Archive for the 'Venezuela' Category

Inflation soars in November, thanks to the Governments incompetence

December 4, 2007

Accumulated 12-month inflation reported each month by the Venezuelan Central Bank this year for the CPI and three of the most important components of the CPI.

The Government was supposed to have reported the CPI numbers last Saturday, but the supposedly “independent” Central Bank postponed it until Monday so as not to have an impact on the vote on Sunday. As if everyday Venezuelans did not feel inflation every time they go to the supermarkets.

The graph above presents 12 month inflation as reported by the Venezuelan Central Bank (sorry about the months in Spanish, it’s good practice for you if you are not fluent anyway).

First, let’s look at the CPI. Minister Cabezas has been saying all year that the CPI will be around 12%. He was brought in to fight inflation. Only two months ago he was claiming success. These numbers represent an absolute defeat to his beliefs that monetary expansion does not cause inflation and that his policies are a failure. He should be out, he should be fired, the graph above, together with the shortages played a very important role in Sunday’s defeat. Unfortunately, it is only going to get worse going forward.

In the graph I have place two arrows, one in March and another in June, when cuts in the value added tax (VAT) were implemented, a cut of 3% in March and another of 2% in June as a way of lowering inflation. Of course, these events did not change structural inflation, they just changed the monthly numbers reported, leaving everything the same. The CPI as you can see from the graph, began the year around 17% annualized and managed to stay below the 20% level thanks to these artificial cuts in the VAT…until this month…

You see, VAT collection is as important as oil in Venezuela in collecting funds for the Government to spend. When some genius came up with the idea of dressing inflation up by cutting the VAT, this person did not seem to realize that it was also significantly reducing the income the Government would have for the year. Then at some point in October another genius (or the same one?) realized this and came up with the perverse Financial Transaction Tax (ITF) to make up the difference in tax collection. Perverse, because when you collect a VAT, each producer/merchant/entity in the chain can subtract from the VAT, what it has paid along the way. That is,. if the tax is 1.5% on the final product or good, the final person can deduct from the tax paid the tax it paid to obtain, for example, the components to make the goods sold.

In contrast, the Financial Transaction Tax (ITF) imposed by Chavez on companies is cumulative, each company along the chain has to pay 1.5% every time it issues a check or makes a debit on a transaction. But this is not deductible at all. Thus, if the tax is 1.5% like in Venezuela, it adds 1.5% at each stage. This is highly inflationary, but the Tax Superintendent kept claiming it was not and it would not affect individual, who are exempt from the tax. But it certainly was inflationary, as the CPI jumped 4.4% for the month of November, reaching an accumulated value of 20.8% for the last twelve months. Thus, it may even be possible for the CPI to double the Minister’s target of 12%, since the CPI is very likely to be high again. (I should also criticize the economists who participate in Reuters’ poll on inflation, the Editor of Veneconomy had the high estimate of 4%, but the average was below 3%, which simply indicates Toby Bottome was the only one to do his homework right)

But if accumulated inflation of 20.9% for the last 12 months sounds bad, look at the value for Food and Beverages, the single most important component for poor people. Despite controls, that value has now reached 29.2% in the last twelve months and is certainly to be above 30% for the full year of 2007. This, despite (or because!) price controls in the most basic food products imposed by the Government.

But the graph actually does not look so bad, because I have included in
it the group Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, the “vice” group, which is
up a whopping 57% for the year, as the Government increased taxes and
removed alcoholic beverages from the CADIVI preferential dollar list. Finally, I also included health costs in the graph, which are up over 27% for the year.

And this graph shows not only why Chavez reform lost on Sunday, but also why his popularity will continue to go down in the upcoming months. These are more than numbers, this is what people feel when they go to the market every day to buy their food and supplies. Not only do the poor “feel” it more because they use more of their income for these items above, but they have more problems dealing with shortages. When I start having problems finding toilet paper in the stores, like last week, I simply buy lots of it when I find it. The poor can simply not afford such a luxury.

While the inflation numbers will not have again the “kick” of the ITF in November, structural inflation will only get worse, not better, and unless Chavez gets rid of his economic team and finds people who understand these problems, this trend will be extremely hard to reverse.

His future, like last Sunday, depends strongly on this.

The day after: Analyzing the results and the political future of Venezuela

December 3, 2007

A Chavez blow up doll lies on the victory platform that was never used in downtown Caracas

I
have a case of electoral hangover. It was tense last night, but the
tiredness can’t be justified by the short hours of sleep, it is more
associated with the tension and expectations of last night. I feel
tired, but there is also certain exhilaration with the victory. Thus,
it is time to take stock and look at the meaning of what happened
yesterday and what may mean to the future of Venezuela:

The Results:
It is my understanding that the No lead is wider than what was reported
by the CNE, between 4 to 5% points. Curiously, there have been no more
reports from the Electoral Board since the first one last night, once
again proving what a joke the best electoral system in the world has
become. A full 24 hours after the polls closed and we do not know
officially even what abstention was like, other than unofficial
numbers. Thus, it would seem premature to say anything about the
numbers in detail. When they are available I will do that.

However,
at first glance it would seem from the polls that the NO should have
won by more than what was reported if abstention was truly around
44-45%. I am hearing that this was in fact the case and that as part of
the agreement with the military and Chávez, the first report was
supposed to show a small difference, which will widen as the remainder
10% of the vote is counted.

Behind the Scenes:
Multiple reliable sources are saying that having Chávez accept the
results was no easy task. In fact, a good source told me that at some
point the CNE President almost announced a Si victory by a slim margin,
which was stopped only because General Baduel threatened to come on
stage and call the fraud if she did this. In the end the military and
Baduel prevailed in defending institutionality. Baduel and the military
reportedly played a key role in forcing Chavez to accept his defeat or
otherwise the military will call it a coup.

Chavez
in some sense acknowledge this last night, when he refereed to his
“dilemma” and the fact that he no longer had one. Chavez tacitly
admitted that he had known the results for three hours and that the
results created a dilemma for him and that even if he tried to refer to
the Electoral Board as an independent institution, in the end it was
his decision. He went as far as mentioning that he even had long
consultations with his Ministers and the Cabinet.

In
a country with true independent institutions, whether or when to
announce a result should have nothing to do with the Executive branch.
The Electoral Board may have the courtesy of informing the winners and
losers right before the announcement, but Chávez clearly proved why
there are no independent powers in Venezuela and why institutionality
is so weak: he fails to recognize where he should stop meddling and
interfering with independent branches of power. It was not his dilemma,
he was interfering with institutions.

It
also shows why our democracy is weak. If the military has to act at
each tough junction in our democratic life in order to restore
institutionality, it means that our politicians do not yet understand
what a functional democracy should be and act like.

This
lack of institutionality extends to the CNE which acted in a very
partisan way during the campaign and which last night did little to
restore complete trust in its functions by unnecessarily delaying the
release of the results and barring the way of the totalization room to
the witnesses of the No vote. This was totally undemocratic and in
violation of the law. Moreover, the long times to report suggest either
they are not doing their job or the automation system is useless. In a
country with true institutionality, everyone should be asking for their
resignation. They performed poorly and by doing so, continued raising
suspicions about their biased role in the process.

Chavez’ Speech:
Not gracious at all. First of all, he should not have extended himself
so much. He should have said he recognized the victory of the No and
not go into more details, least of all when after one hour he said that
he would keep it short. Those abroad should remember that while Chavez
was speaking, all TV and radio stations were forced to carry his
speech. The supporters of the NO, the winners in this race, were
egoistically denied watching their own side celebrate.

Chávez
also tried to turn the loss into a victory, which is valid, but
certainly not very believable for a man used to winning elections
handily. The voters said they did not like his proposal, the voters
rejected his socialism, the voters rejected his indefinite reelection,
but Chavez still said that he would not remove one comma from his
proposal and there will be other times for that fight. Thus, Chavez was
showing how he likes to impose his will without discussion, rather than
use the tools of democracy: negotiation, discussion and concession in
order to reach a consensus. He cannot accept an opinion different than
his; he cannot admit different ways of accomplishing things. Despite
the evidence of the No victory, he plans to continue to push his
project intact, which may be his demise.

It
was good of Chávez to accept his defeat. I confess I never believed he
would. In fact, I still think he may surprise us in the days ahead.
Recall how the days after the April 2002 events Chavez was contrite
after coming back. He apologized to everyone, he spoke of a consensus,
he asked for forgiveness, only to come back with vengeance to stop any
investigation of what happened those days, to destroy PDVSA and its
workers and return back to his Cabinet the same political operators
that were with him during the days leading up to the tragedy of April
2002.

Thus,
as Baduel suggested last night, Chávez is likely to push the whole
agenda of Constitutional reform using other means. In fact, as was
discussed numerous times, most of the things in the Constitutional
reform proposal did not need to be there. Many were somewhat irrelevant
except to have Chavez have more control of the institutions, but
economically and socially he still has an Enabling Bill to pass many of
the proposals rejected by the voters via decrees, which require no
approval or even being known by the people.

Clearly,
Chavez did not see last night’s votes as a rejection of what he
proposes but a temporary setback for his plans. That is bad news, as he
will certainly will try to press it forward again in the future.

Why the No won:
There were numerous factors. First, the proposal was not only clearly
illegal but became more and more complex and questionable as time went
on. Voters had rejected the indefinite reelection from day one, but
other parts of their proposal were attractive to some sectors because
of their populist content. However, the administration always seemed to
be in a rush and as more components were added, the sense that Chavez
and the Assembly wanted to push it through without discussion became
dominant. To many, the proposal was long, complex, and unnecessary and
in the end raised more doubts than it created answers.

The
students played a key role in the process. The student movement got
involved at levels orders of magnitude above what they had done in the
last nine years on concerns over the future of their autonomous
universities and the cancellation of the concession for RCTV. The
students were well organized, had a wide reach and had a message of
conciliation, which was truly important. Even more importantly, they
have families and Chavez did nothing but insult their kids.

The
state of the economy also played a key role. There have been shortages
since June, which have only accentuated in the last few months. Despite
claims by the Government that milk supplies will be normalized shortly,
to this date it has simply not happened. Add to that the periodic
disappearance of various items; some of them permanently, other
sporadically and there is a widespread belief that something is not
right with the Government.

Inflation
has also played an important role. While Government ministers continued
to say the new financial transaction tax would have no effect on
inflation, the CPI reached a whopping 4.4% level for the month prior to
the election, with food inflation topping 7% for the month of November alone
!
Chavez should fire the genius that came up with the idea of this tax
immediately before the referendum. So should be those in the economic team that have managed
to screw things up so badly.

In the end Chávez has two problems in terms of managing the economy: Management and Ideology. Management
because his team is always picked on the basis of absolute loyalty to
the revolution and not ability or even knowledge. Ideology, because his
infinite belief in an incompetent and corrupt public sector, combined
with scaring away investment while trying to increase the supply of
goods are simply incompatible. Thus, the Government continues direct
assistance programs, which create demand, but supply can only be
satisfied via imports. The day oil drops, even by a small margin, the
whole system will simply collapse.

The
opposition political parties played a significant role only in that
once they felt the tide created by the students, they fell in step with
them, letting them take the lead and joining them. In the end, only
Escarrá did not publicly call to go out and vote, about all other
political groups calling for people to go vote NO, creating more
momentum than expected for the No.

Podemos,
Baduel and Chavez’ former wife also played a significant role,
particularly in giving credibility and validity to voting against
Chavez even if you were Chavista. Baduel seems to have player a larger
role within the military, Podemos in driving out the vote and Mrs.
Rodriguez playing the role of victim In the end going forward, it is
Baduel who clearly seems to have the larger role. He played it right
and won.

The implications of the victory:
First of all it was a great victory, this can never be minimized, no
matter how rough things may be going forward. There are many edges to
the victory. First, it was a victory for institutionality even if it
was rocky at some points. This is the main victory achieved yesterday,
as the loss will impose a limit in what Chavez can and not do going
forward, even if he tries.

Second,
there is an important victory in knowing that it is possible to defeat
Chavez. That is very important, as up to now Chavez has had an image of
invincibility whether by honest vote or not, that has now been
destroyed with the victory of the NO. Chávez tried to turn the
referendum on the reform into plebiscite on his rule, he lost it. This
is very significant. With 44% abstention, 28% of the population voted
for the SI, 28% of the population voted for Chavez, that is precisely
the number of hardcore Chavismo in polls. 72% of Venezuelans did not
support Chavez or his reform.

The
implications of this are very significant. For the opposition, it will
mean that abstention and participation will be much more important in
the future. People will no longer say they are not participating
because Chavez will cheat or it is hopeless. This will become a
significant difference in the future (Even if there was cheating in the
end!)

For
Chavismo the victory of the NO is also very significant. To begin with,
it is no longer taboo to go against Chavez. You may go do it and if the
Government does not create a new Tascon/Chavez list, it may encourage
others in the future to go and vote against the President.

But
more importantly, to those that hold important positions within
Chavismo, there is also an important message implied: Chavez is not
there forever and if one day Chavismo has to leave Government they may
be called to account for themselves and their actions and decisions in
power (As well as their wealth!)

But
even more significantly, Chavez has been weakened by the loss. It is my
belief that in the upcoming days Chavez will continue to press his
agenda forward as he stated it yesterday. Some of his supporters at
high level will follow him, other will not. This may create a deep
division within Chavismo, as those that have their own personal
ambitions and understand that Chavez lost with his proposal, will
decide to split from his side and start their own movements. In the
end, the balance of how many are left on his side will decide how
strong he is in the end.

Chavez
could only gain strength by doing exactly what I don’t expect him to
do: Reach out to all Venezuelans to establish a common agenda. That is
not his style, as he has proven over and over and proved once again
last night saying that his proposal had not been approved “For now”,
trying to relive events and a phrase relevant in a different context,
which happened long ago and which, while relevant to him personally,
are not considered by most Venezuelans to be part of their history,
least of all to the students protesting in the streets who were still
young kids when Chavez staged his bloody coup in 1992.

To these students, it is the reality of what is happening today that matters and as Baduel said in his Op-Ed Saturday:

“Venezuelan
society faces a broad array of problems that have not been addressed in
the eight years Mr. Chávez has been in office, even though the present
Constitution offers ample room for any decent, honest government to do
so. Inflation, threats to personal safety, a scarcity of basic
supplies, a housing shortage and dismal education and health care are
problems that will not be resolved by approving this so-called reform.”

That
is reality also for the students and their families and not a now
irrelevant fight between Chavez and Carlos Andres Perez or Accion
Democrática.

Baduel
is calling for a Constituent Assembly in the belief that the results of
the referendum require a new National Assembly in which all parts are
represented. Others believe this is unnecessary and that Chavez can be
recalled under the 1999 Constitution in 2009. Chavez will likely try to
press his socialist agenda, very similar to the proposed reform, but
via the enabling Bill as he can’t introduce another Constitutional
reform. The latter will in the end determine how the future of
Venezuelan politics develops. Given the deterioration of the economy,
Chavez may be playing a losers game, as dissatisfaction by the voters
will only grow in the upcoming months and his popular support as well
as that of those that surround him, may vanish, leaving him almost
alone, holding a losing hand.

Democracy wins, Chavez reform proposal defeated on both questions

December 3, 2007

No wins both questions with 90%, there were two blocks of proposals, both defeated

Chavez’ block: NO 50.70% SI 49.29% Difference 1.21%

Assembly’s block NO 51.05% SI 48.94% Difference 2.06%

Democracy wins, autocracy loses

Chavez lost 3 million votes since last year

I am exhausted, good night and thanks…

No wins, Chavez speaks in defeat and this is all I can think of

December 3, 2007

(When I first posted this, I thought everyone would recognize it, but it turns out this assumption may be as outdated as Chavez’ “For now” among the young, so to them, here is the source: Revolution, by The Beatles)

You say you want a revolution
Well you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it’s evolution
Well you know
We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don’t you know you can count me out
Don’t you know it’s gonna be alright
Alright Alright

You say you got a real solution
Well you know
We’d all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well you know

We’re doing what we can
But when you want money for people with minds that hate
All I can tell you is brother you have to wait
Don’t you know it’s gonna be alright
Alright Alright

You say you’ll change the constitution
Well you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it’s the institution
Well you know
You better free your mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow
Don’t you know know it’s gonna be alright
Alright Alright

No vote defeats Chavez in Venezuelan Constitutional Referendum

December 3, 2007

At 1:12 PM, the Venezuelan Electoral Board, the CNE, just announced that the No won 50.7% to 49.29% , and Chavez’ proposed Constitutional reform has been defeated!!!

Have no words at this time…more when I get my composure back. This simply means too much…

Updates continue as absurd delays in place

December 2, 2007

10:56 PM Rosales on TV saying that last year he accepted defeat and he expects losers to admit defeat tonight.

11:08 PM The President of VTV Anselmi was just on the Government’s TV channel and the guy was absolutely drunk!

11:26 PM Globovision says 90% of data in CNE. What is going on!

12:00 PM It’s midnight, do you know where you money for the automated electoral system is? I don’t either, but is not even close like the NYT is reporting, what I hear is that its 5% for the NO

It is 12:30 PM, while Globovision is saying the CNE is being careful, I think it is being irresponsible, either trying to change teh results or see what Chavez says or does. This is what creates rumors and uncertainties. If the US$ 300 million system is this bad, they have to resign tomorrow. This whole delay can only be justified if the difference is less than 0.3% as 90% of the vote has been counted.

12:53 PM No witness says he is not being allowed to see the totals and this violates the laws and the agreements. He was told he was not allowed in because of the “violence”

1:00 As witnesses for the No vote fight with the military to have their rights respected, General Baduel comes on TV and says this delay is inexplicable and causes innecessary tenisons and he had warned the Electoral Board about this. Violent discussion between the military and the witnesses for the No who feel something may be up.

Useless automated voting system, 11 PM and no results

December 2, 2007

So, Venezuela spent close to US$ 300 million in a voting system that is supposed to be bullet proof, state of the art and transparent and almost six hours after the President of the Electoral Board ordered polls closed we still do not know what happened?

What a joke!

I really can’t feel good about these delays when the Vice-President, who was the same one who bought the system and found no conflict of interest by jumping from one position to the other and is now the spokesmen for Chavez Electoral campaign.

Something is going on and I don’t like it!

Race to the finish…updated as it arrives

December 2, 2007

5:20 PM Two friends at polling booths report in the East of Caracas lower abstention, higher anti-Chavez votes

5:31 PM Globovision report Chavista group detained in Zulia trying to vote twice

6:01 PM Globovision says it has been a strange session as Venezuelans like to vote early as abstention looked high but is comparable to last year’s

6:29 PM CNE says 50% of tallies are already in, with 90% in, they will announce results.

6:45 PM 2001 reports November inflation was up 4.4%, this number should have been released yesterday, but was not.

6:37 PM Government saying Yes won by 6-8%, Comando del No saying No won by 4%

8:03 PM Two sources saying abstention is around 44-45% (one is Italy’s La Repubblica). If this is true, then things have to be close.

8:09 PM From a good source, the Government withdrew its advertising from tomorrow’s paper celebrating the victory

8:32 PM Mood shifting towards No win

9:39 PM Both BBC Mundo and El Pais have shifted from Si wins, to “close”. I hear is not even close.

10:39 PM No results yet at this time, whatever happened to the best and most expensive voting system in the world?

Final parting thoughts before the referendum

December 1, 2007

Lots of people visiting the blog hoping to get some news, but
there is very little. Chavez had to take advantage of his position and ranted in front of the foreign press
his usual stuff, concentrating on CNN being worse than Hitler and going
back a little on his threat of nationalizing the Spanish banks by
saying that he would do so if the Partido Popular wins next year. In
the end he will do what he wants, whenever he wants, so the whole thing
is meaningless. Chavez continues to personalize Venezuela’s Foreign
Relations the same way his egotistical mind personalizes everything and
he refuses to see what a poor job he has done for the people in these
now very long years.
 
As for the outcome, it is
hard to predict what will happen. This year is indeed different, as the
polling firms do show results, which are not only different, but also
fairly consistent among themselves. Last year in the Rosales-Chavez
race, there were a few optimistic pollster, but Datanalisis and Seijas
were giving Chavez a huge lead all along. Just as a reminder,
Datanalisis gave Chavez a 53-26% lead two weeks before the election,
Consultores 21 gave Chavez a 58-41% and Hinteraces gave Chavez a 41-35%
lead, so that things are indeed different this time.
 
The
problem is what the role of abstention will be and while everyone is
focused on the abstention of the No’s and the Ni Ni’s (those that are
not pro- either side), I also believe that abstention among Chavistas
is going to play a role more significant that many are predicting.
Abstention in elections not involving Chavez himself has been high,
such as the referendum to approve Chavez’ new Constitution which had
67% abstention and Chávez was in the height of his popularity. Similar
levels of abstention in the 60% plus category were seen in the regional
elections of 2004. Thus, Chavistas have gone out en force only when
Chavez’ name has been directly involved as a candidate or in the recall
referendum vote of August 2004.
 
Two additional
factors play a role in the pro-Chavez abstention: One, Podemos is a
strong party in many states and this time around they will be driving
but the vote against Chavez. Two, many Governors and Mayors see the
reform as a threat to their own survival. Clearly this works against
Chavez.
 
But there is also large abstention
among Chavez’ opponents who believe that since it is rigged it is not
worth going to vote. Moreover, Venezuela’s have never been to truthful
about their vote intentions, so that even those that claim they are
“likely” to vote are probably not very likely to go. It is shame thing
here to say you are not going.
 
Another positive
notes is that both Datanalisis and Seijas have tended to overestimate
the Chavez vote and underestimate the opposition vote by some 4%
points, so that their recent results may be more positive than some
think.
 
So, to me it is a toss up and I do
believe there is fraud so that the No needs to obtain a large victory
to show a small one. At this time, unless lines are long and huge
tomorrow, my feeling is that the Si edges the No by a small margin, but
I am hopeful that people will go massively and vote and we can squeeze
by 2 or 3 points, fraud and all. In both cases, it will be a huge
defeat for Chavez as he will have a rather weak mandate for his
revolution as I discussed earlier this week. I truly do not believe Chavez can obtain a large victory tomorrow, the numbers clearly say that.
So, let’s
hope my worst moment this weekend was going out to lunch and finding
out I could not order any alcoholic beverages because of the election.
A pity, the food was marvelous as I hope are the results tomorrow.

I will be blogging mostly pictures during the day as I have the time. I do have to go and vote!

December 1, 2007

Today, General Raul Baduel, Chavez’ buddy and former Minister of Defense published an Op-Ed piece
in the New York Times, copied below, in which he goes far beyond the
criticism of the upcoming referendum and presents a strong and sharp
criticism of Chavez and his Government during the last nine years. The
piece in fact sounds like something written in any of the opposition
blogs and is a devastating criticism of Chavez’ revolution by one of
its founders and one of its loyal participants.

 
The
question is why does Baduel have to go today and publish an article in
English in such a newspaper the day before the Venezuelan referendum on
Constitutional Reform? To me the answer is simply the same as to why
Baduel decided to jump ship a month ago and completely distance himself
from Chavez.
 
First of all, while Baduel claims
to have been with Chavez through “thick and thin”, this is not
precisely the truth. At key moment Baduel played his cards just right
in order to survive and proved in two instances to have done precisely
that.
 
The first time, was in 1992 when
despite Baduel’s role as a founder of the Bolivarian movement he failed
to participate in the bloody coup in February 2002, which failed mainly
because Chávez did not achieve his military objective. Baduel was
supposed to participate in it and there has never been a clear
explanation of why.
 
The second time was during
the events of April 2002, when Baduel did not participate in the group
of military that asked Chavez to resign, did not show up at Fuerte
Tiuna once Chavez had left and waited until the Carmona Government
unraveled to single handedly bring Chavez back to the Presidency. This
act, in the end guaranteed that he would end his military career as a
three star General and Minister of Defense.
 
An
ambitious man, Baduel seems to once again be playing his cards right.
Early in November he saw the weakness in the proposal for
Constitutional reform with voters and within the military and saw his
opportunity to play a role if the No vote won. Baduel clearly
understands that Chávez will not recognize a No victory. Chavez is no
democrat and has never been, he has used democratic votes to his
personal advantage, no more no less. If the No vote wins, Baduel has
played his cards right to be a possible acceptable transition figure
should Chavez not recognize the vote and be forced to leave in the
upcoming days, weeks or months after Sunday’s referendum. He is an
acceptable figure to Chavismo, he has tried to present himself as an
alternative to the opposition and now he wants his position to be well
known internationally before the events of tomorrow may unravel as a
way.
 
I have no idea whether he is right or will
succeed, what I do know is that I don’t like the man. From being
military, to his strange beliefs in his past lives, to his silence
while he was Minister of Defense, to his ability to survive by walking
a very fine gray line, I certainly don’t want to see this man in any
position of power in my country. Ever.
 
But he really does…

Why I Parted Ways With Chávez

By RAÚL ISAÍAS BADUEL
Published: December 1, 2007
Caracas, Venezuela
ON
Dec. 17, 1982, three of my fellow officers in the Venezuelan Army and I
swore our allegiance to the Bolivarian Revolutionary Army 2000. We
considered ourselves to be at the birth of a movement that would turn a
critical eye on Venezuela’s troubled social and political system — and
formulate proposals to improve it. One of the officers with me was Hugo
Chávez, the current president of Venezuela, whom I have known since I
entered the military academy 35 years ago.
Hugo
Chávez and I worked together for many years. I supported him through
thick and thin, serving as his defense minister. But now, having
recently retired, I find myself with the moral and ethical obligation
as a citizen to express my opposition to the changes to the
Constitution that President Chávez and the National Assembly have
presented for approval by the voters tomorrow.
The
proposal, which would abolish presidential term limits and expand
presidential powers, is nothing less than an attempt to establish a
socialist state in Venezuela. As our Catholic bishops have already made
clear, a socialist state is contrary to the beliefs of Simón Bolívar,
the South American liberation hero, and it is also contrary to human
nature and the Christian view of society, because it grants the state
absolute control over the people it governs.
Venezuelan
society faces a broad array of problems that have not been addressed in
the eight years Mr. Chávez has been in office, even though the present
Constitution offers ample room for any decent, honest government to do
so. Inflation, threats to personal safety, a scarcity of basic
supplies, a housing shortage and dismal education and health care are
problems that will not be resolved by approving this so-called reform.
How
is it that we, the people of Venezuela, have reached such a bizarre
crossroads that we now ask ourselves if it is democratic to establish
the indefinite re-election of the president, to declare that we are a
socialist nation and to thwart civic participation?
The
answer is that all Venezuelans, from every social stratum, are
responsible for the institutional decay that we are witnessing. The
elite never understood — and still fail to understand — the need to
include, in every sense, the millions who have been kept at the margins
of the decision-making process because of their poverty. At the same
time, President Chávez led the poor to believe that they are finally
being included in a governmental model that will reduce poverty and
inequality. In reality, the very opposite is true.
In
recent years, the country’s traditional political parties have come to
see the Venezuelan people as clients who can be bought off.
During
the economic boom years, ushered in by a sustained increase in oil
prices, the parties dispensed favors, subsidies and alms. In the end,
they taught the people about rights rather than obligations, thus
establishing the myth that Venezuela is a rich country, and that the
sole duty of a good government is to distribute its wealth evenly.
President Chávez has been buying and selling against this idea,
continuing to practice the kind of neopopulism that will reach its
limit only when the country receives what economists call an “external
shock.”
Exorbitant
public expenditures, the recurrence of government deficits even at
times of record-high oil prices, the extreme vulnerability of foreign
investments, exceedingly high import tariffs, and our increased
domestic consumption of fuel at laughably low prices are all signs of
what lurks on the horizon. It now seems that, even without an
appreciable dip in global oil prices, our economy may well come to a
crashing halt. When it does, it will bring an end to the populism that
the government practices and has tried to export to neighboring
countries.
Venezuela
will thrive only when all its citizens truly have a stake in society.
Consolidating more power in the presidency through insidious
constitutional reforms will not bring that about. That’s why the
Venezuelan people should vote no tomorrow, and prepare to pursue a
political culture that will finally be able to steer our beloved nation
toward true economic and social progress.