Tag Archives: Hugo Chavez

Quietly following Chavez’s lead

 

 

While the international community was focusing on the recent Venezuelan referendum, another equally problematic situation was developing in Bolivia. On December 9, 2007, the constituent assembly approved the text of a new constitution which faces fierce opposition from certain groups including six of Bolivia’s nine provinces. The approval of a draft constitution requires two thirds of the votes of the constituent assembly which President Evo Morales does not have.

When the assembly was convened on Saturday, Morales’ party, the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS) decided to change the rules and say that the approval of a constitutional text does not require two thirds of the total members but two thirds of the total members present. Of course, the only people who were there to vote were the supporters of Evo Morales. Only 160 assemblymen out of a total of 255 were present at the vote. That was the solution the supporters of Morales found to the problem of political stagnation he has been facing for the last several months. Assemblymen invented on the spot a new law that enabled them to pass major text for a constitutional reform that must be ready by December 14 and be subject to a popular referendum.

The plans by President Morales, a staunch Chávez follower, to revamp Bolivia’s constitution have reignited long-running conflicts between more indigenous Andean regions, where Morales has his support base, and wealthier lowland areas. There have been violent protests in Bolivia for and against a new draft constitution. In what appeared to be an effort to address the conflict, Morales proposed a referendum to decide whether he and nine regional governors should remain in their posts. Six of the country’s nine regions are controlled by his opponents. Morales says the reforms will give poor Bolivians a voice in running the country but his opponents argue they give the President too much power. Speaking on television, Morales said he would be sending a proposal to Congress to put his leadership to the popular vote. [1] Many criticize Morales’ actions since he took office as President as being divisive. His policy to nationalize the oil and gas industries has alienated foreign governments and investors. His so-called "democratic revolution" which promises a transfer of wealth and power from Bolivia’s elite to the mainly Andean Indian poor, has alarmed the more affluent eastern provinces.

Why are the governors protesting?

These states form a giant half-moon across Bolivia’s relatively prosperous eastern half, an area dominated by a largely mestizo and white population that has began to see with skepticism the newfound influence of the Aymara and Quechua Indian population of Bolivia’s western Andean highlands. Their frustration is rooted in years of living under Bolivia’s heavily centralized government. The protesters want the right to elect local officials now appointed by La Paz, along with more government money for health, education and infrastructure. [2] In addition, the governors of these affluent provinces are afraid of Morales’ evident plan to turn Bolivia into a Socialist state, nationalizing all sectors of the economy, following in Chavez’s footsteps and they don’t want to help Evo’s "project." They have the resources and don’t want Morales to finance his Bolivarian Revolution in their country with the money these provinces generate. They want Bolivia to become economically viable and that is why they are seeking autonomy. They have said that they will "declare de facto autonomy" on December 14.

As stated six provinces announced they will not respect this measure. They began a hunger strike and called for civil disobedience. Controversy around constitutional reforms in Bolivia has been in high gear since the constituent assembly was elected in mid 2007. Indeed, Morales considered his election in December, 2005 as a mandate to transform Bolivian society. Morales was brought to power by a majority of previously excluded sectors, mainly indigenous populations. By the same token, he felt that the vote indicated non-confidence in the old political institutions and parties associated with an obsolete system. The protest social movements that preceded those elections provided this sense that everything that belongs to the past could be swept away to give birth to a "re-foundation" of the Bolivian state. This sense of having a mandate encouraged Morales to exercise power based on the simple principle of majority rule.

Thus, the constituent assembly is an idea that merges as popular social movements advanced in the political arena. The call for a constitutional assembly was negotiated between Morales and the opposition. At the same time a referendum on the autonomy for the Bolivian provinces was negotiated at the request of the opposition. The idea was to leave certain provinces in the hands of the old elite to continue controlling resources in the provinces and so avoid the expansion of the socialist revolution proposed by Morales. A national referendum was conducted with the majority voting against provincial autonomy except for residents of the provinces of the lowlands (eastern provinces).

The new proposed constitution recognizes the pre-colonial right of the indigenous people to their territory, to autonomy and to self-rule. The constitution adopts the moral principles of the indigenous people of the highlands. It establishes that the hydrocarbons are property of the Bolivian people thus declaring null and void all the contracts that violate this principle.  Those who violate these principles will be considered "traitors to the nation". The constitution also establishes the principle of private property but leaves open the possibility of expropriation in case there is any public need that requires it.

The constitution, contrary to the intention of the assemblymen in November 2007 does not secure the indefinite re-election of the President and does not deal with the issue of land distribution. Land distribution and federalization of local province natural resources was an element of antagonism as residents of the lowlands were afraid of nationalization. The constitution provides power to the indigenous population (which constitute about 55% of the population) and to the Bolivian state apparatus. The laws for the Indians have generated the perception that Bolivia will become a de-facto national state of the Indians, making indigenous people first class citizens above the mestizos and the white populations. Due to nationalistic and chauvinistic ethnic voices in the Indian population, anxiety is increasing as they attempt to redraw the current maps in favor of some sort of restoration of pre-colonial Indian sovereignty.   Regarding private property and other rights it leaves citizens vulnerable to the arbitrariness of state power that can make decisions based on what they consider to be state interests.

This is why these proposed reforms have generated a movement in six provinces to become autonomous from the national state. These provinces want to keep their resources and are afraid of a totalitarian take over by Morales.  

Undoubtedly, there is a lot to be done to correct the problem of the marginal sectors of society in Bolivia, more so when the problem of poverty and scarcity is overwhelming. However, Morales from the beginning tried to impose a project while ignoring an electoral minority with a real power on the ground. Instead of negotiating, Morales moved to impose his vision on others like a bulldozer, as did Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez. The difference between him and Chavez is that Chavez was able to enlist supporters thanks to his oil-rich resources which enabled him to bribe a population unwilling to think about the long term consequences of his despotic rule. Morales counted on Chavez’s help which he received but was not sufficient in bringing him the power he wanted.   In Bolivia, the followers of Morales are not an overwhelming majority and the opposition defending their attacked interests did not remain passive.

Street confrontations rightly pushed Morales into negotiations but quickly Morales bypassed all the rules in order to obtain what he really wanted: which was a constitutional reform whose legitimacy will take the form of a contract between him and the indigenous populations while excluding the mestizo and white populations of the country. This move is simply not constitutional by any definition and is not legal under current Bolivian law (which Morales has nothing but contempt for).

Bolivians are now up in arms. They are also encouraged by Chavez’s recent defeat in the referendum over constitutional reforms since Chavez has always been a source of inspiration for Morales. What is more ominous, Morales’ definition of the conflict inevitably creates an indigenous/non-indigenous clash that could end up in civil strife involving dangerous interethnic and interracial dimensions.  This can spread like a spiral into other areas in Latin America where indigenous racial nationalism movements exist (Peru, Chile) and consequently could have serious implications for regional stability. The recent public slaughter of two dogs by an indigenous group in Bolivia was perceived as a clear message to the opposition and reflects the validity of the point in question. This type of bloody and dirty conflict that Morales is encouraging represents Hugo Chavez’s dream of making Latin America chaotic so that it will require a continental savior like himself. Having said so let us not underestimate the striving potential of the new grassroots nationalistic and populist movements that have emerged in South America in the 1990’s, particularly in the indigenous community.  

 

  1. Bolivians set for a historic vote. December 6, 2007. NY Daily News.

  2. Morales faces middle-class protests in Bolivia. January 28, 2007. Los Angeles Times.

Surprise in Venezuela

by The Menges Hemispheric Security Project








No go for Hugo: Chavez’s dictatorial “reforms” were beaten yesterday.
When everybody thought that Hugo Chavez would have his way, Venezuelan voters narrowly rejected the President’s constitutional “reforms” by a margin of 51% to 49%. The proposed changes to the constitution included eliminating presidential term limits as well as vastly expanding presidential powers while restricting the rights of the citizenry. In addition, the proposed “reform” would have given authorities sweeping powers in the case of a national emergency, including detention without charges as well as additional controls on the news media.


Unlike in some previous elections, millions of Venezuelans went to vote yesterday. In fact, some people complained that the voting stations opened late and closed early.  There were some clashes between the police and the opposition forces and ultimately there was an attempt against the life of former Venezuelan Defense Minister, Raul Isaias Baduel. A man in a car went directly towards where Baduel and four other people were standing outside the balloting station injuring four people. When they started responding by throwing rocks at the car, the man pulled a gun and shot once. Then he ran away.


[More]Luckily, Baduel was not injured. Baduel, who headed a civic-military operation that returned President Hugo Chvez to power following a brief coup, recently branded the intended constitutional reform  a “new coup d’tat”, and urged people to vote NO. After the incident, Baduel suggested that the National Electoral Council (CNE) convene a meeting between the political groups supporting and rejecting President Hugo Chvez’s proposed changes to the Constitution, parliamentarian Ismael Garca said. “I delivered a letter from General Baduel to the CNE at 3:00 pm outlining a proposal that the groups supporting the No vote and those supporting the Yes vote meet before the results are announced,” he explained.


General Baduel said the President had tried to force the Venezuelan people’s acceptance of constitutional reforms and had manipulated the people’s feelings in an effort to win their approval. He also warned that Mr. Chavez may now use other means, such as executive order, to pass some of the measures, which include ending other proposals that would abolish the independence of the Central Bank, limit individual rights under states of emergency, and create new forms of community-owned property.


 


The vote ends a tense campaign period, which included repeated protests by opposition groups and violent clashes with police. Election tallies continued past midnight, when officials finally released a count indicating a narrow victory for opponents of the constitutional reform. It was the first defeat for President Chavez since his election to the presidency in 1998. In a nationwide address, Mr. Chavez congratulated his adversaries but said there is a long battle ahead. The President said the reform plan is not dead yet, suggesting he may try again to turn the proposals into law.


The political opposition erupted in celebration, shooting fireworks into the air and honking car horns. The outcome is a stunning development in a country where Chvez and his supporters control nearly all of the levers of power. Almost immediately after the results were broadcast on state television, Chvez conceded defeat, describing the results as a “photo finish.”


Analysis


 


Yesterday’s results are not an indication that Chavez’s power has been diminished; it has just not been increased, for the moment.  If we consider his declarations, he has said that he accepts the results “for now.” He also said that the vote is proof of the credibility of Venezuela’s institutions and that his ideas to revamp the constitution are “still alive.” So we have to be very careful and vigilant about what happens in the next few days.


 


One possibility is that the margin of difference between the NO and the Yes votes is larger and the National Electoral Council cooked the books and made it appear as a narrow defeat for Chavez. In other words it is possible that he lost by a much wider margin. We have to keep in mind that students were monitoring the vote count and they are largely responsible of what happened yesterday. They are the true heroes of this result.


Another possibility is that the Yes vote defeat was an intelligent, calculated, political decision made by Chavez to calm and weaken the opposition and avoid continued protests. He may have decided to listen to his mentor, Hanz Dietrich, the German ideological father of XXI century socialism, and a strong supporter of Latin American integration into a socialist Bolivarian framework. Dietrich wrote a column on November 11, expressing concern over Baduel’s position and advising Chavez to co-opt Baduel since he believed that the general’s surprising move indicated a willingness to become the opposition leader that Venezuela did not have. Thus, if Chavez pushed the reforms too far in the face of a stronger, more unified opposition it could create greater resistance among the Venezuelan people, while elevating Baduel and ultimately causing more trouble for the regime.


So for now, Chavez has decided to go down quietly but in the next days and weeks we will see the true colors of this dictator in the making.


 


Sorpresa en Venezuela


La reforma constitucional propuesta por el presidente Hugo Chvez fue rechazada por el pueblo venezolano que mayoritariamente voto por el “No” en el referndum realizado en ese pas. Segn el conteo de votos, el “No” obtuvo el 51% por ciento, mientras que el “S”, obtuvo el 49% por ciento. Los resultados de ayer no significan que el poder de Chvez se haya disminuido; tampoco se han incrementado por el momento.


En su propuesta de reforma constitucional, el jefe del Estado venezolano plante la extensin del periodo presidencial a siete aos, as como la posibilidad de ser reelegido. En concreto, la derrota le niega la posibilidad de reelegirse indefinidamente en el poder. Tras conocerse los resultados, una explosin de jbilo se produjo entre los seguidores del “No” quienes se haban reunido frente a la sede del Consejo Nacional Electoral a la espera de los resultados.


Chvez ha reconocido que ha sido un “final de fotografa”, por lo ajustado de los resultados, pero no concede ms que una derrota “por ahora” . Ataviado con su ya tradicional camisa roja y acompaado por su gabinete de gobierno, Chvez ha comparecido sonriente varias horas despus de lo previsto. Se esperaban resultados a las ocho de la tarde (0.00 GMT), pero no ha comparecido hasta pasada la una y media. Han sido horas de mucha tensin, en las que los partidarios y los detractores de la reforma aguantaban en vilo los resultados de la consulta.


“Nos venci la abstencin (…) por ahora no pudimos”, ha dicho el mandatario, aunque dice que contina “haciendo la propuesta” de reforma constitucional, es decir, la mantiene, ya que, dice, es la va para “acelerar” la instauracin del socialismo en Venezuela. Ha llamado a sus partidarios a no desanimarse. Pero, sobre todo, no se da por vencido. “Seguiremos trabajando, haremos el esfuerzo ms grande para lograr la mxima inclusin social, la igualdad como principio del sistema, ya buscaremos la manera”. “Esta propuesta (de reforma constitucional) no est muerta, sigue viva, y yo no la retiro”, sostuvo Chvez.


Chvez pretenda el cambio de 69 artculos de la Constitucin de 1999, una reforma que le habra dado un poder casi sin lmites. Para empezar, habra permitido reelecciones ilimitadas para el presidente y ampliaba de seis a siete aos el mandato presidencial. Adems, le daba el control de las reservas de divisas extranjeras, del banco central, de la ordenacin territorial del pas y mayores poderes para expropiar propiedades o censurar medios de comunicacin en situaciones de emergencia. Tambin reduca a seis horas la jornada laboral y creaba un sistema de seguridad social para los trabajadores informales y autnomos.


La campaa por el No’ fue liderada por el movimiento estudiantil surgido en mayo con ocasin de la no renovacin de la licencia del canal opositor RCTV. Recibi adems el espaldarazo del ex ministro de Defensa y emblemtico general retirado Ral Baduel, que lider el movimiento cvico militar que derrot el golpe de 2002 y devolvi a Chvez al poder. Baduel afirm que “debemos estar en alerta ante la posibilidad de imponer esos cambios por una va distinta a la Asamblea Constituyente, por ejemplo, a travs de leyes habilitantes”. El No’ tambin fue apoyado por una disidencia “chavista” integrada por el partido socialdemcrata Podemos, varios intelectuales y hasta la propia ex esposa del presidente, Mara Isabel Rodrguez, que fue constituyente en 1999.


Se reportaron algunas irregularidades y algunos votantes se quejaban que algunas mesas de sufragio haban abierto muy tarde otras haban cerrado muy temprano y algunos centros de votacin reportaron demoras en el proceso. El diputado Ismael Garca, de Podemos, denunci que “un espontneo sac un arma contra el general Ral Baduel”, en uno de los pocos incidentes registrados en esta jornada. “Se debe averiguar quin envi a este espontneo”, que quizs se vio alentado por la “exagerada violencia verbal y las amenazas para intentar atemorizar” que se desprenden de los discursos del gobernante, aadi el legislador, que no dio ms detalles del asunto. Baduel sali ileso del atentado en su contra cuando sala del centro de votacin del Parque De Ferias San Jacinto, cuando un vehculo intent atropellarlo y debido a esta accin cuatro personas salieron heridas.


Anlisis


Los Resultados de ayer no significan que el plan de reforman la Constitucin de   haya terminado. Si leemos sus declaraciones, el dice que acepta los resultados “por ahora.” Tambin declar que los resultados son prueba que la credibilidad de las instituciones Venezolanas y que sus ideas de cambiar la constitucin “siguen vivas.” Tenemos que estar muy alerta a lo que pase en los prximos das.


 


Un posible escenario es que el margen de diferencia entre el SI y el NO sea mayor que el publicado y que el Consejo Nacional de Elecciones haya alterado los resultados para que la victoria de la oposicin aparezca minscula. Debemos reconocer que los estudiantes monitorearon el conteo de votos y son los hroes de la jornada de ayer.


 


Otra posibilidad es que la derrota del SI haya sido una decisin poltica inteligente y calculada por parte de Chvez para calmar a la oposicin y evitar mas protestas. Quizs le hizo caso a su mentor Hanz Dietrich, el idelogo alemn de la idea del socialismo del Siglo XXI y gran promotor de la integracin Latinoamericana dentro de un marco Bolivariano Socialista quien el da 11 de Noviembre escribi una columna expresando su preocupacin por la posicin del General Baduel. Dietrich aconsej a Chvez que coopte a Baduel ya que crea en la posibilidad que el general se convirtiera en lder de la oposicin Venezolana; un lder que hasta la aparicin del ex ministro de Defensa, no exista. Por ello, si Chvez empujaba demasiado las reformas, podra crear ms resistencia de la poblacin Venezolana contra el mandatario, dificultando su capacidad de gobernar y elevando la imagen de Baduel como lder opositor, creando ms problemas para el gobierno.


 


Por ahora, Chvez ha decidido aceptar los resultados pero veremos en los prximos das la verdadera cara de este dictador en potencia.

Civil disobedience, Chavez, and democracy

 

 

The Constitutional reform in Venezuela that is scheduled to be ratified by popular referendum is having major repercussions in Venezuela now. President Hugo Chavez has been gradually reducing the power of civil society in Venezuela for the last several years. This present constitutional reform, which is another step in the same direction, has generated a stronger reaction. What we are facing now is probably the largest civil protests in Venezuela since February 2003 when groups in civil society were struggling to hold a re-call referendum on Chavez.

Indeed, in the last several years, Chavez has increased his political power and fully controls the legislature. In addition, he has manipulated the judiciary and the military by appointing officers and judges loyal to him. In the economic sphere, he has gone against the will of important groups in civil society by halting foreign exchange, and placing price controls on domestic and imported products. Venezuela is moving from a relatively diverse economy into an Arab-like oil petro-tyrannical welfare state. This situation has forced producers to stop producing, resulting in food shortages. By the same token, commerce and investment in the country has deteriorated tremendously.

In the area of human rights and freedom of expression, Chavez has encouraged violence against journalists and passed laws criminalizing opinions. He has denied jobs as well as identity cards and passports to people who signed in favor of the re-call referendum, a public referendum aimed at placing the continuation of the Chavez regime on the ballot.

It is interesting that the business association (Fedecameras) complains about the fact that petro-dollars circulating in the market are not a sign of economic strength, because there are shortages of food, medicines and materials. We are also beginning to hear again from press rights organizations that are denouncing deterioration of the freedom of the press in Venezuela and warning that further restrictions may come out of the constitutional reform. By the same token world intellectuals such as Mario Vargas Llosa and European philosophers such as Bernard Henri Levy and Andre Glucksmann are denouncing Chavez’s abuses.

This new anti-Chavez movement has been brought about by one man. He is the former Chavez Defense Secretary; General Rafael Baduel. Baduel has publicly opposed the constitutional reforms in Venezuela calling them an attempt at a "coup d’etat. As a result he has become the new de-facto leader millions of Venezuelans were waiting for. Until recently, Baduel could be blamed for allowing Chavez to co-opt the military in Venezuela and use it to strengthen his regime and for loyalty to a man who spoke about installing a socialist, revolutionary regime backed by the military. Yet, it is the same Baduel that now begins to rebel.

Whatever Baduel’s reasons were, there is no doubt that the former Defense Secretary and Chief of staff has generated a new momentum and opportunity which will be foolish for those who oppose Hugo Chavez to miss.

In the last couple of weeks students have gone to the streets demanding a halt to the constitutional reforms and protests were organized across the country. Meanwhile the government became defensive; Chavez called Baduel a traitor while Hanz Dietrich, the master intellectual of the Chavez socialist revolution, recommended that Chavez withdraw the proposed constitutional reform and try to co-opt Baduel to avoid further deterioration of the regime. The governor of the State of Anzoategui, Tarek William Saab, taking a defensive position, stated that Baduel responded to the wishes of the (American) "Empire and international Zionism". (By the way, in the past Saab allegedly undermined the indictment process of three Arabs arrested in Venezuela for having allegedly participated in the terrorist attack that destroyed the Jewish community center (AMIA) in Buenos Aires in 1994). .

In the pages of the America’s Report we have repeatedly warned that those fighting for freedom against the Chavez tyranny in Venezuela have been abandoned. The student movement in Venezuela is today the Latin version of the Prague spring of 1968. Whereas the political opposition has become flaccid, legalistic and virtually shut down by the intimidating nature of the Chavez regime, it is the non-political students who are fighting. They are not doing it in pursuit of any gains other than a way of life free of the dogmas and dictates imposed by the growing Chavista state.

Chavez’s image in the world is that of a highly distasteful leader. However, there is an unchallenged consensus that his regime is legitimate because it was democratically elected. Thus, Western common sense tells us that his removal must take place only through democratic means. The reality is that Chavez has designed a model of "totalitarian democracy" where he has used state resources to gain political power at the expense of civil society and where petro-dollars have allowed him to buy the hearts and votes of people who have chosen to ignore the fact that they have less representation, less dignity, and fewer rights. However, there is no doubt that Venezuelans are paying greatly now and will pay heavily in the future.

Democracy is not the mere act of conducting elections. Elections embody the last stage of a large system of liberties and rights that develop gradually over some period of time. Chavez is like Hamas in Gaza using elections to subjugate rights and impose his will. Chavez currently controls the electoral process. The Chavez regime is by far less respectful of the law than the Hungarian and Polish governments were during their last period of communist rule. Opponents could appeal to Hungarian or Polish law to achieve something. In Venezuela to wait for legal means to remove Chavez from power is an illusion because the successive "constitutional" reforms in Venezuela were aimed at reducing rights and the rule of law not increasing rights as a real constitution should.

This has been done in order to create a situation where Chavez will ultimately stand alone before the people with no law that restricts him and no rights that protect or empower them. This is why removing Chavez by non-electoral means is as much a legitimate act as acts of civil disobedience were forty years ago in the US South. Disobedience is an expression of rebellion against unjust laws and an unjust regime. As in the 1960’s Southern United States, this experience could have an effect of a political renaissance and open better opportunities after Chavez’s removal. Civil society must come out now to the streets and show that they are protesting not for salaries, not for or against some specific policy carried by the Chavez regime but for the sake of human dignity and a free way of life. These are basic natural human rights that Chavez seeks to p swallow as a boa does with a rat.

If the citizens come out to the streets the world will respond. Baduel, for his part generated something important. If he can convince the military to resist Chavez, this could have key consequences.

Dr. Luis Fleischman is an advisor to the Menges Hemispheric Security Project at the Center for Security Policy in Washington DC. He is also an adjunct professor of Political Science and Sociology at Wilkes Honor College at Florida Atlantic University.

Venezuela: Countdown to Tyranny VI

by the Menges Hemispheric Security Project

 

Venezuela’s students are leading the protests against Chavez’s takeover.

Venezuelan authorities say a 19-year-old man has been shot dead during an anti-government protest in the central state of Carabobo. They also say 80 other people have been detained in protests elsewhere. Officials say the incidents happened Monday as the demonstrators took to the streets ahead of this coming Sunday’s referendum on proposed constitutional reforms sought by President Hugo Chavez. Every day thousands of students have been demonstrating against the Chavez constitutional reforms.

 

There are conflicting reports about who is responsible for the death of the young man. The government says that the demonstrators killed him while the students say he was killed by the police who were carrying weapons. The detainees are in jail. Nobody knows what will happen to them or when will they be released.

 

[More]According to an article in the November 17th Economist, Chavez has dismissed the students as spoiled "rich kids" angry at the prospect of losing their privileges. He alleges that they are part of a fresh "fascist onslaught supported by the media".   The article goes on to say that the government has deployed countless counter-demonstrators against the students who hurl insults and sometimes rocks and bottles from behind police lines. An example of this was after a recent march, the campus of Central University was turned into a battlefield by "Chavistas" armed with handguns and riding motorbikes, dozens of whom passed through police lines.

 

The proposed changes to the constitution include eliminating presidential term limits as well as vastly expanding presidential powers while restricting the rights of the citizenry. In addition, the proposed "reform" would give authorities sweeping powers in the case of a national emergency, including detention without charges and controls on the news media. The plan has been condemned by Venezuela’s opposition parties, human rights groups and the Roman Catholic Church.

 

A recent poll shows that Venezuelan voters oppose the reforms by a wide margin . The polling company Datanalisis announced Saturday that 49 percent of likely voters oppose the reforms, while 39 percent favor the changes.

Separately, former Venezuelan Defense Minister Raul Isaias Baduel said in an exclusive interview with VOA Spanish service last week that he predicts Venezuelans will vote against the reforms. He has previously said the changes would amount to a coup by President Chavez.

 

Venezuela al día: Cuenta Regresiva hacia la Tiranía

Venezuela: un muerto y 80 detenidos en protestas en Venezuela

Un muerto, dos heridos y 80 detenidos es el saldo de las protestas registradas hoy en el estado Carabobo contra la reforma constitucional impulsada por el presidente de Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, la cual será sometida a referendo el domingo. El joven, de 19 años, que recibió tres balazos constituye la primera víctima fatal relacionada con la rivalidad política en torno al proyecto que abandera el presidente Hugo Chávez. El vicepresidente del país, Jorge Rodríguez, informó que 80 personas fueron detenidas por hechos de violencia en diversos puntos del país.

La versión del gobierno es que los estudiantes que protestaban son responsables fallecimiento del joven mientras que los manifestantes dicen que miembros de la policía dispararon contra el trabajador ya que portaban armas. Los detenidos están presos y no se sabe aún que pasara con ellos o cuando serán puestos en libertad.

 

Los estudiantes se oponen a la reforma ya que viola las libertades civiles y debilita gravemente una de las democracias más antiguas de Latinoamérica por suprimir los límites a la reelección presidencial y aumentar un año a la duración del mandato presidencial de seis años, entre otros cambios. Las reformas incluyen la reelección indefinida del Ejecutivo, eliminar la autonomía del Banco Central de Venezuela y agregar al nombre de la Fuerza Armada Nacional la frase "bolivariana y antiimperialista", entre otros.

 

De acuerdo a un artículo publicado en El Economist el 17 de Noviembre , Chávez se burla de los estudiantes diciendo que son "unos jóvenes ricos" que están molestos ante la posibilidad de perder sus privilegios. Chávez dice que forman parte de un nuevo "grupo de fascistas apoyados por los medios de comunicación." El artículo continúa diciendo que el gobierno ha enviado a miles de personas para contrarrestar las manifestaciones de los estudiantes. Estos infiltrados se colocan detrás de la policía e insultan, arrojan piedras y botellas a los manifestantes. Un ejemplo de esto ocurrió en Marzo en la Universidad Central cuando cientos de "Chavistas" armados y en motocicleta crearon un caos terrible en el campus del centro de estudios y la policía no hizo nada para detenerlos.

El fin de semana, el último sondeo de la consultora Datanálisis reflejó un brusco viraje en las perspectivas, con un 49 por ciento de los que afirmaron que irán a votar dirían "No" frente a un 39 por ciento que sufragaría "Sí", mientras que en su estudio anterior el panorama era el opuesto.

La Conferencia Episcopal de Venezuela reiteró el lunes que considera "moralmente inaceptable" la reforma propuesta por el militar retirado, que también ha sido criticada por universitarios y grupos de derechos humanos porque permite censurar los medios en estados de excepción.

El ex Ministro de Defensa Venezolano Raúl Baduel dijo en una entrevista exclusiva que él predice que los venezolanos votaran en contra de las reformas.

Civil disobedience, Chavez, and democracy

 

The Constitutional reform in Venezuela that is scheduled to be ratified by popular referendum is having major repercussions in Venezuela now. President Hugo Chavez has been gradually reducing the power of civil society in Venezuela for the last several years. This present constitutional reform, which is another step in the same direction, has generated a stronger reaction. What we are facing now is probably the largest civil protests in Venezuela since February 2003 when groups in civil society were struggling to hold a re-call referendum on Chavez. To learn more please open the attachment.

 

To our readers:

Due to the dire situation inside Venezuela, the staff at the Americas Report will publish daily news briefs between now and December 2, 2007 when the Chavez "reforms" are due to voted on by the electorate. In addition to keeping our readers informed of the latest news coming out of Venezuela, we also want to salute the courage of the students and all those in opposition to this latest attempt by Mr. Chavez to turn Venezuela into a totalitarian state. We welcome your comments and any information you believe is relevant to the situation. We may be contacted at: hemisphericsecurity@gmail.com.

A Nuestros Lectores:

Debido a la terrible situación que se esta viviendo actualmente en Venezuela, el equipo del "Americas Report" publicará noticias todos los días desde hoy hasta el 2 de Diciembre del 2007, fecha en la que el pueblo votara si acepta o no las "Reformas Constitucionales" de Chavez. Además de mantenerlos informados sobre los últimos acontecimientos en Venezuela, queremos felicitar a los estudiantes de ese país y opositores el régimen, por la valentía demostrada en su lucha por tratar de impedir que el Sr. Chavez convierta a Venezuela en un país totalitario. Con gusto recibiremos y leeremos sus comentarios y cualquier información relevante con respecto a esta situación. Nos podrán contactar al: hemisphericsecurity@gmail.com.

Main News:

  • Ortega angers Spanish monarch during Ibero-American summit
  • Brazil and Argentina discuss nuclear, oil cooperation.
  • Venezuelan leader eager to start nuclear program. Ahmadinejad and Chavez predict fall of US ‘empire.’ Chavez and Ahmadinejad sign 186 accords. US lawmakers alarmed by Chávez’s plan for nuclear energy program in Venezuela. OPEC summit closes in Saudi Arabia. Chavez starts OPEC summit with $200 oil warning. Venezuela’s Chavez demands Spanish king apologize. Chavez warns Europeans not to side with US on Iran nuclear standoff. Reporters without Borders criticize Chávez in letter to Sarkozy. First Chinese oilrigs arrive in Venezuela. Chávez, Sarkozy deal with humanitarian swap in Colombia. Foreign investment in Venezuela down USD 317 million. Globovisión fears termination of license by Venezuelan government. IAPA: Freedom of expression and private property are at stake in Venezuela. National Assembly interrogates three university presidents. Chávez has no proof of life of Betancourt.
  • Colombia sets a deadline for Chávez’s mediation. EU reiterates support for Chávez’s mediation in Colombia. Colombian government-ELN to resume peace talks in Caracas.
  • Alan García invites Chávez to invest in Peru. Peru’s Government to Track 3,000 Ex-convicts and Freed Terrorists.
  • Interpol Approves Warrants to Arrest Iranians for AMIA Bombing.

View the full version of the Americas Report (PDF) 

 

For any questions, comments, or those interested in receiving this report in the future or seeking to have their email removed from our list please contact Nicole M. Ferrand at our new e-mail address: mengesproject@centerforsecuritypolicy.org. If you have news stories that you think might be useful for future editions of this report please send them, with a link to the original website, to the same e-mail address. If you wish to contribute with an article, please send it to the same address, with your name and place of work or study.

Venezuela Brief: Countdown to Tyranny II

by The Menges Hemispheric Security Project








Where’s the beef?  Chavista socialism is causing food shortages in Venezuela.
Amid oil opulence, Venezuelans are now spending hours in line waiting to buy basic foodstuffs. For several months now there have been reports of food shortages. Supermarket shelves remain stocked with aged whiskey and imported wine, but basic products are nowhere to be found. First there was a shortage of sugar and people started to use brown sugar when they could find it. Then there was no meat so Venezuelan’s could only eat chicken since fish is too expensive. Next the supermarkets had no milk, cooking oil or black beans. There are now no eggs, no powdered milk, nothing. To go out to the supermarket, people need to wear low-heeled shoes because they have to walk a lot in order to get what they need, despite leftist President Hugo Chavez’s social program that promises to provide low-cost groceries for the majority poor.


[More]In an effort to resolve this problem, the government has, among other things, removed taxes on certain goods. Nevertheless, the situation appears to be getting worse as products have not become less expensive. There is not only trouble with food shortages but also with medicines and cosmetics. People in Venezuela say that it is hard to find certain labels, for example, and they have to buy things of lesser quality. Sometimes there are areas of the supermarket that are completely empty. Many people wonder if they are living in a war zone and some are beginning to feel that what they are enduring already resembles Cuba.


Businesses say price controls on staple foods are so low they discourage investment and force stores to sell at a loss. Venezuelans waste several hours a week trawling for food. Retailers ration their supplies, and some even stamp customers’ hands so they do not line up twice. A black market has sprung up where informal vendors illegally peddle bags of sugar, beans and precious powdered milk — for as much as double the regulated price.


Of course, Chavez doesn’t acknowledge this problem and says all of this is to help the poor. After all, when you can buy a gallon of gasoline for 16 cents, who needs to eat?


Protests


Several media outlets in Caracas have reported today that the new protests where thousands of students from all over the country participated against Chavez’s Constitutional “reforms,” left many students wounded. There were violent confrontations with the police in many Universities and there are reports of protesters having bullet and pellet wounds. Allegedly, one is in critical condition. Some newspapers have published news that many students have been detained by the authorities.


Demonstrations also occurred in other cities: Maracay ,Valencia ,Yaracuy and Puerto La Cruz and there is information that many professors joined their students. For this Sunday, all the student leaders will join their forces and will march in a huge demonstration to reject Chavez’s plans to turn Venezuela into an oppressive and tyrannical country.


 


Venezuela al da: cuenta regresiva hacia la Tirana – II 


A pesar que en Venezuela abunda el petrleo, Chvez esta llevando a su pas al totalitarismo siguiendo los pasos de Fidel Castro. Por meses, ha habido reportes de escasez de alimentos bsicos. Los estantes de los supermercados estn llenos de whisky y vinos caros, pero los productos bsicos brillan por su ausencia. Primero fue el azcar y la poblacin empez a usar azcar rubia cuando la lograban encontrar. Luego haba escasez de carne y los venezolanos empezaron a consumir pollo ya que el pescado es muy caro. Despus la gente no poda encontrar leche, aceite y frijoles. No hay huevos, leche en polvo; nada. Para salir de compras, las personas tienen que usar zapatillas ya que tienen que caminar por horas para tratar de obtener lo bsico a pesar que el programa social de Hugo Chvez prometa dar alimentos a bajo costo a los pobres. Es un desastre. Como no hay leche baja en grasa, la gente tiene que mezclar agua con calcio.


En un esfuerzo por resolver el problema, el gobierno elimin los impuestos a ciertos alimentos. Pero la situacin cada vez est peor. Los productos no bajan de precio; pero no solo eso; tambin faltan medicinas y cosmticos de ciertas marcas y los venezolanos se ven obligados a usar productos de peor calidad. Muchas veces hay zonas enteras de los supermercados que estn completamente vacas. Muchos se preguntan si estn viviendo en una zona de guerra o si ya estn sufriendo los efectos de la “cubanizacin” de Venezuela.


Las PYMES (pequeas y medianas empresas) dicen que los controles de precios sobre los productos bsicos desaniman a los inversionistas quienes se ven forzados a cerrar sus negocios tomando prdidas. Los venezolanos desperdician varias horas de su tiempo tratando de encontrar comida. Los minoristas muchas veces tienen que racionar su stock y algunos ponen sellos en las manos de los consumidores para que no regresen a comprar. Un mercado negro ya esta operando donde los informales venden productos bsicos al doble del precio regular.


Por supuesto, Chvez no reconoce este problema y dice que todo lo hace para ayudar a los pobres. Despus de todo, cuando puedes comprar un galn de gasolina por 16 centavos, quien necesita comer?


Protestas


Varios medios de comunicacin de la capital venezolana informaron hoy que las nuevas protestas en donde participaron miles de jvenes en todo el pas, dejaron varios estudiantes heridos. Hubo enfrentamientos con la polica en varias universidades y hay reportes de estudiantes heridos de bala y perdigones. (Hay un estudiante que se encuentra en grave estado). Algunos diarios han publicado noticias de varios jvenes que han sido detenidos por las autoridades mientras marchaban.


Las manifestaciones estudiantiles se realizaron tambin en las ciudades de Maracay, Valencia, Yaracuy y Puerto La Cruz, y hay reportes que varios profesores se unieron a sus alumnos. Para este domingo, todos los lderes estudiantiles tienen planeado unir a sus agrupaciones y organizar una gran manifestacin en rechazo de las pretensiones de Chvez de convertir a Venezuela en un estado opresor y tirnico.

Venezuela Brief: Countdown to Tyranny I

To our readers:


Due to the dire situation inside Venezuela, the staff at the Americas Report will publish daily news briefs between now and December 2, 2007 when the Chavez “reforms” are due to voted on by the electorate. In addition to keeping our readers informed of the latest news coming out of Venezuela, we also want to salute the courage of the students and all those in opposition to this latest attempt by Mr. Chavez to turn Venezuela into a totalitarian state. We welcome your comments and any information you believe is relevant to the situation. We may be contacted at: mengesproject@centerforsecuritypolicy.org.


A Nuestros Lectores:


Debido a la terrible situacin que se esta viviendo actualmente en Venezuela, el equipo del “Americas Report” publicar noticias todos los das desde hoy hasta el 2 de Diciembre del 2007, fecha en la que el pueblo votara si acepta o no las “Reformas Constitucionales” de Chavez. Adems de mantenerlos informados sobre los ltimos acontecimientos en Venezuela, queremos felicitar a los estudiantes de ese pas y opositores el rgimen, por la valenta demostrada en su lucha por tratar de impedir que el Sr. Chavez convierta a Venezuela en un pas totalitario. Con gusto recibiremos y leeremos sus comentarios y cualquier informacin relevante con respecto a esta situacin. Nos podrn contactar al: mengesproject@centerforsecuritypolicy.org.


“Venezuela News Brief: Countdown to Tyranny I”


On Friday November 3, the Venezuelan Congress voted to approve a constitutional reform that would allow President Hugo Chavez to be re-elected indefinitely. This setting will help consolidate Chavez absolutist rule, which will eventually end in a totalitarian XXI century socialism. Opposition forces and students in Venezuela organized protests against the project that is scheduled to be ratified by popular vote on December 2…learn more opening the attachment.


“Venezuela al da: cuenta regresiva hacia la tirana I”


El viernes 3 de diciembre, el Congreso Venezolano aprob una reforma constitucional que permitir al Presidente Hugo Chvez ser reelecto indefinidamente. Este escenario ayudara al Presidente Chvez a consolidar su poder absoluto que en definitiva terminara convirtiendo a Venezuela en un pas totalitario logrando finalmente lo que Chvez llama el “socialismo del siglo XXI.” Las fuerzas opositoras y miles de estudiantes organizaron protestas en contra de este proyecto que est programado a ser ratificado por voto popular el 2 de Diciembre…sepa mas abriendo el attachment.


Main News:



  • Ibero-American summit ends in Chile.



  • Ibero – American summit: Spain’s king tells Chvez, Why don’t you shut up?’ (Video available). Chilean FM takes sides with Spain in impasse with Chvez. Chavez threatens Spanish firms in Venezuela. Despite booming oil prices, Venezuela with the highest country risk in the region. Chvez’s landings in Bolivia spark protest. Chvez on “rush” tour on Saudi Arabia, Iran, France, Portugal. Congress asks Venezuelan govn’t to declare IAPA persona non grata. Venezuela Keeps Official Exchange Rate Despite Flourishing Currency Black Market Trade. Petrobras leaves gas project in Venezuela. Fedecmaras: Govn’t is sponsoring rejection against constitutional reform. University students spread over freeway against changes to the Constitution. Chavez to Meet with Colombian ELN.



  • “People Summit” Concludes in Santiago de Chile.



  • Bolivia : Morales has delivered USD 80 million in Venezuelan checks. Strike over back wages halts Bolivia ‘ s busiest airport.



  • Uribe-Chvez ties unlikely to harm Colombia-US relations. Colombian President would like FARC chief to meet with justice.



  • Chile : Bachelet refuses Chvez offer to back “Transantiago”. Strong earthquake shakes Chile.  



  • Brazilian Congress postpones voting on Venezuela’s admission to Mercosur.



  • Peru & China to Negotiate Free Trade Agreement. Venezuela’s Investment in Peru’s Oil Resisted by Critics.



  • Argentina: Cristina Kirchner names Cabinet. Argentina : Iran seeks arrests of Argentines (AMIA). South Bank to Open in Argentina.

View full version of the Americas Report (PDF)


Ver la versin completa del Informe de Amricas (PDF)




For any questions, comments, or those interested in receiving this report in the future or seeking to have their email removed from our list please contact Nicole M. Ferrand at our new e-mail address: mengesproject@centerforsecuritypolicy.org or to hemisphericsecurity@gmail.com. If you have news stories that you think might be useful for future editions of this report please send them, with a link to the original website, to the same e-mail address. If you wish to contribute with an article, please send it to the same address, with your name and place of work or study.

Countdown to tyranny in Venezuela

On Friday November 3, the Venezuelan Congress voted to approve a constitutional reform that would allow President Hugo Chavez to be re-elected indefinitely. The same amendment will enable the President to handpick rulers of new regions to be created in the future, and, will also facilitate expropriations of private property. This setting will help consolidate Chavez absolutist rule, which will eventually end in a totalitarian XXI century socialism. Opposition forces and students in Venezuela organized protests against the project that is scheduled to be ratified by popular vote on December 2nd.

General Raul Baduel, a friend of Hugo Chavez, a protector and an accomplice of Chavez who has supported the process of ‘totalitariazation’ of Venezuela for the last five years (including the co-optation of the army into Chavez political agenda) rebelled against the constitutional reform. Baduel claims that this constitutional reform goes against the rights of the people. He urged the population to vote against the ratification of the reform and urged Congress and the judiciary to restore the people’s rights. Baduel has expressed concern over violence and civil war in Venezuela.

[More]Hanz Dietrich, the German ideologist of the idea of XXI century socialism, a strong supporter of Chavez and the idea of Latin American integration into a socialist Bolivarian framework, wrote a column on November 11, expressing concern over Baduel’s revolt. He believes that Baduel’s surprising move indicates that the general is willing to become the opposition leader that Venezuela does not have right now. Dietrich is very concerned that Chavez‘s revolution is weakening and surprisingly calls to avoid conflict. He believes that a defeat for Chavez on December 2 will put an end to the revolution. Thus, Dietrich calls on Chavez to co-opt Baduel, negotiate with him, cut an alliance with him, and thus prevent civil war and secure the continuation of the revolution. The very scared Dietrich is concerned about a repetition of the Bolivian case where President Evo Morales does not have enough support for his constitutional reform. Dietrich ends up the article by saying that the constitutional reform in Venezuela is not necessary after all.

Let us ask, if the power of that revolution was so strong, how come Dietrich is so concerned. In fact, Dietrich calls to co-opt Baduel and cancel the constitutional reform to continue cheating the nation. After all Dietrich is telling Chavez, you can still subjugate Venezuelans without asking them for permission.

El Nacional reports this morning that based on a poll, 40% of the Venezuelans will abstain from voting on December 2. Two groups, the Patriotic Front and the National Command for the Resistance call the population to abstain on December 2. The logic of these groups is to show that Chavez constitutional reforms are supported by a minority and not by a majority as Chavez wants. By contrast General Baduel has called on people to vote "no" on December 2. Baduel seems to believe in the honesty of the process.

Meanwhile it has been reported that 11 organizations have expressed public opposition to the constitutional reforms.

El Universal reports this morning that the Business association (Fedecameras) expressed public opposition to the constitutional reforms predicting a period of civil war and violence in Venezuela. Fedecameras president Juan Manuel Gonzales stated that constitutional reforms seek to "perpetuate the power of one will, one voice. The constitutional reform also is trying to transform us from being citizens in a democratic republic into activists of an enslaving socialism"

Gonzales also denounced that the fact that there are petro-dollars circulating in the market does not mean that the economy is strong. "There is no milk, there is no sugar. Soon we will not have cereals, medicines and materials for construction and efficient manpower to work in agriculture". "We are experiencing scarcity of basic products. This is a situation we never experienced before". Price-controls in Venezuela have systematically discouraged production in the last several years.

Meanwhile El Nacional reports this morning that Chavez is planning to travel to Teheran next week. The reason for their visit is to follow up on previous agreements signed between Caracas and Teheran. The Venezuelan Ambassador in Tehran, Arturo Gallego reiterated Venezuela’s support for Iran’s nuclear program.

Would there be any relation between the internal revolt in Venezuela and Chavez’s trip to Tehran? After all the Iranians have been very skillful in repressing opposition forces. Perhaps the Iranians will teach them something Venezuelans do not know.

America’s blunder, Chavez’s success

The recent Colombian elections for governors, mayors, plus state and city legislators were remarkable, with much good news about the state of democracy in the long troubled country. Unfortunately, there was as much gloomy news as the nation looks to 2010 presidential elections. Good, bad or neutral, these polls between the 2006 and 2010 presidential races resemble U.S. midterms where future trends are often detected.

First, the good news, representing a stark contrast to elections in neighboring Venezuela:

  • Nearly 15.5 million men and women cast ballots – some 48 percent of registered voters – an increase of more than 20% over 2003.
  • 86,449 candidates competed for 18,527 positions with an historic low in violence [sadly, 20 candidates lost their lives, at least 15 at the hands of FARC, the ruthless communist terrorist and narcotics trafficking organization].
  • Overall, non-radical candidates won a significant majority of executive and legislative races.

Clearly, the elections reflected a vibrant democratic spirit throughout the country. That said, however, portents for the presidential stakes in 2010 have become even more clouded than they were pre-election.

Last year’s presidential race was won overwhelmingly by incumbent President Alvaro Uribe, who received more than 62% of the popular vote. Tellingly, Marxist professor and former judge Carlos Gaviria of the ultra-leftist, Polo Democrático, party finished a distant second with 22% and the candidate of Colombia’s long-established Liberal party, placed third.

To be sure, the Liberal candidate, Horacio Serpa, was a previous two-time loser, accused of having close ties to narco-traffickers, but Polo Democrático had well-known ties to the murderous FARC guerrillas and clear ties to Venezuelan dictator, Hugo Chavez.

Last Sunday’s election results cause concern because the Polo Democrático candidate for mayor of Bogotá, Samuel Moreno, won a resounding victory, retaining control for the party of the country’s second most powerful elective position. Receiving nearly 44 percent of votes cast, while the second place candidate mustered just over 28 percent, Moreno’s 900 thousand votes were the most ever cast for a mayoral candidate.

Moreno’s victory was a stinging setback for President Uribe who backed the second place finisher, former mayor Enrique Penálosa. Polo Democrático’s chances for winning the presidency in 2010 are thus significantly strengthened. Should this happen, Chavez’s Bolivarian Revolution will have gained its biggest prize yet: Colombia, the United States’ strongest Latin American ally.  

The Chavez regime machine is already laying extensive groundwork, contacting some two million Colombians living in Venezuela illegally, to offer them permanent residence, jobs and/or "settlement stipends" on condition they remain loyal to the "Bolivarian Revolution."  

Chavez has allowed the FARC to establish bases in southwest Venezuela and residences for its representatives in Caracas. Mobile medical clinics have been sent to the Venezuelan–Colombian border, where Cuban doctors provide free medical services to thousands of Colombian campesinos in neighboring areas.

With Polo Democrático retaining political control of critically important Bogotá at least through 2011, the 2010 presidential race becomes very problematic.  Consider the following scenario:

  • Polo Democrático nominates a popular figure, such as former President Cesar Gaviria, leader of the Liberal party, to run in a united front.
  • The nominee receives the support of Polo Democrático’s political organization in Bogotá.
  • The nominee receives clandestine support from the FARC, who have long been Polo Democrático supporters, which retain strong organizations in several rural and southern areas of the country.
  • Hugo Chavez, who has said he would spend $5 billion or more in the coming election, provides a substantial amount to the FARC for "campaign expenses".
  • The FARC pays 50 thousand pesos [$25.00] to millions who would normally have voted for an opposing candidate, or not voted at all.

While publicly denying the possibility of such a drastic change, respected political analysts privately worry that the above is indeed possible.  Unfortunately, as they see no single, strong center-right candidate on the horizon, some have proposed that President Uribe be drafted to serve a third four year term.

Such a development would severely cloud Colombia’s great democratic achievements during the last several years, with detractors charging the nation’s president had become convinced – like so many developing world leaders – he was indispensable to Colombia’s continued survival.   Rather, it is incumbent on President Uribe and like-minded leaders to select and support an equally incorruptible candidate who embraces solid democratic principles.

Many of Bogotá’s elites contend Polo Democrático cannot possibly succeed nationally, saying the citizenry would reject such radical leadership.  They cite the generally conservative nature of the population plus the need for the winning presidential candidate to get 50+ percent to win, which could mean a runoff of the two top vote getters in the event of a multi-candidate initial election.

These factors, albeit correct, ignore another indicator: many 20-something Colombians are declaring support for the red-shirted, charismatic Chavez, who has a Che Guevara-like attraction for a cross-section of youth, a possibility many of the same leaders in the country’s capital said could never happen.

The situation is further hurt by the failure of the U.S. Congress to ratify the free trade agreement that was agreed to by the two countries a year ago.  Failure to do so has played into the left’s hands as proof the United States does not stand by its friends.

 

It is also important to keep in mind that Peru might follow in Colombia’s footsteps since Ollanta Humala is already campaigning for the 2011 Presidential elections, is being funded by Hugo Chavez and is a strong believer in his Bolivarian Revolution.  

What does all this mean, potentially?  Unless current trends are reversed, the western hemisphere’s ongoing struggle to establish strong, viable democracies could well lose one of its greatest current success stories, Colombia and possibly Peru. In short, friends of a democratic Colombia – at home and abroad — must do everything possible to strengthen the country’s institutions and support proven patriotic leaders.

John R. Thomson is a Journalist, businessman and former diplomat comments frequently on developments in the developing world. 

 

Fujimori: The other side of the story

The latest news about former Peruvian President, Alberto Fujimori is that he has been extradited from Chile to face seven charges in Perú. The charges range from claims of having committed crimes against humanity to corruption. The Peruvian mainstream media as well as several leftist NGO’s and many self-proclaimed "intellectuals," have gone to great lengths to portray him as a corrupt criminal, a traitor, a fugitive and a murderer. But this is not what all Peruvians think of him. There is another side of Fujimori that his enemies don’t want you to know.

Peru is now a safe country, with a growing economy and on the verge of signing a beneficial Free Trade Agreement with the United States. This is the context today but seventeen years ago before Alberto Fujimori became President, in 1990, Perú was completely different. The current President, Alan García’s first term in office between 1985 and 1990 was marked by bouts of hyperinflation which reached 7,649% in 1990 and had a cumulative total of 2,200,200%, thereby profoundly destabilizing the Peruvian economy.

Owing to such chronic inflation, the Peruvian currency, the sol, was replaced by the Inti in mid-1985, which itself was replaced by the nuevo sol ("new sun"), at which time the new sol had a cumulative value of one billion (1,000,000,000) old soles. By the end of his term in 1990, national reserves were a negative $900 million dollars. García also made an attempt to nationalize the banking and insurance industries. He incurred the wrath of the International Monetary Fund and the financial community by unilaterally declaring a limit on debt repayment equal to 10% of the Gross National Product, isolating Peru from international financial markets. [1]

Peru was also in the midst of an awful civil war against two terrorist groups known as the Sendero Luminoso or "Shining Path" and Movimiento Revolucionario Tupac Amaru (MRTA). These groups controlled about a third of the country and were responsible for the death of thousands of innocent civilians.  In addition, hundreds of brave army and police personnel who fought these terror groups were killed or badly hurt while thousands of children lost their parents, many of whom witnessed their executions.  Many local government officials in the Sierra had to endure "public trials" and some of these individuals were killed in front of their communities with no chance to defend themselves. These acts were meant to scare the population so they wouldn’t cooperate with the government or dare to vote in any election.

The SL and MRTA began attacking electric towers, causing almost daily blackouts all over the country. The García administration unsuccessfully sought a military solution to the growing problem, allegedly committing human rights violations which are still under investigation. These include the Accomarca massacre, where 47 campesinos were gunned to death by the Peruvian armed forces in August of 1985, the Cayara massacre (May 1988) in which some thirty were killed and dozens disappeared, and the summary execution of more than 200 inmates during prison riots in Lurigancho, San Juan Bautista (El Frontón) and Santa Bárbara in 1986. According to an official inquiry, an estimated 1,600 forced disappearances took place during García’s presidency. His own personal involvement in these events is not clear. [2]

The MRTA used kidnapping and extortion as well as drug trafficking to finance their activities. In addition, the country was being ravaged by corruption, by drug problems, and by terrorist warfare.  Most universities were inaccessible since they were dominated by these violent groups. [3]

In general, everyday life was harsh. There were food, water and electricity shortages, car bombs exploded almost every day, killing and severely injuring thousands of people as well as members of the military and police. Soon, the attacks were also felt in the capital city of Lima and people lived in constant fear. There were limits on the amount of food each family could buy, and supermarkets were meagerly stocked as prices changed by the hour.

So when Fujimori become president in 1990 Perú was facing catastrophe. His appealing election slogan, "Honesty, work and technology" represented a departure from the failures of the traditional ruling parties. To tackle the economic problems, "El Chino," (Fujimori’s nickname "the Chinese" although he is from Japanese descent), decided to adopt a program of shock treatment similar to that advocated by defeated Vargas Llosa. Fujimori made his priorities clear: on the one hand there was an urgent need to boost the economy and on the other to eliminate terrorism. Within a year, he brought down inflation from a peak annual rate of 7,650% to 139%.   Near the end of his tenure as president in 1999, the annual rate of inflation had fallen to 3.7%. [4]   He worked non – stop, traveling all over the country, to the most remote areas to see first hand, the needs of the people.

The problem was that his political group "Cambio 90" lacked a majority in Congress. His victory that took place in the second round of elections meant that Fujimori’s group was the third party with the most members in Congress. [5] It was very difficult to implement his policies since Congress blocked all his proposals to combat terrorism and improve the economy and there was constant fighting in the legislature.   His opponents stalled all his initiatives to force him from power.

On the fifth of April, 1992, a frustrated Fujimori decided to close the Congress. Many called this action "autogolpe" or self-coup. This decision was attacked by traditional politicians and by the international community, which accused him of being antidemocratic. Surprisingly for many of his critics, he won local support and said that he would rule Peru in accordance with national interests and not to make himself more popular. According to polls, nearly 80% of the population approved of his decision. [6]

He also decided to suspend the Constitution, declaring that he needed a freer hand to introduce more economic reforms, combat terrorism and drug trafficking and root out corruption. He also purged the judiciary, dismissing 13 of 23 Supreme Court justices and dozens of other justices with alleged ties to extremist groups. Soon, he called elections for a Democratic Constitutional Congress that would serve as a legislature and a Constituent Assembly. Some parties attempted to boycott this initiative, but the Popular Christian Party and many left-leaning parties participated in the election. Fujimori won a majority and drafted a New Constitution in 1993. A referendum was scheduled, and the document was approved by a majority of the population. [7]

After the self-coup the Congress was changed from two legislative bodies to one and the army was restructured to operate directly under the president’s control. The "National Council of Defense" was established to unify the "National Service of Intelligence" (SIN) and the "Secretariat of National Defense." Fujimori appointed important military servicemen to head these institutions. Then he promoted many high-ranking military officers to participate in the government and integrated the National Police, the Armed Forces and the SIN transforming the defense apparatus into a strong ally. [8]

On the war front, the MRTA and the Shining Path were being confronted both militarily and legally. The new Constitution allowed strong measures to combat these subversive forces. These actions alienated the leftist parties, politicians and organizations which, for years, had advocated for negotiations between the government and the terrorists and had denounced any kind of military intervention. With these measures the government was able to break the drug-terrorism alliance by offering the barons protection so they would stop providing the terrorists with resources. In the end the terrorist groups were left without economic support.

Suddenly the left parties, organizations and associations disappeared from the political scene but they would never forgive Fujimori for this and continuously accused him of having committed crimes against humanity in the war against terrorism. Of course they never defended the true victims; the innocent; their only concern was the terrorists. The government established the "rondas campesinas" (peasant rounds) a program that provided the campesinos in the interior with the means to combat terrorism and defend themselves and their families.

Significant developments soon took place. Major Benedicto Jimenez, an officer in DINCOTE (The National Office Against Terrorism) who was disgusted with the civil war, had proposed to capture the leaders of the Shining Path by patient detective work and set up a small unit with that objective. On September 12th, DINCOTE led a raid on a house in an upscale neighborhood in Lima and arrested Abimael Guzmán, the Maoist leader of the Shining Path. [9] That was the turning point in the war against terrorism that is estimated to have cost 30,000 lives.

Prior to the 1995 elections Fujimori’s opponents attempted to undercut his popularity by challenging his human rights record. Despite those challenges, Fujimori’s accomplishments overwhelmed his critics at the polls, where he won the presidential elections outright, gaining more than 60% of the votes.

But then on December 17th 1996, in the residence of the Japanese ambassador, a party in honor of the Emperor’s birthday was in full swing when Tupac Amaru terrorists seized the building and took 452 guests hostage, including Fujimori’s brother, the foreign minister, the agriculture minister, high ranking army officials, the Japanese ambassador, and prominent Japanese businessmen. The terrorists demanded the release of several hundred MRTA members who were held in Peruvian prisons. Over the next four months negotiations took place and some hostages were let go but 72 were still being held enduring inhumane treatment and living under terrible conditions. Then on April 22nd 1997, all but one who suffered a heart attack, were freed in a dramatic raid by Peruvian commandos. All of the 14 MRTA members and two brave soldiers died in the assault. [10] The successful freeing of the hostages boosted Fujimori’s popularity to new heights.

 

 

On the economic front, the reinsertion of Peru into the international financial community was achieved due, in large part, to the process of privatization. The inflation rates were reduced to less than 10% and Perú was made eligible again for external loans and became an important emerging market country due to successful economic policies. On the Social Front, Fujimori constructed thousands of miles of roads, and also built schools, rural hospitals and implemented measures to alleviate poverty by bringing running water and electricity to poor communities. In addition, Peru finally achieved peace with its neighbors Ecuador and Chile. Fujimori and Ecuadorian, Jamil Mahuad, signed the "Acta de Brasilia" which ended the conflict between Lima and Quito.

Signs of Trouble

The Constitution of 1993 states that a president can be re-elected for an immediate consecutive term. Fujimori had been president since 1990 and according to many he could not run for the 2000 elections. But some close advisors decided to interpret the constitution differently which was a decision many analysts believed to be a huge mistake. Under the new Constitution, Fujimori had only been elected once since the election of 1990. His supporters approved the "Ley de Interpretación Auténtica" in August of 1996. The relationship between the government and the opposition became very strained. Critics decided to publicly act voicing their discomfort. In this process the "Tribunal Constitucional" decided to vote against the "Authentic Interpretation" and widespread opposition began to emerge. This began to undermine Fujimori’s legitimacy. After the judges of the Tribunal were dismissed, the opposition campaigned for a referendum to be conducted to decide on the interpretation of the law. The dismissed judges became the new point of convergence of the opposition forces. They began a number of protest rallies against the government. [11]

Nonetheless, Fujimori did run for President in the elections of 2000. These elections were highly criticized by international observers such as Transparency International. The Organization of American States (OAS) sent representatives to monitor the process and called for the delay of the elections arguing that the computer system that had to count the votes did not work well. A drill was performed to demonstrate otherwise and the system proved accurate. But a dark cloud began to emerge regarding the elections.

On Election Day (April 9th, 2000) some polls informed the public that Alejandro Toledo, Fujimori’s rival, had the upper hand, but Transparency International had the real figures and knew that Fujimori was the real winner. Curiously, they never informed the public thus creating an atmosphere of doubt. Opposition leaders denounced the elections as a fraud. Soon they organized the "Marcha de los Cuatro Suyos" which created a tense situation. Thousands of people arriving from all over the country participated (their transportation costs were covered by unknown people or groups) and many violent incidents occurred. The leftist groups saw this as an opportunity to act and joined forces with opposition groups, reappearing on the political scene.

There can be no understanding of the Fujimori regime without making reference to Vladimiro Lenin Ilich Montesinos Torres. Montesinos was a lawyer who had served in the military for many years. He was an obscure but efficient figure who handled the powerful National Intelligence Service since 1990. He was Fujimori’s right hand. Vladimiro was very servile when he was in the presence of Fujimori but had actually been successful in defeating terrorism and destroying the drug-trafficking machinery. But secretly, he built a huge network of personal relations that penetrated every aspect of political, economic, social and military life. He also secretly gained control over the media.

The darkest side of him was revealed in the year 2000 when it became public that he videotaped all his meetings and then used these tapes to blackmail people. In most of this so called "Vladivideos," he appeared giving huge amounts of cash to people from every sector of Peruvian society. After the uproar that ensued following the first video broadcast, Fujimori announced that he would hold new presidential and parliamentary elections in which he, himself, would not be a candidate. At the same time, he announced the dissolution of SIN, el Servicio de Inteligencia Nacional (the National Intelligence Service), of which Montesinos was chief. It is not clear who leaked the first tape to the media. Some speculate that a lover of the former chief of SIN (Matilde Pinchi Pinchi) became jealous and stole the tape wanting revenge. It is said that Montesinos had amassed a fortune of $800 million dollars thought to have been taken illegally from the Peruvian government’s coffers. But no one can say for sure where the money came from.

Montesinos had decided that if Fujimori ousted him, he would stage a military coup. Anticipating Vladimiro’s actions, the president decided to grant Montesinos immunity, giving him political asylum in Panama. The Organization of American States intervened to achieve this outcome since the atmosphere in Peru was extremely tense and Montesinos’ presence contributed to this situation. Montesinos fled to Panama but felt unsafe and contrary to what was decided with Fujimori and the OAS, he returned to Lima and went into hiding.

This scandal had already changed the distribution of political forces and the opposition tried to censure the Board of Directors of Congress (all members of Cambio 90, Fujimori’s party). If they achieved this censure, Fujimori could be overthrown. The President ordered the arrest of the former SIN chief and he was finally captured. When he saw his power slipping away, Vladimiro lost control. His illegal associations were so strong that with one order, Fujimori could be sent to jail or killed. Fujimori was advised that he had no option but to flee the country. On November 17th the President arrived in Japan after attending a summit of Asia-Pacific leaders in Brunei. Three days later he faxed his resignation to Congress which was rejected outright. They instead voted to sack Fujimori on the grounds that he was "morally unfit" to govern. The Board of Directors was finally censured and Valentin Paniagua became President of the transitional process until new elections could be called.

Accusations against Fujimori

The accusations against Fujimori include the 1993 slayings of nine students and a professor at La Cantuta University, which was controlled by terrorist groups, and the 1991 killings of 15 people at Barrios Altos, a working-class neighborhood of Lima. Let’s keep in mind that Peru was in a civil war and the armed forces were under extreme pressure and sadly, in every war, mistakes are made. The corruption charges involve alleged payoffs to lawmakers and to news media, illegal phone tapping and misuse of $15 million in government funds. It is important to point out that on July 17, 2007 the Chilean Supreme Court Judge, Orlando Álvarez, ruled that he had not found any evidence linking Fujimori with all the corruption cases and alleged human rights violations of which he was accused. Judge Álvarez declared to the Chilean newspaper, El Mercurio, that all the accusations were based on gossip and innuendo. The ruling was appealed to the Chilean Supreme Court. [12]

On September 21, 2007, the Chilean Supreme Court granted Fujimori’s extradition to Peru on 7 of 13 charges which passed by 3 votes in favor and 2 votes against. Fujimori and other prominent lawyers claim that the charges are politically motivated. The former President says that while his government made mistakes, his conscience is clear: The extradition "does not mean that I’ve been tried, much less convicted. … I hope that in Peru, there exists the due process to clarify the accusations against me," he told the Chilean newspaper El Mercurio. While acknowledging "gross failures," he told Peru’s RPP radio: "In the trials themselves, I will show that I acted in a correct manner." [13] Let’s bear in mind that every person is innocent until proven guilty.

Why the Fujimori regime ended

The accusations of corruption and authoritarianism contributed to create a strong opposition, but the determining factor was the feud with Montesinos and the uncertainty Fujimori felt about his future. Vladimiro could not function without Fujimori and when he saw his fate sealed he was determined to take Fujimori down with him. This ended Fujimori’s presidency after almost eleven years. But he still has huge support in Peru especially amongst the poor since many have not forgotten and remain grateful for what he did. In the latest poll (carried out in October, 2007), 54.6% of the population say they approve of his government and 35.7% say they sympathize with him. His daughter, Keiko, who is a member of Congress, has an approval rating of 41.8%. [14] These numbers are likely to grow since Fujimori just arrived in Peru a few days ago and is in jail and has not made a public appearance yet.

There are many lessons to be learned. If Fujimori had listened to all the accusations regarding Montesinos, he probably would have asked for his resignation in order to separate him from his government. If he hadn’t pushed to run again in 2000, he probably would not have encountered such strong opposition and would be viewed more favorably today.  But he made mistakes, as all humans do, which contributed to the end of his regime. Maybe Fujimori’s political career has not been sealed yet and we will stay tuned to see what happens in his trial.

Part II

 

 

To the surprise of his critics, in the latest poll (carried out in October, 2007), 54.6% of the population indicated their approval of his government and 35.7% said they sympathized with him. His daughter, Keiko, who is a member of Congress, has an approval rating of 41.8%.1 These numbers are likely to grow since Fujimori recently arrived in Peru and is in jail and has not made a public appearance yet. His many supporters still regard him as the man who rescued Peru from the verge of economic and political collapse.

He had inherited hyperinflation from the previous administration of Alan Garcia (1985-90), and had managed to stabilize this situation with help from multi-national banks. He then presided over a period of economic recovery, during which real living standards rose rapidly from the abysmal levels they had reached in 1990. Fujimori was successful too in dealing with the other scourge he had inherited from the Belaúnde (1980-1985) and Garcia (1985-1990) regimes: terrorism.

Many "human rights" organizations, his critics and enemies and the left are delighted with their "success" in bringing Fujimori back to Perú. They worked on the case for seven years and finally their efforts seem to have paid off. But they seem unaware of what Fujimori’s presence in the country might trigger.

Implications of Fujimori’s presence in Peru for the future of the Garcia regime

The first problem for the Garcia regime is that his victory in the 2006 elections was very slim and his party (APRA) lacks a majority in Congress. To pass legislation and to avoid censure of Ministers, the President’s party has relied on the support of Unidad Nacional (UN) and Alianza para el Futuro (AF), Fujimori’s political party. The problem for Alan Garcia is that just a few days after Fujimori arrived in Peru, his daughter, Keiko Sofia Fujimori, publicly claimed that her father was enduring harsh treatment in jail, even worse than the terrorist leader, Abimael Guzman. She firmly stated that her father is not allowed to walk like other inmates and that since he suffers from high blood pressure; he is not in good health and has not been allowed to take his medicines. Furthermore, Mrs. Fujimori has said that the government is responsible for all this. As expected, the former President’s followers are outraged by the news and AF Congress members have already said that they will no longer collaborate with the government.

Secondly, since APRA can no longer depend on the continued support of AF, it will have to look elsewhere for support. But the options are very limited. They may try to win over supporters of Ollanta Humala, the leftwing populist whom Garcia only narrowly defeated in the second round of presidential elections in 2006, (the Humalistas form the largest bloc in Peru’s congress), but since Chavez’s buddy is already campaigning for the 2011 elections, the Garcia regime will find it difficult to secure their cooperation. If APRA doesn’t get more people to cooperate with them in Congress, Garcia will have a hard time passing legislation and governing effectively.

Third, Fujimori is going to be tried for corruption. Garcia’s first time in office (1985 – 1990) has been widely credited as being one of the most corrupt in recent Peruvian history. Garcia narrowly managed to avoid being charged when there was congressional hearings into corruption just prior to his 1992 self – coup. Garcia fled to France and lived between Paris and Bogota and was never tried. Any hearings into corruption under Fujimori might lead to revived accusations over Garcia’s own responsibilities during his time in office. Fourth, regarding "Human Rights" accusations, the findings of Peru’s Comisión de la Verdad y Reconciliación (Truth and Reconciliation Commission or CVR), lead by prominent leftist intellectuals and published in 2003, concluded that the death-toll during the five years of Garcia’s administration was considerably higher than that during Fujimori’s time in office. Garcia’s critics have accused him of involvement in several notorious killings, including the massacres that took place in the Andean villages of Accomarca (1985) and Cayara (1988). They have also held him responsible for the mass-killings of inmates in three Lima jails in 1986. During Fujimori’s trial, these cases are likely to be brought up by Fujimori’s defense. Garcia has skeletons in his own closet regarding corruption and the revival of these cases might trigger a backlash for his regime. Fifth, Fujimori’s presence in Peru will definitely divide opinions and cause a major distraction for the current regime. The justice system will be put to a test and as the trial goes on, many will start to remember the former President’s achievements and his popularity is likely to increase. In fact, his defense might have important information under their sleeve which could have huge repercussions for the current regime. But we will have to wait for the trial to start, to see how things develop.

Implications for Ollanta Humala

It is well known that Mr. Humala’s staunchest ally and most important financier is Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez. In fact, he is already campaigning for the 2011 elections with money sent directly from Caracas. Humala was defeated by a miniscule margin in the 2006 elections so he has a huge support base. In fact, many followers of Fujimori voted for Humala since they saw in him something the former President had: charisma and the idea that he would take care of the poor as Fujimori did during his presidency.

The only person capable of defeating Humala in 2011 is Fujimori. But some people, sadly, don’t seem to recognize this. If Fujimori’s trial drags on for years and he is not able to run in the next presidential elections, Chavez will have one more friend in the region to expand his "Bolivarian Revolution." Fujimori’s capacity to attract followers is impressive. In addition, he has concrete evidence that he can do what no other President ever did by reminding people of his accomplishments. They are hard to miss: he implemented measures to achieve economic prosperity, to reinsert Peru into the international community; he defeated terrorism and achieved peace with Ecuador. In addition he built schools and hospitals in remote areas, provided poor communities with water, and electricity, and constructed thousands of miles of roads. All these accomplishments attracted foreign investment and now Peru is a more prosperous country.

Already, there is speculation that Fujimori’s daughter, Keiko, might be able to run instead of her father. This is a possibility since she won 500,000 votes in the 2006 congressional elections which was far more than any other candidate.

Soon the trial will begin and it could be the perfect platform for the Peruvian people to have their say regarding Fujimori. There are many people inside Peru who would like to believe that Fujimori has returned to the political scene and that he will be able to run in 2011. But only time will tell how these events will shape Peru’s future.

Notes:

  1. Kimura, Rei. Alberto Fujimori of Peru: The President who dared to dream.
  2. Ibid.
  3. Ibid.
  5. Aspen, Rino. Fujimori: Milagro Peruano, Tigre Pacificador.
  6. Bowen, Sally. Expediente Fujimori.
  7. Bowen – Ibid.
  8. Aspen, Rino. Fujimori: Milagro Peruano, Tigre Pacificador.
  9. Bowen – Ibid.
  10. Rino – Ibid.
  11. Bowen – Ibid.
  12. Chile Judge Rules against Extraditing Fujimori. The Santiago Times. July 18, 2007.
  13. Peru’s ex-president sent home to face charges.  September 22, 2007. USA Today.
  14. Grupo de opinión pública de la Universidad de Lima.