Oil and democracy in Venezuela and US policy in Latin America

"Venezuela is Latin America's biggest exporter of crude oil and has the world's largest petroleum reserves." - Brian Ellsworth and Andrew Cawthorne, Venezuela death toll rises to 13 as protests flare Reuters 02/24/2014

A little more than half of the world's oil is in the Middle East. Latin America, from Mexico to Argentina, comes in second with around percent, led by Venezuela, Brazil, and Mexico in that order. Cuba is not included, but its Gulf of Mexico fields-that could potentially hold about the same amount of oil as the United States-are not a game changer.

However, Latin America's share is expected to rise significantly as Brazil continues to certify its recently found subsalt fields, with indications that reserves could be exponentially more than currently reported. Venezuela also certified an additional 85 billion barrels in reserves early in 2011 which made its reserves officially the biggest in the world at nearly 297 billion barrels. - Andrés Cala and Michael Economides, America's Blind Spot

America's Blind Spot: Chávez, Oil, and US Security (2012) by Andrés Cala and the late Michael Economides is an oil-industry oriented analysis of US policy toward Venezuela. They call for a pragmatic, "realist" policy toward Venezuela.

The reader can be excused for wondering at time what they mean by "realism" when they repeatedly quote John Negroponte. Negroponte was one of the bad actors in the Reagan Administration's Central American policy as Ambassador to Honduras. He served as the first Director of National Intelligence and in other posts under the Cheney-Bush Administration. For some background on him, see Robert Perry, Negroponte's 'Friendly Eye' Consortium News 04/13/2005.

But they don't seem to buy into the kind of policy one might expect coming from Negroponte. They argue that the US needs to recognize how concerned the governments of Latin America tend to be in protecting democracy. And that would mean not backing coup attempts against the chavista government in Venezuela, now headed by Nicolás Maduro. They urge American policymakers to not get too bent out of shape over the regime's rhetoric about socialism and populist bluster, which continue under Maduro even if he's not as effective a blusterer as the late Hugo Chávez was.

They have some very helpful descriptions describing how, at the time of the book's writing, the Obama Administration hadn't endeared itself to most Latin American governments, as the most recent political crisis in Venezuela has illustrated once again. His Administration's willingness to recognize the coup regime in Honduras in November 2009 (the coup was in June) along with closer US allies like Colombia and Costa Rica. Chile and Mexico delayed recognition until 2010, and Argentina, Brazil and Venezuela waited until June 2011, two years after the coup, when "all criminal charges on the deposed [elected] leader [Manuel Zelaya] were dropped in June 2011, clearing the way for his return and a national unity transition."

As is often the case, events that had a big effect on the perception of the US Administration in Latin America didn't gain a lot of attention in the American media, which had celebrities and horse-race estimates on elections to chatter about. Cala and Economides write:

Obama's administration put its priorities at odds with all big [Latin American] countries, except Colombia. Stopping Chávez was more important [to them] than an unequivocal defense of democracy. And Latin America interpreted this as a serious setback, a reminder of Bush's stance on the Venezuelan coup in 2002, and of a not so distant past.

Yes, the Cheney-Bush Administration and that 2002 coup. Cala and Economides write:

... the Bush administration's perceived support in 2002 of a military coup in Venezuela forever changed relations with an outraged region. It's not that other leaders wanted Chavez in power, far from it, but it was an unforgivable reversal of the democratic principles that the United States had finally adopted in the early 1990s. The very suggestion that Washington would once again support military coups put the entire region on the defensive, starting with powerhouse Brazil. At stake was not Venezuela's democracy, but setting a precedent for a renaissance of the century of dictatorships.

The new Latin American left-of-center regimes in Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Bolivia, Chile, Nicaragua, Ecuador, and eventually Paraguay and El Salvador - that is, most of the continent's population living precisely in countries that suffered at the hands of American-backed militaries - grew suspicious of Washington's intentions and its democratic U-turn. [my emphasis]

That suspicion has flared anew in the latest round of political conflicts in Venezuela. They have been happening at the same time as protests that at least earlier this year looked similar to those in Ukraine, where the US was pretty painfully open about its desire for regime change there. While there haven't been such blatant indications of direct US meddling in the Venezuelan situation Secretary of State John Kerry has been notably harsh in his public indictments of Maduro's government.

And though they used the phrase "perceived support" in the quote just given, Cala and Economides make it clear that the perception was not wrong:

In private, the US Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Otto Reich summoned continental ambassadors to reportedly back the new Venezuelan leadership and pleaded with others for similar support, which he didn't get. American ambassador to the Organization of American States (OAS) at the time Roger Noriega recognized a "provisional government."

The White House also admitted its diplomats had met several times with coup leaders before it actually took place, but it denied endorsing it. Ultimately, an internal government investigation determined no officials were responsible for wrongdoing, for promoting a coup. That said, officials did little to impede it. The United States did not condemn the coup until after Chavez had been reinstated to power.

Otto Reich was a Cuban immigrant who also had a background in the neocon shenanigans in Central America during the Reagan Administration. See Robert Perry on Reich, Iran-Contra's 'Lost Chapter' Consortium News 03/14/2013

Cala and Economides also provide this helpful background on the militant anti-chavista forces in Venezuela:

Almost four years after Chávez took office in 1999, and only months after a failed military coup in April 2002, Venezuela's anti-Chávez opposition rallied support for a nationwide strike that included PDVSA [the national Venezuelan oil company] and thus involved shutting in output. The stoppage started in December and lasted for around two months. Venezuela had to import crude not only for local supply but to meet export obligations. The entire export fleet was grounded, refineries and production stopped. The country lost $13.3 billion as a result of the strike. The GDP for the first trimester of 2002 fell 27 percent.

This is why it's important to remember Venezuela's status as a petrostate with the biggest oil reserves of any country. There are lots of people who would like to get their hands on it, inside and outside Venezuela. But the preponderance of oil in the Venezuelan economy also makes it especially vulnerable to fluctuations in oil prices and to disruptions of PDVSA (pronounced pay-day-vay-sa). "PDVSA, the state company," they write, "is not just one of the world's biggest energy companies, but a state within a state. It's involved in everything from fighting poverty to balancing the national budget."

Cara in writing on the current crisis is not in favor of the US pushing for regime change in Caracas. In What Venezuelan ‘Regime Change’ Could Mean Consortium News 4/15/2014:

Thus, the backdrop to the violent disorders that have swirled across Venezuela in recent months is the prospect that a coup to unseat elected President Nicolás Maduro could alter the balance of power across Latin America, possibly leading to other U.S.-desired "regime changes," even the long-sought destruction of the Castro regime in Cuba.

Though the prospect of Maduro's ouster and a possible cascade of other “regime changes” may be appealing to Washington's neocons and other hawkish policymakers, the impact on Latin America could be grim, a regression from the democratic gains and economic stability that the region has experienced the past two decades.

But the rhetoric emanating from Washington is increasingly hostile, portraying Maduro as a brutal tyrant and threatening painful economic sanctions. And, Venezuela’s economic difficulties, including inflation soaring to more than 50 percent annually and shortages for some basic commodities, have undermined Maduro’s control. That has encouraged extremists on both sides, pro- and anti-Maduro. The more radical camps are asserting more and more control over their movements. [my emphasis]

Economides unfortunately passed away late last year: Jeannie Kever, UH Energy Expert Michael Economides Dies During International Flight University of Houston 12/02/2013.

See also Luis Boscán's review of America's Blind Spot in the LSE Review of Books 05/22/2013, and this piece by Economides, RIP Hugo Chávez but How About Chavismo? FuelFix 03/08/2013 in which he mentions some of his criticisms of the Chávez government.

Tags: hugo chávez, nicolás maduro, venezuela

Hugo Chávez

A friend of mine years ago pointed out that obituaries can be some of the most interesting reading in a newspaper. These days when I don't look at a hardcopy newspaper very often, I don't often find myself browsing by the obituaries. But news services do keep obituary drafts about famous people in the can. And when a prominent world figure like Venezuela's Hugo Chávez Frías passes, it gives readers a chance to get a more substantial summary of history than we get in typical daily news stories.

But unless you happen to have a full day or two to looking through them, you may miss a lot of the obituary pieces. So I'm including several of them here.

David Sirota's Hugo Chavez's economic miracle Salon 03/06/2013 reminds us that that although the American press and politicians tended to use his name as a synonym for tin-horn dictator, he legacy is much more complex than that. Calling him a dictator is just inaccurate in any case. The Carter Center has monitored the four elections in which Chávez was elected; see reports on their Venezuela page.

Sirota writes:

... Chavez became the bugaboo of American politics because his full-throated advocacy of socialism and redistributionism at once represented a fundamental critique of neoliberal economics, and also delivered some indisputably positive results. Indeed, as shown by some of the most significant indicators, Chavez racked up an economic record that a legacy-obsessed American president could only dream of achieving.

For instance, according to data compiled by the UK Guardian, Chavez’s first decade in office saw Venezuelan GDP more than double and both infant mortality and unemployment almost halved. Then there is a remarkable graph from the World Bank that shows that under Chavez’s brand of socialism, poverty in Venezuela plummeted (the Guardian reports that its “extreme poverty” rate fell from 23.4 percent in 1999 to 8.5 percent just a decade later). In all, that left the country with the third lowest poverty rate in Latin America. Additionally, as Weisbrot points out, “college enrollment has more than doubled, millions of people have access to health care for the first time and the number of people eligible for public pensions has quadrupled.”

The UN' ECLAC report 2012 Social Panorama of Latin America (Nov 2012) on poverty rates indicates that Venezuela had the eighth lowest poverty rate (29.5%) in 2011 among 18 countries; the 2011 figures aren't included for all 18 countries, but the earlier figures in the table strongly suggests that Venezuela's ranking won't be changed when they are available. The countries will lower poverty rates: Argentina 5.7%; Uruguay 6.7%; Chile 11.0%; Costa Rica 18.8%; Brazil 20.9; Panama 25.3%; Peru 27.8%.

Ana Kasparian leads a good, succinct discussion about Chávez and his legacy in Hugo Chavez Dead at 58 - What Will Happen Worldwide? The Young Turks 03/06/2013

Ana's colleague and boss from The Young Turks, gives this take on Chávez in Hugo Chavez - What Success Can We Actually Learn From? 03/06/2013:

Here are two English-language video reports:

Chavez dies: "Divisive" Chavez unites people in tribute Euronews 03/05/2013:

Tributes pour in for Chavez from neighbours Euronews 03/06/2013

Hugo Chávez, Líder de la Revolución Bolivariana 03/06/2013. 8:15ff amusing moments

I'vbe created a YouTube group of videos on Hugo Chávez, with most of the videos in Spanish.

Additional articles:

Mark Weisbrot, Why Chávez Was Re-elected New York Times 10/09/2012

Mercedes López San Miguel, El líder que encarnó la Revolución Bolivariana Página 12 06.03.2013

Robert Dreyfuss, R.I.P. Hugo Chavez (1954–2013) The Nation 03/06/2013:

But now is the time for thinking about Hugo Chávez’s legacy. It’s a controversial one, because Chávez made mistakes and missteps along the way. But there’s no disputing the fact that the late Venezuelan leader did a lot to make life better for many, many Venezuelans. It’s rare, very rare, to find a leader of a developing country who cares passionately and deeply about the underprivileged, the poor, the downtrodden and the underserved, while simultaneously taking on the often selfish and self-interested elite, the wealthy and the privileged, who in turn make common cause with US and Western elites and the vaunted “private sector” abroad. And those Western elites find it easy to mobilize the institutions of the states in which they live, including military and intelligence agencies, to do their bidding.

During the administration of George W. Bush, Chávez himself found out how it works, when Venezuelan reactionaries—with support in the United States—made a short-lived coup d'état against Chávez’s elected government.

The Miami Herald presents a reprehensible version of a hostile evaluation of Chávez' career and politics in an editorial, Venezuela's Hugo Chávez and his legacy of plunder 03/05/2013:

... as a national leader, he was an abject failure who plunged Venezuela into a political and economic abyss.

Dead at 58, Hugo Chávez leaves behind a country in far worse condition than it was when he became president, its future clouded by rivals for succession in a constitutional crisis of his Bolivarian party’s making and an economy in chaos.

A former paratrooper, Mr. Chávez had a radical vision for “21st Century Socialism,” which was never fully explained. His skillful rhetoric, which filled supporters with utopian dreams, was used to justify the methodical destruction of Venezuela's democratic institutions and the free market.

The reader wouldn't know from that about Chávez' four democratic elections as President in free and competitive elections with real opposition. Or that the Venezuelan state oil company, PDvSA (Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A.) was nationalized in 1976, the year Chávez turned 22 and long before he came to power. [Clarification 03/10/2013: Chávez re-nationalized the oil industry after it had gone through a period of privatization.] Nor about the decline in poverty rate as reported by ECLAC from 48.6% circa 2000 to in 29.5% in 2011; although perhaps that's what the Herald editorial board means by "the downward spiral of Venezuela that began the day Hugo Chávez was elected." And that Bush Administration-backed coup attempt against Chávez in 2002 after his first election? I guess they couldn't squeeze that in. Because it was that bad Chávez, you see, who was the one aiming for "the methodical destruction of Venezuela's democratic institutions."

Tags: hugo chávez

Obama and Latin America

I didn't catch this until today. But Tom Hayden reported on July 2 at TPM Cafe on The Possibility of an Obama-Chavez Understanding. Referring to the April Trinidad conference, he writes:

What has not been reported is that Obama, leaving his advisers behind, held lengthy private conversations with Chavez where only an interpreter was present.

It is not known what occurred in the secret talks. But sources in Caracas say that Chavez has become fascinated with Obama, seeking to understand the new US president and the forces around him, partly with advice from Brazil's president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

I definitely have my criticisms of Obama, particularly on the Afghanistan War and prosecuting the torture perpetrators. But there is no question that his foreign policy has already shown some major improvement over the Cheney-Bush rolling disaster. Just returning to a situation where diplomacy is considered to be something more than the use of military threats to get other countries to do what the US wants is a huge improvement.

Obama's administration does seem to be taking a straightforward anti-coup, pro-democracy stance on the Honduran crisis. Latin America under democratic regimes is getting more and more serious about protecting democracy and maintaining international peace in their region. We saw that in the general Latin American reactions to Colombia's military strike on Ecuadorian territory and to the separatist violence in Bolivia. It makes very good sense for the US to align ourselves with those basic goals and not allow American government agencies or businesses to mess around with promoting coups or separatist movements or wars in Latin America.

Tags: hugo chávez, obama administration

Why did Argentine President Cristina Fernández' face turn grey when Hugo Chávez saluted her?

Hey, I didn't doctor the photo! It came right from her own Facebook page.

Tags: cristina fernández, hugo chávez

Bolivia and other points south of the border

Vete, embajador estadounidense subversivo (Pictured, Bolivian President Evo Morales)

I suppose with the failure of the private financial system in the United States grabbing headlines, it's understandable that events in South America wouldn't always be on page one.

But lots of news is happening there, anyway. The UNASUR organization of South American nations is meeting in Chile today (Monday) on the Bolivian situation. (Evo Morales acude hoy a la cumbre regional que analizará la crisis en Bolivia El País [Spain] 15.09.2008) Leaders of the hydrocarbon-wealthy "Media Luna" rebel provinces in eastern Bolivia tried but failed to get themselves formally invited to participate in the UNASUR talks.

El País quotes a Chilean professor of international relations, Ricardo Israel, saying:

"Una guerra civil en Bolivia sería terrible no solo para Bolivia sino para toda la región. Afectaría a la seguridad de muchos países. Las expectativas son muy altas. Pero lo único que los líderes pueden hacer es animar a ambas partes a que negocien, y tampoco está claro que logren ese objetivo".

[A civil war in Bolivia would be terrible, not only for Bolivia but also for the whole region. It would affect the security of many countries. Expectations are very high. But the only thing the [UNASUR] leaders can do is encourage both parties to negotiate, but it's not clear that they will achieve this objective.]

Some of the less militant leaders are not happy about the bolstered profile this crisis gives to Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez. But the basic position of all the countries so far is to support the democratic Bolvian government of Evo Morales. Venezuela's is the same, but with more verbal venom directed toward the US government.

Brasilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has publicly stated that his government will not "tolerate" the disintegration of Bolvia toward which the eastern Bolivian oligarchy is heading with their rebellion. (El polvorín de Evo sacude Suramérica por Jorge Marirrodriga El País [Spain] 14.09.2008)

And speaking of Chávez, El País (Spain) also reports on the alleged coup attempt that his his government thwarted this past week, El supuesto golpe contra Chávez se salda con cinco militares detenidos por Clodovaldo Hernández 15.09.2008. Hernández writes that several times since the failed coup of 2002 against him, Chávez has claimed various conspiracies against him, but the concrete proof has generally been thin. But, he writes, the evidence Venezuela is producing on this one is more convincing, so far. Five of the alleged conspirators were recorded supposedly discussing the coup plan.

In short, the crisis in Bolivia is really serious stuff, with far-reaching implications for all of South America, and for the relationships of the UNASUR countries with the United States.

Tags: bolivia, evo morales, hugo chávez, venezuela

Bolivian developments

Bolivian President Evo Morales is moving more forcefully against the separatist rebels, whose opposition to the national government developed into armed rebellion during this week. He has declared martial law (estado de sitio, literally "state of siege") in the norther rebel province of Pando. (Bolivia declara el estado de sitio en la violenta región de Pando El Mundo/EFE [Spain] 13.09.2008) He has arrested the governor of the rebellious department (province) of Pando.

The PBS Newshour presented a major report on the Bolivian situation on Friday, Unrest in Bolivia Leads to Ousting of U.S. Diplomats 09/12/08:

Opposition protesters reportedly shot and killed seven peasant farmers in a remote eastern Amazon region of Bolivia called Pando on Thursday, and an employee of the opposition-led regional government employee was also killed, a government official told Reuters.

The violence is rooted in an ongoing stand-off between President Evo Morales' leftist government and opposition governors who control four of the country's nine regions - some of which hold the country's valuable natural gas reserves.

The governors are demanding more energy revenue and opposing Morales plan to distribute land to the poor and rewrite the constitution.

PBS also reports on developments in Venezuela:

In a show of support for ally and fellow-leftist Morales, Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez also expelled the U.S. ambassador from Caracas on Thursday and shouted insults at the United States at a political rally.

"Go to hell...Yankees, we are a dignified people, go to hell a hundred times," Chavez said, reported Reuters.

"The yankee ambassador in Caracas has got 72 hours to get out of Venezuela, in solidarity with Bolivia," Chavez said.

Chavez accused the U.S. of being behind a plot to oust him and of planning to bomb Venezuela.

"If there was an aggression against Venezuela there would be no oil for the people or for the government of the United States," he said, according to the AP. [my emphasis]

PBS provided an earlier report on earlier actions by Morales' government that antagonized the petroleum oligarcy there, Bolivia Moves to Nationalize Oil and Gas Industries 05/02/06.

A new disturbing development Califican de injerencia al anuncio de intervención El Diario [Bolivia] 12.09.2008; Trigo a Chávez: No se permitirá ninguna intervención militar El Mundo [Bolivia]) is that both the opposition and the Bolivian military itself are making an issue out of Hugo Chávez' offer of Venezuelan military support to the Morales government.

General Luis Trigo, who in the Bolivian system is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces (not President Morales), declared on Thursday in a public announcement carried on radion and TV:

Al señor presidente de Venezuela, señor Hugo Chávez, y a la comunidad internacional le decimos que las Fuerzas Armadas (de Bolivia) rechazan enfáticamente intromisiones externas de cualquier índole, venga de donde venga, y no permitirán que ningún militar o hueste extranjera pise el territorio nacional.

[To the President of Venezuela, Señor Hugo Chávez, and to the international commenunity, we say that the Armed Forces [of Bolivia] emphatically reject external interference of any nature, from wherever it may come, and we will not permit any foreign military or army to enter the national territory.]

Since Trigo is formally the head of the Bolivian military, it's not clear to me just how far his statement goes in being a threat to the Bolivian government. Trigo did state his intention to support the democratic government of Morales in the current crisis.

Chávez, speaking in his own capacity as commander-in-chief of the Venezuelan armed forces, responded to Trigo directly. (Chávez pide al Ejército boliviano que apoye a Morales El País [Spain] 14.09.2008)

Chilean President MIchelle Bachelet has called a meeting of the Unión de Naciones Sudamericanas (UNASUR) for Monday to discuss the Bolivian crisis. (Bachelet convoca a presidentes de UNASUR a reunión de emergencia por Bolivia Los Tiempos [Bolivia] 13.09.2008)

In Central America, Honduras joined in the diplomatic defense of Bolivia by refusing to accept the credentials of the new US Ambassador to their country (Honduras se niega a recibir las credenciales del nuevo embajador estadounidense El País [Spain]/EFE 13.09.2008)

Honduran President Manuel Zelaya said that Honduras would remain allied with the US, but made clear that the act was an expression of solidarity with Bolivia, in the face of what Bolivia claims is US intervention in fomenting the oligarchs' separatist rebellion.

Honduras is a member of the Alternativa Bolivariana para las Américas (ALBA), along with Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua and Bolivia. The tiny Carribean island nation of Dominica (population circa 70,000) is also a member. (Cuba, Nicaragua and Bolivia are three of the poorest countries in Latin America.)

El País [Spain] reports in Evo Morales anuncia que detendrá al Gobernador opositor de Pando por desacato 14.09.2008:

Santa Cruz es el principal foco de oposición al Gobierno de Evo Morales y lidera un proceso autonomista, que el Ejecutivo considera ilegal, secundado también por las regiones de Beni, Pando, Tarija y Chuquisaca. Los sucesivos desencuentros políticos entre el Gobierno de La Paz y los prefectos autonomistas, agrupados en el Consejo Nacional Democrático (CONALDE) se han agravado en los últimos días con varios episodios de violencia en los departamentos de Tarija (sur), Santa Cruz (este) y Pando (norte).

[Santa Cruz is the principal focus of opposition to the government of Evo Marales and is leading a process of autonomy which the Executive [Morales] considers illegal, seconded also by the regions of Beni, Pando, Tarija and Chuquisaca. The successive political clashes between the government in La Paz and the autonomist prefects grouped in the Consejo Nacional Democrático (CONALDE) have been aggravated in recent days by episodes of violence in the provinces of Tarija (south), Santa Cruz (east) and Pando (north).]

The rebel provinces are referred to as the Media Luna (Crescent Moon), because of their contiguous shape in the easter part of Bolivia.

For more background on the situation in Bolivia in English, see:

Bolivia: Can the Majority of People Vote for Change and Actually Get It? by Mark Weisbrot, AlterNet 08/27/08

Bolivia: Rescuing the New Constitution and Democratic Stability International Crisis Group 06/19/08

Tags: bolivia, evo morales, honduras, hugo chávez, venezuela

South American solidarity with Bolivia

Simón Bolívar el Libertador and José de San Martín, liberator of Perú and Chile

The Bolivian Ambassador to the US is also being sent home. Venezuela is expelling the US Ambassador there, Patrick Duddy, in solidarity with Bolivia (Chávez expulsa al embajador de EEUU en solidaridad con Bolivia El Mundo [Spain] 12.09.08). Chávez reminded the US at the same time that if the US attacks Venezuela - yeah, like Bush's disaster of a foreign policy leaves that as any option - he will suspend crude oil exports. Plus, he's buying new Russian fighter planes.

Chávez, who isn't famous for delicate diplomatic language, threatened none too subtly to break relations with the US entirely. He may also be ticked because Venezuela is reporting having foiled another planned coup attempt. This week. (Desmantelado un golpe contra Chávez El Mundo [Spain] 12.09.08El Mundo [Spain] 12.09.08) Chávez' government is accusing former Defense Minister Raúl Isaías Baduel of being behind it.

Meanwhile, the Argentine government is accusing the FBI of "political operations" in the accusations that Venezuela injected illegal campaign contributions into Cristina Fernández' successful electoral campaign. (Dura respuesta: el Gobierno responsabiliza a EE.UU. de "operaciones políticas" Clarín [Argentina]11.09.2008)

What the hell is going on down there? Did Cheney tell the CIA to try to make as big a mess as possible in South America before he turns his office over to the White Princess of Pentecostal Christian Zionism?

Chávez also declared that if Morales is deposed or killed by rebels, he is prepared to support a pro-democracy armed struggle in Bolivia, including direct intervention. (Chávez anuncia apoyo "armado" a Bolivia si Morales es "derrocado" El Deber/AFP [Bolivia] 11.09.2008) He said:

Si la oligarquía y los pitiyanquis dirigidos, financiados y armados por el imperio (de Estados Unidos) derrocan algún gobierno nuestro tendríamos luz verde para iniciar operaciones de cualquier tipo para restituir el poder al pueblo en esos países hermanos".

(If the oligarchy and the Yankee imitators directed, financed and armed by the empire [of the United States] outst any government of ours, we will have to give a green light to initiate operations of whatever kind to restore the power to the people in these brother countries.)

Seriously, we can't assume that everything like this that happens has the CIA behind it. But it's a pretty safe bet that we'll find out sooner or later that the CIA and maybe rogue Special Forces directed by the Pentagon are involved in the ugly business in Bolivia. I'm sure one of the reasons that other South American governments are expressing solidarity with Morales' regime in Bolivia is that the operation there looks an awful lot like the buildup to the coup in Chile in 1973. But as of now, I don't know of any hard evidence in the public record of the CIA or the Pentagon's involvement.

You know, if the Democratic leadership in Congress could take enough time away from kissing up to telecom lobbyists and the like, they could be holding public hearings on this and finding out just what kind of risks the outgoing Bush administration is creating for us in Latin America. We can always dream.

Venezuela isn't acting as a "rogue state" in this, though. Despite the criticism for the Cheney-Bush government, Chávez is a democratically elected president whose opposition has proven surprisingly inept, so far. Evo Morales' government facing a separatist insurrection by petroleum oligarchs with a far-right thug group as muscle, is also democratically elected.

So is the Argentinian government of Cristina Fernández, who just announced her support for the Bolivian government in this crisis. She is conferring with Brasilian President Lula da Silva and Chilean President Michelle Bachelet on the crisis. A group composed of Brasil, Argentina and Colombia are offering to mediate in the conflicct between the Bolivian national government and the rebel leaders in the five most affected provinces: Tarija, Santa Cruz, Chuquisaca, Beni and Pando. (Grupo de Amigos de Bolivia ofrece mediar en el conflicto El Nuevo Día [Bolivia] 12.09.2008)

Essentially, Bolivia has five provinces in a state of rebellion.

Bolivian troops are moving in to retake Santa Cruz from separatist rebels

In Bolivia, Morales has not declared a state of emergency and appears to be trying to avoid any military clashes that would unnecessarily inflame the situation or give the separatists a basis to claim government atrocities. But with the separatists seizing government buildings, bombing the gas pipeline to Brasil and Argentina, and even taking control of the city of Santa Cruz, the government can't delay very long in taking military action. El Mundo (Bolivia) has an AP report that 10 people died in the city of Cobija in the northeast in clashes between separtists rebels and pro-government farmworkers. (Matanza en Cobija en enfrentamientos entre campesinos y autonomistas 11.09.2008) The report also says in the southern city of Tarija, pro-government labor-unionists fought it out with rebels, with both sides using "sticks, rocks and dynamite."

Nine are reported dead in fighting in Pando (Nueve muertos en Pando y el ‘Vice’ lanza amenazas El Nuevo Día [Bolivia] 12.09.2008), seven pro-government farmworkers and two rebels. Others are missing and 50 are reported wounded.

El Mundo (Bolivia) also reports that the national government is sending troops into Santa Cruz to retake the city from the Falangist rebels (Gobierno instruyó a militares entrar en acción en Santa Cruz 11.09.2008) The report says that as of 8:00PM Thursday, 400 government troops were headed toward the city.

I haven't seen any indication so far of significant disloyalty among the armed forces. Although in one or two cases of government facilities being seized, I did wonder how much resistance defending troops put up against the rebels.

Morales warned the rebel leaders in the five provinces on Wednesday that the government's patience had its limits and that he was prepared to take "radical measures" against those who have seized government buildings if they don't back off pronto.

Tags: argentina, cristina fernández, hugo chávez, venezuela

What a concept - diplomacy to solve a military crisis!

Now this is the way to conduct diplomacy!

The nearly week-long crisis between Colombia on the one hand and its neighbors Venezuela and Ecuador on the other has been resolved. It's an amazingly daring idea. They decided to get together and talk instead of going to war! Talk and even hug, if you can believe that.

Colombia was pretty much completely isolated diplomatically in Latin America over the border-violation incident. The Cheney-Bush administration, which sneers at all this "national sovereignty" nonsense, backed Colombia.

But Colombia decided not to approach it the Cheney way, i.e., making up fake intelligence to justify invading Ecuador and making "regime change". Their alternative is described in news reports: Uribe, Chávez, Ortega y Correa cierran la crisis diplomática con un apretón de manos El País 07.03.08Latin American nations end crisis with handshake Reuters 03/07/08; Handshakes and a hug cool South American war talk by Frances Robles, McClatchey 03/07/08.

The leaders of Colombia, Ecuador, Venezuela and Nicaragua got together and agreed to work things out peacefully. Nicaragua's presence is particularly notable, because they have their own separate issues with Colombia. Nicaragua joined Ecuador and Venezuela last week in breaking diplomatic relations with Colombia over Colombia's cross-border military incursion into Ecuador.

Here's how Reuters describes the meeting:

The presidents of Colombia, Ecuador and Venezuela ended a border dispute on Friday with a summit handshake after a week of regional diplomacy in the face of hostile rhetoric and troop buildups.

"And with this ... this incident that has caused so much damage (is) resolved," leftist Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa said before standing up and shaking hands with his U.S.-backed conservative Colombian counterpart, Alvaro Uribe.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who had blamed the United States for the crisis as he sent tanks to the border with Colombia, joined in shaking Uribe's hand and applauded loudly and smiled.

The dispute erupted last Saturday when Colombia raided inside Ecuador to kill a rebel leader. It resolution brought the summit to a surprise ending after bitter exchanges, including Correa calling Uribe a liar.

The accord came after Uribe apologized to Correa under pressure from governments across the region, which worked to prevent the crisis escalating into Latin America's first armed conflict in more than a decade. (my emphasis)

Washington's bogeyman Hugo Chávez declared, "This summit was a gift from God."

One detail that only the El País article of the three linked above reports is that after Colombian President Alvaro Uribe shook hands with Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa, he went over to Chávez and not only shook hands with him but hugged him. Then he did the same with Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega.

What are they, all a bunch of hippies? It sounds like some kind of California New Age convention! Did they pass around a reefer or something after that?

Gosh, who knew that serious international tensions could be resolved that way? Not Dick Cheney or George Bush or Rummy or the bold Maverick McCain, I would say.

But, you know, it might be worth giving it a try!

Tags: colombia, daniel ortega, ecuador, hugo chávez, nicaragua, venezuela

Well, that didn't take long

Burn the witch!

The motto of the Cheney-Bush administration often seems to be, "Allies? We don't need no stinkin' allies!!

That came to mind when I saw the following story. On Monday, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner was inagurated President of Argentina. Before the week was out, the ubiquitous anonymous administration officials were trying to discredit her by linking her and her political part to dirty business with the current second-favorite Latin American bogeyman for the US, Hugo Chávez of Venezuela: Argentine Leader Slams U.S. Allegations by Monte Reel and Juan Forero Washington Post 12/14/07; Un fiscal de EE UU dice que Chávez financió la campaña de Kirchner por Alejandro Rebossio El País(Spain) 14.12.2007; La prensa mundial reflejó la réplica de Cristina a EE.UU. La Nación 14.12.2007; Argentine Leader Faults U.S. on Inquiry by Alexei Barrionuevo New York Times 12/14/07; text of indictment in US v. Moises Maionica, et al.

Unlike Chávez is sometimes inclined to do, Fernández responded diplomatically, with no references to Bush as El Diablo or to the smell of sulfur. What she said was, without mentioning the US, "Hay ciertos personajes que parecen salidos de ficciones que montan operaciones basura. Países que más que países amigos quieren países empleados. Es su forma de operar en la política regional, pero no va a tener respuesta. Voy a seguir afirmando la relación con todos los países de la región y también nuestra relación con Venezuela". Which is diplomatic Spanish for, "Bite me."

After being sworn in, Fernández held meetings with foreign leaders including Chávez, Spanish Prince Felipe de Asturias, Alvaro Uribe of Colombia, and Dominique Strauss-Kahn of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). In her meeting with Chávez and presumably also with Uribe, she stressed to them her concern about getting former Colombian presidential candidate Ingrid Betancourt released from captivity by the Colombian FARC guerrilla force. Betancourt has been held in captivity for the past six years.

Argentina is not in any rational perception of the real world anti-American. Why those anonymous officials in the Cheney-Bush adminstration would be trying to alienate the incoming administration in Argentina, I don't know. But after seven years of this crowd in office, does it even make sense to ask about the reason? Do they need a reason? Just the suggestion that Argentina might be pushing, for instance, to ease tensions between Venezuela and Colombia, or to help Colombian find some peaceful solution to the intractable guerrilla war there, is probably enough for Dick Cheney to want to trash the Fernández administration. She also favors granting Venezuela full membership in the Mercosur trade bloc of Latin American nations.

Chancellor Reinaldo Gargano of Uruguay, a country with which Argentina has had rather touchy relations recently, was surprisingly supportive of Fernández. He said that some people (obviously referring to the Cheney-Bush administration) were uncomfortable with the improved relations that Argentina and other Latin American countries are pursuing with Venezuela. A senior Uruguan official said that the incident should be viewed as "una especie de esquema armado, destinado a deteriorar la imagen de la presidenta de la República Argentina" (a type of hostile scheme intended to damage the image of the President of the Republic of Argentina). Not to put too much weight on it, but "esquema armado" could be more literally translated as "armed scheme". I don't know what particular nuances attach to the phrase in Spanish diplomatic language. But I'm guessing it is meant to hint that something more elaborate than a single smuggling bust is involved.

For the Cheney-Bush administration, which actively supported the 2002 coup attempt against Chávez and encouraged another attempt, having Venezuela incorporated more and more into peaceful, active cooperation with its neighbors is a bad thing. It might reduce the possibilities for war and/or the reversal of Chávez "Bolivarian revolution".

But one of Fernández' priorities is to prosecute the chief perpetrators of the military junta that ruled Argentina in the later 70's and early 80's and carried out a brutal campaign of suppression known as the "dirty war", which she referred to in her inaguaral address as "the greatest genocide in our history". Maybe Cheney and some other officials thought that they could take refuge in Argentina after they left office and avoid being charged with domestic and international criminal violations over the Iraq War, the torture policy and other things.

Certainly, if any of them were paying attention to her inagural address to the Argentine Legislative Assembly on Monday, they might have been shocked at some of the (to Cheney) radical ideas she expressed. For instance, her insistance that in prosecuting perpetrators of crimes on behalf of the junta's rule, that the defendents be insured "all the rights and guarantees that other Argentines did not have" during the junta's own rule. An exotic concept indeed for the Cheney-Bush administration.

She even talked about combatting terrorism and used the phrase "human rights" when talking about it! More and more suspicious. She claims that respecting the human rights of accused terrorists is an important factor in the struggle against terrorism. Obviously, she hasn't heard of the ticking-nuclear-bomb scenario that justifies anything and everything in the civilize American way of doing things under Cheney and Bush. And she apparently has the notion that human beings are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, as some dang revolutionary or the other said one time. Pretty wild and crazy, if you ask me.

This also sounds kind of un-Cheney-like:

Finalmente, queremos en este mundo global también fijar nuestra posición en cuanto a una necesidad imperiosa, la reconstrucción del multilateralismo. Un mundo unilateral es un mundo más inseguro, más injusto.

[Finally, in this globalized world, we also want to focus on our position in regard to an imperative necessity, the reconstruction of multilateralism. A unilateral world is a world more insecure, more unjust.]

That sounds suspiciously like she's actually trying to insult our Dear Leader Bush, Liberator of Peoples and Scourge of the Heathen, and his faithful servant Dark Lord Cheney. So if Cheney decides Argentina needs to be liberated before he leaves office, well, they only have their radical female president to blame. Cheney's probably saying to himself that he's disappointed with some of the Argentine leaders and generals, letting some dame tell them what to do; "They're not carrying the big stick I would have expected ... ", just like those Democrat wimps who let Pelosi push them around.

Man, this unipolar world business just isn't working out quite as well as nationalists like Cheney or his neoconservative friends seem to think. The surly natives is those lesser countries seem to have their own ideas about how they should operate in the world. Who would have imagined such a development?

Tags: argentina, bush doctrine, colombia, cristina fernández, dick cheney, hugo chávez, venezuela

The latest development in the Cheney-Bush nuclear nonproliferation program?

Remember how invading Iraq was supposed to terrify any other country from trying to get nuclear weapons without American approval?

This isn't a nuclear weapons program. But, then, so far as official declarations and actual proof available in the public record, Iran's nuclear program isn't a weapons program, either: Chávez: Venezuela is launching nuclear program for peaceful purposes El Universal 11/15/07; Chávez anuncia su propio programa nuclear en víspera de su viaje a Irán El Mundo 16.11.07; Venezuela set to launch peaceful nuclear program - Chavez RIA Novosti 15.11.07.

How long will it be before Republican war fans start grumbling that this is part of the Islamunist conspiracy?

Tags: hugo chávez, nonproliferation, nuclear nonproliferation, venezuela

More on Chávez and the King

King Juan "why don't you shut up, punk?" Carlos I of Spain

This is a somewhat longer video than I linked before of the now-famous encounter between Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, on the one hand, and Prime Minister Zapatero and King Juan Carlos of Spain, on the other. Doggone if I can make the embed work. But here's the link, from Clarín: Zapatero, Chávez y el Rey Juan Carlos. There's also a similar version now on YouTube. (See below.)

The King's crack to Chávez became an instant favorite on the Internet: ¡Que nadie se calle! El Mundo 11.11.07 (includes audio of a ring-tone version); "¿Por qué no te callas?", la frase de moda en Internet Clarín 11/12/07 (I'll modestly note that readers of this blog heard about it pretty early on.) It's kind of sad, but inevitable. King Juan Carlos deserves a great deal of credit for facilitating the transition to democracy in Spain after the death of the late, (should-be) unlamented Francisco Franco. But, "Why don't you shut up, punk?" will probably be the most famous quotation of his life.



Before I go into the rest, I'd say Zapatero handled this situation with a great deal of dignity. What he was doing was the correct thing in demanding that Chávez show respect to Spain in that diplomatic setting, even though he knows what a major-leak jerk Aznar can be. And can you imagine how moritified he must have been when the King piped up and stuck his foot in his mouth like that? For the King to blurt out something like that is funny to us commoners. But Zapatero had to know instantly that Juan Carlos had made a fool out of himself by tossing aside royal protocol like that. And, good grief, this is the King of Spain at a meeting of nations almost all of which were once Spanish colonies. And here's the Socialist Prime Minister trying to do the right thing and the King is talking to the head of one of the main oil-producing countries on earth and a former Spanish colony as though the King thought he was talking to trailer trash. Zapatero probably wanted to punch the King in the mouth at that moment. But he handled it with remarkable diplomatic poise.

This video in El País shows Zapatero (left) and Aznar (right) talking about Zapatero's defense of Aznar, for which Zapatero actually got no love at all from Aznar's party, the Partido Popular (PP). That's not exactly what the video shows, though. El País is considered the leading "quality" paper in Spain. Can you imagine the New York Times running something that would spoof our Glorious Leader Bush like this? Even if you don't understanding Spanish, you will be able to appreciate the question if you watch it: El País de 'Los Guiñoles'

Even though Zapatero defended him, the PP didn't have the good grace to appreciate the fact that the Socialist (PSOE) Prime Minister diplomatically defended Aznar's hiney over one of his more questionable actions during his time as prime minister. They're bitching about how Zapatero ought to recall the Spanish ambassador to Venezuela and yadda, yadda. The PSOE pointed out that Aznar himself managed to visit Chávez 14 times. The implication being, to paraphrase the King, "Why don't you shut up, PP punks?"

But whatever you think of Chávez' "populist" brand of democracy, as his critics like Mario Vargas Llosa have been known to call it, his question that he posed to King Juan Carlos after their famous encounter is a perfectly reasonable one: did you know about the attempted coup against the elected Venezuelan government in 2002? ("La pregunta que me hago es... bueno que responda el Rey de España. Señor Rey, responda ¿sabía usted del golpe de Estado contra Venezuela, contra el Gobierno democrático, legitimo, de Venezuela en 2002?") See Chávez reta al Rey a revelar si conocía el golpe de Estado de Caracas en 2002 El País 12.11.07. The King should make a response.

A bit of recent history, sadly underreported in the Establishment press in the US (imagine that!): Chávez was briefly ousted in a coup in 2002 but the coup crumbled essentially within hours and Chávez maintained his elected power as President. Whatever validity there may be in some of the opposition's criticisms of some of Chavez' methods of governance, the real reason that Venezuela's economic royalists wanted to oust their elected government was that they had been living big off the state-owned oil company PDVSA (prounounced pay-day-vay-sa) and Chávez came up with the subversive idea of devoting a larger share of that oil revenue to programs that would benefit working people and the poor.

The American ambassador was on the phone within hours giving advice to the coup leaders, practicing the Dick Cheney version of "democracy promotion", i.e., oil interests always come first and who the hell wants to bother with this election nonsense anyway? From the news I've read on it, the Cheney administration wasn't necessarily taking the lead on promoting the coup, although they were happy to go along and actively cooperated.

According to the Spanish news magazine Cambio 16, (link to the Web site, not the particular article), Aznar's government in Spain also cooperated in promoting the coup, along with the wealthy and powerful Catholic order Opus Dei in Spain. The secretive Opus Dei figures in many conspiracy theories, but just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not after you. Opus Dei was founded to promote reactionary politics and religion in Spain, was a pillar of support to Franco's dictatorship and is the most important reactionary group in the Roman Catholic Church today. Pope Ratzinger I (Benedict XVI) has been an enthusiastic sponsor of the group. It's not at all far-fetched that Opus Dei would have been involved in a scheme like this. (I'll try to pull out that article soon and post on it.)

On the subject, see:

"US revealed to be secretly funding opponents of Chavez" Independent 03/13/04; quoted in my blog post of 03/14/04. (This is one reason I developed the annoying blog-habit of citing the names and sources of articles in my posts; it leaves me with a reference when the original links go dead.)

Lötterdämmerung by James Galbraith The American Prospect Online 12/17/02. He refers to a later attempt by the Cheney-Bush administration to promote a coup against Chávez.

Venezuela has another little beef with the US. The US is refusing to extradite accused terrorist and Venezuelan national Luis Posada Carriles to Venezuela to stand trial for blowing up a Cuban plane on a flight from Venezuela in 1976 on which 73 people were killed. The Cheney-Bush administration says they won't extradite him because he might be tortured in Venezuela. I wonder how much credible that sounds to the rest of the world. The Iberamerican Summit of 2005 demanded that he be extradited. The National Security Archive summarized some of the contents of documents they got released on the case (Luis Posada Carriles: The Declassified Record 05/10/05):

The National Security Archive today posted additional documents that show that the CIA had concrete advance intelligence, as early as June 1976, on plans by Cuban exile terrorist groups to bomb a Cubana airliner. The Archive also posted another document that shows that the FBI's attache in Caracas had multiple contacts with one of the Venezuelans who placed the bomb on the plane, and provided him with a visa to the U.S. five days before the bombing, despite suspicions that he was engaged in terrorist activities at the direction of Luis Posada Carriles.

Presumably, though, none of this is an issue between Venezuela and Spain.

See also:

Chavez drives a hard bargain, but Big Oil's options are limited by Robert Collier San Francisco Chronicle 09/24/06: "The stakes here [in Venezuela] are huge. The area around El Tigre, known as the Orinoco Oil Belt, possesses the world's biggest petroleum reserves - 1.3 trillion barrels of so-called extra-heavy oil."

Hugo Chávez and the Catholic Church by Charlie Hardy, NarcoNews Network 10/25/07

Venezuelan President Clashes with the King of Spain at Latin American Summit by Chris Carlson 11/12/07 Venezuelanalysis.com

The Trial (And Errors) of Hugo Chavez by Steve Ellner In These Times 08/27/07

Gobierno español cree que Chávez tiene interés en mantener cruce de declaraciones El Universal (Venezuela) 12.11.07

El Rey versus Chávez II por Miguel Wiñazki, Clarín blog 11/12/07.

La bronca entre Chávez y el Rey se convierte en una batalla PSOE-PP El Mundo 12.11.07

España y Venezuela: dos versiones en la prensa sobre diferendo rey-Chávez El Universal (México) 12.11.07

El Gobierno descarta llamar a consultas al embajador español en Venezuela El País 12.11.07

Bruselas confía que el incidente Juan Carlos I-Chávez no "empañe" relaciones El Universal (Venezuela) 12.11.07

"¡Por qué no te callas!", exigió el rey Juan Carlos a Chávez por Néstor Restivo Clarín 11/11/07

Tags: aznar, españa, hugo chávez, juan carlos, spain, venezuela, zapatero

Chávez and the King

I know that in the eyes of the Patriotically Correct crowd all Americans are supposed to despise Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez as Castro, Jr., or whatever.

But I enjoyed this exchange just for the pure entertainment value of it. The Iberoamerican Summit was held last week in Santiago de Chile. On the final day, Friday, Chávez was harshing on former Spanish prime minister José María Aznar, the one who supporter Bush's Iraq invasion. Several times he referred to him as a "fascist", a false and unfair charge but not totally off the wall, since Aznar's People's Party (PP) is the direct organizational successor to former dictator Francisco Franco's party. More to the point, Aznar's government and the Spanish portion of the Catholic order Opus Dei actively promoted the unsuccessful 2002 coup attempt against Chávez.

Both the current Spanish Socialist Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero and King Juan Carlos were in attendance at the same session. Zapatero, who successfully outsted Aznar's government in the elections of 2004, interrupted Chávez to object to his characterization of Aznar. Chávez kept talking and finally King Juan Carlos jumps in and says, "¿Por qué no te callas?" (Why don't you shut up?)

The English doesn't quite catch the King's use of the familiar "tú" form, where in diplomacy the formal "usted" form is essentially mandatory. So it was more like, "Why don't you shut up, punk?"

I'm sure Chávez' feelings weren't much hurt. And goading the Spanish King into losing his cool toward him surely won't hurt Chávez' image in the eyes of anyone who might be favorably inclined toward him.

You would think the PP would be grateful to both Zapatero and the King for defending their former prime minister. But you would be wrong. In a statement, the party said the whole thing was Zapatero's fault! Fascist, maybe not; but they've sure got some pricks in that party.

Source: El Rey se enfrenta a gritos a Chávez en defensa de Aznar: '¿Por qué no te callas?' El Mundo 10.11.2007 with a video of the exchange; El Rey a Chávez: "¿Por qué no te callas?" El País 10.11.2007 also with video.

Tags: aznar, españa, hugo chávez, juan carlos, spain, zapatero