page 7 | Analysis:
page 8 | Opinion
Foreign media campaign claims terrorism in Venezuela
Major league baseball Manager Ozzie Guillen suspended for expressing his opinion...in the US
Friday | April 13, 2012 | Nº 104 | Caracas
ENGLISH EDITION The artillery of ideas
Power to the people Venezuelans commemorate the 10th anniversary of a popular uprising that defeated a US-backed coup d’etat and rescued President Hugo Chavez from assassination
Chavez raises minimum wage again Venezuela continues to enjoy the highest minimum wage in Latin America as President Hugo Chavez announced an additional 32% hike in a wage that affects millions in the South American nation. The basic wages, $476 per month, plus the government food stamp program, which benefits all workers, private and public, regardless of salary, brings the minimum earnings to nearly $700 monthly, well above other countries in the region. Chavez has boosted the minimum wage every year for the past 12 years. | page 5
This week Venezuela held events to mark the 10th anniversary of the April 11, 2002 coup d’etat that briefly overthrew President Hugo Chavez and installed a brutal US-backed dictatorship in the country. In one of Latin America’s most extraordinary moments, millions took to the streets in Venezuela to demand the return of their elected President just 48 hours after the coup occurred. Chavez was rescued by military loyalists and returned to power on April 13, 2002. Today Venezuelans see this event as a decisive moment for the Bolivarian Revolution. Chavez continues to express his gratitude to the people of Venezuela for saving his life and ensuring the revolutionary process continues. | pages 2-3
Interview
A coup-time testimonial Grassroots educator Joel Linares tells his story of the April 11, 2002 coup d’etat. | page 4 Economy
State program to provide millions of employment opportunities A Chavez administration initiative aims to train workers and create new jobs.| page 5 International
Venezuela denounces US aggression in Syria President Chavez warned of a plan to provoke violence internally to justify regime change.| page 6
Venezuela 5th “Happiest Country in the World” T/ AVN
A
global happiness survey released by the polling firm Gallup found that Venezuela is the fifth happiest country in the world. According to the poll, 64 percent of Venezuelan respondents said their well-being was thriving. The poll measured how people in 124 countries rated their lives at
the current time and their expectations for the next five years. Topping the list were Denmark (72 percent), Sweden (69 percent), Canada (69 percent), and Australia (65 percent). Finland was tied with Venezuela, sharing the fifth spot. Venezuela is the Latin American country with the highest wellbeing, followed by Panama (11th),
Costa Rica (14th), Brazil (15th) and Mexico (19th). Respondents rated their wellbeing based on “thriving,” “struggling,” or “suffering.” People who considered themselves to be thriving rated their lives a 7 or higher on a scale from 0 to 10. The poll showed that the respondents with highest wellbeing also reported fewer health pro-
Chavez thanks Venezuelans for rescue On Wednesday, Venezuelan President Pre Hugo Chavez th thanked the people w who rallied around the Miraflores Presidential Palace ten years ago on April 13, 2002, to demand deman his return after a to the government governm perpetrated by coup d’état pe the right-wing right-win and supported by the private mein dia, which installed a de facto government led by governm Pedro Carmona Carmon for a period of 48 hour hours. “My appre appreciation for those that gav gave their lives to save the life of this soldier”, said Chavez, Cha during a discussion w with friends and governme government officials experienc the April who experienced 2002 coup. Chavez agre agreed with the jou Venezuelan journalist Jose Vicente Range Rangel, who said the initial plan of the coup leaders was to assassinate h out of the him and take him political game entirely. “That plan failed fa thanks to the people who – withc out arms – came here”, Chavez said.
blems, less stress and sadness, and more happiness, respect and enjoyment. Out of the 124 countries polled in 2010, the majority of residents in only 19 countries (mostly in Europe and the Americas) rated their lives as “thriving”. An article published on the website of Gallup states that the list “is largely dominated by more developed and wealthier nations, as expected given the links between wellbeing and GDP”.
|
2 | Impact
NoÊ£ä{ÊU Friday, April 13, 2012
The artillery of ideas
Venezuela marks 10th anniversary of opposition’s failed coup, highlights plotters’ continued political presence T/ COI P/ Bill Hackwell
T
his week Venezuelans commemorated the 10th anniversary of the attempted coup d’état against democratically-elected President Hugo Chavez in April 2002 with a series of events ranging from street demonstrations to media workshops and public debates. The activities, sponsored by an array of public institutions and social organizations, drew attention to the destabilization efforts of the Venezuelan opposition while at the same time reflecting on the only time in Latin American history when an overthrown leader was brought back to power through spontaneous grassroots mobilizations. “We must not forget the danger that fascism represents for any society”, Venezuelan Vice President Elias Jaua said of the coup during an interview with Telesur on Tuesday. The Vice President went on to remind viewers of the “determining role” that the private media played in the opposition’s efforts to establish a right-wing dictatorship in the country and haled the heroic actions of the Venezuelan people in overcoming the coup. “We as a people...overcame a coup d’état supported by the government of the United States and Spain as well as other governments on our continent. They were defeated peacefully by the strength of the people and our patriotic soldiers”, Jaua affirmed. THE EVENTS OF APRIL 11-13, 2002 Although the genesis of what occurred in April 2002 cannot be attributed to any one factor, analysts generally point to two major laws passed by presidential decree in late 2001 as the catalysts for the events that followed. The first was Venezuela’s Land Law, which saw the initiation of a radical new agrar-
ian reform process based on the government’s redistribution of fallow state lands illegally held by private owners. The second was the enactment of the Hydrocarbon Law, which prompted greater executive control over the oil industry and broke the grip maintained over Venezuela’s most important and most profitable natural resource by a small group of wealthy plutocrats. While the left-leaning Chavez had always maintained an antineoliberal discourse in his campaigns and his push to re-write the nation’s constitution and provide greater services to the poor marked a break with the status quo, it wasn’t until the former military leader directly threatened the interests of the Venezuelan upper class through these two laws that the political divisions in the country began to assume violent overtones. Enter Coordinadora Democratica (CD), the opposition’s umbrella organization backed by Washington, that took up the task of organizing the antiChavez population into a consolidated political front deter-
mined to oust the incumbent president from power by any means necessary. Through a network of funding sources that included the US State Department, National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the US Agency for International Development (Usaid) and a variety of foreign and domestic supporters, CD pooled together Venezuela’s oil aristocracy, employer-controlled unions, and the private media to incite an uprising against the then 47year old Chavez. A series of general strikes spearheaded by the corrupt Venezuelan Confederation of Workers (CTV) in collaboration with the national chamber of commerce, Fedecámaras, took place from December 2001 to April 2002, accentuated by numerous street protests and a steady diet of anti-Chavez propaganda emanating from the overwhelmingly privately-controlled media landscape. The stage was thus set for April 11, 2002 when a protest called by the CD to take place at the state oil company, PDVSA’s, headquarters in Caracas was
quickly diverted towards the presidential palace of Miraflores where opposition leaders had arranged to post snipers in nearby high-rises. With a clash eminent between pro and anti-Chavez groups gathered in front of the palace, the snipers opened fire, killing over a dozen Venezuelans on both sides. Through a series of audiovisual manipulations and outright lies, private television stations used the violence to distort the events, accusing the Chavez government of firing upon unarmed demonstrators when in fact the gunshots had been carefully orchestrated by the coup’s plotters. Upon surrounding Miraflores, opposition activists and military defectors threatened to bomb the palace if Hugo Chavez refused to resign. Although the head of state never signed a resignation, he surrendered to the subversives to avoid further bloodshed while Pedro Carmona, the head of Fedecámaras, was installed as the de facto president. The nascent dictatorship would be short lived, however,
as thousands of residents descended the next day from the shantytowns surrounding the capital demanding the return of the democratically elected Chavez to office. With the palace surrounded by government supporters, members of the presidential guard retook Miraflores and Hugo Chavez was re-installed as Venezuela’s rightful president less than 48 hours after being taken hostage by the opposition. FROM COUP TO PRESENT While a handful of those responsible for the massacre that occurred on April 11 2002 have been prosecuted and are currently behind bars, other members of the Venezuelan opposition involved in the planning and execution of the coup including Pedro Carmona have successfully fled the country. In December 2007, amnesty was granted to a number of those behind the plot to overthrow the Chavez administration, but last Tuesday, the country’s highest legislative body, the National Assembly, revealed the names of some of the conspirators who continue to openly exercise political functions. One of those members of the Venezuelan right-wing is the current opposition presidential candidate Henrique Capriles Radonski, who according to socialist congressman Dario Vivas, “was one of the principle actors” of the coup, assisting in the “harassment of journalists, political leaders and generating chaos in embassies and in [the state television channel] Venezolana de Television”, he imputed. Specifically, government supporters have been quick to point out the role that Capriles Radonski played in violent siege of the Cuban embassy in Caracas during the coup attempt. “Can someone who assaulted an international embassy be president of Venezuela?” Vice President Jaua asked rhetorically during his interview with Telesur on Tuesday. Other opposition political figures who played an active role in the installment of the briefly lived right-wing dictatorship in Venezuela include congressional representatives Maria Corina Machado, Enrique Mendoza, Julio Borges, and Miguel Angel Rodriguez as well as Vice Presidential candidate Leopoldo Lopez.
NoÊ£ä{ÊU Friday, April 13, 2012
The artillery of ideas
Special Report | 3 |
Venezuela’s turning point Defeating Venezuela’s 2002 coup sent a message to the world: under Hugo Chavez we are in charge of our own affairs T/ Samuel Moncada, Ambassador of Venezuela to the United Kingdom P/ Bill Hackwell
T
en years ago Latin American history reached a turning point. In Venezuela, a US-backed military coup against the elected government of Hugo Chavez was stopped dead in its tracks after just a few days. It marked a clear break from the coups and subsequent dictatorships installed to defend economic elites that had cast a long shadow across Latin America. (Indeed, Pinochet’s 1973 coup in Chile shows what could have happened in Venezuela.) A tide of progressive governments across the continent followed. Over the three days of the coup many were killed. Like many others, I had a friend shot dead by coup police. Casualties
and human rights abuses were widespread and all democratic institutions annulled. Having appeared on national TV the day before to warn that a coup was coming, I was concerned I’d be arrested. I was lucky. The others dragged away from my apartment block were not. The seizure of power united much of the old order – big business, media moguls, landowners, the church hierarchy – with the US. They opposed reforms giving the government a greater share of the nation’s oil wealth. But against these powerful forces stood millions of long-excluded Venezuelans. They rose up, took over the city centers and surrounded army bases demanding the return of their elected president. In defeating the coup, they began a new chapter in Venezuelan history. Ten years on, how do these momentous events relate to the challenges facing my country today? The defeat of the coup was not only a victory for democracy – though more elections have been held in Venezuela over the past 12 years
than in the previous 40 years, and with record turnouts. It was also a catalyst for social progress, economic change and provided a new basis for our international relations. In the
aftermath, a free health service was established giving millions access to a doctor for the first time. Over a million people, mainly women, were taught to read and write. A 25-
year decline in GDP per head – with real incomes falling to levels of the 1950s – was reversed. Nonetheless, Venezuela continues to confront many problems. The free-market shock therapy of the 1980s and 1990s resulted in social devastation. Some difficulties were even longer term, a product of an oil state whose primary purpose was, for decades, to share this wealth among narrow interests rather than developing the nation. Today, providing affordable homes for the millions still living in shanty towns, tackling crime and diversifying the economy are some of the greatest challenges. It was only with the defeat of the coup that the force capable of carrying out such fundamental change emerged. Millions of Venezuelans became active in politics like never before, taking charge of developing their local areas through new community councils. This mass involvement ensures that the sharing of wealth and social investment is not about clientelism but emancipation. It also offers vigilance against inefficiency, bureaucracy and corruption. Sharp differences over Venezuela’s economic direction lay at the heart of the coup. They continue today. Ahead of presidential elections in October, the government believes that stateled development policies are the best way to address ongoing challenges. In contrast, the rightwing candidate promotes the free market and a return to IMF policies. In foreign relations, the USbacked coup also left its mark. Over 10 years, we’ve built our closest-ever links with Latin America nations. We are working closely with the Bric nations, with European governments and have more embassies than ever before, a sign of our commitment to constructive engagement. Maintaining this independent path is a constant challenge, not least with US state agencies like the National Endowment for Democracy spending millions of dollars supporting movements opposed to the elected government. This intervention should end. The Venezuelan people should be allowed to decide their own future. That was, after all, the loudest message from the people on the day they defeated the coup.
|
4 | Interview
NoÊ£ä{ÊU Friday, April 13, 2012
“Power to the People” Grassroots educator, Joel Linares of Petare, talks about his personal experiences during the 2002 coup and the significance for the Revolution. T & P/ Rachael Boothroyd
C
an you talk about what happened during the 2002 coup? In 2001-2002 there was a really strong media campaign that was aimed at delegitimizing what President Chavez had proposed in 49 decree-laws. Fedecameras and the directors of other media outlets were doing things like ripping these laws up on television and really attacking them. You have to remember that in 2001, we barely even had VTV, and that didn’t even reach the whole country. That was the only public media. The opposition had total monopoly over the media and people thought that if they saw something on the television, well then it had to be true. Between 2001 and 2003, the country was the most polarized it’s ever been; the opposition was using terror, even going out into the streets asking for “help” from the United States, using the corporate media to ask for direct intervention. They were organizing march after march, and we were organizing ours in defense of the President, that was the state of play until April 11. I can’t say that I knew that the coup was coming, but it felt like something had to break. You have to remember that at that moment we had armed groups that weren’t under the control of the government - you had the police from Baruta, Chacao, Hatillo, Miranda and the Metropolitan police force. Five police bodies with heavy weaponry, a virtual army, against the government. The opposition governors and mayors of those municipalities had put these forces at the direct disposal of the rightwing opposition. On the day of the big opposition march I was at home. Their march was supposed to have finished in the “Plaza de Meritocracia,” but when it got
there, figures like corrupt union leader Ortega started saying that the march would head on to the Miraflores Presidential Palace they were in an absolute frenzy. As soon as they said that, tons of people from nearby barrios starting coming out because they knew they had to defend the palace. I came down with the other people from Santa Lucia (Caracas) and we arrived at 1pm. The shots started straight away. There were 19 people killed, the majority with direct shots to the head from snipers. People were hiding from the bullets, and because of that the opposition march only made it to Parque Calvario, it never reached Miraflores or Avenida Baralt. So when the media showed images of government supporters shooting (supposedly down on to Avenida Baralt), they weren’t shooting at ordinary people, but at the Metropolitan police across from them, there was nobody on Avenida Baralt. It was totally orchestrated. The whole coup was entirely a creation of the media and it was all premeditated. They knew that Chavez would come out to call for calm, and as soon as he did, they started showing images of people falling down dead. So, you had Chavez as a voice over while they were broadcasting those images. Then they immediately start broadcasting statements from the military commanders (calling for the resignation of the President). The media, like CNN, were talking about “the dead” before the first person had even been shot. They already knew everything. Then those 5 anti-Chavez police bodies start coming out onto the streets and they’re firing everywhere, so before they grabbed us, we all fled, it was total chaos. That’s when they kidnapped Chavez. That night we didn’t sleep and the next day everyone was going crazy, we were in shock, trying to get the message out that Chavez had been kidnapped, through texting and word of mouth. So we decided to take to the streets. It wasn’t organized or anything, it was spontaneous. And it wasn’t just civilians, but an important number of the military as well took back the Fuerte Tiuna military base. So that’s how progressively more
and more people began to act and in the end they had to hand power back. But April 12th and 13th were totally crazy. It was a witch hunt. There were people fleeing, torture, people thrown in jail - many were tortured by the police. What would have happened if the people hadn’t taken to the streets? Without a popular rebellion, then the military probably wouldn’t have acted to save Chavez. It was a spontaneous popular rebellion, organized through word of mouth, through taking to the streets. So the majority of the armed forces came out in support of Chavez and in support of the people. That’s the main difference between what happened here and what happened in Honduras in 2009. In Honduras they used the same blueprint as April 11, 2002, but there it worked because there was no popular rebellion and crucially, no military support. The term “popular rebellion” is often used to describe the 1989 Caracazo uprising, are there similarities?
The artillery of ideas They’re similar, but there is a big difference. And that difference is why did the people come out? Why did they rebel? In 1989, it was about making themselves visible as human beings. Society was co-opted by the media, an alienated left, a corrupt society. A society that was about status and symbols, that said you were only worth what you owned. So in 1989, what people were looking for was their humanity. Or what they had been taught would give them their humanity. In 2002 the people had a higher level of consciousness and they also had something to fight for; the constitution, Chavez, the recuperation of the nation’s historic memory - they felt like these things were theirs. People went out to demand their rights. People felt like Chavez actually paid attention to them, he gave them their humanity, he put them on the map and made himself accountable to them. That’s why we say that Chavez is the people and the people are Chavez. Even if it wasn’t possible to resolve all the people’s problems at that moment, he had given them something important, which was hope, and that’s what the people went out to rescue in 2002.
What is the significance of the 2002 for the Revolution? After the coup, the process radicalized. One of the most important consequences of the coup was that we took back our national armed forces. Also, Venezuela started to move away from the US towards creating a multi-polar world. I would also say that the 2002 coup created the conditions for the left to take up new positions in Latin America. Chavez became a point of reference for the Latin American left. After 2002, you have Lula, Kirchner, Correa, Morales, etc. In 2002, there were mostly rightwing governments in the region, there was no one to come out and denounce the coup. It was really dangerous. The coup highlighted how necessary it was to create the people’s militias, alternative media, for the people to get organized through grassroots organizations, and also to reorientate Venezuela’s foreign policy, to create a great bloc of hemispheric allies. We’re much better prepared against any offensive now than in 2002. The defeat of 2002 coup was the materialization of the concept “power to the people”. The people took back power and saved their democracy.
NoÊ£ä{ÊU Friday, April 13, 2012
The artillery of ideas
Economy | 5 |
Venezuela raises minimum wage to highest level in Latin America T/ COI P/ Presidential Press
B
efore departing for Cuba to begin his third cycle of radiotherapy last weekend, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez announced a more than 32 percent hike in his country’s minimum wage, making the Caribbean nation the leader in Latin America in the category. The raise will take place in two installments, half coming on the first of May and the second half coming in September, increasing the current monthly minimum of 1,548 bolivars ($360) to 2,047 bolivars ($476). “If we add the 957 bolivars that makes up the [monthly food stamp benefit], we arrive at 3,004 bolivars which in dollars is $698.60 monthly”, the Venezuelan President said during a meeting with cabinet last Saturday. This is the 12th consecutive year that the Chavez administration has boosted the nation’s lowest pay rate, keeping wages on par with inflation and surpassing this year what the government has established as
its goal of maintaining price increases between 20-23 percent. Venezuela’s inf lation in 2011 measured 27.6 percent and has averaged 22.4 percent since Chavez became President in 1999. Last February, the rate of price increases reached an all time low of 1.1 percent and marked the third consecutive month of diminishing inflation as measured by the National Consumer Price Index (INPC). During the announcement of the wage raise last weekend, the Venezuelan President informed that the new salary will benefit 3.9 million workers in the public sector and will bring a cost of $4 billion dollars that will be covered by state oil revenues. Chavez also drew attention to the differences between his administration and the policies of the neoliberal governments of the 1980s and 1990s that saw, according to the ex-lieutenant colonel, a near freeze on wages while inflation broke “the ceiling of 100 percent annually”. “Every year, without exception, the Revolution has decreed an increase in the minimum
wage as a way to continue building social justice. This is one of the reasons that Venezuela is the country with the least amount of inequality on the continent”, the head of state commented. While broadcasting on national television, the socialist leader additionally noted that the number of workers relying on the minimum wage has been reduced drastically since he took office. “65 percent of those who worked in the formal sector received the minimum wage
Venezuela’s newest employment mission to provide opportunities to more than a million workers T/ COI
A
fter a national registration process that has lasted more than 2 months, government officials reported at the end of March that more than 1 million Venezuelans have enrolled in the country’s new employment program. Mission Work and Knowledge, first inaugurated by President Hugo Chavez in January, has been created to provide meaningful work opportunities to un-
employed and underemployed Venezuelans in a variety of strategic development industries. Applicants for the program have the opportunity to choose from up to 12 employment sectors including the oil industry, agriculture, construction and essential services such as education and health care. “The enrollment is something that demonstrates once again the credibility and power of convocation that President Chavez has with respect to his missions and
his vision of development for the people”, said Ricardo Menendez, Minister of Industry and head of the program at the close of the registration process in Caracas. According to the Minister of Industry, education and housing construction have topped the list of preferences for potential employees, followed by work in the Orinoco Belt oil fields. The overall aim of the Chavez administration, as articulated by Menendez, is to create 3 million new jobs in the country by 2019.
NEW LABOR LAW With International Worker’s Day quickly approaching on May 1st, the socialist President called attention to the proposals brought forth by
members of the Venezuelan working class who are contributing to the drafting process of the South American nation’s new Labor Law. Nicolas Maduro, Venezuelan Foreign Minister and member of the presidential commission created to work with labor and civil society to draft the law, mentioned that more than 19,000 proposals had been received from workers around the nation. “There has been a great maturation of the Venezuelan working class because we’ve seen the consciousness of the workers grow over the past years”, Maduro said. According to a poll released by International Consulting Services (ICS), more than 82 percent of the Venezuelan people view favorably the elaboration of a new Labor Law in the country. President Chavez assured on Saturday that the new legislation will be approved the week before May 1st and will include new economic and social benefits for workers while addressing a series of occupationrelated issues including length of the workday, job security, training and sanctions against employer fraud. “This has been made through debates, in discussions with the workers, the unions and the working class”, Chavez said of the process that has marked the drafting of the new legislation last weekend.
“We should incorporate 421,000 jobs per year. This is the goal that we have established”, the Minister said during an interview with state television at the beginning of the month. This includes, Menendez said, linking potential workers with other new government programs such as its large-scale public housing initiative and its far-ranging domestic food production measures. As such, more than 6,000 people have already been offered job assignments with the Ministry of Land and Agriculture while and additional 2,000 have been given the chance to take part in Mission Housing Venezuela. With respect to agriculture, Menendez pointed out the high number of aspirants seeking work in the countryside, a positive sign for the highly urban-
ized country that for decades has been dependent on foreign food imports. The head of the new mission also pointed out that the labor opportunities being provided for Venezuelans include training programs and represent a break with those traditionally offered under a capitalist system. “These are not alienating jobs. They are not jobs that punish a person or which attempt to sell their labor power. This is a mission designed for knowledge and for liberating work”, he affirmed. More than 49,000 workers began training under the auspices of the mission at the beginning of April and government officials have also reported that a full 55.6 of the nearly 1.2 million people enrolled in the new program are women.
while in 2010, 21.1 percent of workers were earning the minimum”, he said. “We will continue working hard to close the gap and assist the people who were condemned to poverty and misery by capitalism and the bourgeoisie”, he added.
|
6 | International
NoÊ£ä{ÊU Friday, April 13, 2012
The artillery of ideas
Venezuela denounces US-backed terrorism in Syria O
in an attempt to oust President Bashar al Assad”. Both Russia and China have maintained a firm position with respect to the conflict in Syria, calling on the international community to respect the country’s right to selfdetermination and national sovereignty. Both countries received harsh criticisms from the US and Europe after they prevented the passing of a UN resolution that would have allowed for direct military intervention by the very same forces that invaded Libya last year.
ARMING OPPOSITIONS Speaking to the Venezuelan people via satellite television late last week, President Chavez explained that Syria’s year-long escalation in violence is directly linked to “a new imperial modality” in which the United States, Europe, and their allies, “arm opposition movements and task them with both creating civil wars and overthrowing governments”. After violence spreads, Chavez affirmed, “the big countries come out, beginning with the United States, and condemn those governments that defend themselves”. According to Bashar al-Jaafari, Syria’s Permanent Ambassador to the United Nations, the 2011-2012 surge in political violence has resulted in 6,143 civilian casualties, 2,088 deaths in the Syrian Armed Forces, and an additional 478 police officers killed.
US GENERAL: 7 COUNTRIES BY 2012 Chavez’s warnings of a “new imperial modality” as well as Syria’s demands that international forces stop arming “terrorists” are anything but speculative. In a 2007 interview with independent journalist Amy Goodman, retired US General Wesley Clark described a classified memo he viewed in 2001 detailing how the Pentagon planned “to take out 7 countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran”. Using Iran as an example, Clark explained how the US planned to “take out” the Arab and African nations. First, he said, Washington has “asserted that their government needs regime change”. Then, to no one’s surprise, “we’ve asked congress to appropriate $75 million to do it, and we are supporting terrorist groups, apparently, who are infiltrating and blowing up things inside those countries. And if we’re not doing it, let’s put it this way: we’re probably cognizant of it and encouraging it”. In March 2011, Chavez warned that in Syria “the supposedly peaceful movements have already begun, and then there will be some deaths, and then they’ll be accusing the Syrian president of killing his people”. “Later, the Yankees come and want to bomb the people in order to save them, imagine that”, he affirmed. “What shameless cynicism!” said Chavez, “It’s a new strategy they’ve invented, to generate violent armed conflicts and spill blood in a country in order to then bomb it and intervene and take ownership of its natural resources and convert it into a colony”.
T/ COI P/ Agencies ver the weekend, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez used a televised address to the nation to reiterate his call for an end to US and European meddling in Syria’s “sovereign affairs”. President Chavez warned viewers that such interventionism could be used against Venezuela, and that a recent conversation with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad confirmed that international pressures are being combined with “acts of terrorism” in a Libya-like attempt to topple the Damascus government. Ever since the NATO-backed overthrow of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, Syria has suffered a dramatic escalation in political violence. While the United States and Europe accuse the al-Assad government of violently repressing “peaceful protestors”, Damascus blames terrorists armed from abroad for the widespread violence.
The UN reports an additional 30,000 Syrians were forced to seek refuge in neighboring countries, especially Turkey, while another 200,000 have been displaced within Syria itself. Speaking hypothetically, Chavez told viewers that if “a group of terrorists were sent into Venezuelan territory” his government “would also have to defend the country and national sovereignty”. “If that were to take place”, he said, “the empires would be sure to come out saying that our government is massacring the people”. Though the UN successfully negotiated a ceasefire scheduled to begin this week, the USbacked Syrian National Council and Free Syrian Army have both suggested it won’t last. Not part of the UN agreement, armed opposition forces responded to a request for “written guaran-
tees” that they will respect the ceasefire with new calls for the Syrian President to step down. Speaking on behalf of the Syrian National Council, London-based Obeida Nahas told the UK’s Telegraph that “the regime must understand that there is no way that Bashar alAssad can continue to rule this country. There will be national dialogue but the leaders of this regime have to go”. Riad al-Asaad, Commander of the opposition’s Free Syrian Army, added that his grouping “does not recognize the regime and, as such, will not give any guarantees” about laying down weapons. SPEAKING OF SOVEREIGNTY In a new effort to prevent further violence and block blatant interventionist maneuvering by the US and its allies, President Chavez recently spoke via
telephone with his Syrian counterpart. The two discussed Syrian sovereignty and the danger posed to all independent nations by US-sponsored “terrorism”. According to Chavez, Syria’s al-Assad explained to him “that the security situation is getting better, that he hopes, and is certain – and let’s hope that’s the case – that in the coming days, and with the least amount of bloodshed possible, the security situation will soon be under control and normality returned to the brother Arab nation”. Chavez added that his Syrian counterpart described “in detail” how “a series of political reforms have taken place in the country, including a new constitution and a new Law of Political Parties”. “However”, Chavez noted, “US imperialism and its allies continue to mount pressure, using guns, weapons, and terrorism
NoÊ£ä{ÊU Friday, April 13, 2012
The artillery of ideas
Miami’s El Nuevo Herald: false claims of terrorism in venezuela T/ COI P/ Agencies
W
ith Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez well on his way to sweeping this year’s presidential election, local opposition media are picking up news headlines from allies abroad aimed at denouncing the “growing threat” to peace and stability represented by none other President Chavez and his electoral victories. Of the numerous anti-Chavez claims issued by mainstream media in the United States, Europe, and across Latin America, perhaps one of the most surprising was a March piece in Miami’s El Nuevo Herald titled “Paramilitary Training Denounced in Venezuela”. In it, the Florida-based paper claimed Venezuela’s Margarita Island, an internationally-acclaimed tourist destination known for its white-sand beaches and crystalline Caribbean ocean, has somehow been transformed into
a “paramilitary training camp” covered in “secret tunnels” and “subterranean hideouts”. Though Venezuela’s Ministry of Tourism reports that Margarita Island hosted over 250,000 tourists in January alone, and that the island regularly receives some 40% of all international tourists who come to Venezuela, El Nuevo Herald’s Antonio Maria Delgado affirmed that the island’s Macanao peninsula is now home to “paramilitary encampments” built specifically “to train militiamen and other guardians of the Bolivarian Revolution in tactics of asymmetrical warfare”. According to anti-Chavez lawmaker Tobias Bolivar, Delgado’s principal source behind the article, Margarita Island is now “being used to train people in guerrilla warfare, and as a place to hide weapons”. In the words of Anthony Daquin, referred to by Delgado simply as an “ex security advisor” to the Venezuelan Armed Forces, “all of those who receive
training in Margarita first go through a background investigation”. Speaking to Delgado from New York City, Daquin added that some “all those trained are committed to the (Bolivarian) process, to the militias…and some even went to Cuba first”. Delgado also added that lawmaker Bolivar “mentioned the existence of testimonies that talk about the presence of people from the Middle East in the encampments”. Though Bolivar “admitted he had no evidence to prove it”, his allegation of a Middle East presence on Margarita island took on a life of its own. On March 26, Bolivar’s “testimonies” made their way into an article by Jerry Brewer titled “Crime and Extraterritorial Terrorists Threaten the Americas”. In it, Brewer claimed that “Venezuela President Hugo Chavez has facilitated Iran’s strategic presence in Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Cuba and Nicaragua” and that “radical Islamic groups in Venezuela, and on its Margar-
Analysis | 7 |
ita Island, possess unprecedented capabilities to threaten neighbors and the United States”. In what seems to be a direct citation from the El Nuevo Herald piece, Brewer mentions reports of “people originating from the Middle East in these locations”. Mr. Brewer, who just happens to be the CEO of Criminal Justice International Associates [www. cjiausa.org], “a global threat mitigation firm headquartered in northern Virginia”, also claimed, “Venezuela’s Margarita Island is reported to currently be the principal safe haven and center of Hezbollah operations in the Americas”. A RELIABLE SOURCE? In 2006, it was revealed that several Miami Herald journalists were also paid agents of the US government. In the case of its Spanish-language affiliate, El Nuevo Herald, the paper recognized that opinion analyst Pablo Alfonso received $175,000 from the US government between 2001 and 2006, and contributing journalists Olga Connor and Wilfredo Cancio Isla received $71,000 and $15,000 in the same period, respectively. The three received those payments for producing news reports critical of Cuba.
El Nuevo Herald correspondent Antonio Maria Delgado is a member of the Miami International Press Association (MIPA) and a rabid critic of both Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution and President Hugo Chavez. When he isn’t busy writing shaky reports against Venezuela generally, or about President Chavez and his ongoing battle with cancer, Delgado also enjoys attacking the Cuban Revolution, the Sandanista government in Nicaragua, the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of the Americas (ALBA) and any other progressive forces active in Latin America. Looking beyond his March 22 piece on the supposed “Paramilitary Presence Denounced in Venezuela”, Delgado also recently contributed a fresh attack on the joint Venezuela-Cuba medical mission that provides free medical assistance to millions of poor and working Venezuelans. Titled “The Indoctrinating Mission of Cuban Doctors in Venezuela”, Delgado’s March 5 piece claims the internationally-acclaimed Barrio Adentro Social Mission seeks “to Cubanize” Venezuela by “systematically pitching the benefits of the Cuban Revolution” to needy Venezuelans. According to Uberto Hernandez, a man who claims to be an ex agent of Cuban intelligence now residing in the United States and Delgado’s main “source” behind the article, “once a (Cuban) doctor gained confidence in the community, his real mission began…Asking people if they knew who Fidel Castro and who Che (Guevara) are”. Whatever their intent, the stories produced by Delgado and El Nuevo Herald are guaranteed front-page status across any one of Venezuela’s opposition dailies. The strategy, it seems, is to provoke fear and instability, looking to somehow prevent Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez from securing another democratic electoral victory. While farfetched articles claiming tourist hotspot Margarita Island has become a site of “paramilitary training camps” might easily be disregarded as blatant anti-Chavez propaganda, the false accusations come from sources with clear links to US foreign policy circles and, as such, represent a concrete effort to provoke fear and instability in the run-up to the October 7 presidential election.
ENGLISH EDITION The artillery of ideas
Friday | April 13, 2012 | Nº 104 | Caracas | www.correodelorinoco.gob.ve
A publication of the Fundacion Correo del OrinocoÊUÊ ` Ì À ivÊEva GolingerÊUÊ À>« VÊ ià } ÊJosé Manuel Hernández ChacínÊUÊ*ÀiÃÃÊFundación Imprenta de la Cultura
Big trouble in Little Havana: The perilous politics of Ozzie Guillen /ÉÊ >Û `Ê< À
S
hort of a hurricane or an armed taxpayer revolt, this had to have been Miami Marlins owner Jeffrey Loria’s worst nightmare. Loria was opening a new state-of-the-art, tax-funded stadium in Little Havana that will cost the city $2 billion over the next forty years. He also paid out several hundred million dollars in salary for free agents, making his new ballplayers the nation’s wealthiest public employees. This was the last, best, chance to sell baseball in South Florida. Loria desperately needed a hot start for his team and some sugary-sweet media coverage for his new ballpark. Then his new manager, Ozzie Guillen, decided to share his views about Cuba and Fidel Castro. Guillen tends to talk without a filter, and in an interview with Time magazine, he revealed that he happens to not believe that Castro is Satan incarnate. Saying that he “loved” Castro, Guillen explained, “I respect Fidel Castro. You know why? A lot of people have wanted to kill Fidel Castro for the last 60 years, but that son of a b—— is still here”. Casual kind words for Castro in Miami is akin to looking at a leaky bottle of kerosene and thinking it could use a match. Now, we haven’t seen outrage like this in South Florida since butterfly ballots and hanging chads. The Miami Marlins immediately released a condemnation of Guillen, but that couldn’t stop a volcanic political explosion. Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez called on the organization “to take decisive steps” against Guillen in the name of “freedom-loving people”. Miami-Dade County Commission Chairman Joe Martinez demanded Guillen’s resignation. Cuban-American State Senator
and Hispanic caucus chair Rene Garcia—in record time!—sent an open letter published in the Miami Herald calling Guillen’s comments “appalling” and said he was “looking forward to further actions taken against him for his deplorable comments”. Garcia also stuck Loria in the ribs by including, “What I also consider disturbing is the fact that the Miami Marlins received tax dollars from this community, including Cuban-American exiles, to fund the construction of the new stadium”. Suffice it to say, many a sports commentator also want Guillen fired or suspended. In their frothy anger, they have a common demand with the Cuban hardline exile group Vigilia Mambisa. An organization that has never shied from street violence and intimidation, Vigilia Mambisa has called for protests in front of the stadium until the Miami Marlins manager is fired. As for Guillen, he has crumbled under the weight of all this,
saying that he is now flying back to Florida to apologize in person to every animal, vegetable and mineral he might have offended. “I want them to know I’m against everything [in Cuba] 100 percent—I repeat it again— the way [Castro has been] treating people for the last 60 years”. [Editor’s Note: Guillen later gave a press conference begging for forgiveness “on his knees”]. Let’s leave aside the rather glaring irony that the politicians, sports commentators and Cuban exiles want to show their love of freedom by taking Guillen’s job for the crime of exercising free speech. The fact is that when looking for political consistency and clarity, Ozzie Guillen is not the best place to start. The Venezuela-born Guillen’s comments on Castro are not very different from what he has always said about Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. He has made comments very favorable about Chavez and very negative. He said, “Viva Chavez” af-
ter his Chicago White Sox won the 2005 World Series. He has also been one of Chavez’s most high-profile critics. Trying to make sense of Guillen based on public utterances is a fool’s errand. As someone who knows people that talk to Guillen when the cameras are off, I will try to explain his actual politics on Venezuela and Cuba. Guillen is big on a collective Latin American pride and will not abide anti-immigrant and anti-Latino words or deeds. He has a great deal of respect for the way Castro and Chavez stand up to the United States. He opposes efforts by the United States to impose its will on these countries and wishes the rest of Latin America would show similar mettle. It’s not a question of the relative good or bad of Cuba’s internal politics. It’s a question of independence. He’s also as gung-ho for the United States as any manager in baseball, going as far as to fine players for
not showing proper respect for the National Anthem, a practice I criticized in 2005. I know that people love portraying Ozzie Guillen as an out-there, crazy kind of guy, and that’s in part because he is an out-there crazy kind of guy. But what’s crazier? Guillen’s views on Cuba or the fact that an aging coterie of people who mourn for the strong hand of Fulgencio Batista control the political debate in South Florida? But this issue is bigger than Guillen and it’s bigger than Cuban exiles who dream of returning to a smoldering “free Havana,” with Castro’s head on a pike. It’s bigger than the petty hypocrisies of those who stand for freedom by denying it for others. It’s now about whether the ire produced by Guillen’s words will be directed against Loria, his grab of public funds and the entire Miami baseball operation. If that happens, this issue won’t die, but the Marlins might.