When revisiting Francis Sánchez’s “Analysis of the Letter from Jamaica: 1815–2015, Two Hundred Years of Bolivarian Thought and Legacy,” we find a shared history. [Caracas](https://www.britannica.com/place/Caracas?utm_source=chatgpt.com) and Bogotá were, among other cities, capitals of the Spanish American revolution. It was there that insurgent movements born in the Americas took shape. They all shared a common goal: to end Spanish colonialism and create independent nations.
Two hundred years later, the history of Colombia and Venezuela presents a contrast that is difficult to ignore. The ideals that once united these peoples now coexist with expressions of xenophobia between neighboring countries.
It was in this context that Bolívar’s political thought emerged. His ideal defended freedom and democracy. He also proposed a unified and comprehensive system of government for the continent.
Thus, Carabobo and Maracaibo helped forge the Republic of Venezuela. From Pantano de Vargas and Boyacá emerged the Republic of Colombia. Pichincha led to the formation of the Republic of Ecuador. Junín gave rise to the Republic of Bolivia. Ayacucho paved the way for the creation of the Republic of Peru.
The Summit and Laurels of Freedom
Each battle represented the summit and laurels of freedom. Each victory meant a new and free homeland in the Americas.
These nations were created and forged through struggle and intellect. The goal was to share a common geographical space. There was also an effort to unify legal, economic, social, and military policies.
Everything responded to a single ideal: the South American Continental Homeland. This is the foundation of Bolívar’s thought reflected in the Letter from Jamaica.
Then came the moment when Chávez appropriated the Bolivarian concept. He planted it in Venezuela and began spreading it across the continent.
After his death, Venezuela became a recurring subject on the regional and international agenda. The discourse eventually caused the hopes of Bolivarian socialism to wither.
Why? The social and political crisis facing Venezuela has several causes. One of them is the weakening of its ruling class. It has failed to respond to the needs of an increasingly dissatisfied population.
There is also the state’s inability to make its economic model work effectively. This was compounded by the continued shortage of basic necessities.
The country experienced unprecedented inflation. There were also allegations of sabotage. For other sectors, however, this was an expression of popular discontent.
These problems were accompanied by allegations of human rights violations and persecution of the opposition. Political polarization also intensified. Fear of chaos and government dysfunction became increasingly widespread.
All of this left social actors deeply divided. The dispute also moved into the media, where a relentless media war unfolded.
Dependent on Oil
Venezuela depends on oil sales. However, the political succession under Maduro left the country in a fragile position.
Internal divisions gained increasing international attention. Venezuela began to appear weakened and increasingly distant from the nation envisioned during the Bolivarian Revolution.
During Chávez’s government, many saw their leader as a messianic figure. For them, he represented a long-awaited answer.
That is why people now speak of two different moments: the Venezuela embodied by Chávez and the Venezuela Chávez left behind.
It is true that Chávez’s Venezuela reduced poverty. It also reduced social inequality.
However, today’s Venezuela reveals a divide between two opposing projects. The country is divided and polarized between Chavistas and those who oppose Chavismo.
Both sides represent a Venezuela that has yet to find its path.
More recently, the assassination of an opposition candidate created a grim warning. It happened just days before the elections.
Nevertheless, the victory of the Venezuelan opposition in the legislative elections of December 6, 2015, demonstrated the importance of voting. Popular participation became a fundamental tool.
When people vote in large numbers, abstention can be overcome. In this way, citizens can open a new democratic path.
The result brought new political, social, and economic hope to a society suffocated by the direction of its government.
In Venezuela, that democratic space was consolidated at the ballot box through active popular participation.
The result went beyond the guarantees the opposition had been given. The people had begun to doubt their own ability to respond. Yet they ultimately demonstrated their strength in the face of the abuses they had experienced.
Thus, Chávez’s dream of a homeland began to fade. It was not because of the external enemy he had so often denounced.
Instead, it was because of Maduro’s lack of leadership. The president had to lead Chavismo without Chávez.
The Impact of Xenophobia Between Brother Nations
The history of Colombia and Venezuela is united by the shared ideals of their struggle for independence.
It is also marked by people who have suffered internal violence in both territories. Added to this are political figures whose words inflame nationalist sentiments.
At times, these speeches have shaken the integration of two peoples who need each other. They also share needs and problems.
In August 2015, the Venezuelan government declared a constitutional state of emergency in several states along the border with Colombia.
For Maduro, these measures were necessary. His stated goal was to build a “peaceful border” and combat “terrorism” in the border region.
However, the result was deplorable. Acts of violence, looting, and dispossession occurred.
Around 25,000 Colombians were deported. Others returned to Colombia out of fear of being deported.
This episode became one of the most visible examples of xenophobia between brother nations. It also demonstrated the consequences of certain political decisions.
Security-related rhetoric can directly affect communities. In this case, those affected were people who had shared territory, families, and economic ties for decades.
These acts had a clear element of aggression. Some people needed medical attention to manage anxiety.
Others received clinical treatment for psychological distress. Some even required therapeutic treatment with psychiatric referral.
There is a mental border that those seeking to sever the bonds between brother nations are determined to impose.
It could be said that one of these countries was blessed with vast oil wealth. This allowed it to project economic grandeur and military power.
It also gave the country greater freedom in managing its resources. It even allowed it to support friendly nations and intervene in their economies.
The other country was left to calm tensions. Its goal was to prevent those ties from becoming permanently fractured.
It therefore sought to place reason above discord. It also chose good manners over inflammatory rhetoric.
Diplomacy prevailed over uncomfortable words. Above all, the aim was to seek solutions through dialogue.
The purpose was to overcome actions that ranged from threats to the use of force.
Xenophobia Between Brother Nations: A History United by Shared Ideals
The history of Colombia and Venezuela is united by the shared ideals of their struggle for independence.
It is also shaped by people who have suffered internal violence in both territories. Added to this are political figures whose speeches stir nationalist sentiments.
At times, these statements threaten the integration of two peoples who need each other. Both share problems, ties, and needs.
In August 2015, the Venezuelan government declared a constitutional state of emergency in several states bordering Colombia.
For Maduro, these measures were necessary. The goal was to build a “peaceful border” and combat “terrorism” in the border region.
However, the result was deplorable. Acts of violence, looting, and dispossession occurred.
Around 25,000 Colombians were deported. Others returned to Colombia out of fear of deportation.
These events had a clear element of aggression. Some people needed medical attention to manage anxiety.
Others received clinical care for psychological distress. Some required therapeutic treatment with psychiatric referral.
There is a seed of hatred that the people do not want to harvest.
The armed conflict in Colombia also became more acute along the border. Some victims fled the country and sought refuge in Venezuela.
They settled there without being officially recognized as refugees. Over time, they became an invisible population.
They were economic migrants, but they were also victims of violence. The measures taken by Maduro’s government worsened their difficulties.
This population suffered dispossession and violations of their human rights.
In practice, these circumstances also fueled xenophobia against Colombians. The situation was accompanied by a strong Venezuelan military presence.
The mistreatment affected people who maintained emotional ties and roots in Venezuela. There were also evictions in which force was used.
For many people, this meant losing the little they had managed to build over the years.
Xenophobia between brother nations does not only damage diplomatic or trade relations. It also affects families, communities, and bonds built over generations.
In these situations, dignity and national sentiment are trampled upon. An inevitable question then arises.
How many people were stripped of something more than their material possessions? How many lost bonds built through fraternity and family love?
A Sad Truth: Xenophobia Between Brother Nations
The xenophobia being encouraged has consequences that extend far beyond national borders. The events of just a few months earlier revealed a profound disregard for the dignity of Colombians.
Media and populist rhetoric also deepened the divide. The confrontation between Uribista and Chavista factions intensified on both sides of the border.
Every attack fueled the division even further.
Talking about xenophobia between brother nations also means asking what happens when ideological differences turn a neighbor into an enemy.
Meanwhile, it is ordinary people who suffer the consequences. People were prevented from moving freely across a border filled with barricades.
In the first days of January 2016, Maduro’s government ordered the opening of a humanitarian corridor along the Colombia–Venezuela border.
Hopefully, that opening would soon become permanent and complete. It was the hope of a reunion without barriers between two brother nations.
Ultimately, ignorance is not perpetuated only through laws. It also survives in rigid ideological convictions.
The same is true of dry and shameless fanaticism. This was one of the challenges the new National Assembly had to confront.
Its task was to reclaim the greatness of Venezuela.
Because, in the end, combating xenophobia between brother nations means recovering what has always united Colombia and Venezuela.
Their shared history is one of those bonds. So are their families, cultural exchange, and the closeness between their peoples.
Above all, there is the willingness to live together despite political differences.
