Showing posts with label leopoldo lópez. Show all posts
Showing posts with label leopoldo lópez. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 01, 2017

Venezuela and the US after Sunday

"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

"Venezuela claims the world’s largest proven reserves of petroleum, an estimated 298 billion barrels of oil." - Michael Klare, The Desperate Plight of Petro-States TomDispatch 05/26/2016

The Trump Family Business Administration is now calling the Venezuelan government a dictatorship and elected President Nicolás Maduro a dictator. And his CIA is all but explicitly declaring that they are actively supporting a regime change effort there. A State Department spokesperson today called the election for a Constituent Assembly in Venezuela on Sunday was "illegitimate." (State Department news briefing PBS Newshour 08/01/2017)

She mentioned that Vice President Pence has spoken directly to one of the main opposition leaders in Venezuela, Leopoldo López, and communicated to him that the US is concerned about what she called "grave human rights" abuses. She quoted Pence as saying, "The United States stands with the Venezuelan people and we call for the full and unconditional release of all political prisoners in Venezuela, free and fair elections, restoration of the National Assembly, and respect for human rights in Venezuela." She says "the United States urges the re-establishment of democracy in Venezuela."



At the same press conference, ExxonMobil Secretary of State Rex Tillerson addressed Venezuela starting at 35:00, saying that US policy is to work with like-minded governments in the Organization of American States (OAS) "as well as others who share our view of Venezuela's future." He articulated the current official US position representing Sunday's vote as abolishing democracy in Venezuela. Whether Secretary ExxonMobil cares about human rights and democracy in Venezuela or is thinking mainly of the oil, you can make your own guess. López and another major opposition leader who had been under house arrest were returned to prison after Sunday's election, charged with violating the terms of their house arrest. Tillerson presented that as a "re-arrest." And in what could easily been heard as a threat - to me it obviously is a threat - he said that "this could lead to an outbreak of further violence in the country." He followed it up by saying, "We are evaluating all of our policy options as to what can we do to create a change of conditions where either Maduro decides he doesn't have a future and wants to leave of his own accord, or we can return the government processes back to their constitution."

The US at this point isn't even calling for Bashar al-Assad's removal of head of government in Syria. We Americans are shocked, shocked that Russia would try to fiddle around in our elections last year. But Latin America, we can openly declare we're ousting an elected President there and it's just routine business, because we're Exceptional. None of this looks good to me. I wish I could expect to hear an outcry in Congress over something like this. But I'm not holding my breath.

Without belaboring it, I'll point out here that the current Venezuelan government, both President and National Assembly (Congress), were elected in competitive elections. A Constituent Assembly to write a new Constitution was not so long ago a demand of the anti-Maduro opposition. But the opposition boycotted Sunday's election. It's clear that there have been police and military abuses in Venezuela, which the anti-Maduro opposition has made sure are are presented to the American public via an all-too-uncritical media. The organized and spontaneous violent actions by the opposition have not received similar publicity in the US.

I'm not going to recount the past 18 years of Venezuelan politics in every post on Venezuela. And I'm not going to repeat every time I quote or share something from TeleSUR that it is primarily funded by Venezuela with contributions from several other South American countries and takes a sympathetic position toward the current Venezuelan government of Nicolás Maduro. I assume that readers can apply reasonably critical thinking to what they read and hear. Not everyone does, I know. But that's the operative assumption at this blog.

I also try to avoid facile comparisons between how the US approaches foreign affairs and how we object to similar practices on the part of other countries. That's partly because hypocrisy of that sort is part of the common currency of diplomacy. But the fact that the US feels so little embarrassment about regime change operations is one reason that we can't reasonably expect Latin Americans to be shocked, shocked by the accusations the US intelligence agencies and the media have been making about Russian interference in the 2016 American elections. And do you remember the last time we let somebody out of prison because a hostile foreign government demanded it? Me neither. But we're American and we're Exceptional.

Also, it's a useful exercise to imagine that the Russian Foreign Minister just gave a press conference declaring, "We are evaluating all of our policy options as to what can we do to create a change of conditions where either Trump decides he doesn't have a future and wants to leave of his own accord, or we can return the government processes back to their constitution."

TeleSUR carried this clip of Maduro responding to the escalation of the rhetoric from the US government against Venezuela

Abby Martin in this edition of her Empire Files program on TeleSUR interviews the head of the Venezuelan National Guard. And she elecits his responses to some of the serious accusations being made against him. Head of Venezuela National Guard on Insurgency & US Threats 07/31/2017:



The rhetorical - and almost certainly not only rhetorical - escalation that Venezuela now faces from the US certainly give Maduro the ability to frame the internal political struggle in Venezuela as an anti-imperialist stand for democracy and against US imperialism. In this clip (Maduro: Trump arremete contra el pueblo de México y nadie alza la voz TeleSUR 07/31/2017), he asks at the start (in Spanish), "Are you with Trump or are you with Venezuela? Are you with Trump or are you with democracy? Are you with Trump or are you with the destiny of the free peoples of the world? ... Are you with Trump or are you with the Free World?"


Monday, March 09, 2015

Obama declares a state of emergency over ... Venezuela?!?

"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

President Obama just declared a state of emergency for the United States over Venezuela. Seriously.

The White House website provides the Declaration of a National Emergency with Respect to Venezuela 03/09/2015:

Pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), I hereby report that I have issued an Executive Order (the "order") declaring a national emergency with respect to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by the situation in Venezuela. [my emphasis]
The concrete measures involved consist of visa requirements for Venezuelans traveling to the US and, more significantly, sanctions directed at seven Venezuelan officials.

Jeff Mason and Roberta Rampton report for Reuters in U.S. declares Venezuela a national security threat, sanctions top officials 03/09/2015:

Declaring any country a threat to national security is the first step in starting a U.S. sanctions program. The same process has been followed with countries such as Iran and Syria, U.S. officials said.

The White House said the order targeted people whose actions undermined democratic processes or institutions, had committed acts of violence or abuse of human rights, were involved in prohibiting or penalizing freedom of expression, or were government officials involved in public corruption.

"Venezuelan officials past and present who violate the human rights of Venezuelan citizens and engage in acts of public corruption will not be welcome here, and we now have the tools to block their assets and their use of U.S. financial systems," White House spokesman Josh Earnest said in a statement.

"We are deeply concerned by the Venezuelan government's efforts to escalate intimidation of its political opponents. Venezuela's problems cannot be solved by criminalizing dissent," he added.
The also note the apparent approval of the US actions by the leading opposition figure, "Opposition leader and twice-presidential candidate Henrique Capriles told Reuters the sanctions were a problem for a corrupt elite in the Maduro government, but not ordinary Venezuelans."

Capriles is the Governor of the Venezuelan state of Miranda. He came close to defeating Maduro in the Presidential election of April 2013. He disagreed with strategy still pushed by radical-right opposition leaders Leopoldo Lopez and María Corina Machado to force Maduro's government out of office - to overthrow it, in other words - before the next Presidential election. But he seems to be supporting the hostile American measures against his own country.

Without splitting a lot of hairs here, I consider Obama's sanctions against Venezuela and today's declaration an a clear statement of his Administration's overt sympathy for the efforts of the radical right opposition to overthrow Venezuela's elected government of President Nicolás Maduro by extra-constitutional means.

Formal sanctions against government officials are not a normal situation in diplomatic relations. Venezuela and the other nations of Latin America will understand this as a serious attempt by the US and the Obama Administration to overthrow the Venezuelan government. And they're right to take it that way. They would be foolish not to.

Carpriles' apparent support for the American actions is another indication that in practice the US government is acting to some significant extent in political cooperation with the opposition and vice versa.

President Maduro responded in a predictably patriotic tone in this statement, Maduro: "Obama asumió personalmente la tarea de derrocar mi gobierno" 09.03.2015


Before Obama's state of emergency order was announced, the Venezuelan paper Últimas Noticias presents this report featuring a Chilean senator talking about lessons from the 1973 coup against Salvador Allende in Chile and the Veneuelan radical right's current effort to oust Maduro, titled simply Senador Alejandro Navarro 08.03.2015:

09.03.2015

Saab asegura que funcionarios sancionados "no tienen visas ni bienes" en EEUU

Lucas Keorner reports on Obama's state of emergency in U.S. President Barack Obama Brands Venezuela a "Security Threat," Implements New Sanctions VenezuelaAnalysis.com 03/09/2015:

The executive order is the latest in a series of U.S. sanctions imposed on Venezuela over the past few months. On February 3, the Obama administration expanded the list of Venezuelan officials barred from entering the U.S., which now includes the Chief Prosecutor Luis Ortega Diaz.

"Venezuelan officials past and present who violate the human rights of Venezuelan citizens and engage in acts of public corruption will not be welcome here, and we now have the tools to block their assets and their use of U.S. financial systems," announced White House spokesman Josh Earnest.

The U.S. has failed thus far to disclose evidence that might bolster its claims of human rights violations, leading Venezuelan and other regional leaders to condemn what they regard as the arbitrary and political character of U.S. sanctions.

While regional bodies such as the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) have called for dialogue, Washington has so far refused to support negotiations or to recognise the organisation's stance.

Friday, February 20, 2015

Caracas Mayor arrested on charge of promoting a coup against the Venezuela government

"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

That quote comes from almost exactly a year ago, as months of protests driven by the hard-right faction of the conservative opposition in Venezuela were ramping up.

The Obama Administration instituted formal Sanctions against Venezuela late in 2014, making Venezuela the only other country in the Western Hemisphere besides Cuba subject to US sanctions.

Caracas Metropolitan District Mayor Antonio Ledezma, a leader in the opposition to President Nicolás Maduro and his ruling Partido Socialista Unido de Venezuela (PSUV), was arrested on charges of planning a coup against Maduro's government. The US State Department was quick to vocally criticize the government for Ledezma's arrest. (Roberta Jacobson: EE UU "profundamente" preocupado por "intimidación" a opositores Panorama 20.02.2015)

Ledezma is a member of the small Alianza Bravo Pueblo party. In a post last April I noted, "One major opposition leader, Antonio Ledezma, Mayor of Metropolitan Caracas, is not explicitly supporting the far-right group led by Leopoldo López and María Corina Machado. But he paints the situation in hysterical terms to which the far right would be unlikely to object."

The Independent reports (Lamiat Sabin, Mayor Antonio Ledezma arrested and dragged out of office 'like a dog' by police in Venezuela 02/20/2015):

Last week, Mr Maduro named Mr Ledezma – who was elected as mayor in 2008 after beating a socialist candidate – among critics and Western powers he believes are enemies to his government.

The US state department called his accusations of coup-plotting “baseless and false”, and said they are to distract from Venezuela’s severe economic problems such as widespread shortages and inflation that reached 68% last year.
And the State Department knows hours after the arrest that the coup planning charges are “baseless and false” ... how? Because the NSA is monitoring every word and movement Ledezma has been making? Because the US is careful to coordinate carefully with all coup plotting in Venezuela?

Gladys Gutiérrez, President of the Venezuelan Supreme Constitutional Court, made a public statement telling the United States to stay out of Venezuelan politics, "Exigimos el cese a las agresiones contra el gobierno democráticamente electo, el Estado y el pueblo venezolano" ("We demand the cessation of the aggressions against the democratically elected government, the state and Venezuelan people"). (TSJ expresó “rechazo categórico” al injerencismo de Estados Unidos Panorama 20.02.2015)

The dragged-like-a-dog reference in The Independent's headline Ismael García comes from a tweet by National Assembly (Parliament) member Ismael García of the opposition parties Avanzada Progresista and Primero Justicia (PJ). The article does not report whether Ledezma was placed in a collar with a chain attached to it.

Bill Clinton also got into the act, tweeting:


Why is Bill Clinton stepping in on behalf of one of the main leaders of the far-right opposition (Leopoldo López) that was and is explicitly seeking the immediate, extra-constitutional removal of the government of Venezuela that had been elected in a tightly competitive election in 2013? Good question!

Rachel Boothroyd reports for Venezuela Analysis on the charges against Ledezma, presumably basing her description of the offical justification for the arrest. (Venezuelan Opposition Mayor, Alias “The Vampire,” Arrested for Role in Blue Coup Plot 02/20/2015) She also recounts how Ledezma had more recently identified himself with the more-or-less explicit coup plan promoted by Leopoldo López and María Machado:

The planned coup was uncovered last week by security forces, just hours before several US backed Air Force officials had planned to partake in a bombing spree of strategic targets in the capital. They had hoped this would lead to the assassination of the country’s president and bring about regime change in the South American country.

“Antonio Ledezma who, today, by order of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, was captured and is going to be prosecuted by the Venezuelan justice system, to make him answer to all of the crimes committed against the peace and security of the country and the Constitution ... We’ve had enough of conspiracies, we want to work in peace!” announced Venezuelan President, Nicolas Maduro, amidst a chorus of cheers from onlookers.

Last week, Ledezma, who is current Mayor of the Metropolitan Capital District of Caracas, signed a statement calling for a “National Transition Agreement” alongside opposition politicians, Maria Corina Machado and currently detained leader of the Popular Will party, Leopoldo Lopez.

The document calls on Venezuelans to unite behind a plan to remove elected President Nicolas Maduro and sets out an action programme for the would be provisional government. This includes facilitating the return of “exiled” Venezuelans, prosecuting current members of government and reaching out to international financial lending agencies such as the International Monetary Fund. [my emphasis]
He hasn't exactly been entirely faithful to constitutional scruples in the recent past:

It is not the first time that Ledezma has been implicated in a plan to violently overthrow the government. In 2002, he participated in an attempted coup which saw socialist president of the time, Hugo Chavez, ousted for a period of 47 hours. Last year, he was also named several times as a “principal ally” by currently detained terror plotter, Lorent Saleh. Saleh was one of the main underground activists fuelling the armed barricades known as guarimbas which last year claimed the lives of at least 43 Venezuelans. He had planned to go on a killing spree with the help of Colombian paramilitaries but was arrested before the plan could take place.

Popularly known as “the vampire”, Ledezma began his political career in 1973 as a member of the “Democratic Action” Party. In 1989, he infamously became Governor of the Federal District of Caracas, when he oversaw one of the most violent periods in the history of the Caracas Metropolitan Police.
Boothroyd also thinks reports of his being dragged out like a dog are not supported by the available facts:

Although international press has widely reported that the Mayor was manhandled when SEBIN officers entered his office, a video of the detention has emerged appearing to show a reticent but unharmed Ledezma being escorted from his office by several armed guards. Photos published of glass on the floor in Ledezma's office by news agency, Ultimas Noticias, appear to show that SEBIN forcibly entered the building.

Friday, May 09, 2014

US sanctions against Venezuela?

"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

This headline illustrates that even McClatchy, who does such good reporting on the Middle East, isn't above hysterical headlines about Venezuela: Chris AdamsAs Venezuela continues crushing dissent, a bipartisan push in Senate for sanctions 05/08/2014.

Yes, just as the G-7 this week were declaring they want to get Europe less dependent on Russian oil, the rightwing Cuban lobby, aka "Miami", and their Florida Senators Marco Rubio and Blue Dog Democrat Bill Nelson think it would be a dandy idea to carry on a mini-Cold War with Venezuela, the country with the largest oil reserves in the world.

We can only marvel at the geopolitical perception of these foreign policy prophets.

Rubio tried on a little populist rhetoric, although it's hardly good taste in Republican circles to criticize rich people for ostentatious consumption - unless they're libruls, of course:

Citing sanctions against individuals in Russia for that country’s actions in Ukraine, Rubio asked what the difference was between repressive officials there and those in Venezuela.

"We sanction human rights violators all the time," Rubio said. "The only difference between those sanctions, those people, and others, is they spend their weekends in Miami."

He spoke of people connected to the Venezuelan regime who live in Miami and "drive up and down the streets in their fancy cars. They laugh at you and they laugh at us, because they know they can get away with these things."
Yeah, Russia, Venezuela, they both have government, they're big in the oil business and they spread funny foreign languages. They're just alike. All a bunch of rich Commies with big cares. Or something.

Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, another Democrat who constantly seeks to show he's not one of them thar "bleeding-heart liberals" - he uses the term - is on the bandwagon, too:

The criticism of the administration’s go-slow stance was bipartisan. Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said the administration’s hesitancy on sanctions in the Venezuelan crisis could be applied to the use of sanctions in other places.

"I think you continue to make arguments against sanctions, and I have to ask you, 'What’s your alternative?’" he said. "If we start with the premise that we can’t do anything that might affect the Venezuelan economy because it will hurt innocent people, we find ourselves at the end of the day saying, ‘Well, they’re just aren’t many sanctions’" the U.S. could use.

"If we're not going to use military force, what are sanctions that might result in a positive outcome?" Durbin asked.
"What's your alternative?" Uh, not rushing into needless conflicts? Not backing hard-right extremists in Venezuela like Leopoldo López and María Corina Machado in trying to overthrow an elected government? Maybe trying to build positive relationships with the government presiding over the world's largest oil reserve?

Not surprisingly, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has some ideas about sanctions and the alternatives (Maduro a EE UU: "Estúpidos, saquen sus sanciones" Panorama 09.05.2014):

"Ya ni provoca responder las estupideces que dicen las élites imperialistas del norte. Que se queden con sus amenazas y estupideces, dediquemos a construir patria y no dejemos que nadie se meta en los asuntos de nuestra patria. Ahora andan diciendo que nos van a sancionar. ¡Estúpidos, eso es lo que son! saquen sus sanciones, al pueblo de Bolívar no los para las sanciones de ningún imperio”, soltó el Jefe de Estado este viernes.

“Que viva la dignidad del pueblo de Venezuela, abajo el imperialismo. Son luchas de todos los días (…) ante cualquier ataque imperialista tiene que haber una respuesta de organización, que se consolide la fuerza para luchar, que cada quien se defina. Aquí hay un proyecto de patria, el más avanzado de la historia de 200 años de República, un proyecto democrático y profundamente humanista que fue construido sobre la base de la conciencia del país”.

["The idiocies that the imperialist elites of the North say don't even deserve a response. Let them take their threats and idiocies, let us dedicate ourselves to building our homeland and to not allowing anyone to meddle in the business of our homeland. Now they are going around saying that they are going to sanction us. Idiots, that's what they are! take your sanctions, the people of Bolívar are not going to stop because of sanctions of any imperialist power," the Chief of States declared this Friday.

"Hooray for the dignity of the people of Venezuela, down with imperialism. There are struggles every day ... Facing any kind of imperialist attack we have to have an organized response, that consolidates our forces to fight, no matter who is defining it. Here we have a national project, the most advanced in 200 years of the Republic, a democratic project and a profoundly humanist one"] that was constructed on the basis of the conscience of the country."]
By the "national project," he means the political project of the Bolivarian Revolution, as the chavistas refer to their cause.

This is a video of part of Maduro's statement from the state television channel VTV, Maduro a voceros de EEUU: ¡Estúpidos…Al pueblo de Bolívar no lo para sanciones de ningún imperio! 09.05.2014:



Tags: , , ,

Sunday, May 04, 2014

Venezuela through the fog of lazy (or worse!) conventional wisdom

"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

I'm not especially impressed with Aljazeera English's reporting and op-ed features on Latin American politics. Latest case in point for me: Remi Piet, Russia and Latin America: What gives? 05/02/2014.

Soviet Foreign Minister Lavrov is on a diplomatic tour in Latin America that includes Cuba, Nicaragua, Peru and Chile. Piet's opinion piece is mostly a catalogue of not-very-enlightening conventional wisdom about how flaky various Central and South American government supposedly are.

This was especially interesting:

Venezuela, once the economic driving force of the "Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America" - the regional integration scheme promoted by Chavez - is now stricken by economic depression and a hyperinflation which forced Maduro to increase by 30 percent the minimum wage in the country for the second time this year. This populist move, in the naïve hope of contenting demonstrators, mostly increased the already alarming deficits which culminated at a staggering 11.5 percent of GDP in 2013.
"Hyperinflation" is a real scare word, although inflation in Venezuela has been severe recently. But that debt number has to be some kind of mistake. 11.5%? That would be minuscule! This chart from Trading Economics shows a 49.8% ration of debt-to-GDP as of now, far lower than that of most industrialized countries, even assuming this is excluding debt of Venezuelan states and municipalities. I see no good reason to thing that's a particular concerning level of debt for a petrostate like Venezuela.

For publicity and propaganda purposes, an inflation rate of 30% will for the foreseeable future sound horrifying to average "middle class" people in developed countries. But if you have a government like the one in Venezuela who takes active measures like selective price controls and measures to increase wages so that ordinary workers' real income can keep pace with inflation, it may not be so horrifying.

It's a nice little touch that Piet adds in saying that a 30% increase in minimum wages is being done "in the naïve hope of contenting demonstrators." Gee, raising people's income by 30% sounds like a pretty good way of producing greater contentment to me!

Mark Weisbrot has a recent piece on Venezuela that provides a much more level-headed and, from what I call tell, realistic picure of what's going on in the current political conflict there, The Story of Venezuela’s Protests May Be Different From What You Are Told CEPR 04/28/2014. For instance, he writes, "Of course the increased shortages and rising inflation over the past year have had a political impact on Venezuela, but it is striking that the people who are most hurt by shortages are decidedly not joining the protests. Instead, the protests are joined and led by the upper classes, who are least affected." In that sense, Piet may be right when he says the increases isn't a promising way of "contenting demonstrators." The demonstrations appear to be more a product of grumpy but comfortable segments of the country.

This is also an important point from Weisbrot about the Venezuelan media, who one would think from the conventional coverage is virtually dominated by the national government:

As for the media, state TV in Venezuela has only about 10 percent of the TV audience; the New York Times recently had to run a correction for falsely reporting that opposition voices are not regularly heard on Venezuelan TV. They are on TV, even calling for the overthrow of the government – which has been the announced goal of the protest leaders from the beginning. These are not like the protests last year in Brazil, or the student protests from 2011-13 in Chile, which were organized around specific demands.
He's right about the diplomatic support that Venezuela is getting in this current situation from fellow UNASUR members:

The strategy of Venezuela’s extreme right is to make the country ungovernable, so as to gain by force what they have been unable to win in 18 elections over the past 15 years. It is clear from the statements of Brazil’s former president Lula da Silva and current president Dilma Rousseff that they have no illusions about what is going on in Venezuela. It is now 50 years since Brazil's coup brought in the military dictatorship that put them in prison, but they can remember what a coup looks like. So, too, can the other governments of South America, who have made similar statements.
Tags: , , ,

Sunday, April 20, 2014

Venezuela through the lens of the PBS Newshour

This report below from PBS Newshour on the situation on Venezuela is, at best, sloppy. My confidence in the Newshour's reporting has declined recently, not least thanks to reports like this, these two from The Young Turks.

PBS Has Some Explaining To Do 03/10/2014:



That report was based on Davied Sirota's article, After pledging transparency, PBS hides details of new deal with billionaire owner of NewsHour PandoDaily 03/07/2014.

More on the same theme from an earlier Young Turks report, PBS Gets On Its Knees For Billionaires/Integrity Is Dead 02/13/2014:



The PBS Newshour report is this, Socialism after Chavez: Political divisions deepen amid unrest in Venezuela, YouTube video title, Political divisions deepen amid unrest in Venezuela 04/18/2014:



We need realistic news reporting on Venezuela. This one falls short, for reasons I'm going to describe in some detail:

[Hugo Chávez'] handpicked successor, Nicolas Maduro, was elected president soon after [Chávez' death]. As Maduro marks the end of his first year in office tomorrow, divisions have deepened in a country that has become violent in recent months.
Given how little even the average PBS Newshour presumably knows about Venezuelan politics, it might have been appropriate to mention here that while Maduro was Chavez' preferred successor, he won the President's office a year ago in a competitive election. Competitive enough that Maduro won by less than a couple of percentage points.

Late last week, after more than three months of sometimes deadly street protests throughout Venezuela, President Nicolas Maduro met with his political opposition.

The six-hour televised session brokered by the Vatican and three South American foreign ministers attracted record ratings on Venezuelan TV, reflecting the nation's anxiety at the street violence that has killed more than 40 and posed the biggest challenge to the government in more than a decade. [my emphasis]
After all the reports we've seen about how Maduro's government is suppressing the press, it's worth noting that these talks with the opposition "attracted record ratings on Venezuelan TV." They were also reported in other media in Venezuela, as well. They featured a number of opposition leaders from the umbrella opposition alliance, Mesa de la Unidad Democrática (MUD). Including Henrique Capriles who was the MUD candidate who came close to defeating Maduro in last year's Presidential election.

When I saw the title of the YouTube video, "Political divisions deepen amid unrest in Venezuela," I expected a big part of the report to deal with the major divisions among the opposition. Capriles and his electoral alliance initially refused to accept the result of the Presidential election a year ago and engaged in street demonstrations that resembled the present militant dissent.

But in the current disruptions, a far-right faction of the MUD lead by Leopoldo López and María Corina Machado. This faction is explicitly about pursuing a goal of immediate "regime change," as Machado has explicitly said. They call their current goal La Salida, the exit, meaning immediate change of government without waiting for elections. Capriles has kept his distance from that strategy, sticking with a goal of seeking a change of government through the established constitutional, parliamentary institutions. That hasn't stopped him from being bitterly critical of the Maduro government and putting the blame for violence and misconduct during the protests onto the government.

State and municipal governments have elected governments in Venezuela, with some mayors and governors from the chavista party and others from the MUD coalition. In municipal elections in December, the national ruling chavista party gained notably in its vote percentage compared to last April's elections. Yet Moisés Naím, a former Venezuelan Development Minister aqnd syndicated columnist, appears in the segment saying, "And even the election results show that about half the country is against the government." About half: apparently meaning less than half and not enough to win a larger majority than Maduro's party! Later, they quote an anti-Maduro engineer saying, "We are talking for the other half of Venezuela, and the president is ignoring us." I guess the President appearing on live television for six hours with major opposition leaders, an event that "attracted record ratings on Venezuelan TV," doesn't count.

If the Newshour was going include comments like Maim's and the engineer's, they should have inserted some solid information about, you know, the actual elections over the last year. They also include a comment from the same engineer, "He always spent money before elections. That is why he won." Gee, a government spends public funds to do things that benefit ordinary people and then they vote for him! Oh, the horror, the horror!

Michael Stifter, president of a group called the Inter-American Dialogue, is one of the experts interviewed by Margaret Warner for the segment. He strikes a seemingly moderate tone in the parts of the interview aired, but his framing is clearly sympathetic to the opposition. He allows that Hugo Chávez "put his finger on a legitimate grievance in Venezuela." (Only one?!) But Warner's segment lets this statement of his pass without challenge or correction: "The problem is, this is a model that has obviously failed and obviously is unable to deliver basic goods to people, a reasonable economic environment with security protections." It's certainly relevant here that a majority of Venezuela's voters haven't yet decided its' "obvious" that the chavista model is a failed one.

And what does it mean when Stifter says the current government and chavista economic model is "unable to deliver basic goods to people"? There are shortages in some grocery items. But one could easily draw the conclusion from Stifter's comment that some major portion of the people are on the verge of starvation, which is not the case. In fact, the rates of poverty and extreme poverty have fallen dramatically in Venezuela during the chavista period.

I'll give the Newshour credit for not throwing out a few of common points that one sees about Venezuela: that the government is a dictatorship; and, the idea that the government party monopolizes the news media, which is far from the case.

They do mention inflation, which scares average Americans more than it seems to scare Venezuelan voters.

But they work the groceries business, and do so in a way that would seem disturbing to the average American news consumer. It's one thing not to be able to get adequate food. It's quite a different thing not to be able to find your favorite brand in every grocery store.

The Newshour segment quotes a woman from the state of San Cristobal, without noting that its the state where the current round of protests began in early February.

MARGARET WARNER: To test the public’s view of all this, a NewsHour crew went to San Cristobal far from the capital, near the Colombian border, to meet up with architecture student Geraldine Colmenares. She’s finding life untenable right now:

GERALDINE COLMENARES, (through interpreter): I cannot go out on the streets and get what I want to feed my child, always having to stand in line, looking from supermarket to supermarket and thinking if I’m going to get back home alive.

MARGARET WARNER: She doesn’t stay long at her neighborhood’s barricades. She’s afraid to take her young son, but she helps by supplying protesters with food and water. She too has no confidence in Maduro.

GERALDINE COLMENARES (through interpreter): Maduro wants to do the same as Chavez, but he can’t. He wants to be like Chavez, but he is not like Chavez. [my emphasis]
She can't get "what I want to feed my child" - starving children! - but she "helps by supplying protesters with food"? Say what?

The report alludes to the problem of violence there and elsewhere without ever distinguishing criminal violence from violence directly associated with the political protests, thus inviting the viewer to conflate the two. There is a real and serious problem of criminal violence in Venezuela. I posted about it in January before the current round of protest began, Venezuelan actress Mónica Spear's murder becomes a national political shock. Also see below.

One thing that sticks out heavily, and that makes this piece look to me more than a little influenced by animus against the Venezuelan government, is the segment just after 5:10, featuring the one straight-up Maduro supporter interview in the segment, Marlin Marchand. Who happens to be the only person focused on in the segment who is very dark-skinned, the only one an American audience would immediately code as black. The other two person-on-the-street style interviews are a light-skinned male student and the light-skinned and middle-class-looking San Cristobal lady. How would a typical American Republican viewer understand the following:

MARGARET WARNER: There are still plenty of fervent Chavistas who are sticking with Maduro, like Marlin Marchand, who lives with her mother in Caracas, and depends on Chavez era government programs, like the subsidized food stores.

MARLIN MARCHAND, Maduro Supporter (through interpreter): This merkal is a basic grocery, but with very low prices. A pack of flour cost two bolivars. On the open market, it’s 35 or 50. Why? Because capitalism is structured in a way that we, the poor, can’t buy what we need.

MARGARET WARNER: She says her faith in Chavez and Maduro endures.

MARLIN MARCHAND (through interpreter): Chavez was a leader. He built schools for people who did not know how to read, and now many more people know how to read. This is socialism, and Chavez transmitted this to President Maduro. Maduro’s made mistakes. Nobody's perfect, but he's trying to lead things in a positive direction.
She's black, she supports "socialism," she criticizes capitalism explicitly and, as Warner helpfully explains to the viewers, "depends on Chavez era government programs, like the subsidized food stores." Food stamps! Socialism! A Taker not a Maker! Taking tax money from the Job Creators! They show empty shelves in a grocery store earlier in the segment when they are talking about shortages. But while the Socialist Taker is speaking, they show stuffed shelves in that communist food market with the food stamp subsidies.

Good grief! It's hard to imagine that report accidentally came out with a framing that a Venezuelan opposition political consultant could have happily suggested. If they didn't get some kind of payoff for this from a political consultant or the CIA or some neocon "democracy promotion" outfit wanting to overthrown Maduro's government, they were leaving easy money on the table!

And given the other problems with the report, it's pretty painfully noticeable that the two of the three anti-Maduro reg'lar folks they show interviewed as well as Shifter make statements that claim or could be easily interpreted as sympathetic to Chávez but critical of Maduro. They didn't leave the chavista party, the chavista party left them! The Newshour really should have taken the opposition cash.

It's interesting to note that one of their expert sources in the interview is Moisés Naím, the one-time Venezuelan Cabinet minbister, also recently wrote the following blatantly misleading - I'm being generous here - description of his country:

Venezuela is now the world champion of inflation, homicide, insecurity, and shortages of essential goods—from milk for children to insulin for diabetics and all kinds of indispensable products. All this despite having the greatest oil reserves in the world and a government with absolute control of all state institutions and levers of power. [my emphasis]
It might be useful if someone at the Newshour or The Atlantic or one of his colleagues at the Carnegie Endowment to ask him to defend those claims in light of competitive elections, opposition officeholders and aggressively critical private media companies.

The Real News has been providing far more informative and reality-based mreports on Venezuela in a nine-segment series of which three more segments are available on YouTube since I posted earlier ones.

The Modern History of Venezuela: The Bolivarian Revolution - Edgardo Lander on RAI (5/9) 04/16/2014:



Edgar Lander in that video talks about some of the challenges presented by Venezuela's dependence of the oil business to the professed aims of the Bolivarian Revolution there. he also talks about the countries agricultural challenges. "Agricultural culture in Venezuela was destroyed by oil," Lander says.

The Modern History of Venezuela and the Need for a Post-Oil Economy - Edgardo Lander on RAI (6/9) 04/17/2014:



Lander in that segment discusses with a more reality-based approached the segment that the Newshour quotes Moisés Naím presenting, a version that perhaps coincidentally is likely to appeal to conservative sentiments in the US: "Lack of investment in the oil industry — again, the Chavez model is not a model of investment. It’s not a model of boosting productivity. It’s a model of spending."



The Modern History of Venezuela, Why Still So Much Crime? - Edgardo Lander on RAI (7/9) 04/18/2014:



Lander in that video addresses the real problem of criminal violence in Venezuela and Caracas in particular and how the current justice and penal system do a badly inadequate job in dealing with it. This is a substantive criticism of the chavista governments of both Maduro and Chávez.



Tags: , , , ,

Tuesday, April 08, 2014

Political talks in Venezuela sponsored by UNASUR

"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

Mark Weisbrot writes about the Obama Administration's Venezuelan policy in an op-ed co-signed by Oliver Stone, Obama Administration Faces Diplomatic Isolation in Latin America on Venezuela CEPR 03/22/2014 (also appears as Obama wrong to isolate Venezuela Boston Globe 03/22/2014; Obama se aísla en Latinoamérica por Venezuela La Journada 28.03.2014.

The United States downgraded the priority of Latin America generally after the fall of the Soviet Union. That shift began with the Old Man Bush Administration, continued under Clinton and Shrub Bush (despite the Cheney-Bush Administration's backing for a coup in oil-rich Venezuela) and became even more pronounced under the Obama Administration. In the political coups in Honduras and Paraguay, this Administration showed indifference at best, more like tacit approval in the Honduran case. (Mark Weisbrot, Top Ten Ways You Can Tell Which Side The United States Government is On With Regard to the Military Coup in Honduras CEPR 12/16/2009) Although compared to the more typical historical US policy toward Latin America, indifference could count as a distinct improvement.

Weisbrot and Stone refer to:

... the lopsided vote at the Organization of American States (OAS) on Venezuela on March 7. Twenty-nine of 32 countries not only rejected Washington’s attempt to get the OAS to intervene in Venezuela, but to add insult to injury, passed a resolution expressing their solidarity with the government of President Nicolás Maduro. It is hard to imagine a more resounding diplomatic defeat in a body where the U.S. government still has quite a disproportionate influence.

The Obama administration seems surrealistically unaware that this is a very different hemisphere than it was 15 years ago. Governments representing the majority of Latin America are now from the left: including Brazil, Argentina, Ecuador, Bolivia, Uruguay, and Venezuela in South America; El Salvador and Nicaragua in Central America. These governments emphatically reject Washington’s depiction of the recent events in Venezuela as a government trying to "repress peaceful protesters." If we look at the statements of these governments and bodies such as the South American trading bloc Mercosur and the Union of South American Nations, they share Maduro's view of the protests. They see them as an attempt to overthrow a democratically-elected government. Even President Michelle Bachelet of Chile, who is reluctant to criticize Washington as many of the others do, used the word “destabilization” to describe the protests. And they see that Washington is once again using its muscle to support this effort. [my emphasis]
It's significant that there was no such collective, defensive diplomatic reactions by South American nations to the mass protests that broke out in Brazil in the winter of 2013 (which was mid-year, summer in the Northern Hemisphere), notwithstanding the good relations that Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff has with her Latin American neighbors. South American governments evidently did not see those protests as a danger to the democratic system or as showing signs of foreign intervention. (On the Brazilian protests, see André Singer, Rebellion in Brazil: Social and Political Complexion of the June Events New Left Review Jan-Feb 2014)

Weisbrot and Stone also note:

The Obama administration’s manipulation of the OAS in the aftermath of the 2009 military coup in Honduras – to help legitimize the dictatorship -- spurred the rest of the region to form a new hemispheric organization, CELAC, without the U.S. and Canada. True to form, it was only the U.S. and Canada, joined by the right-wing government of Panama that objected to the March 7 resolution.
The Venezuelan government has been cooperating with UNASUR attempts to broker peaceful consulations with opposition leaders (Venezuela's Maduro agrees to Unasur-brokered opposition talks BBC News 04/07/2014) The government has announced that formal talks will begin on Friday to include governors and mayors from opposition parties. (Gobierno convoca a reunión con gobernadores de oposición Últimas Noticias 08.04.2014) There was an initial meeting between Maduro and some opposition leaders on Monday. (Maduro: “Si la reunión con la oposición se concreta, será un gran mensaje de paz” Panorama 08.03.2014)

Henrique Capriles, Governor of the state of Miranda, was the Presidential candidate of the opposition last year who came very close to defeating Nicolás Maduro. Although a year ago he initially refused to accept the election results and promoted militant protests similar to the ones we're seeing the last couple of months, he has kept his distance from the far right's demands to immediately overturn Maduro's elected government. As of this report in Panorama, he has not yet agree to be part of the formal talks: Unasur podría sentarse con los 23 gobernadores 07.04.2014. But he has agreed to talk with the foreign ministers of UNASUR sponsoring the talks. Capriles seems to be walking a line between keeping his credibility among the opposition parties while not embracing the immediate regime-change demands of the far right.

One major opposition leader, Antonio Ledezma, Mayor of Metropolitan Caracas, is not explicitly supporting the far-right group led by Leopoldo López and María Corina Machado. But he paints the situation in hysterical terms to which the far right would be unlikely to object (Ledezma insta a estar atentos a las intenciones de Unasur Últimas Noticias 08.04.2014):

“Liberen a Leopoldo López que está secuestrado, permitan el retorno de los exiliados, liberen a Iván Simonovis que se está muriendo en Ramo Verde, resuelvan el problema de la invasión cubana, resuelvan la separación de poderes”, exhortó el Alcalde Mayor.

[Free Leopoldo López who has been kidnapped, permit the return of the exiles, free Iván Simonovis who is dying in Ramo Verde, resolve the problem of the Cuban invasion, resolve the separation of powers," the Alcalde Mayor exhorted.]
Saying that it's hysterical - e.g., "the Cuban invasion" referring to Cuban personnel working in Venezuela with the government - doesn't mean there isn't substance to some of the complaints. It's not clear to me, for instance, to what extent the evidence would justify López' jailing on charges of promoting violence.

Machado tweeted on April 7:


"The only dialogue that we will accept is the one that facilitates the democratic transition," in this case meaning the overturning of the democratically elected government. (La respuesta de MCM a la propuesta de diálogo de Maduro Noticias 24 Venezuela 08.04.2014)

Tags: , , , ,