Mike Baker

Ah, interim.

Not as an endorsement of the old regime, but as a way to keep the country functioning without plunging it into chaos.

Although to outside observers, working with the Maduro regime key players...

It could seem like an endorsement of the old regime, since, well, those key players are the old regime.

As one opposition figure told The Times, the U.S.

appears to be betting on reforms, not on a revolution.

Now, on one level, you can see the logic here.

Washington looked at the landscape and chose the path that appeared to offer the least resistance, keep the machinery of the state running, protect oil flows, and avoid the need for a prolonged U.S.

military presence on the ground.

But, as you may guess, that approach carries its own risks.

If the White House sidelines the Democratic opposition simply because it seems easier, it risks undercutting its credibility, both inside Venezuela and with allies that are watching closely.

As we told you yesterday on the PDB, the senior regime figures still in place are not reformers.

They're just as corrupt, complicit, and compromised as Maduro.

Betting on continuity may buy you short-term stability, but it also risks entrenching the very system that Washington says it wants to dismantle.

It's not a perfect analogy to be sure, but it's a bit like the White House pushing Kiev to simply agree to peace, regardless of the concessions they have to make, simply to say that, well, they have peace.

Or to ignore the Gaza ceasefire's phase two requirements that Hamas disarm and give up governance,

Because, well, they just seem too difficult.

Capturing Maduro, the face of the regime, because his regime has been complicit in narco-trafficking, violent repression, and the outright theft of an election, but leaving his cronies in place to continue running things with the hope that they're now frightened enough to reform?

Well, yes, perhaps that's easier than forcing the regime's remaining key players to accept a transfer of power to the lawfully elected opposition.

But really, at the end of the day, is it anything more than a reshuffling of bad actors?