government. Historians agree that the absence of an armed population allowed the coup to succeed quickly. Maduro appears to be learning from that history and ensuring Venezuela does not repeat Allende’s mistake.
Venezuelan militias are not ordinary civilians with guns. They are organized, trained, and subordinated to the state. Their weapons, structure, and chain of command are controlled by the government, making them a formal part of national defense. This creates a coordinated armed force that can respond to both external invasion and domestic unrest. The state effectively integrates the population into its defensive and political apparatus.
By contrast, civilians in the United States or Canada are armed for personal defense, hunting, and recreation. Guns are legally owned but not integrated into a permanent state-directed military structure. Citizens in North America could resist an invasion if necessary, but there is no nationwide, trained, coordinated militia under government command. Any resistance would be decentralized, voluntary, and dependent on local initiative.
In Venezuela, the militias are designed to act collectively, raising the cost of intervention for any foreign power. They also strengthen Maduro’s internal control, as armed citizens are loyal to the government rather than neutral institutions. This transforms social and political life, tying regime survival directly to the militarized population. The population becomes both defender of the nation and instrument of state authority.
Analysts of armed civilian structures note both advantages and risks. Coordinated militias increase deterrence and regime resilience, but they also embed military power within society, making future instability more likely. Historical research on civilian defense forces shows they can reinforce state control while also creating long-term governance challenges if they operate independently of central authority. Venezuela is activating an existing structure rather than creating it from scratch, making the militarization immediate and comprehensive.
Maduro’s decision is not symbolic or temporary as it is a structural change in how Venezuela conceives defense, governance, and political survival. Unlike civilian gun ownership in North America, this is a coordinated, state-controlled force, not a dispersed, individual right. It ties national defense directly to regime loyalty, and its effects will shape Venezuelan politics and society for years.
Authored By: Global Geopolitics
If you believe journalism should serve the public, not the powerful, and you’re in a position to help, becoming a PAID SUBSCRIBER truly makes a difference. Alternatively you can support by way of a cup of coffee:
buymeacoffee.com/ggtv
https://ko-fi.com/globalgeopolitics
Leave a comment