On Shaky Ground: Venezuela After Catastrophic Earthquake Losses

Olivia Wearing | Latin America Fellow

Image sourced from Eduardo Juhyun KIm via Unsplash

Venezuelans are still working to recover and respond to the earthquakes of 24 June 2026. As the death toll continues to climb, passing 6,000 as of the beginning of August, the ineffectiveness of the Venezuelan government to respond to the tragedy has resulted in widespread public dissatisfaction. The severity and ongoing outrage at the Venezuelan government’s subsequent perceived lack of urgency in protecting and providing for its people is exactly the kind of catalyst for regime change that has been seen in countless revolutions in history.

If the public continues to speak out in reaction to the government’s inaction, it is possible that we will see a demand for legitimately democratic leaders, as instances of corruption and humanitarian failings of the government are brought to the fore in this turbulent period. However, given the United States’ consistent intervention in Venezuelan politics, it is also possible that the ascent of more legitimate democratic governance will be quelled.

Instability in Venezuela

The Venezuelan government’s response to the earthquake was slow and limited in scale. The Interim President Delcy Rodriguez defended the lack of substantial machinery provided to remove rubble, stating that the government had “acted immediately”. While 19,000 officials were deployed, the majority of the action to search for and rescue victims of the catastrophe, as well as the immediate delivery of food and water supplies, was civilian led. In the days following the catastrophe, there were expressions of frustration from Venezuelans as many more lives could have been saved had they been searched for in time.

Furthermore, the disaster revealed the devastating infrastructural issues plaguing the country. Underfunding and insufficient maintenance of buildings stemming from the country’s economic crisis showed how irresponsible the governance had been leading up to 24 June. A further demonstration of the gulf between the Venezuelan government and the experience of its people was seen in Rodriguez’s televised address in which she said to soldiers that critics of the government and armed forces would “be buried”. If this bitter relationship between public and government continues, an uprising may come as no surprise.

The Lead-up: Venezuela’s Economic Struggle

The causes of the devastating earthquake trace back decades. Over the course of President Nicolás Maduro’s leadership of Venezuela from 2013 until his arrest this year, the country saw an extreme downturn. Nearly eight million Venezuelans have fled to escape the violence, crime and poverty resulting from the country’s economic breakdown. This collapse was pre-empted by decades of poor macroeconomic policy under former presidents Chavez and Maduro, with excessive government spending resulting in substantial external debt. A sudden 2014 drop in oil prices, which the government was severely underprepared for, triggered the process of collapse.

The dependence on revenues from fossil fuel exports also resulted in the neglect of many of the country’s essential sectors, creating an unreliable economic landscape and living conditions for civilians. In recent political history, corruption has also increased, with Venezuela ranked 180 out of 182 countries on Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index 2025. These figures are key markers of change within the country and potentially the region as the intolerable civilian experience of the economic collapse caused by Maduro and his predecessor has come to a fever pitch.

A Third Pink Tide

With the Venezuelan earthquake bringing about public disapproval of the government response, the conditions are in place for a broader response and demands for government changes. Historically, waves of leftist leaders have been brought to power across Latin America in response to authoritarian regimes fuelled by neoliberal ideologies. These periods are known as the First and Second Pink Tides. The First Pink Tide came to Venezuela with the election of Hugo Chavez. While the purported aim of these changes was to redistribute oil wealth and bring about equality, neither period has proved to affect change in the long term.

While Chavez, Maduro and Rodriguez are all technically defined as socialist left-wing leaders, the legitimacy of their ideological identities has been heavily scrutinised. While Chavez and Maduro both represented strong anti-U.S. sentiment, Rodriguez has seemingly been given the stamp of approval by the far-right Trump administration, as evidenced by the very recent oil deal which bestows the U.S. with a significant stake over Venezuelan oil. As the number of Trump-backed leaders, including Rodriguez, increases across the region, the discontent caused by the earthquake has the potential to catalyse significant uproar, potentially causing the pendulum to swing back to a period of widespread public demonstrations of anger demanding legitimate democracy. 

What’s Next?

The immediate future of the Venezuelan government could be solidified by U.S. backing, maintaining its authoritarian position. At the same time, the exposure of the government’s corruption leading up to the earthquakes, combined with the subsequent civilian outrage, could result in demands for policies which ensure that essential human rights are met and civilian safety is prioritised, or even for a new political regime.

Olivia Wearing is a student at RMIT University in her final semester of completing a Bachelor of International Studies. She has a strong interest in linguistics, particularly the Spanish language and also Latin American history and culture. Spending a semester studying at Universidad de Carlos III in Madrid deepened her understanding of Latin American contribution to the world with its natural riches and unique cultures.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Young Australians in International Affairs. AI tools were not used by this author. All content is original, and no plagiarism has been used in the preparation of this article.