Venezuela is once again a protagonist on the international scene, and on its own merits. Of course, a lot has to do with the current international situation, with disaster capitalism having already devastated the global status quo and the economic dynamics being shattered.

All the factors converge to rekindle the importance of our country on the regional scene and in other latitudes. We can speak with certainty that oil and the political and diplomatic importance that Chavismo holds for other countries is essential for the resolution of multiple crises manifesting themselves in various parts of the planet.

No matter how hard one tries, one cannot disguise the resilience and audacity of the government of Nicolás Maduro, which has understood the circumstances of the political conflicts in which it has been involved, and has made decisions that have broken the solid rock of Sisyphus that the enemies of Venezuela have insisted on throwing on its shoulders.

The announcement of the resumption of the dialogue with the opposition is a living example, very current. It is not a coincidence that Venezuela continues to be present in the global arena as a significant actor, both for what it does in diplomatic terms and for what it represents, for Tyrians and Trojans.

If it were a soccer match, affirming that Chavismo came back in the final minutes (of 2022) is wise and consistent with what is observed in reality. We must also admit  that sometimes the game was not always the most attractive or the most admirable, even though it was effective.

Let’s look at it with a magnifying glass: Washington traveled to Caracas, and not the other way around, last March, with the sole objective of resuming a channel for dialogue and negotiation that could alleviate the gringo’s pain resulting from the shots in the foot that have recently been fired, apparently to destroy another state, an existential enemy of its already ancient hegemonic condition: Russia. The miscalculation of the Joe Biden administration, in short, exceeded its intellectual attributes, and there is no arbitrator who could disguise the blunders that the White House makes every day.

Then it was Macron, the French president now under investigation for his electoral campaign, who urgently approached Maduro during COP27 due to energy needs, as Europe is a social pot on the verge of boiling due to the erratic economic policy that is also anti-Russian and subordinated to the Washington and New York interests. To continue with the soccer analogy, they have scored a few goals on their own net, and their primary players suffer from injuries that will leave them on the bench for the rest of the season.

Gustavo Petro has not managed to escape the troubles of the Colombian internal crisis that little by little cause one to question the practical application of his project. The difficulties of reaching consensus through political alliances in Congress and the economic situation of our neighbors have led the Petro administration to champion its support for the Venezuelan dialogue in Mexico, since the Colombian–Venezuelan border is where perhaps the greatest incentive lies for economic and financial connectivity that could provide extra support to his government—a consolation prize for not having qualified for the final phase of the World Cup, even with notable talent.

Not to mention Alberto Fernández, who now celebrates the fact that Chavismo and the Unitary Platform sit at the same table, almost as if he had scored a goal himself, when his government has shown itself to be indifferent towards its Venezuelan counterpart in different scenarios, taking almost two years to recognize the ambassador Stella Lugo and demonstrating negligence in the EMTRASUR case. Someone answer honestly: where does Alberto fit into the resolution of the political conflict in Venezuela? Our dear Diego Armando Maradona, on the other hand, did contribute, economically and through solidarity, when he was still with us.

Meanwhile, Argentina resents the blows of having been subordinated to the technocrats of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Democratic agenda for the region. Hebe de Bonafini, may she rest in peace after decades of anti-neoliberal resistance, dignifiedly apologized to Venezuela on behalf of the Argentine nation for the damages caused, as a show of gratitude and honor.

Seen this way, it seems that there is a simulation of political and diplomatic opportunism in all these expressions of "guarantors" of the dialogue between Chavismo and part of the non-parliamentary opposition. The presidents who are now cheering for a new day in Mexico seem to have much more to lose and cling to the position of Venezuela as a fundamental country in the recent regional dynamics so as not to fall into the misfortune of their own internal crises—the equivalent of hunting for lost balls on the rival’s side of the field, running the risk of being shut out, if we stick to this soccer analogy mixed with Bolivarianism.

It was very easy for all of them to adhere to the proposals of the United States, whether we refer to it as a "sanctions regime," an anti-Chavista condemnation, or support for the Guaidó project, when all of Venezuela was cornered in its own end of the field. Now that the conditions of the game have changed, the opposing players don’t seem so brave and they try to ingratiate themselves with the referee. The economy and the energy crisis has directed them in favor of our country, on account of gaining a prestige that they could not acquire on their own.