Analysis
Opinion
The challenge of the Bolivarian Revolution: starting Again page 7
US must recognize Venezuela’s elections page 8
Friday, April 26, 2013 | Nº 155 | Caracas | www.correodelorinoco.gob.ve
CNE to audit all votes The President of Venezuela’s electoral authority, Tibisay Lucena, announced a 100 percent audit of the nation’s presidential vote last Thursday after defeated opposition candidate Henrique Capriles petitioned the body for verification of the results handed down on April 14th. The move was made to quell the wave of violence that has afflicted the South American country after Capriles refused to recognize the victory of socialist candidate Nicolas Maduro, who won the contest by 1.8 percent of the popular vote. page 2
ENGLISH EDITION/The artillery of ideas
President Nicolas Maduro Names New Cabinet, Pledges Efficiency
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro appointed new faces to over half of cabinet positions, though ministers with a number of key portfolios, including defense, foreign affairs, petroleum and information will stay on for another term. The new team includes former members of President Hugo Chavez’s cabinet, as well as new additions, such as writer and activist Reinaldo Iturriza as Communes Minister and Olympian star Alejandra Benitez as Sports Minister. About half of the high level officials are under 45, adding youth and fresh ideas to a government hoping to win over support for the Bolivarian Revolution. Page 4
A Nation of Readers T/ AVN
Nicolas Maduro was inaugurated as Venezuela’s new President. page 3
Venezuela rejects US aggression Foreign Minister Elias Jaua responded to US threats of sanctions. page 4
US to fund Venezuelan opposition Secretary of State John Kerry announced millions for opposition groups in Venezuela. page 5
Calixto Ortega designated as chief of Venezuelan Embassy in Washington T/ AVN
Politics
New President sworn in
INTERNATIONAL
“Today we can say that Venezuela has become a nation of readers, and that is a humanitarian achievement by this people and the Bolivarian Revolution”, said the Minister for University Education, Pedro Calzadilla, at an event Tuesday for World Book Day at the National Library in Caracas. He recalled that President Hugo Chavez turned books into a symbol for Venezuela’s revolution. “If there is a symbol of culture associated with the revolution it is the book; Chavez did this, he turned the book into his image and a symbol of consciousness”. Calzadilla highlighted the strengthening of the Venezuelan state’s capacity to guarantee the availability of books throughout the country, with public bookstores, cultural centers, publishers, and book distributors. “Never before had there been so much investment in literacy than in the last 14 years, and that has played a role in freedom of thought”, he added.
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro announced Tuesday his decision to name Latin American Parliament legislator Calixto Ortega as charge d’affaires for Venezuela in the United States. “For some time I have been evaluating naming a new charge d’affaires at our Embassy in Washington and I have decided to name Calixto Ortega in this role so that he can increase dialogue with US society”, Maduro said. Dialogue in the US, he added, should include “universities, the academic world, the social world, unions, the African-American community, the Latino community, Congress, senators, representatives, the economic world”. “Calixto Ortega is a man with a lot of experience and knowledge of US society and we believe he can play an important role in bringing the truth about Venezuela [to the United States] to continue opening up understanding so that, sooner rather than later, there is respect for Latin America, the Caribbean, respect for the Bolivarian Revolution.” The head of state said that the Venezuelan government wants to have the best possible relations with all governments around the world, including the United States, but on the basis of respect. “There cannot be any type of threats”, he said. Addressing the US government, Maduro added, “If you want to have relations based on respect, conversations, cooperation, that’s welcome”. Neither Venezuela nor the US currently have ambassadors in either country. The US continues to financially and politically back opposition groups in Venezuela.
2 Impact | . s Friday, April 26, 2013
The artillery of ideas
Venezuela's CNE calls for further audit, respect of electoral process T/ COI P/ Agencies
T
he President of Venezuela’s electoral authority, Tibisay Lucena, announced a 100 percent audit of the nation’s presidential vote last Thursday after defeated opposition candidate Henrique Capriles petitioned the body for verification of the results handed down on April 14th. The move, Tibisay announced at a press conference, was made to quell the wave of violence that has afflicted the South American country after Capriles and other opposition leaders refused to recognize the victory of socialist candidate Nicolas Maduro, who won the contest by 1.8 percent of the popular vote. Since the announcement of the election results, opposition leadership has encouraged street protests against the National Electoral Council (CNE), while extremist elements of the Venezuelan right-wing have engaged in violent acts against government installations and individuals. At least 10 supporters of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) have thus far been killed and party members have reported the torching of public health clinics, PSUV offices and housing projects around the country. During the televised broadcast on Thursday, Tibisay insisted that the decision to audit the votes “has been taken to attend to a situation that is evidently unique” and that the CNE’s actions can in no way be interpreted as a questioning of the veracity of the agency’s work. “The Electoral Power is making this decision to contribute to the preservation of harmony between Venezuelans, but also to isolate those violent sectors who are irresponsibly looking to damage democracy”, the CNE President said. Government supporters have pointed out that all independent and international organizations that participated in the election as observers have confirmed the transparency of April 14th’s vote.
The CNE has also been quick to highlight the numerous accolades it has received in the past from various international electoral organizations, including the Carter Center, for its efficiency and trustworthiness. “[The National Electoral Council] emitted electoral results absolutely transparent and which reflect, flawlessly,
the expression of voters”, Tibisay stated. “It is an electoral system that was and has been audited and whose strength and robustness has been proven for a long time. The system is about guaranteeing the political rights of citizens. It is the sovereignty of the country expressed by suffrage. The institution is the guarantor of these votes and therefore the decisions of the people by way of suffrage”, she added. The head of the electoral authority informed that the audit would see a verification of 46 percent of the nation’s voting machines by cross-referencing the paper ballots emitted by the touchscreen computers used to tally the vote. Fifty-four percent of the country’s voting machines were already audited on election day and overseen by representatives of both pro-government and opposition political organizations participating in the contest.
The verification process began this week and will continue until the end of May at which time a final report will be released, the president of the CNE said.
NO CALL FOR RECOUNT Tibisay affirmed that there would be no recount of the vote as called for by some opposition sectors. For a recount to take place, a complaint stating accusations of electoral fraud must be filed with the nation’s Supreme Court, something the Venezuelan opposition has not done. Apart from a series of allegations presented by Henrique Capriles to the media last week Tuesday, the opposition has not brought formal charges of electoral fraud to the Supreme Court. CNE President TIbisay also underscored the fact that the door of the Council has always been open to those citizens who question electoral results and that there has been nothing impeding the opposition from
lodging formal inquiries into the vote. “Sunday [April 14th] when we announced the results, we also reminded those who might disagree with the results of their right to approach us and we clearly pointed out the steps to contest the results of the election. We insisted that all these contestations be presented formally in front of the corresponding authorities and not through the media”, the official affirmed. The CNE head, who had her home attacked earlier last week, demanded that the media and political parties respect the audit process and that they cease inciting residents to take violent measures which have cost the lives of ordinary citizens in the country. “We want to exhort the media and different spokespeople of the political organizations to be responsible with respect to national peace and to avoid emitting premature judgments or expressing criteria that promotes the alteration of sentiments during this [auditing] period. Let the Electoral Power do its work without blackmail, aggression or threats to its functionaries or offices. We need to make sure that our democracy is backed-up for the well being of everyone”, Tibisay said. Defeated candidate Capriles agreed to accept the CNE’s audit and called for calm on Thursday but tensions have remained high in the OPEC member state. Outgoing Interior and Justice Minister Nestor Reverol reported that the government would not permit deaths resulting from the violence to go unpunished. “We are committed to justice. We have designated a special team from the Investigative Police to find those involved in these horrendous crimes”, he said. Last week, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro attended the wake of one of those killed during the post-election demonstrations and referred to the fallen government supporters as “martyrs” and “heroes of the republic”. “I feel a great pain because due to the irresponsibility of a group of fascists, a brave man, Jose Luis Ponce has lost his life”, Maduro said of the deceased PSUV backer. “We have to go after [those responsible]. I’ve given the order to Minister Reverol and the head of the investigative police to streamline the capture of these murderers”, the Venezuelan President said.
. s Friday, April 26, 2013
The artillery of ideas
echoed her countryman’s statements while displaying her loyalty to the Bolivarian Revolution started by Hugo Chavez. “We are here accompanying the president of the people, the president of peace. Here we’re going to continue the legacy of Chavez”, Quintana said.
UNASUR BACKING
Nicolas Maduro sworn in as Venezuela’s new President T/ COI P/ Presidential Press
N
icolas Maduro, the winner of Venezuela’s April 14 presidential elections was officially sworn in as head of state last Friday during a ceremony that took place in front of the country’s congress, the National Assembly, in the capital of Caracas. “I swear to the people of Venezuela, to the eternal memory of our Supreme Comandante [Chavez], that I will carry out the constitution and the laws of the republic and the position of President to build an independent, socialist, and free homeland for all”, the new head of state affirmed at the inauguration ceremony. After asking for the blessing of God, Venezuela’s forefathers and his predecessor Hugo Chavez, Maduro expressed his desire “to extend my hand to all Venezuelans in order to build an inclusive nation of peace and love”. “That is how I want to begin today, April 19, 2013, with these words as constitutional President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela”, he declared. During his speech, Maduro, reiterated his commitment to the social policies of Venezuela’s ruling socialist party that he promised to implement throughout the 6 years of his presidential term. “The objective of the social revolution is this: in 2019, zero misery and poverty in Venezuela”, the President stated.
“I have absolute faith that this government is going to be a national miracle, a national resurrection, it will be a government of advancement, revolution, economic, political and social growth. I am absolutely certain of this”, he added. Seventeen heads of state were present for the inauguration ceremony and various rallies were held in different parts of the capital to support Maduro
in his formal acceptance of the presidency. “We came to give our unflinching support to Maduro because we’re going to defend the legacy of our Comandante [Hugo Chavez]. Maduro is going to govern this country and this legacy is going to continue with the people and with greater force”, said Ivan Romero, a Caracas resident. Olivia Quintana, another participant in Friday’s rally,
The Union of South American Nations called an extraordinary session in the Peruvian capital of Lima last week where members of the continent-wide alliance expressed their support for Nicolas Maduro as the elected President of Venezuela. The meeting was convened to address the violence that has been employed by opposition sectors in Venezuela following the close defeat of right-wing candidate Henrique Capriles in April 14th’s elections. “The Council of the Heads of State of Unasur... expresses its congratulations to the people of Venezuela for their massive participation in the presidential election of April 14th that ratifies its dedication to democracy. [The Council] also salutes President Nicolas Maduro for the results of the contest and his election as President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela”, the alliance declared in a written statement. Unasur members urged opposition sectors to respect the work of Venezuela’s electoral authorities and resolved to send a delegation to accompany investigations taking place in the Caribbean nation surrounding the post-election violence that has claimed 10 lives.
| Politics
3
“[Unasur] calls for an end to all attitudes or acts of violence that put peace at risk and expresses its solidarity with the injured and the families of the deceased victims... It also appeals for dialogue and the preservation of a climate of tolerance in benefit of all the Venezuelan people”, the statement reads. President Maduro welcomed the alliance’s declaration on Friday and questioned the Venezuelan opposition’s willingness to recognize his presidential victory following the electoral audit recently called by the nation’s electoral authorities. “[The opposition] is not going to recognize [my victory]. They have another plan. We’re prepared... The homeland is strong and safe... The democratic homeland is going to win over anti-democratic forces. The homeland is tolerance, love, respect and inclusion and is stronger than those who want to sabotage it or impose an agenda of violence”, the head of the Caribbean nation said. Maduro also spoke directly to family members of those who had been killed by opposition violence, ensuring that those responsible for the crimes are held accountable and that justice is done. “I am telling you that there will be no impunity. Those who committed these murders are going to pay so that these types of crimes, which are a product of social racism, are not repeated against the disadvantaged”, he pledged.
Three million workers to benefit from minimum-wage increase T/ AVN
A
round three million workers will directly benefit from a gradual minimum wage increase announced earlier this month by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, with a first phase of increases beginning on May 1st. Congressman Francisco Torrealba, the vice president of the Bolivarian Workers Union and co-drafter of the 2012 Labor Law, said that this is a positive measure and one that has characterized the 14 years of government of Hugo Chavez, who raised minimum-wage above inflation. “This translates into a progressive recuperation of
purchasing power”, Torrealba said. On April 9th, Maduro announced that the increase in minimum-wage this year would be from 38% to 45%, in three phases: first, a 20% increase on May 1st; a 10% increase in September; and an increase of 5 to 10% depending on inflation in November. The amount will go from the current rate of 2,047 Bolivars per month (US $325) to 2,497 Bolivars per month ($390), then 2,702 Bolivars per month ($429), finally reaching 2,838 to 2973 Bolivars per month ($451-473) by November. Torrealba said that workers with sliding scale wages will also benefit from the adjustment. He said that a general increase
in wages isn’t easy, because “you have to be responsible in the management of public finances”. “The President has decreed a sufficient measure, one that is fair. Now we have to control inflation. This is a task for all of us”, he said.
SHORTER WORK WEEK Torrealba recalled that the new labor law requires a re-
duction of the work week this May. The law, enacted on May 7, 2012, establishes that one year from its entry into force, workers should work a maximum of 40 hours per week and be given two consecutive days off. The law used to state that the workweek could not exceed 44 hours.
4 Politics | . s Friday, April 26, 2013
The artillery of ideas
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro appoints new cabinet
T/ Ryan Mallett-Outtrim P/ Presidential Press
V
enezuelan President Nicolas Maduro appointed new faces to over half of cabinet positions, though ministers with a number of key portfolios, including defense, foreign affairs, petroleum and information will stay on for another term. “[This is] a great team of men and women”, Maduro told
the media last night. Describing his government as starting “with its lead foot”, Maduro stated that he intends to head a “period of development and growth”. The announcement came after a tweet in which Maduro described his new government as aiming to “achieve socialist efficiency”. The largest change to the new cabinet is the splitting of the
Ministry of Finance and Planning into two separate bodies. Former head of the Central Bank, Nelson Merentes has taken up the new position of Finance Minister, as well as Vice President of Economics. Previous Minister of Finance and Planning Jorge Giordani will stay on, but only as Minister of Planning, a position he has held for nearly the entire Chavez presidency.
Reuters described Merentes as being more “pragmatic” than Giordani, and is “uncomfortable” with current currency exchange regulations. Merentes held the old portfolio twice under former president Hugo Chavez. During his time as Minister of Finance and Planning, Giordani was a strong advocate for currency and price controls. Maduro said he has “great confidence” in Merentes, but indicated that he will be expected to “achieve single digit inflation” within three years. “We have to lower inflation... [and] we must control speculative factors”, Maduro stated. Maduro stated that his new Minister of Interior and Justice is expected to address Venezuela’s internal security problems with “an iron fist”. Former director of the nation’s intelligence service (SEBIN) General Miguel Rodriguez Torres has taken over the portfolio, while his predecessor General Nestor Luis Reverol, has returned as head the National Anti-Drug Office. Some of the 17 new ministers are well known in Venezuela for their work outside the political arena. New Minister of Health, Dr. Isabel Iturria is the founder of the publicly-funded Caracas Children’s Cardiology Hospital Dr. Gilberto Rodríguez. Established in 2006, the hospital pro-
vides free treatment for heart problems to children from all over Latin America. In another high profile appointment, Olympian athlete Alejandra Benitez will take over the position of Sports Minister. Benitez represented Venezuela in fencing at the 2012 London Olympic Games. The portfolio of Women and Gender Equality is also changing hands, with the appointment of 28 year-old Andreína Tarazon. Tarazon was a delegate in the 2006-7 XI Congress of the International Democratic Federation of Women, and has been involved in the literacy project, Mission Robinson I. The Ministry of Communes will be headed by Reinaldo Iturriza, a frequent commentator and constructive critic of government policy. Former Chavez communications minister, Andres Izarra, will now head the Ministry of Tourism. Public television station VTV received hundreds of tweets supporting Maduro’s appointees, including “congratulations to the team... perfect combination”, and “...let it be known that our resolution is to be free, sovereign, independent and happy”. The new cabinet, which has a median age of about 40, representing Venezuela’s vanguard youth, met for the first time Monday afternoon.
that have the backing of the candidate [Henrique Capriles] whom they support”, Jaua added. Critics of Washington’s stance have pointed out a double standard in the nation’s foreign policy, as the White House was quick to recognize the presidency of Mexico’s Felipe Calderon in 2006 despite his mere .5 percent win over Andres Obrador. Other Venezuelan government supporters have highlighted the vast electoral problems that plague the US voting system which have resulted in dubious election outcomes, the exclusion of minority groups from polling places, and the
suspect democracy of the country’s electoral college. While Jaua did not expound upon any immediate actions that might be taken by the Venezuelan government in response to the threats, the country’s highest diplomat suggested that the OPEC member state could implement its own sanctions against the United States. “If the United States implements economic or any other sanctions, we will take commercial, economic, political, and energy measures that we deem necessary to respond to this unacceptable threat to Venezuela”, he warned.
Venezuelan Foreign Minister rejects new threats from US, possibility of sanctions T/ COI
D
eclaring that his country will not accept threats from “a decadent empire like the United States”, Venezuela’s Foreign Minister Elias Jaua strongly denounced statements made by the US State Department last Sunday that challenged the legitimacy of recently elected President Nicolas Maduro. Jaua referred to the comments made by Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Roberta Jacobson, which called for a recount of Venezuela’s April 14th presidential elections as “interventionist” and “a direct threat” by Washington. “In Venezuela, there will be no recount of votes because we have one of the best electoral systems in the world”, Jaua affirmed on Monday. In addition to advocating a recount of the elections won by then socialist candidate Nico-
las Maduro, Jacobson did not discard the possibility of implementing sanctions against the South American country. “President [Maduro] has given me instructions to respond to these threats”, Jaua said, adding that the Venezuelan government would act with “reciprocity” towards any The recent chide by the US State Department follows a pattern of similar comments that have attempted to cast doubt on Venezuela’s electoral authorities, which have been lauded by numerous international organizations for its transparency and efficiency. But by refusing to recognize Maduro as the constitutionally elected President of Venezuela, Jaua stated that the US has once again become isolated with respect to its stance towards Latin America. “[Washington] does not have the support of a single country in the world”, the Venezuelan
Foreign Minister said with respect to the decision. On April 14th, Maduro beat his conservative rival, Henrique Capriles by 1.8 percent of the popular vote in a presidential election that saw near 80 percent turnout. Capriles and his supporters have refused to concede defeat, calling for protests while some sectors of the right have demanded a recount of the vote. In its adoption of a position that clearly favors the Venezuelan right, Minister Jaua blamed the US to the recent violence that has been employed by opponents to Maduro. “The refusal to recognize [the election outcome] and encouraging hatred to fill the streets has left 10 people dead, an attack on a [community health center] and the burning of the headquarters of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela”, he declared. “We hold the United States responsible for the acts of violence...
. s Friday, April 26, 2013
The artillery of ideas
T/ Ryan Mallett-Outtrim
I
n 2014, the United States will devote more resources to targeting Venezuela and Cuba for “freedom” promotion, while reducing funding to regional allies Mexico and Colombia. As Secretary of State John Kerry explained to the Committee on Foreign Affairs last week, the new budget is a minor variation to Washington’s approach to what he condescendingly described as “our backyard”. In the State Department’s proposed 2014 budget, $5 million has set aside for “political efforts to protect democratic space” in Venezuela, according to Kerry. Despite an overall decrease of 6% in the budget, the $5 million earmarked for expenditure in Venezuela represents a $2 million increase over 2013. During his announcement of the 2014 budget, Kerry stated, “the funding will help civil society... and human rights organizations working in Venezuela”. According to Kerry, some “civil society” organizations are dependent on State Department funds to cover operational costs. As revealed in a leaked 2006 diplomatic cable published by Wikileaks earlier this month, in the last decade “over 300 Venezuelan civil society organizations” have been funded by Washington, primarily for the purpose of regime change. While some US sponsored projects in Venezuela have seemingly benign objectives, as then US ambassador William Brownfield stated in the cable, these “civil society” programs were intended to achieve four major policy outcomes; “penetrating [former president Hugo] Chavez’s political base ... dividing Chavismo ... protecting vital US business ...[and] isolating Chavez internationally”. These objectives remain implicit factors in the State Department’s 2014 budget. As Kerry told the Committee on Foreign Affairs, “This new budget is not just a collection of numbers, is an illustration of our values and priorities”. The dramatic decreases in funding for non-governmental organizations working in Colombia and Mexico show that while the State Department is more concerned than ever with Venezuelan “civil society”, it is relatively satisfied with conditions in allied states. Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos is a loyal supporter of Washington, and his
US to continue funding Venezuelan opposition
country is relatively stable, largely thanks to US funding. Perhaps it’s of limited importance to the State Department that a 2012 report from the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights strongly expressed concern “about the continuing homicides, threats, attacks, information theft, illegal surveillance and intimidation targeting human rights
defenders and their organizations”. Santos has echoed Washington’s human rights rhetoric, but as Amnesty International (AI) reported last year, “there were few tangible improvements in the overall human rights situation”. In Mexico, conditions are likewise bleak. As AI stated in its 2012 World Report, last year the
Government take measures to solve energy problem T/ Paul Dobson In the mark of President Maduro’s call for “auto criticism”, measures were announced by the government to tackle one of the major problems facing the nation: the failings of the electricity network. President Maduro pronounced the electrical network of “national strategic importance”, and declared a “state of emergency” in the system, which will last for 90 days and will facilitate rapid implementation of necessary measures to solve the problem of power supply. He also unveiled a new program titled Great Electrical Mission, an idea of former President Hugo Chavez, to provide
a solution to this very serious problem. Maduro called on the working class in the electrical sector, as well as the Armed Forces who are now to oversee security in power installations, to take a principle role in the activities and development of the Venezuelan Electrical Corporation (Corpoelec), in order to safeguard the efficiency and development of the electrical grid. Vice President Jorge Arreaza announced plans which will allow the government to “structurally” address the problem, to get “to the root… and to take the actions which are essential to fixing this urgent matter”. Alongside Arreaza, newlynamed Minister for Electrical Energy, Jesse Chacon, dis-
| Politics
5
Mexican “government did not take effective measures to prevent or investigate widespread grave human rights violations committed by the military and police, including enforced disappearances, extrajudicial executions, torture and arbitrary arrests”. Furthermore, the “criminal justice system failed to deliver justice or security. Those re-
sponsible for the vast majority of crimes, including attacks on journalists, human rights defenders and women, were not held to account”. Yet as long as Mexico remains politically aligned with the US, chronic human rights violations are tolerable. Overall, aid to Mexico and Colombia still far exceeds Venezuela (at $205 million and $323 million respectively), yet little of this appears to go towards supporting opposition parties, let alone political groups intent on violently overthrowing their governments. Comparatively, even a week after Venezuelans committed the crime of voting against Washington’s pick in the April 14th presidential elections, Kerry couldn’t rule out imposing new sanctions on Venezuela. In his announcement, Kerry also indicated that the State Department aims to do more to “support fundamental freedoms” in Cuba. Evidently, the State Department’s “values and priorities” involve more “civil society” dependent on US funding in countries like Venezuela and Cuba, while regional allies are given free reign to permit human rights abuses. The one thing Kerry forgot to mention is that Venezuela and Cuba have no need for US interventionism. As President Nicolas Maduro stated when responding to US criticism of the elections, “we have chosen to be free, and we are going to be free with or without you”.
closed the 7 areas of focus of the new Great Electrical Mission: (1) The immediate strengthening of the electrical network and infrastructure; (2) the promotion of energy saving without reducing quality of life; (3) the rentability of the energy sector, and the reassessment of contracts to large consumers, in particular shopping centers, which consume more than they pay for; (4) the development of auto generation and renewable energy sources; (5) the substitution of the importation of parts, especially transformers, to prioritize national production and industry; (6) the adaption of the business model to democratize the energy sector, and to incorporate organized workers into a socialist, efficient, model of production for energy; (7) a long term plan of investment in the electrical sector. Due to 14 years of rapid economic development and indus-
trialization and better access to electrical consumer goods, the electrical supply, which comes from 80% renewable energy sources and principally hydropower, has come under great strain. This has resulted in frequent power cuts, especially during dry season. Regarding the fragility of the network, the government announced the militarization of the installations for security reasons. Power cuts suspiciously occurred in each place President Maduro visited during his recent presidential campaign. Sabotage is thought to have been the cause. “We are going to decree the Electrical System as a service of national security” explained Maduro. Regarding the sabotage during campaigning, he explained that “there are almost 50 arrests in the country, all involved with the right-wing”.
6 Analysis | . s Friday, April 26, 2013 T/ Jose Vicente Rangel Ultimas Noticias
A
fter living through the tense moments of Sunday, April 14th, it’s important to react responsibly. If one thing became clear on Election Day, it’s the confirmation that we as Venezuelans are now living through a moment of heightened political polarization. No one benefits from claims, by either side of the political spectrum, that their opponents benefit from favoritism or other types of political perversions. An undeniable reality exists – Venezuelan society is split down the middle. Thanks to the nature of our people, this split has yet to result in widespread violence (though eight people have now been killed, many more wounded). Similar situations, in other countries, have led people to kill and be killed. Here, in moments of even greater tension, rationality has imposed itself. Though this is the norm in Venezuela, we must not abuse of our trust in that result. The electoral map drawn after April 14th indicates that President Nicolas Maduro won a majority of votes in 16 states. In other words, Maduro lost four of the 20 states in which pro-Chavez forces won governorships on December 16, 2012. Meanwhile, failed opposition hopeful Henrique Capriles took eight states, that is, he added 5 states to the 3 he won that same December day. This fact is significant because Hugo Chavez’s movement, often referred to as Chavismo, is now fundamentally changed by the result. Even in the states in which Maduro won, the difference between the two principal candidates decreased significantly. What is the reason for this? Is it simply those same problems that continue to impact the Venezuelan people – electricity, insecurity, shortages of goods, and devaluation of the currency? Or is it the consequence of the physical departure of President Chavez, head of the revolutionary process underway and the popular leader capable of turning any difficult electoral challenge into a successful victory? The task of analyzing the results and examining the causes of such a tight election seen by most Chavistas with great optimism is the responsibility of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) and its campaign coalition, the Great Patriotic Pole. Diosdado Cabello, President of the National Assembly, correctly called for an immediate process of internal self-criticism.
The artillery of ideas
The April 14th Election With results that are almost equal, numerically, with the increase in opposition votes, and with Chavismo maintaining itself in the executive despite sharpened daily problems – something that demonstrates popular support for the movement led by Hugo Chavez – reciprocal recognition is a must. The greatest mistake both sides of the debate can make is to underestimate each other. In spite of mistakes and errors, a strong and powerful movement exists within the government to continue pushing forward the transformations underway aimed at changing politics, to give it oxygen, to provide it a new face, to make it profoundly popular. This contribution to change has, without a doubt, greatly benefited the Venezuelan opposition. The passing of time confirmed that an opposition does exist, that it has secured important political strength, and that as such, it must be recognized as a political player. Mutual recognition, among both forces, is the key to institutional normality. It is the key to peace and security for the nation and to the progress for all Venezuelans that both forces claim to defend. The numbers are clear: Nicolas Maduro won 7,505,338 votes (50.66%) while Henrique Capriles obtained 7,270,403 (49.07%).
The numbers confirm polarization and institutional stability depends on how these numbers are understood. There is no reason anyone should be fooled. The only way to avoid mistakes is to follow the legal road laid out by the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (1999). What do I mean by this? First of all, Nicolas Maduro won a fair and democratic presidential election on April 14th. The official results issued by the Na-
tional Elections Council (CNE) are impeccable and irreversible. The CNE has the legal and moral authority as well as the support of public opinion for its results to be both respected and accepted. Having accepted the CNE as electoral referee, not recognizing the results is to rebel against the competent authorities. The difference in votes between Maduro and Capriles, reason behind the current dispute, is unusual for elections of the Fifth Republic (1999 – present) in which the last 17 electoral processes created a political culture of wide margins. 235,000 votes, a 1.59% difference, is actually normal in elections around the world. Here in Venezuela, during the Fourth Republic (1958-1998), Rafael Caldera won the 1968 presidential election with just 0.89% more votes than Gonzalo Barrios. In Latin America, specifically in Mexico, the last two presidential elections were similarly close. In the United States, the same is true. Of course, the opposition has the right to object to the results. The only rule they must follow is the respect for legality and the nation’s public institutions. Mechanisms exist that cannot be overlooked.Theopposition must channel
its claims through the CNE and use legal norms and procedures. Not doing so is to go against the rule of law. The excellent opposition campaign, which secured a leadership role for Capriles, risks ruin if incorrect steps are taken. What kind of steps? The temptation to fall into the same trap that led the opposition into the (failed coup) adventure of 2002, and a reduced capacity to resist pressure from extremists and transnational interests that seek change Venezuela by force. In short, the mistakes produced by hate and grievances and all of the savage expressions that contaminate politics. Currently, a two-fold challenge exists. One, Chavismo must recognize that for one reason or another half the nation opposes its platform. Half of the country, including many important democratic players, is now producing election results for the “opposition”. These forces must be recognized as long as they maintain themselves along the path of civility, of democracy, of the norms established in the constitution of ‘99. The other challenge lies, precisely, in the hands of the opposition. Within their ranks there are those who seek to remove Chavis-
mo from the political map, those who base their political conceptions on fascism. Henrique Capriles is not free of suspicion. Though he affirms he has always been a democrat and has never conspired otherwise, his affirmations are untrue. Capriles participated in the terrible events of April 2002, the disturbances, the persecution of Chavista leaders, and the sabotage of Venezuela’s oil industry aimed at toppling democratically-elected President Hugo Chavez. Evidence exists to confirm this conduct, though it doesn’t necessarily mean he isn’t now engaged in a truly political process, based on institutional norms, that has greatly strengthened the opposition. Without seeking to judge the rest, Capriles’ past holds significant importance. In short, this is the time for politics, for dialogue. An audacious search must begin to find the intermediaries which, in my opinion, do exist. The proposal of peace, if not taken seriously, can quickly become simple rhetoric. An excellent opportunity to find the correct response to April 14th should not be lost. Dialogue and politics are the key from here on out.
. s Friday, April 26, 2013
The artillery of ideas
The challenge of the Bolivarian Revolution: to start again T/ Reinaldo Iturriza
A
couple of friends agreed that the close result of April 14th was equivalent to starting again. “It’s as if we were just beginning” and “it’s like going back to 2002” each one commented to me in different moments. I think that this assessment, correct in my opinion, encloses one of the keys to treading firmly in such a shifting political moment. The first thing I have to say is that I got it wrong. I was not only wrong in the electoral “forecast”: I imagined perhaps a slightly closer result than that of October 7th, with some abstention in Chavismo, slightly more in anti-Chavismo, and an advantage of around ten points, probably less. Indeed, I never seriously considered the hypothesis of obtaining more votes than the 8,191,132 achieved by Comandante Chavez last year. Yet furthermore, I committed another calculation error. It was clear to me that on April 15th we would wake up in another country, [and] that we would enter a new stage of the Bolivarian revolution, with previously unseen challenges (almost all derived from the physical absence of Chavez), with the strength that a new ratification of the Bolivarian path grants (of April 14th), with the need to update the inventory
of problems we confront, re-entering strategic discussions, etc. However, it turned out that the country already wasn’t the same on March 6th. The death of the Comandante had a profound impact on the ranks of Chavismo, whose reach we still haven’t been able to measure with precision. Very preliminarily, the hypothesis could be given that some hundreds of thousands judged that with the parting of Chavez it was necessary to say goodbye to the political project he led. Perhaps this allows us to begin to understand the narrow margin of victory of the result on April 14th. What is clear is that the Bolivarian Revolution did not die with Comandante Chavez, and this must be insisted on, even though it seems obvious to many of us. It didn’t die to the extent that, even without the leadership of the political giant that was Chavez, we were capable of defeating the candidate of the oligarchy once again. It’s difficult for us today to evaluate the historical significance of this difficult contest from which we have successfully emerged, but perhaps in the future it will be held as an example of a revolutionary people who continue battling and triumphing despite the death of their leader. In this sense, the assessment according to which we are start-
ing again seems correct to me. We have arrived here with an accumulated history, of course; with great material and spiritual advances, and with a political culture in the process of consolidation. But we’ve lost our leader. So great was his weight, his importance, his strategic influence, that in his absence we were close to turning back the balance even more. It is our strength which has impeded this. Our consciousness, if the term is preferable. If we’re starting again, it’s because we haven’t lost. But above all: we’re not starting from zero. Due to this, evaluating the result of April 14th as an expression of the lack of “consciousness” of the “traitor” people seems incorrect to me. Absolutely the opposite: April 14th is the clearest example of what a people are capable of doing when they becomes conscious of their own strength and of the imperative necessity of promoting new men and women to assume leadership roles. Some are arguing the point of view of a “beneficiary” people who voted for their class enemies. Nevertheless, what needs to be combated, and this should be a fight without quarter, is this logic of the “beneficiary”. This image of people who vote for the revolution for the simple fact that they “benefit” from this or that Mission, which is in the head of
many a “conscious” left-winger and party or office bureaucrat, contradicts the very idea of consciousness, and ends up reproducing the discursive logic that anti-Chavismo has constructed to refer to the Chavista people. There is also much talk of management errors by the Bolivarian government, and there are those who venture that the electoral result represents something like a protest vote. I don’t agree. I know Chavista people, from the middle class, who didn’t vote not only because they were “sure” of Maduro’s victory, but also as a “punishment” for management failures. A terrible reading of the moment. On April 14th nothing like management was at stake, but rather the political legacy of Comandante Chavez, and the continuity or not of the democratic and revolutionary path. If it’s about management, the first thing that must be said is that the emphasis should always be put on politics. The Bolivarian Revolution has never tried to administer the state better or worse, but rather defeat it, creating new institutions. This is because beyond the state in abstract there is a state in concrete, made in the image and likeness of the interests of the oligarchy. A coup at the helm! If it’s about management, let’s delve into the issue of the “inefficiency” of a comfortable and faint-hearted civil service, but let’s also talk about political efficiency, as Maneiro proposed, which refers to the capacity to direct the government by offering concrete solutions to the fundamental problems of the Venezuelan nation; and this is only done by carrying a revolution forward.
| Analysis
7
Let’s also talk about sabotage of the electricity system, of food shortages, phenomena around which many of us fell into the trap of exclusively blaming the government, but not the saboteur or the speculator - the criminals who play with the people’s food supply. A slogan in the first years of the revolution highlighted the accelerated process of the politicization of the Venezuelan people, with its unbeatable clarity: “With hunger and unemployment, I’m sticking with Chavez”. We can say today that if we triumphed on April 14th, we achieved it because, as a friend wrote, “With speculation and sabotage, I’m sticking with Maduro”. Let’s leave arrogance to one side, which does so much damage. None of us ever imagined the result of April 14th, which makes the “I told you so” attitude simply inexcusable. Enough already of self-praise and stating the obvious. No one predicted it. No one could. The country changed and we didn’t realize it. Let’s stop sharing out blame and using analysis that only helped to think about the country in which we lived before March 5th. There are still those who think that, just as occurred after every election for years, these are days for “self-criticism”. What an over-used word. Let’s start by recognizing that we got it wrong, that the answers to the previously unasked questions that are emerging are only going to be found by listening to the people. Some reach the extreme of saying that April 14th was a victory with the taste of defeat. Go and say that to the people who didn’t only celebrate Sunday’s victory until they couldn’t any more, people satisfied that the oath of loyalty sworn to Comandante Chavez was honored, but now are pressed to defend that victory with their lives. Because a conscious people don’t have time to chew over nonexistent defeats, and much less when fascism lies in wait. In this country that changed, in this revolution that’s beginning again, the Chavista people are standing and have a new President. Yes, it’s true, Nicolas Maduro isn’t Chavez, but he never aspired to be. But now nothing is what it was. We’ve entered a new stage, and it’s up to our fellow Maduro to be at the front. So I’m sticking with Maduro. Reinaldo Iturriza is a well known commentator on Venezuelan political affairs. After writing this article was appointed Minister for Communes by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.
Friday, April 26, 2013 | Nº 155 | Caracas | www.correodelorinoco.gob.ve
INTERNATIONAL
! PUBLICATION OF THE &UNDACION #ORREO DEL /RINOCO s Editor-in-Chief %VA 'OLINGER s Graphic Design Pablo Valduciel L. - Aimara Aguilera
T/ Dan Kovalik
U
pdate: Venezuelan government agrees to expand audit of votes to 100 percent of all votes cast The United States is refusing to recognize the results of the Venezuelan elections, insisting that Venezuela conduct a re-count of 100 percent of the votes in light of the narrow margin of victory for Nicolas Maduro. The facts surrounding the voting process and election outcome in Venezuela, the US own experience with close presidential elections, and the US recent recognition of coup governments in Latin America demonstrate that Washington’s position in regard to Venezuela has nothing to do with its alleged concerns for democracy, but rather, its complete disdain for it. I just returned from Venezuela where I was one of over 170 international election observers from around the world, including India, Guyana, Suriname, Colombia, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Scotland, England, the United States, Guatemala, Argentina, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Ethiopia, Jamaica, Brazil, Chile, Greece, France, Panama and Mexico. These observers included two former presidents (of Guatemala and the Dominican Republic), judges, lawyers and numerous high ranking officials of national electoral councils. What we found was an election system which was transparent, inherently reliable, well-run and thoroughly audited. Indeed, as to the auditing, what has been barely mentioned by the mainstream press is the fact that around 54 percent of all votes are, and indeed have already been, audited to ensure that the electronic votes match up with the paper receipts which serve as backup for these electronic votes. And, this auditing is done in the presence of witnesses from both the governing and opposition parties right in the local polling places themselves. I witnessed just such an audit at the end of election day on Sunday. And, as is the usual case, the paper results matched up perfectly with the electronic ones. As the former Guatemalan President, Alvaro Colom, who served as an observer, opined, the vote in Venezuela is “secure” and easily verifiable.
Opinion
Washington must recognize Venezuela’s elections In short, the observers’ experience this past week aligns with former US president Jimmy Carter’s observation last year that Venezuela’s electoral system is indeed the “the best in the world”. And so, what were the results of the election? With an impressive 79 percent of registered voters going to the polls, Nicolas Maduro won by over 260,000 votes, with a 1.6 percentage point margin over Henrique Capriles (50.7 to 49.1 percent). While this was certainly a close
race, 260,000 votes is a comfortable victory, certainly by US election standards. Thus, recall that John F. Kennedy beat Richard Nixon in 1960 with 49.7 percent of the vote to Nixon’s 49.6 percent. In addition, George W. Bush became president in 2000, though losing the popular vote to Al Gore, with 47.87 percent of the vote to Gore’s 48.38 percent, and with the entire race coming down to several hundred votes in Florida, with the Supreme Court actually blocking a hand recount in Florida. In none of
these cases, did any nation in the world insist upon a recount or hesitate in recognizing the man declared to be the winner. Indeed, had a country like Venezuela done so, we would have found such a position absurd. Washington’s current position vis à vis Venezuela is no less absurd. The US position is all the more ridiculous given its quick recognition of the coup government in Paraguay after the former bishop-turned president, Fernando Lugo, was ousted in
2012, and its recognition of the 2009 elections in Honduras despite the fact that Washington’s stated precondition for recognizing this election -- the return of President Manuel Zelaya to power after his forcible ouster by the military -- never occurred. Of course, this even pales in comparison to Washington’s active involvement in coups against democraticallyelected leaders in Latin America (e.g., against President Árbenz in Guatemala in 1954, against President Allende in Chile in 1973, and against President Aristide in Haiti in 2004). And, Washington’s failure to recognize the Venezuelan elections is having devastating consequences in Venezuela, for it is emboldening the Venezuelan opposition to carry out violence in order to destabilize that country. Unlike Al Gore in 2000 who stepped aside for George W. Bush in the interest of his country and the US Constitution, the Venezuelan opposition, being led by Henrique Capriles, clearly wants to foster chaos and crisis in Venezuela in order to topple the Maduro government by force (just as the same forces represented by Capriles forcibly kidnapped and briefly overthrew President Chavez, with US support, in 2002). Thus, reasonably believing itself to have the backing of the US and its military, the opposition is causing mayhem in Venezuela, including burning down clinics, destroying property, attacking Cuban doctors and destroying ruling party buildings. In all, seven Venezuelans are dead and dozens injured in this oppositionled violence. There is no doubt that the US could halt this violence right now by recognizing the results of the Venezuelan elections, just as the nations of the world recognized, without question, the results of the elections which put John F. Kennedy in power in 1960 and George W. Bush in power in 2000. The reason the US is not doing so is obvious: It does not like the Venezuelans’ chosen form of government, and welcomes that government’s demise, even through violence. The US, therefore, is not supporting democracy and stability in Venezuela; it is intentionally undermining it. Dan Kovalik is a human rights and labor lawyer.