The Devil's Excrement

This afternoon the Venezuelan Foreign Ministry issued a communiqué rejecting terrorism, but also rejecting what Colombia had done in Granda’s case and saying there were mechanisms for handling these cases.

Well, the Colombian Government has just responded reiterating that they pay ransom to capture terrorists, but does not blackmail as the Venezuelan Government has suggested.

Colombian also says that one can not fall into the cynical trap of presenting as a kidnapping, the capture of kidnappers.

But here is the interesting part translated verbatim:

“4. Colombia will hand over proof to the Government of Venezuela about the protection by Government officials of that country of Mr. Granda. The harboring of terrorists violates the sovereignty of Colombia, the offended country, because it increases the risk of terror on its citizens.

5. Colombia will not accept that representatives of terrorist group be admitted to a political event sponsored by official Venezuelan institutions. One thing is political opposition and a very different one terrorism.

6. With surprise we read in the communiqué of the Venezuelan Foreign Ministry that in the Granda case they want to involve four Colombian policemen. Venezuelan authorities opportunely found out that it was a different anti drug trafficking operation. They were investigated and freed.

7. Colombia has gone to the official and diplomatic channels. What we are asking for is that those channels operate and be effective. Once again, we will hand over to that Government information about the presence of Colombian terrorists in Venezuelan territory. We will include the names of seven leaders of terrorism and the locations of several terrorist camps in Venezuela. “

Note that it says that Colombia has done it already and will, once again, hand over the information.

This is getting interesting…and the accusations are very serious.

This afternoon the Venezuelan Foreign Ministry issued a communiqué rejecting terrorism, but also rejecting what Colombia had done in Granda’s case and saying there were mechanisms for handling these cases.

Well, the Colombian Government has just responded reiterating that they pay ransom to capture terrorists, but does not blackmail as the Venezuelan Government has suggested.

Colombian also says that one can not fall into the cynical trap of presenting as a kidnapping, the capture of kidnappers.

But here is the interesting part translated verbatim:

“4. Colombia will hand over proof to the Government of Venezuela about the protection by Government officials of that country of Mr. Granda. The harboring of terrorists violates the sovereignty of Colombia, the offended country, because it increases the risk of terror on its citizens.

5. Colombia will not accept that representatives of terrorist group be admitted to a political event sponsored by official Venezuelan institutions. One thing is political opposition and a very different one terrorism.

6. With surprise we read in the communiqué of the Venezuelan Foreign Ministry that in the Granda case they want to involve four Colombian policemen. Venezuelan authorities opportunely found out that it was a different anti drug trafficking operation. They were investigated and freed.

7. Colombia has gone to the official and diplomatic channels. What we are asking for is that those channels operate and be effective. Once again, we will hand over to that Government information about the presence of Colombian terrorists in Venezuelan territory. We will include the names of seven leaders of terrorism and the locations of several terrorist camps in Venezuela. “

Note that it says that Colombia has done it already and will, once again, hand over the information.

This is getting interesting…and the accusations are very serious.

When Hugo Chavez was running for President, he emphasized that he did not believe in representative democracy, but in participatory democracy. So much so, that Chavez refused to sign the declaration after the Quebec Summit, because it used representative rather than participatory.

I had to wonder what happened to that when the Venezuelan National assembly named this week a committee to choose a replacement for Central Bank Director Manuel Lago. Despite the fact that the National assembly is split almost 50/50 between pro-Chavez and anti-Chavez Deputies (there is a difference of only three Deputies out of 160), there is not a single representative of the opposition. It is two Ministers of the Cabinet, two pro-Chavez Deputies and a pro-Chavez member of the Academy of Sciences. Thus, the opposition will have absolutely no input into the decision. The decision was protested today by Proyecto Venezuela.

The Venezuelan Central Bank is the only important institution that is not totally controlled by the Government, but it looks like it will lose its independence soon as this Director and its President are replaced unilaterally.

Of course, Chavez left his beloved participatory democracy aside a long time ago. Committees that are supposed to have representation from non-Government organizations function without it, all Chavista candidates for Governor and Mayor were picked by Chavez himself and the opposition did not know the new Supreme Court Justices until their names came up for the vote in the Assembly. Oh shucks! Another broken promise.

Transcript of the interview with the President of the Land Institute (INTI) Eliezer Otaiza in El Nacional.

-It would seem to us that the decrees by the Governor of Cojedes took you by surprise?

I knew in particular that he was going to issue them.

-Do you disagree with the Governor’s decision?

I do not have disagreements with the Governor, he has his responsibility and I have mine. Since Nov. 10^th. When the President gathered us and gave us that objective at Tiuna Fort, he told the Governors to make war on large farm states. The Governor of Cojedes did what agreed with his vision because of the problems that the large farm states have in his state.

-In Cojedes they used the word intervention, but that term is not present in the Yaracuy or Carabobo decrees.

The central problem is precisely the word intervention, which was eliminated by decision of the Venezuelan Supreme Court in the Land Bill and that is why it generates publicity. But when you see the procedures, you can see that INTI ahs not delegated its competence and its actions follow the law. Let me tell you that Cojedes was the first state we evaluated and we had to make a change in coordinator because all cases were paralyzed ever since Adam Chavez was President.

-So, prior Presidents of INTI were also responsible for the slow fight against large farm states?

No, because you have to remember the political circumstances…

-If the problem was one Government official, why didn’t the Governor wait for the INTI to act?

I don’t see the conflict of competence. I don’t think we can carry out the fight against large land states if the Governors do not participate, but to me the problem is not the decree, that may have some problems at the level of detail from the legal point of view, but I don’t care about the legal point of view, because in the end, INTI carries out the procedure.

-In the case of Hato El Charcote, some groups hope that you will guarantee their right of permanence.

Everything is ready and we have taken measures in the Board of INTI with respect to this one specifically.

-What are they?

I can’t tell you. They are part of a strategy, because that’s where politics is involved.

-Does INTI guarantee those rights even before the ownership of the law is defined?

Yes, it is not a binding decision. What happens in El Charcote? Many of the people that live there or in others are people that have lived and worked there for 20, 30 or 40 years. What did they do? Take care of it; produce a crop in one or two hectares, but their role was to take care of unproductive lands. Thus, we can not call them squatters, because there existed a work relationship with the purported owner of the land. ..Now, the squatter, the person that enters by force, gets nothing, but these cases are not many.

-How many?

Few. Less than 1,000 have been denounced, we can fix those very quickly.

-There is also the case of Hato Pinero that plays a role in ecotourism. Can’t you recognize that there is productive work there?

That is a decision to be taken by the President. I must say that the only difference I may have with the Governors is that to them the decisions are going to be made by President Chávez and not the Governors.

My take: There you have it, there is no law, who cares about legalities, measures have already been decided before the legal procedure is followed and Chavez will decide everything. Nothing new here, this is what we have seen the last six years. He is the law.

Transcript of the interview with the President of the Land Institute (INTI) Eliezer Otaiza in El Nacional.

-It would seem to us that the decrees by the Governor of Cojedes took you by surprise?

I knew in particular that he was going to issue them.

-Do you disagree with the Governor’s decision?

I do not have disagreements with the Governor, he has his responsibility and I have mine. Since Nov. 10^th. When the President gathered us and gave us that objective at Tiuna Fort, he told the Governors to make war on large farm states. The Governor of Cojedes did what agreed with his vision because of the problems that the large farm states have in his state.

-In Cojedes they used the word intervention, but that term is not present in the Yaracuy or Carabobo decrees.

The central problem is precisely the word intervention, which was eliminated by decision of the Venezuelan Supreme Court in the Land Bill and that is why it generates publicity. But when you see the procedures, you can see that INTI ahs not delegated its competence and its actions follow the law. Let me tell you that Cojedes was the first state we evaluated and we had to make a change in coordinator because all cases were paralyzed ever since Adam Chavez was President.

-So, prior Presidents of INTI were also responsible for the slow fight against large farm states?

No, because you have to remember the political circumstances…

-If the problem was one Government official, why didn’t the Governor wait for the INTI to act?

I don’t see the conflict of competence. I don’t think we can carry out the fight against large land states if the Governors do not participate, but to me the problem is not the decree, that may have some problems at the level of detail from the legal point of view, but I don’t care about the legal point of view, because in the end, INTI carries out the procedure.

-In the case of Hato El Charcote, some groups hope that you will guarantee their right of permanence.

Everything is ready and we have taken measures in the Board of INTI with respect to this one specifically.

-What are they?

I can’t tell you. They are part of a strategy, because that’s where politics is involved.

-Does INTI guarantee those rights even before the ownership of the law is defined?

Yes, it is not a binding decision. What happens in El Charcote? Many of the people that live there or in others are people that have lived and worked there for 20, 30 or 40 years. What did they do? Take care of it; produce a crop in one or two hectares, but their role was to take care of unproductive lands. Thus, we can not call them squatters, because there existed a work relationship with the purported owner of the land. ..Now, the squatter, the person that enters by force, gets nothing, but these cases are not many.

-How many?

Few. Less than 1,000 have been denounced, we can fix those very quickly.

-There is also the case of Hato Pinero that plays a role in ecotourism. Can’t you recognize that there is productive work there?

That is a decision to be taken by the President. I must say that the only difference I may have with the Governors is that to them the decisions are going to be made by President Chávez and not the Governors.

My take: There you have it, there is no law, who cares about legalities, measures have already been decided before the legal procedure is followed and Chavez will decide everything. Nothing new here, this is what we have seen the last six years. He is the law.

Over the last two and a half years I have been writing this blog, without much concern about what I said or about whom. This is no longer the case. After recently receiving public, veiled and private warnings and threats, many of you may have noticed that my blog has become more newsy and and I have made it less opinionated or reduced the amount of color that I add to the news. This will be the case while I figure out where to go from here.

I have privately kicked around some ideas with friends and so far, the only one that has some appeal to me is to open my blog to posts from other people. I would moderate them, but people could write whatever they wanted and I would not identify them to protect them (and me!). The blog would be more of a collaboration and thus I could not be accused of saying anything in particular. The only thing I would ask people to do is to use lots of links to prove points and not throw facts up in the air without backing. What do you think? Please send comments privately or leave them below in the comments section.

Similarly, during the last two years and half I have never censored comments, even if some people felt at some point that I did. Ever since my successful newspaper “Se Dice” was censored in my high school when I was fifteen, I have believed in freedom of speech. (It was actually not censored, it was prohibited!). However, at times the comments section has been dominated by individuals in ways that I felt took away from my blog. A blog is a personal diary by definition. 

I love when people make comments, even if I disagree with what they say. But when someone makes two dozen posts in three hours that exceed my own posts in the last five days, it stops being my blog and becomes someone else’s. More so if the topic is not precisely that of this blog or the writer has his own blog. If someone wants to prove that Vladimir Putin is a crook, or there was no Holocaust or the FARC are peace loving angels, do it somewhere else, not here. Start a blog about it if you want, but junk should be somewhere else, not here.

President Uribe throws the gauntlet at Chavez inviting him and other Government officials from other countries to a public discussion “in the framework of a wider discussion about terrorism”. This, of course, places Chavez in a tough spot, the FARC are asking him where he stands and so is Uribe. My guess, he will not accept, as we say in Spanish you can’t be in good terms with God and with the Devil at the same time.

The whole FARC discussion is very tricky for Chavez. Thousands of the Colombians that were speedily nationalized last year to vote in the recall vote, support Chavez but are in Venezuela escaping from the guerrilla activities of the FARC and would not support any sort of accommodating policy with FARC in Chavez’ part. This are not just a few thousand Colombians, we are talking hundreds of thousands. 

While Colombian newspapers are reporting at least one border location which is now closed to Colombians, the Commander of the CORE 1, denies this is true.

Our own esteemed (Word used only to satisfy the new Penal Code) Vice-President, says this whole crisis has been caused by reactionary, anti-Venezuelan forces in Colombia. Well, if I recall correctly this whole “crisis” was started by the FARC itself in a communiqué in their website asking the Venezuelan Government to take a stand on the Granda case, which it did not do at the time.

Meanwhile, the US Ambassador to Colombia said that the US Government agreed with the FARC “for the first and the last time” in their call to ask President Chavze to define his position with respected to the guarantees the FARC have to visit Venezuela. The US Ambassador said that Uribe’s statement was “moderate, analytical, of transcended importance not only for Colombia but also for the anti-terrorist fight in the Andean zone.

I usually like to digest news before I write about them and the decision by the Venezuelan Government to suspend all “commercial” relations with our neighboring country is certainly an ongoing event that requires understanding and care, but I am sure people want to know what everyone thinks. So here are some thoughts about it even before the Colombian Government has responded to the decision (Will update post rather than create new ones at least for the next two days):

-First, it is strange to suspend commercial relations rather than diplomatic ones. Is Chavez planning to shut down the border? How do you stop commerce if you don’t do that?

-What can Chavez say, if it was bounty hunters, after all, Uribe announced a $2 million reward on Jan. 1^st. for anyone turning in a FARC representative.

–What about the accusation by the Colombian Attorney General of a connection between former Peruvian intelligence Chief Montesinos, also captured in Venezuela and Granda?

-Second, Uribe may be the wrong person to pick a fight with. He did not get to where he is by being a wimp, on the contrary. This leads to two possibilities: Either Chavez is underestimating him, which I doubt, or Chavez simply wants to pick a big fight with Colombia to distract attention to other problems such as:

·          Why was Granda living in Venezuela?

·          How did he get his Venezuelan nationality?

·          How did they take him all the way from Caracas to Colombia without anyone knowing? If the Colombians did it, how can they act with such impunity?

·          If Venezuelan military did it, whatever happened to the “unity” of the Bolivarian military?

·          Whatever happened to Chavez saying Uribe knows nothing about it?

·          Whatever happened to Chacon saying the Colombian Government knows nothing about it?

·          All the other problems.

Will Chavez blink first?

Will Uribe blink first?

What do you think? Will Uribe apoglogize? Is this going to escalate? Is that what Chavez wants? Stay tuned!

Friday Night: 8:55 PM Caracas time: Aja! Just as I expected, Colombian President Uribe says his Government acted follwoing the law and without violating Venezuela’s sovereignty. Now what will Chavez do, reiterate or fall back? My guess: He will push forward. By the way, you ahve to love how Uribe says that Granda is a well known terrorist who has massacred the Colombian people and that paying ransom is accepted worldwide in those cases.