On March 4, Venezuela's "self-styled president" Guaido returned to China with high profile. The judicial, procuratorial and gendarmerie departments did not arrest him, and there was no obstacle. They were surrounded and cheered by supporters, and went to the welcoming conference to issue a "victory declaration", threatening to use "new rules" to promote the struggle to overthrow the Maduro government. This matter has aroused widespread concern and heated discussion. My opinion is:

First, Guaido is just a pawn in the hands of the United States, a card played by the United States to manipulate the situation in Venezuela, and a bait cast by the United States to create an excuse to use military means as a last resort. He spent ten days abroad this time, mainly doing this: from forcibly transporting "humanitarian relief materials" to lobbying Colombia, Brazil and other countries to help the military intervention Committee, to challenging the ban and returning to the trial law, all for the sake of the United States. For the United States, it is not a pity to sacrifice a Guaido as long as it can detonate the "fuse". On the other hand, if Guaido successfully explores the road, the United States can force Maduro to retreat without bloodshed.

Second, for Maduro, grasping or not grasping is really a dilemma: not grasping stigma will damage the image; If you catch someone, you will be given a handle, which will lead to serious consequences. What's more, envoys from Germany, France, Spain, the Netherlands and other ten countries will "escort" the United States as "depth bombs", which is rare in the world. If the military and police make a hasty arrest, it is inevitable to have physical contact with the envoys, which will lead to diplomatic incidents and the consequences will be more serious. In this case, objectively speaking, it is wise not to catch it. Patience to avoid chaos and calm handling are conducive to the overall situation. For Guaido, the sword of law is also hanging high.

Third, there are still many possibilities to solve the crisis. After the relatively peaceful "critical day" of "February 23" when "humanitarian relief supplies" were forcibly delivered, the invasion, civil strife and Venezuela's peaceful negotiation to solve the problem within the scope of the Constitution and laws are all under the consideration of all parties concerned. It is worth noting that Bolton, Assistant to the US President for National Security Affairs, declared that "efforts should be made to replace Maduro with a broad alliance to achieve a peaceful transition". Secretary of State Pompeo proposed to consult with Russia on the issue of the Committee, while Russia responded on the premise of abiding by the UN Charter. Maduro has repeatedly expressed his willingness to talk and talk with the United States and the opposition; Guaido had to accept the slogan of "peaceful struggle" when it was hopeless to lobby neighboring countries to form an alliance to intervene. It can be seen that the road of "dialogue" has not been blocked, and there is still room for consideration if Maduro does not catch Guaido.

Guaido is already in China. What matters is not his personal fate, but the development of the situation and the changes in the positions of all parties. The crisis in the Communist Party of China (CPC) originated from internal affairs, and its essence is internal affairs. However, it is increasingly international, involving a wide range, and the game is subtle and complicated, which requires thorough and objective observation.