The Devil's Excrement

In one week, we have felt the change in the covergae by the media and foreign Governments about what is happening in Venezuela, so the message is getting there. Today The White House called for elections in Venezuela as a way of resolving the crisis in the strongest statement by the US Government since Chavez became President.

Separately, S&P downgrade the country’s sovereign rating to CCC+, meaning its is vulnerable unless condition improve. S&P blamed the strike for the downgrade, the Government continues to call the strike a failure.

In one week, we have felt the change in the covergae by the media and foreign Governments about what is happening in Venezuela, so the message is getting there. Today The White House called for elections in Venezuela as a way of resolving the crisis in the strongest statement by the US Government since Chavez became President.

Separately, S&P downgrade the country’s sovereign rating to CCC+, meaning its is vulnerable unless condition improve. S&P blamed the strike for the downgrade, the Government continues to call the strike a failure.

In one week, we have felt the change in the covergae by the media and foreign Governments about what is happening in Venezuela, so the message is getting there. Today The White House called for elections in Venezuela as a way of resolving the crisis in the strongest statement by the US Government since Chavez became President.

Separately, S&P downgrade the country’s sovereign rating to CCC+, meaning its is vulnerable unless condition improve. S&P blamed the strike for the downgrade, the Government continues to call the strike a failure.

In one week, we have felt the change in the covergae by the media and foreign Governments about what is happening in Venezuela, so the message is getting there. Today The White House called for elections in Venezuela as a way of resolving the crisis in the strongest statement by the US Government since Chavez became President.

Separately, S&P downgrade the country’s sovereign rating to CCC+, meaning its is vulnerable unless condition improve. S&P blamed the strike for the downgrade, the Government continues to call the strike a failure.

The rights and wrongs of Chavez

Dec 12th 2002
From The Economist print edition

An elected leader, but one who has lost his legitimacy

PORTS, airports and banks are barely functioning, troops have been called out to pump petrol, strike-bound oil tankers lie at anchor, and exports have all but ceased. As a general strike called by opponents of President Hugo Chavez continued for a second week, Venezuela was grinding to a halt. The opposition says the strike will continue until Mr Chavez either resigns or agrees to an election early next year. So far, the president has seemed unmoved. He was elected in 1998, and again for a six-year term under his own constitution in 2000. In April, he survived an opposition-inspired coup (which the United States was lamentably slow to condemn). This strike, he says, is merely another coup attempt.

The chaos in Venezuela is more than a little local difficulty. It has already claimed several lives, and worse violence could follow. As the world’s fifth-largest oil exporter, and a neighbour of violence-torn Colombia, Venezuela’s woes matter to outsiders. But what should outsiders do? Normally, the answer would be nothing. Mr Chavez is democratically elected, whereas some of his opponents showed in April that they are not democrats. Shouldn’t an elected president be free to govern as he pleases?

This is an over-simple reading of events. For Mr Chavez, a former army officer and coup plotter, has begun to rule in a way that undermines his own legitimacy. Though his “Bolivarian revolution” has been marked chiefly by devastating incompetence, not illegality, he has concentrated power in his own hands and those of his cronies, while hurling bombast and threats at his opponents. This penchant for government by permanent confrontation has reaped its predictable reward. Even before the strike, the economy was set to shrink by 6% this year. Unemployment was 17% and inflation rising. Meanwhile, Mr Chavez’s efforts to turn the army into an instrument of “revolution” have divided and politicised it.

The result has been to earn the president the opposition of almost every organised group in the country and, according to opinion polls, more than 70% of Venezuelans (including many of his former supporters among the poor). It is a travesty to compare Mr Chavez with Chile’s elected socialist, Salvador Allende, and the opposition with General Pinochet, as his apologists would have it. The truth is that, as opposition has grown, Mr Chavez has started to disregard his constitution. For example, he seized control of the Caracas police, and his legislators voted to sack a supreme court judge. Gunmen who may be inspired by the government have fired on demonstrators and pro-Chavez mobs have trashed media offices.

A second reason for Mr Chavez to agree to an early vote is his own proud claim that Venezuela is a “participatory democracy” in which sovereignty resides with the people. To this end, he masterminded a constitution that allows a “consultative” referendum on matters of “national transcendence” at any time. In accordance with this, the opposition has gathered the necessary signatures for an immediate referendum on the president’s rule. Mr Chavez has manoeuvred to block this.

Now the opposition is unlikely to settle for anything less than a fresh election. Having made his country ungovernable, Mr Chavez should call one. For weeks, the Organisation of American States has been trying to mediate an “electoral solution” to Venezuela’s stand-off. Its efforts deserve wholehearted support—from Latin America as well as the United States. The alternative might be a bloodbath.

This article was written by Attorney Francisco Castillo, it speaks for itself

Chavez and Terrorism

Francisco Castillo

The Venezuelan situation is once again the focus of international attention as a result of the events which took place at Plaza Francia in Altamira on December 6, 2002.

The United Nations has not yet accepted a single definition of terrorism, but there is a consensus that terrorism is a method that produces anxiety about repetitive actions of violence, is carried out by (semi-) clandestine individuals, groups or states (the actors), for reasons which can be idiosyncratic, criminal or political, and where – unlike murder – the direct targets of this violence are not the main targets.  As a general rule, the immediate human victims of the violence are chosen at random (targets of opportunity) or selectively (representative or symbolic targets) from a specific population, for the purpose of sending a message.  Communication processes which are based on threat and violence, between the terrorist organization, the victims (who are in danger) and the main targets, are used in order to manipulate the main target (the audience), thus turning it into the target of terror, target of demands or target of attention, depending on whether the objective being sought is intimidation, coercion or propaganda (Schmid, 1988, United Nations Office for Drugs and Crimes).

It is clear that the actions of Joao Gouveia, who was caught flagrante delecto and who confessed to having shot against a group of citizens, can and should be defined as a terrorist action, because, although he stated that his main target was Venezuelan television, specifically Globovision, indicating that this station had kidnapped and raped him, he attacked several other innocent people in order to achieve his objective.  Little does it matter whether his action is individual or belongs to a group known as the “circles of terror”; in both instances, it would be defined as terrorism because his victims were chosen in one sense, at random, among those present at Plaza Francia, and in another sense, selectively, because they were precisely, people who were taking part in a peaceful protest against the current government.

Extremely significant evidence has surfaced, linking terrorist Joao Gouveia to groups who sympathize with the National Government and most specifically, to Mayor Freddy Bernal; however, instead of making a clear cut and firm condemnation of terrorism and ordering an exhaustive investigation of these presumed relationships, Lieutenant Colonel  Hugo Chavez Frias, acting as President of the Republic, has dedicated himself to defending the terrorist and confessed assassin Gouveia, and even suggested some exculpatory hypotheses, based on psychiatric reasons and on grounds of mental insanity.

On Sunday December 8, during his weekly radio program “Alo Presidente”, while the funerals of the victims were taking place, much to the delight of the cabinet ministers present, he used a family tale for the purpose of jocularly casting doubts on the intellectual authorship of the terrorist acts, thus eluding his responsibility as a Head of State, in condemning all acts of terrorism!  In prior statements he defined as “patriots” those armed individuals who were caught on an amateur video film in the areas surrounding PDVSA – La Campiña, and concluded by saying that the film was “doctored” or that the person who appeared in the video couldn’t possibly be that “gentleman” Gouveia, because at the time he was on a flight from Lisbon.

The High Commissioner for Human Rights of the United Nations, Sergio Vieira de Mello, has clearly declared that States have, not only the right, but also the obligation to condemn terrorism, in order to protect themselves and their populations, in a manner that respects human rights and the right to due process.  Joao Gouveia’s right to due process, as well as his human rights, must be protected, however, he must also be tried.  It is imperative that an impartial and exhaustive investigation, lead to the imposition of the legal sanctions which apply, not only to he who was detained flagrante delecto, but to all those who participated with him in this act of terrorism and, that these terrorist groups or “circles of terror” be disarmed in order to ensure the safety of the civilian population.  If this terrorist has links to the government, we are in the presence of one of the gravest situations that one could imagine:  state-sponsored terrorism.

However, regardless of whether there is proof of a link between terrorist Gouveia and the Government, we have yet to see a clear-cut, overwhelming statement by the President, as Head of State, condemning this act of terrorism, nor have we seen any announcement concerning an investigation, nor steps being taken for the purpose of disarming those who were seen in the amateur video, in the areas surrounding PDVSA – La Campiña, and who can also be described as terrorists.

Actually, quite the opposite is true; the “circles of terror” continue to be viewed complacently by the highest government officials; During the evening of December 9, while the Minister of the Interior and Justice spoke of peace, the media was being surrounded and intimidated by individuals wearing ski masks and hoods (typical terrorist behavior); in major cities of the interior, things went even further as television and radio stations and newspaper printing shops were attacked and destroyed.   The following day, the Vice President was saying “those who advocate the departure of President Chavez are coupsters and terrorists, who use that kind of language in order to terrorize the population, but there is an overwhelming response by the people of Venezuela, who expressed themselves, for example, Monday night, all over the country”; such is the government’s double and contradictory discourse which fuels the continuous actions of the “circles of terror”.

The government has failed to speak out or take action in the face of the events which took place on September 11, 2001.  The same applies to the many excesses and misdeeds which have been carried out by the “circles of terror”.  These inactions place the government of Hugo Chavez Frias squarely against the international community, who has declared war on terrorism, no matter where it comes from.

Courtesy of Oscar Sabater

This is a press report of what was said today  by the Organization of American States’ Human Rights Commission. It is nice to know somebody outside has an understanding of what is going on.

 The boldface is mine:

WASHINGTON, Dec 12 (Reuters) – A group attached to the Organization of American States (OAS) on Thursday issued a strong statement urging Venezuela to do more to stem a worsening human rights situation.

The Human Rights Commission, part of the 34-member OAS, said in a statement it was “extremely worried with the worsening of the crisis in Venezuela, characterized by violence, intolerance and a generalized lack of confidence in the institutions of the State.”

Tensions are running high in Venezuela as an 11-day strike by the opposition has cut into vital oil production. The opposition is looking to force out leftist president Hugo Chavez.

Efforts by the OAS’s secretary general, Cesar Gaviria, to broker a peaceful solution to the crisis have so far proved fruitless, despite strong backing from the United States and other Latin American states.

The commission condemned attacks against the independent media and expressed concern over the rise of violent armed civil groups which it said operated with impunity.

It also blasted a decision by a takeover by the military of the Caracas city police from the capital’s anti-Chavez mayor, saying it was “a decision of doubtful legality.”

It was that move which triggered the strike.

The commission said it was “profoundly worried about the systematic attacks against human rights activists” and accused the government of stalling on setting a date for a new human rights’ mission to visit Venezuela.

A previous visit in May concluded Venezuela’s justice system lacked independence and free speech was limited.

The top managers of most of the TV stations in Venezuela are giving a press conference from the Hotel where OAS Secretary Cesar Gaviria is staying in which they are informing him of a plot to destroy their facilities tonight by Chavez’ Bolivarian Circles and paramilitary groups.

PDVSA’s all-powerfull President Ali Rodriguez announced this morning that it had fired four of its top four manager’s including the President of the white-collar worker’s union (never recognized by the Government), its civil association, the President of the petrochemical affiliate Pequiven and a Human Resources manager. The reaction by the workers was swift, within two hours they were holding a worker’s meeting where they are now saying they will join the strike not as individuals but as PDVSA workers. They are calling for the resignation of Ali Rodriguez and Hugo Chavez.

While Rodriguez did say that the President of Pequiven was only removed from his post, other sources say he has also been fired.