Archive | Venezuela

Zionist Puppet Capriles insists Venezuela must hold new presidential election

NOVANEWS

Venezuela’s opposition leader Henrique Capriles

Venezuela’s opposition leader Henrique Capriles.

Nicolas Maduro won Venezuela’s presidential election on April 14, but opposition leader Henrique Capriles refused to accept the results.”

Venezuela’s opposition leader has warned that if the Supreme Court does not accept a demand for a new presidential election, he will bring the issue to ‘international bodies.’

Henrique Capriles told AFP on Wednesday that “within hours, we are going to have a decision on whether (the Supreme Court) accepts” the opposition’s request for a new election.

The opposition leader also stated that he would take his fight to “international bodies” including the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

On April 14, Nicolas Maduro won the presidential election with 50.7 percent of the vote against 49.1 percent for Capriles.

Capriles refused to accept the results and lawyers representing the opposition coalition lodged a complaint at the Supreme Court, claiming that a number of irregularities had occurred.

On April 27, Venezuela’s National Electoral Council said Capriles had failed to present any compelling proof that there were irregularities during the presidential election.

Maduro replaced late President Hugo Chavez, who lost a two-year-long battle with cancer on March 5.

The Venezuelan president says the United States provided the opposition with financial support. Maduro said on May 11 that Washington has made a “grave mistake” in refusing to acknowledge his victory.

“I believe (the United States) is committing a grave mistake, one more in its policy towards Latin America,” Maduro stated.

He made the remarks after US President Barack Obama rejected to say whether Washington recognized Maduro as the new president of Venezuela.

In addition, Maduro said Obama was “convinced” by his advisors to refuse to recognize the election results. “They promised him that I would be ousted in 24 or 48 hours, or that there would be a violent crisis in the country.”

Posted in Venezuela0 Comments

Statistical Study Shows That First Audit of Venezuelan Election is Decisive

NOVANEWS

Probability of Getting First Audit Results if Vote Count Was Stolen is Less than One in 25 Thousand Trillion

WASHINGTON – May 9 – A statistical analysis of the voting machine audit from Venezuela’s April 14 election, done on the day of the election, shows that this audit was decisive.  The odds of getting the April 14 audit result if in fact the unaudited machines contained enough errors to reverse the election outcome are far less than one in 25 thousand trillion.  A new paper details and explains the statistical analysis behind the results that CEPR has previously made public.

“There is really no doubt at all about this election result,” said Mark Weisbrot, CEPR co-Director and co-author of the paper. “The Obama administration must know that auditing the remaining voting machines cannot change the outcome, yet they continue to pretend differently and refuse to recognize the election results.”

Weisbrot noted that few in the international press have shown interest in what this huge election-day audit, conducted in the presence of tens of thousands of witnesses, can tell us about the result of the election or the probability of fraud.

“It’s very strange,” he said. “It is kind of like reporting on climate change and ignoring all the scientific evidence.”

The paper, A Statistical Note on the April 14 Venezuelan Presidential Election and Audit of Results by David Rosnick and Mark Weisbrot, is available here.

The initial results of Venezuela’s April 14 presidential election returned 7,575,506 votes for Nicolás Maduro, and 7,302,641 votes for opposition candidate Henrique Capriles.  This is a difference of 272,865 votes, or 1.8 percent of the two-way total between the candidates. Following the announcement of the official results, Capriles asked for a full audit. Venezuela’s National Electoral Council (CNE) agreed to audit the remaining machines, although Capriles later rejected their proposed audit.  The U.S. government, unlike almost all other governments in the world, has held off on officially recognizing the Maduro government until such an audit is conducted.

In the April 14 presidential election, voters expressed their preference by pressing a computer touch screen, which then prints out a paper receipt of their vote.  The voter then checks to make sure that the receipt was the same as her choice, and deposits the paper receipt in a sealed box.

When the polls closed, a random sample of 53 percent[i] of all the machines (20,825 out of 39,303) was chosen, and a manual tally was made of the paper receipts.  This “hot audit” was done on site, in the presence of observers from both campaigns, as well as witnesses from the community.

The audit came back clean – finding no discrepancies between the machines and the paper receipts. This means that in order for the election results to be changed, and the winning margin to shift from Maduro to Capriles, all of the remaining discrepancies would have to exist in the remaining 46 percent of machines

What if it were true that there were enough mismatches in the 39,303 machines to have given Maduro a 50.8 percent majority, when Capriles had been the true winner?   CEPR calculated that the probability of getting the results of the first audit would then have been far less than one in 25 thousand trillion.

###

The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) was established in 1999 to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people’s lives. In order for citizens to effectively exercise their voices in a democracy, they should be informed about the problems and choices that they face. CEPR is committed to presenting issues in an accurate and understandable manner, so that the public is better prepared to choose among the various policy options.

Posted in Venezuela0 Comments

Hugo Chávez, 1954 – 2013

NOVANEWS

 

A great revolutionary life, lived in the service of humanity

Hugo Rafael Chávez Frias was born on 28 July 1954, the second of six sons of impoverished primary school teachers. Chávez enrolled in Venezuela’s military academy at the age of 17, graduating near the top of his class in 1975

After graduating, he was posted to a counter-insurgency unit charged with subduing an armed Maoist rebel group called Red Flag operating in a rural part of eastern Venezuela. There, in the late 1970s and early ’80s, as a result of contact with these fighters, Chávez came to question the inequality in Venezuelan society that Red Flag had hoped to eliminate, and opposed the brutal treatment meted out to the guerrillas. [Let us give some thought to the brave communist fighters, whose principled stand must have influenced the young army officer, even as they were being brutally tortured by the regime that he served.]

Failed coup attempt

In 1989, then-President Carlos Andrés Pérez won an election on a platform of standing up to the austerity being imposed via the IMF. He famously proclaimed that the IMF was “a neutron bomb that killed people, but left buildings standing“. But once elected on the basis of this popular demand, he did a 180 degree turn and imposed further austerity on the Venezuelans at the behest of the IMF and drowned the protests of the masses in blood.

This was the context in which in February 1992, Hugo Chávez and his army associates decided to rise up in rebellion, but their coup failed and Chávez was forced to surrender. His surrender was televised and he took the opportunity to announce on TV that though the rebellion had failed, this was only ‘por ahora’ – for now. ‘Por ahora’ became a catchword of the Venezuelan revolution.

He and his fellow rebel officers were court-martialled, and sent to prison but after two years Chávez was freed.

In 1998, he stood in presidential elections and was elected by a population tired of austerity. At first, he was supported by all the old guard, for they expected that a military man like himself would follow the traditions of military rulers wherever they are to be found: ie, to settle his fee and then carry on as before.

Chávez, however, broke the mould. He was determined to improve the situation of the poor, offering them land, education, health care and hope – and this notwithstanding the fact that he was a nationalist, not a communist. He was motivated by the belief that the wealth of Latin America belongs to the Latin Americans, not to foreign imperialists, and that it is Latin Americans who should profit from the exploitation of Latin America, not foreigners.

He knew that this policy put him on a collision course with imperialism and could only succeed to the extent that he could mobilise the masses against imperialism. Hence it was his priority to provide them with the basics they most need.

Attempted coup against Chávez

Chávez’s support for the poor was an anathema to the comprador ruling class of Venezuela and the various, mainly white, strata of society engaged in facilitating the imperialist looting of the country’s oil wealth. Hence plots were soon afoot to have him removed.

The enemy sector that caused most trouble to Chávez was to be found amongst those operating Venezuela’s oil industry. Pre-Chávez governments, who were tied hand and foot to the interests of US imperialism, had appointed its management personnel, and these cronies are said to have been siphoning off more than $40bn a year as their reward for delivering 13 percent of US oil needs at the ‘right price’. And it was not just management cronies, but also cronies in the leadership of the oil workers’ trade unions who benefited from this slush fund.

On 11 April 2002 a major coup attempt was mounted against Chávez and his government.

The military, businessmen, trade unionists and media were behind the coup, many of whom were funded by the US Department of State through the National Endowment for Democracy. A prominent businessman, Pedro Carmona, was installed as ‘President’.

Chávez’s supporters responded by massing in the streets. Neither the masses nor the Venezuelan army were willing to accept Carmona, as a result of which Chávez was restored to power within 48 hours.

Less than a year later, the comprador bourgeoisie was again attempting to mobilise in order to bring about Chávez’s downfall by means of an oil industry strike in the first week of December 2002. By closing down the crucial oil industry, which accounted for about half of total government revenues and one third of GDP, they hoped to cripple the economy, reverse the government’s plans to take back a controlling stake in the national oil monopoly, and force fresh presidential elections, otherwise not due to take place until 2007.

In this strike, around 30,000 technical and administrative staff stayed away from work though most of the shop-floor workers ignored the strike call. Banks added to the pressure by closing their doors, meaning that thousands of workers were unable to access their money. Anti-Chávez demonstrations were organised, and shops in the middle-class areas closed down, but the huge mobilisation the opposition hoped for never materialised.

By Christmas, most of the strikers had returned to work, and the shops, unable to take any more losses, were open again. In late December the strike was declared illegal by the Supreme Court. Again the counter-revolution had failed, and again this was principally because the masses took to the streets in vast numbers to show their support for the government and the majority of the military also sided with the government.

Following the failure of the coup, new managers and directors were installed into the Venezuelan state oil company, (PDVSA).

Land reform

In 2003, the situation in Venezuela was that 77 percent of farmland was owned by a mere 3 percent of the population. Despite the fact that Venezuela has vast tracts of fertile land, much of this was lying uncultivated, forcing the country at that time to import some 70 percent of its food, much of it supplied by US agribusiness.

Under Chávez’s presidency, a land act was passed prohibiting ownership of more than 5,000 hectares and allowing the expropriation of all unused land, of which there was rather a lot in Venezuela, much of it forming part of vast estates owned by the old aristocracy .

After 2005, the Venezuelan government has recovered more than 4m hectares (9.9m acres) out of the country’s total of around 30m hectares (74m acres) of agricultural land. This land has been either redistributed to smaller farmers, or retained by the state for use by farmers’ collectives. As a result agricultural production has expanded significantly in recent years, especially in dry grains.

In addition, local farmer-to-farmer programmes have been set up to exchange knowledge and skills, and special funds and support are provided to secure tractors, seeds, training and technical assistance to farming co-operatives.

The Venezuelan government has also set up 24 laboratories to develop biological pest control and fertilisers and to eliminate chemicals. The use of genetically-modified crops is also prohibited.

Many of the tractors being supplied to the collective farms are now being produced in Venezuela by a joint venture company set up with Iran – Veniran Tractors.

Venezuela has also launched satellite Miranda to monitor agricultural lands across the country. Satellite imagery will allow the government to oversee the use of around 15m hectares (37m acres) of agricultural land, and determine how land is being utilised.

As a result of all these measures, Venezuela has been able to cut food imports from 90 percent to 30 percent of its consumption. In terms of specific products, national production has since 1998 risen to include self-sufficiency in corn and rice production, and a rise in pork production by almost 77 percent, that now exceeds national demand and makes exports of surplus pork now possible.

There has also been significant increase in the production of beef (meeting 70 percent of national demand), chicken (85 percent), eggs (80 percent), and milk (55 percent) , black beans (143 percent), root vegetables (115 percent), and sunflowers for cooking oil (125 percent).

Urban food security measures

In the towns steps have been taken to provide home-cooked, nutritious meals both to the poor and to all school children who receive two free meals per school-day. In addition, employees in workplaces of more than 20 people are provided with a hot meal every day.

Chávez’s anti-imperialist measures

Chávez was never in any doubt that the main enemy of the Venezuelan masses is imperialism, US imperialism in particular. It was glaringly obvious to everybody that the Venezuelan masses had been subjected to hardships and harsh IMF austerity regimes, even while massive profits from the pumping of Venezuela’s oil were pouring into imperialist coffers, with barely any benefit to Venezuela at all.

He was also aware of the massive amounts of money being taken out of the Venezuelan economy by the servicing of loans – money owed to imperialist financiers. Furthermore, oil was not the only vital area of the Venezuelan economy controlled by imperialist concerns when Chávez took power – and, of course, wherever imperialist concerns were in charge, the interests of the Venezuelan people never figured at all.

He determined that core Venezuelan industries should all be renationalised, and also that the country’s debts to imperialism should be paid off – and that is what was done.

Renationalisation of the oil reserves, a priority of the Bolivarian revolution following the 2006 election, was completed on 2 May 2007, when the government took hold of the Orinoco oil installations and handed them over for management by the Venezuelan state oil company, PDVSA.

The overwhelming majority of the multinational companies who had stakes in Venezuelan oil – Total, Sincor, Chevron Texaco, ExxonMobil, BP and Veba oil, signed agreements with the state to allow them to continue to exploit a minority interest in the oil. A 2001 law cut foreign companies’ share of the sale price from 84 to 70 percent, and the royalties they had to pay increased to 16.6 percent on Orinoco basin heavy crude – they had formerly paid a mere 1 percent.

As a result, PDVSA came to account for about half of government revenues and three quarters of Venezuela’s exports. In May 2007, PDVSA also took over all the operations abandoned by ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, Chevron and Total, as well as 46 oil rigs.

There were, however, problems, which Chávez sought to resolve by moving towards self-reliance. PDVSA’s 2007 plan had a target of 191 oil rigs to produce 3.3m barrels of oil per day (mbd), but in fact only 112 were then operational. This is partly because of a law in Venezuela that requires contract winners (including the providers of oil rigs) to put 10 percent of the contract value towards social programmes, and partly because of an international shortage of rigs, the cost of hire having doubled since the previous year to $400,000 a day.

In response to this problem, the Venezuelan government, besides having immediately acquired some rigs from Iran and China, arranged for Chinese rigs to be assembled in Venezuela. This graphically goes to show the incompatibility of socialism with a market economy. The shortage of oil rigs was directly related to the economic ‘inefficiency’ of undermining profitability by creating decent facilities for workers and their families!

Following Chávez’s death, virtually all the bourgeois media have taken the opportunity to bemoan his alleged ‘economic mismanagement’, resulting in sluggish economic growth compared to, say, Brazil. Yet they admit that:

“ During Hugo Chávez’s time in office, from 1999 to the present day, income inequality in Venezuela gradually declined, as it did in most of the region.

The country now boasts the fairest income distribution in Latin America.” But this equality is not good enough, it is claimed:

So every Venezuelan now has a more equal slice of the cake. The trouble is, that cake has not been getting much bigger.

“Instead of investing in PDVSA to increase production, Mr Chávez treated it as a cash cow, milking its funds to finance his social spending on housing, health care and transport.”(‘Hugo Chávez leaves Venezuela in economic muddle’, 5 March 2013)

There could be no better demonstration of the incompatibility of capitalism and socialism! Under capitalism, using production for the benefit of the masses – “social spending on housing, health care and transport” – is to use it “as a cash cow“. Production cannot be for the benefit of the masses! That is entirely inappropriate! Its purpose is the generation of profit through the generation of economic growth, which is why, in the opinion of the BBC, Chávez ought instead to have invested everything “in PDVSA to increase production“.

Colombia therefore is – according to the BBC – a success story because it has increased production, even if its people are still languishing in poverty and misery, forcibly held down by a vicious US-backed authoritarian regime.

In order to break the hold of US imperialism over the Venezuelan economy, it was important for Venezuela to break its dependence on the US (Venezuela’s largest oil market), which it was able to do through strengthening trade relations with China and neighbouring Latin-American states.

Steps have also been taken under the aegis of ALBA (Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas) to move oil refineries currently situated in the US to Latin America.

With the majority renationalisation of the Venezuelan oil industry complete, other natural resources and basic industries were next in line, including the steel industry, private banks, electricity and telecommunications. The plan is to develop domestic industrial productive capacity to replace foreign-controlled private monopolies. The planned ‘social production enterprises’ will give workers partial ownership of the company.

It should be remembered that all those dispossessed were fully compensated, although none of the bourgeois media deigns to mention what effect these compensations have had on the national economy and its ‘growth’:

With regard to breaking financial ties with imperialism, on 13 April 2007, Chávez announced that Venezuela had paid off all monies owed to the IMF and World Bank and was now free of the heavy shackles of debt. “ We have transformed Venezuela, from an indebted and bound country that we were … to a modest but important country and financial centre that supports other countries and peoples .” (‘President Chávez announces World Bank debt has been paid off’, TeleSur/Prensa Web RNV, translated by Yoshie Furuhashi, 13 April 2007)

In place of heavy-strings-attached funding from imperialist banks, Venezuela now has the security of substantial reserves built up from oil revenues. (‘Venezuela: 20 percent minimum salary raise, withdrawal from World Bank and IMF’, Venezuelanalysis.com, 1 May 2007)

Chávez was also instrumental in setting up a Latin-American development bank, the Banco del Sur, which will enable countries in the region to borrow at low rates of interest and without conditions that damage the economy and the population.

On 26 September 2009, the presidents of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Ecuador, Bolivia and Venezuela signed an agreement establishing the Bank of the South with an initial capital of US$20bn. The bank is gearing up to commence operations this year and will constitute a lasting tribute to Chávez’s dream of a sovereign and independent Latin-American continent.

Economic achievements

In July 2007, the first Venezuelan-made car rolled off the production line. As with the tractors mentioned earlier, it was the product of a Venezuela/Iran joint venture, Venirauto, inaugurated in November 2006, and which is 51 percent Iranian and 49 percent Venezuelan. Production currently stands at 16,000 cars a year.

Chávez also inaugurated a programme called ‘Socialist Factory 2007′, to create 200 state-owned socialist companies whose purpose was to make Venezuela self-sufficient in all kinds of manufactured goods, including cement, glass, bicycles, paper, plastics, rubber products, kitchen appliances, oil pipelines, wheelchairs, etc. Added to the existing state-owned companies, it was hoped that these would be in a position to compete with the private sector in almost every area of the economy.

“ Poverty is down from 71 percent in 1996 to 21 now, and extreme poverty is down from 40 percent to 7.3. The programmes, or misiones, have reached 20 million people, and 2.1 million have received senior citizens’ pensions, a sevenfold increase under Mr Chávez. … the country now has 58 doctors per 10,000 people (as against 18 in 1996). As many as 96 percent of the population now have access to clean water, and with school attendance at 85 percent, one in three Venezuelans is enrolled in free education up to and including university”. (Sazzad Hussain, ‘Adios ChavezCounter-currents.org, 7 March, 2013)

As already mentioned, Venezuela has made impressive advances whilst Chávez was at the helm in improving the lives of ordinary working-class and peasant people. For example,Proletarian carried an article in 2007 documenting progress to that date:

“In real (inflation-adjusted) terms, social spending per person increased by 170 percent during the period 1998-2006. But this did not include the state oil company PDVSA’s social spending, which was 7.3 percent of GDP in 2006. With this included, social spending was at least 314 percent more in 2006 than in 1998 (in terms of real social spending per person)… This has brought about significant gains for the poor in health care, subsidised food, and access to education …

“The official poverty rate, which measures only cash income and does not include such advances as increased access to health care and education, dropped by 31 percent from 1998 to the end of 2006 – from 43.9 percent of households to 30.6 percent. Measured unemployment dropped from 15 percent in June 1999 to 8.3 percent in June 2007.” (Center for Economic and Policy Research, ‘Venezuela’s economy during the Chávez years’, 26 July 2007)

And Owen Jones in the Independent, although he is no friend of anti-imperialism, brings us right up to date:

“ The truth is that Chávez won democratic election after democratic election, despite the often vicious hostility of the media, because his policies transformed the lives of millions of previously ignored Venezuelans. Poverty has fallen from nearly half to 27.8 percent, while absolute poverty has been more than halved.

“ Six million children receive free meals a day; near-universal free health care has been established; and education spending has doubled as a proportion of GDP. A housing programme launched in 2011 built over 350,000 homes, bringing hundreds of thousands of families out of sub-standard housing in the barrios. ” (‘Hugo Chávez was a democrat not a dictator’, The Independent, 6 March 2013).

Chávez’s internationalism

Just as Chávez understood the need for people within Venezuela, seeing that their main enemy was imperialism, to sink their differences in order to confront imperialism as one, he could also see that anti-imperialist unity was needed between oppressed countries. The Banco del Sur initiative was one anti-imperialist initiative of this kind.

From Simon Bolivar, Chávez, like many other Latin-American revolutionaries before him, had a great yearning to bring about Latin-American unification, and he was happy to put at the disposal of all the peoples of Latin America a part of Venezuela’s vast oil wealth to help the process of unification.

Chávez worked closely with Fidel Castro on this front. Castro was an encouragement to Venezuela in its ‘Petrocaribe’ initiative – a multi-lateral energy cooperation scheme led by Venezuela that has been signed by 14 Caribbean nations – the aim of which was to supply oil to Caribbean countries at an affordable cost. Under the terms of its deal with Venezuela, Jamaica, for example, paid just $40 per barrel of oil, at a time when the market rate was over $60.

Another initiative in which Venezuela has played a leading role is in ALBA.

The fifth ALBA summit (Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas), held in Venezuela in April 2007, was attended by leaders from Bolivia, Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua and Haiti, as well as by delegations from Ecuador, Uruguay, Dominica, St Vincent and the Grenadines.

The organisation had been set up by Chávez in opposition to the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), a neo-liberal economic project promoted by the US government in order to ‘remove trade barriers’ and thereby facilitate North-American imperialist exploitation of the continent. The objective of ALBA, by contrast, is to promote cooperation and collective development of the region with an emphasis on fighting poverty and social exclusion. Daniel Ortega, Nicaraguan president, explained that “ the objective is not necessarily to maintain high economic statistics or attract investment, but rather to benefit our populations, so that they have health care, education, jobs and so they can get out of poverty “. (‘Fifth ALBA summit in Venezuela strengthens regional integration’ by Chris Carlson,Venezuelaanalysis.com, 29 April 2007)

Key to the venture are agreements for the supply of oil from Venezuela and joint financing of social and industrial projects. The establishment of joint companies for the exploitation of natural resources – Cuban-Venezuelan stainless steel plant and nickel plants; a Nicaraguan-Venezuelan aluminium plant; joint plans for the extraction of Bolivian iron, alongside steel and cement plants – will strengthen regional industry and decrease dependence on the US and other imperialist states.

Similarly, Venezuelan health and education missions are to be extended to ALBA territories, to the mutual benefit of all.

Venezuela’s leading role in fomenting this increased cooperation, backed up by its willingness to invest its natural wealth in the project, has been instrumental in assisting neighbouring states to escape the debt trap. With Venezuelan assistance Nicaragua and Argentina have been able to pay back millions of dollars owed to the IMF so as to be free of its diktat over their economies.

Furthermore, Chávez, perhaps because he too was demonised by the imperialist communications media, was perfectly able to recognise a fellow anti-imperialist. Hence he unstintingly supported the anti-imperialist governments, for instance, of Gaddafi in Libya, Assad in Syria, Ahmadinejad in Iran, Kim Jong Il and Kim Jong Un in the DPRK and Mugabe in Zimbabwe, without for one moment being taken in by the imperialist hate-speak against these towering figures of the world anti-imperialist resistance.

Empowerment of the oppressed and the fight for racial equality

It is not just that the poor are experiencing a much-enhanced quality of life in material terms. Even more important is that their voice, for so long suppressed, is now heard and they have real power to influence their own lives.

An important vehicle for this is through Bolivarian Circles, self-organised groups based along the lines of the Cuban CDRs (Committees to Defend the Revolution). Funded directly by the government, some 70,000 circles have when necessary been able to organise over a million workers and peasants outside the bourgeois state apparatus to defend by force of arms the gains won so far – and to push them further.

“These ‘Bolivarian Councils of Workers’ (workers’ councils) have been set up as ’ political organisations of the working class, based on direct democracy and control over production’. Alongside these representative bodies, another source of community power is being encouraged through the formation of 19,000 Communal Councils, each made up of 200-400 families (smaller groups in rural areas). Discussions within these forums are progressing towards the setting up of federations of Communal Councils to tackle larger projects .” (‘Venezuela’s revolution accelerates’ by Federico Fuentes, Green Left Weekly, 25 April 2007)

Such self-organised, democratic organisations of peasants and workers can be the germ of an alternative working-class state power, and the fact that they have arms and are prepared to defend themselves means that the Bolivarian revolution will be no easy pushover. No wonder the Venezuelan bourgeoisie and their imperialist backers are terrified of what they have dubbed the “circles of terror“.

Furthermore, the Venezuelan masses enjoy a privilege that is certainly not available in this country, namely, access to the media.

Christian Science Monitor article in 2005 noted:

“Chávez has struck back against the established media through Vive TV, a state-sponsored station..

“ According to its website, Vive TV promotes ‘the common citizen, Through Vive’s programming, claim the station’s managers, ‘it is possible to acquaint oneself with the reality, lives and struggle of people of African descent [and] indigenous peoples.’

“ As Blanca Eekhout, the former manager of Vive explains, people of colour previously ‘have appeared in the media but in a stigmatised way; they are shown as marginal people, criminals. They are not shown building, constructing, which is part of the struggle for the development of the country. That’s one thing we are trying to change.’ …

“ Chávez has also increased the visibility of Latin America’s indigenous peoples through the launching of the government-sponsored Televisora del Sur (Telesur).”

Since 2005, giant strides forward have been taken in the battle against racism and discrimination in the media.

“The new state-funded channels (and there are several of them too, plus innumerable community radio stations) are doing something completely different, and unusual in the competitive world of commercial television. Their programmes look as though they are taking place in Venezuela, and they display the cross-section of the population to be seen on cross-country buses or on the Caracas metro.

“ As in every country in the world, not everyone in Venezuela is a natural beauty. Many are old, ugly and fat. Today they are given a voice and a face on the television channels of the state. Many are deaf or hard of hearing. Now they have sign language interpretation on every programme. Many are inarticulate peasants. They too have their moment on the screen. Their immediate and dangerous struggle for land is not just being observed by a documentary filmmaker from the city; they are being taught to make the films themselves.

“Blanca Eekhout … coined the slogan ‘Don’t watch television, make it’. Classes in filmmaking have been set up all over the country. Lil Rodriguez, an Afro-Venezuelan journalist and the boss of TVES, the channel that replaces RCTV, claims that it will become ‘a useful space for rescuing those values that other models of television always ignore, especially our Afro-heritage.’ With time, the excluded will find a voice within the mainstream.”(Richard Gott, ‘The battle over the media is about race as well as class’, The Guardian, 9June 2007)

Chávez and socialism

As Chávez fought for the equality, dignity and human rights of ordinary Venezuelan people of all colours, religious beliefs, and both genders, he built up a stronger and stronger understanding that capitalism is simply incompatible with these ideals:

Eleven years ago [when first elected] I was quite gullible. I even believed in a ‘third way’. I believed it was possible to put a human face on capitalism, but I was wrong. The only way to save the world is through socialism … Capitalism is destroying the world .” (BBC TV Hardtalkinterview with Hugo Chávez, 13 June 2010)

We have seen above that the harder Chávez fought for the ‘human rights’ so lauded by western imperialism, the more he was demonised as a dictator, a monster, a madman, an egomaniac, an ignoramus, and the like. We have seen how social programmes totally undermine the viability of a market economy, the beating heart of the capitalist system. Chávez was not too proud to learn as he fought for what he believed in, which is perhaps the most important quality of leadership.

Venezuela’s future

Chávez’s enthusiasm for giving himself body and soul to the service of the masses is poignantly demonstrated by this prayer of his that was overheard in April 2012 after he learnt of his illness: “ I ask God to give me life, however painful. I can carry 100 crosses, your crown of thorns, but don’t take me yet. I still have things to do.” (Quoted in ‘Hugo Chávez, Venezuela’s anti US socialist leader, dies at 58′ by Charlie Devereux and Daniel Cancel, Bloomberg, 5 March 2013)

Certainly his leadership in Venezuela’s and Latin America’s struggle against western imperialist for independence and sovereignty will be sorely missed. Imperialism is hoping that with Chávez gone the fire will go out of the struggle.

Jonathan Watts, whose article was put on line within minutes of Comrade Chávez’s death, put the imperialist hopes into words:

“His death will … trigger a presidential election, to be held within 30 days, to decide who controls the world’s greatest untapped reserves of oil. ” (Guardian, 6 March 2013)

Western imperialists are hoping to have that oil back under their control within a very short time. We believe they will be disappointed.

The Venezuelan and Latin-American people will now have to carry on their struggle without Chávez. We are confident, however, that from the millions of inhabitants and militant workers of the region, his place will be taken by worthy successors who, inspired by his example, will complete the tasks that have been initiated under Chávez’s leadership.

Posted in Venezuela0 Comments

Lebanese Expats Prepare for a Post-Chavez Venezuela

NOVANEWS

by jodymcintyre

 

Ahmed’s clothing store on Lecuna Avenue, Caracas, is doing good business.  “People in Venezuela always want something new,” he tells me, “seven t-shirts, minimum, seven pairs of trousers, minimum…” he laughs at the thought.  Ahmed moved to Venezuela from Lebanon when he was just two years old, although his parents and three sisters have since returned to the Bekaa Valley.  His cousin, Mohammed, who is aged 17, was born here.  The Lebanese community in Venezuela stretches back for many decades.  Under the government of Hugo Chavez, however, a particular contradiction was faced.  Here was a government who openly spoke out against the Israeli government, unlike many Arab leaders, and who regularly criticised the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, but whose economic policies did not always benefit Lebanese people doing business on the country.
When I meet up with Ahmed on the day after recent Presidential elections, in which Chavez’ successor Nicolas Maduro won by a hairline majority of just under 2%, with the opposition immediately refusing to recognise their defeat, Ahmed’s little finger is stained with purple ink, one of the measures taken by the National Electoral Council to ensure the security of the vote.  He tells me that it was made easier for foreigners to take up residency in Venezuela during the Chavez government, and since successfully applying for citizenship four years ago, he is now able to vote.
“Yes, in the end I voted for Maduro,” Ahmed says, “because I look at [Henrique] Capriles, the opposition candidate, and I know that he supports Israel… he does not have our interests at heart.”
It is clear that the government remain popular with the poor majority in Venezuela, not least due to their social policies of building new apartments and homes for struggling families, selling food at cut prices in government-subsidised supermarkets, and sending doctors to provide free healthcare in the most deprived areas of the country.  Nevertheless, it is impossible to ignore the fact that Maduro’s vote was down by almost half a million from what Chavez received in his last electoral victory, just five months before his passing away in March.  The trauma of three full election campaigns in seven months as well as the death of Chavez has left financial speculation dramatically increasing.  For Ahmed, the issue has a personal effect.
“I have to send money to my sister in Lebanon so that she can study.  It used to cost around ten or twelve bolivars to buy a US dollar, but suddenly, it is at least double that!  I’m tired of working and working and then finding I have no money at the end.  We are earning in bolivars, but it’s hardly worth anything when I want to send it home.”
During Chavez’ time in power, the Venezuelan government imposed restrictions on the amount of foreign money a person can buy, in order to strengthen the Venezuelan currency and in an attempt to prevent wealthy Venezuelans trying to damage the economy by instigating mass flights of capital.  However, the downside of the measure has been the profilgation of a black market, on which foreign currency is available for purchase at far above the official rate of exchange.  It’s good news for tourists arriving in the country, but a nightmare for Ahmed.
“You are lucky, man,” he tells me, “you could go back to London and visit your family right now.  For me, it’s a big problem.  You can change $3,000 dollars with the government, once per year, and nothing more.  If they got rid of the currency controls the black market would disappear!”
In the Paraiso district of Caracas, shawarma restaurants and Arabic spoken in the streets are a mark of a strong Lebanese presence.  Samer, who lives in the area, says that the government has benefited poor people, but that corruption remains prevalent.
“I know Lebanese people who came here years ago with no more than a hundred dollars in their pocket, and they have made millions,” Samer tells me.  “The system is wide open to corrupt practices.  You can import whatever you like; it can be clothes or just piles of garbage… the point is that you make the profits in exchanging the currency.  Under the system that Chavez’ government introduced, you just sign a piece of paper saying you want to import a certain amount of goods, but people deliberately over-estimate the value.  Once the governments have also signed the agreement, it’s like having a blank cheque for making money.  Did the government introduce this system to help poor people?  No, but it is helping people get rich.”
Issa, who also lives in Paraiso, says that despite their problems, he will continue to support the government in power.  “There is no other option,” he asserts, “Capriles is a gangster… he is supported by the US government, and his followers send money to support Israel.  There are many problems here; there are people being attacked in the streets by criminals, the cost of living is high, but Capriles is not the solution.  The Venezuelan government are always speaking for the rights of our Palestinian brothers.  What other government in the world do you see doing that?”
Following his refusal to accept the results of the Presidential elections on April 14th, Capriles’ call for his voters to take to the streets resulted in violent actions across the country.  As well as the killings of nine government supporters, the protests included arson attacks on government initiatives such as hospitals and cheap food markets, as well as the surrounding of the home of Tibisay Lucena, President of the National Electoral Council, an independent body responsible for the running of the elections.  However, Capriles laid blame for the deaths on the government, and amongst critics of the Bolivarian process, crime is always a major talking point.
There is more to the issue than is often presented, with Venezuelans pointing towards attempts by successive right-wing Colombian governments to destabilise the country by sending in armed mercenaries.  During his electoral campaign, Nicolas Maduro accused US officials Roger Noriega and Otto Reich of being behind a plot to assassinate Capriles in order to justify foreign intervention in Venezuela.  “They want to do the same here as they have in Libya and Syria,” Maduro announced on more than one occasion.
Nevertheless, not all violence in the Venezuelan capital can be blamed on foreign plots.  To Ahmed, the rising murder rate in Caracas is more than a number.  In early March, his uncle was stabbed to death on the doorstep of his home by a man demanding money that he didn’t have.  It was just a day after Chavez’ passing had been announced.
“Of course we were sad,” Ahmed says, “above all, because there was no reason for it to happen.”
The problems faced by the Lebanese community in Venezuela can be seen as a microcosm for those the wider society is now coming up against.  Nicolas Maduro is the first post-Chavez President to be elected since his Bolivarian revolution began, and he is living in the shadow of the former leader, still referred to by many as “our Commandante”.  According to Ahmed, activists within Maduro’s own party, the PSUV [United Socialist Party of Venezuela], have unofficially given him until December this year as a trial period.
“We hope things will get better”, Ahmed concludes.  “Personally as well, I hope that the currency gets strong, that I will be able to go and visit my family in Lebanon.  If Maduro manages to calm the situation, and to improve the economy, then we can go from there.  If not?  Yes, he might have problems on his hands.”

Posted in Lebanon, Venezuela0 Comments

Disabled people have a voice in Venezuela

NOVANEWS

by jodymcintyre

The corridors are always packed in the Metropolitan Council of Popular Power for People with Disabilities, situated in a building just down the street from Plaza Diego Ibarra in Caracas. Wheelchairs come and go, sometimes squeezing to the side in order to let another person pass first. In a small area just behind the front door, which is frequently opened and closed as new visitors come inside, Jose Suarez is leaning back in his chair, relaxed, chatting with a friend. It seemed to contrast with the tension I had witnessed on the streets outside, in the days following Nicolas Maduro’s Presidential election victory on April 14th.

“Firstly, yes I voted”, says Jose, turning his attention in my direction. “I voted this time and on October 7th as well. Really, it is right that we all have, and especially people with disabilities. But more than a right, it’s a commitment that we have to the nation.

As disabled people, we are proud of this process. The Bolivarian process has put us into the public light, recognized us as human beings and included us in the political base”.

Since my arrival in Venezuela just over seven months ago, I have often been struck by the visibility of disabled people, particularly in Caracas. I am walking towards Plaza Bolivar on a warm afternoon when I notice Ramon, a blind man, being helped along the path by a member of staff from the Metro. Perhaps helping travellers with disabilities is a matter of due course inside stations for Metro workers in many countries, but here they had already walked some distance from the nearest Capitolio stop.

When the Metro worker leaves, I speak with Ramon. He too, is eager to affirm that he is “with the process”, but suggests that the recognition Jose had mentioned still has a long way to go.

“The problem is that the law still doesn’t have its enforcement. There a group of articles [from the 2006 Law for People with Disabilities] concerning our rights, but those carrying the most weight are 28 and 38. These are what we are discussing now, but we need unity on the matter. Nevertheless, the government has a huge capacity for construction. They have achieved what no government has achieved. They have given what no government has given. Maduro should take charge of this affair. But, we are asking for political participation. We want to have disabled people at the front of the Municipal Councils, but also in the [National] Assembly! I would like to see representatives for disabled people in the PSUV. That level of political participation still hasn’t arrived for us. Participation and protagonism!”

The question of political representation is an important one, and a concern shared not only by Ramon. Back at the Metropolitan Council, Luis Roja, a leading figure of the organization, says that he is proud of their independence from the government, but that something more is needed.

“It seems that first our rights were originally passed onto the Ministry of Health, as if we have illnesses, but we are not sick. It’s an important distinction we should make. We’re not just a small group, we are hundreds of thousands, and we are asking Maduro to create a specific government ministry for people with disabilities. That is something which needs to happen! The first thing we have in mind is the law. Article 28 stipulates that public institutions must employ disabled people as at least 5% of their workforce. This means that disabled people are leaving their houses; we are going out to sustain our families”.

Former opposition candidate Henrique Capriles spent much of his pre-election campaign promising that he would keep benefits and missions for disabled people in place, although his subsequent refusal to accept the results of the elections, even after they were audited, has thrown into doubt his ability to co-operate with democratic institutions. Capriles promised that he would deliver the “change” that Venezuela needed, but many disabled citizens, to the contrary, see Capriles as a symbol of the old political forces which ignored them for so long.

I ask Jose Suarez for his opinion on the violent events which followed the opposition’s refusal to accept the results. Capriles made a speech just one hour after they were announced, calling for his supporters to “show the world [their] rage”.

“It will always be like this”, says Jose. They are never going to feel satisfied because they lost. It doesn’t matter if they are presidential, municipal or parish elections. They are always going to be screaming and crying, specifically because of Henrique Capriles Radonski. Capriles is not going to accept the results, because he comes from a part of society that had become accustomed to using such tactics and getting their own way. They don’t understand that in the last fourteen years, things have changed. If the majority of people say Nicolas Maduro is the president now, then Nicolas Maduro is the president.A few of the leaders of the opposition want to deceive their followers because they can’t believe they have suffered yet another loss to the revolution, but, thanks to God, they are a minority, even amongst their supporters. But also we should say that we have a conscious, revolutionary people who are mentally and ideologically prepared”.

“Why are we revolutionaries?” asks Luis, rhetorically. “Because we were excluded from society in the years before. The por ahora was an awakening for people with disabilities. The governments of the Fourth Republic had a badly-named law for people with “incapacities”. Just with the name of that law, they assassinated our rights as human beings. So the por ahora served as something of an internal revolution amongst people with disabilities”.

“Before Hugo Chavez, I never voted. They had a political system like sharing out a cake”, affirms Jose. “What the revolution has provided is a space for disabled people, a space for us to project our voices. The process hasn’t given me a house, or a car. I work, but the process didn’t give me a job. But I know people, friends and family, humble people in need of those things, who have benefited greatly”.

I meet Alexander as he is travelling from one line of the Metro to another in his electric wheelchair, holding on to the sides of the escalators for stability.

“Before, we never had any support”, he tells me. “We didn’t have a base. I voted because we want a free country. The opposition don’t have a choice, because our rights are in law now. The law applies to everyone. But Capriles wouldn’t even remember us”.

Recent weeks have been a time of reflection for disabled people here, as they have for many Venezuelans. The struggle remains for disabled people not only to be visible in society, but to lead the narrative on the fulfilment of their rights as citizens. But even more than laws or articles, it is a self-respect that disabled people stride with today. The road is a long one, but the wheelchair tracks are being marked into the earth.

“We don’t shut the doors to anyone here”, says Luis. I ask him what his position is at the council. As we talk, people come and go, discussing and joking with each other, often contributing to Luis’ responses to my questions with their own thoughts and suggestions.

 

Luis smiles. “I’m just another one.”

Posted in Venezuela0 Comments

Venezuela: Arrested US citizen tied to rightists’ conspiracy

NOVANEWS
By AVN – MINCI. Axis of Logic

“El Gringo” – Timothy Hallett Tracy, arrested today in Venezuela

Most people who are following events in Venezuela since the April 14 election of President Nicolas Maduro, have now heard about the violence that followed the election. If you read the U.S. and European capitalist media you have read the two lies – one that the government caused the violence and the second – that the new Venezuelan government “oppressed peaceful demonstrations by the opposition.”

Meanwhile, the Venezuelan government reported that after he lost the election, opposition candidate Capriles Radonski called for the opposition to go to the streets and if you live in Venezuela as I do, you know what that means. While Radonski was secure in his posh house in East Caracas with body guards, he sent members of ordinary citizens who oppose the government to go to the streets at night and to carry on with “demonstrations,” pot-banging, screaming “fraud” and in many cases, attacking government institutions, PSUV headquarters, Chavista homes, missions, schools and hospitals throughout the country. The election on Sunday was followed by violence on Monday and Tuesday, leaving 9 people dead, 8 Chavistas shot to death and one woman burned to death with a molotov cocktail. The corporate media called them “peaceful demonstratons.”

Up until now, we have reported that President Nicolas Maduro described this violence as an attempted coup. Many opposition readers (many residing in Miami) reacted negatively to our reports, calling us “naive” and “ignorant.” Today, the government for the first time revealed an investigation that their intel services have been conducting since President Chavez’ October 7, 2012 election victory..

Today we saw on television “El Gringo” – Timothy Hallett Tracy, naked from the waist up in handcuffs, arrested as one of the perpetrators of the US government’s attempt to overthrow the democratically-elected government of Venezuela. This report by MINCI was broadcast today. Please keep in mind that the US government will continue it’s attempt to foment violence, destabilization and civil war in Venezuela and they will not stop with this arrest. But this report demonstrates howPresident Maduro like President Hugo Chavez before him, continues to outmaneuver the imperialist agenda to gain control of Venezuela and our natural resources.

- Les Blough in Venezuela

 

April 25, 2013
Arrested US citizen tied to rightists’ conspiracy
Venezuelan News Agency (AVN)

Caracas, 25 Abr. AVN.- Interior Relations, Justice and Peace minister, Miguel Rodriguez Torres, informed Thursday about the arrest of a US citizen named Timothy Hallett Tracy, who is allegedly tied to conspiracy of local right-wing sectors against democracy in Venezuela.

Actions carried out by Timothy Hallett Tracy, aka ‘gringo,’ are tied to far right groups which seek to destabilize Venezuela through attacks in the streets after the April 14 presidential elections.

Minister Rodriguez Torres said that the objective of the plan was to create chaos in the country to undermine the government, creating a violent scenario.

“It is important to inform the population about situations that have been occurring. We will show the reasons and ties they have to carry out a series of actions we have been living since the April 14 elections at night,” Rodriguez Torres said at a press conference.

Since October, November and December 2012, he said, the National Bolivarian Service of Intelligence (SEBIN) started investigations on a plan named Connection April.

“All evidences we have gathered showed that the election day would come in complete normality; but once results were released by the National Electoral Council (CNE), right-wing candidate Henrique Capriles Radonski would refuse to accept it,” the Minister detailed.

During investigations, Rodriguez Torres added, a US citizen was found deeply related to rightist young people who make up the so-called Operation Sovereignty.

“When this relationship was found, surveillance and monitoring started and we noticed that this person managed to infiltrate into revolutionary groups to get their protection, though he related with the far right,” explained the Interior Relations, Justice and Peace minister.

This US citizen is presumed to be member of an intelligence agency. Also, he has been funded by foreign non governmental organizations (NGO’s).

Connection April

Miguel Rodriguez Torres explained that the plan Connection April aimed at stirring actions after results of the presidential election were released and leading to a civil war.

“It was their objective, to lead us into a civil war. We have documents in proof of this, which they exchange through [electronic] chips. Messengers took them from La Castellana square (eastern Caracas) to gringo’s house.”

According to him, investigations revealed that the idea was to achieve a civil war in Venezuela to lead to the immediate intervention of a foreign power.

“Those were and continue to be their ends. We have over 500 videos seized in a raid. We wonder, Do housewives who voted for the opposing option want a civil war? Do taxi drivers want that? I am sure that nobody in this country, regardless of their stance, wants that, except these extremist groups headed by extremist leaders of rightist parties who want civil war,” said the Miguel Rodriguez Torres.

Evidence

At a press conference, minister Miguel Rodriguez Torres presented a video in which Antonio Rivero, retired general of the Armed Force, giving orders to people who disturbed public order at Altamira community, greater Caracas.

All evidence seized in a raid carried out last Wednesday night will be submitted to the corresponding organs.

The National Government has managed to act on time to continue guarantee peace and calm to the Venezuelan population thanks to intelligence actions nationwide, Rodriguez Torres stressed.

“The President of the Republic, Nicolas Maduro, has emphasized that this country will always be on the road of peace and coexistence. It has to be an effort of all Venezuelans, regardless of our ideological and political stance. We have to reject and isolate these fascist factors that are trying to get Venezuelans to kill ourselves and to hate ourselves. We cannot allow that,” insisted the Minister.

 

Posted in Venezuela0 Comments

Obama, grand chief of devils: Venezuelan President Maduro

NOVANEWS

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro

On April 14, Nicolas Maduro was elected Venezuela’s president after defeating opposition leader Henrique Capriles by receiving 50.7 percent of the vote against 49.1 percent, with a difference of 235,000 ballots. Capriles claims irregularities had taken place.

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has slammed US President Barack Obama and called him the ‘grand chief of devils.’

Maduro made the comment during a speech on Saturday as a response to Obama’s interview with a Spanish-language television network a day earlier.

While speaking to Univision, Obama did not say whether Washington recognized Maduro as the new president of Venezuela.

“Coming out of Central America, Obama let loose with a bunch of impertinent remarks, insolent stuff… He is giving an order, and his blessing, for the fascist right wing to attack Venezuela’s democracy,” the Venezuelan president stated.

“We are here defending our institutions, peace, democracy, the people of Venezuela… and we can sit down with anyone, even the grand chief of devils: Obama,” Maduro said.

The Venezuelan president also charged Washington with helping the Venezuelan opposition financially.

“It is Obama himself – as the puppet of the imperial power – who is behind the financing in dollars of this right wing that is seeking to destroy Venezuela’s democracy.”

In addition, the Venezuelan president accused the United States for a brawl which took place in the chamber of the country’s parliament on April 30, after the assembly passed a measure denying opposition members the right to speak in the chamber until they recognize Maduro as president.

Maduro said the physical altercation was “planned” ahead of Obama’s trip to Mexico and Central America.

On April 14, Maduro was elected president after defeating opposition leader Henrique Capriles by receiving 50.7 percent of the vote against 49.1 percent, with a difference of 235,000 ballots. Capriles claims irregularities had taken place.

However, on April 28, Venezuela’s National Electoral Council said Capriles had failed to present any compelling proof that there were irregularities during the presidential election.

Posted in Venezuela0 Comments

Venezuelan Audit Can’t Find Any Different Result in Presidential Election, Statistical Analysis Shows

NOVANEWS

 

CEPR,-  statistical analysis by the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) has shown that if Venezuelan opposition claims that Nicolás Maduro’s victory was obtained by fraud were true, it is practically impossible to have obtained the result that was found in an audit of 53% of electronic voting machines that took place on the evening of Venezuela’s April 14 elections.  The odds of this occurring would be far less than one in 25 thousand trillion.

Photo Prensa Presidential

Photo Prensa Presidential

“The U.S. government must know this, too,” said CEPR Co-Director Mark Weisbrot, economist and co-author of a forthcoming paper with economist and computer scientist David Rosnick. “So it is difficult to explain why they are refusing to recognize the elected president – in opposition to all of the countries in Latin America and most of the world.”

The results of Venezuela’s April 14 presidential election returned 7,575,506 votes for Nicolás Maduro, and 7,302,641 votes for challenger Henrique Capriles Radonski.  This is a difference of 272,865 votes, or 1.8 percent of the two-way total between the candidates.

In this election, voters express their preference by pressing a computer touch-screen, which then prints out a paper receipt of their vote.  The voter then checks to make sure that the receipt was the same as her choice, and deposits  the paper receipt in a sealed box.

When the polls closed, a random sample of 53 percent[i] of all the machines (20,825 out of 39,303) was chosen, and a manual tally was made of the paper receipts.  This “hot audit” was done on site, in the presence of the observers from both campaigns, as well as witnesses from the community.  There were no reports from witnesses or election officials on site of discrepancies between the machine totals and the hand count.

Capriles evidence

Immediately after the election results were announced on the night of April 14th, the Venezuelan opposition demanded a full “recount” of all of the voting machines’ paper receipts and subsequently called for an audit – or manual count – of the 46% of the sealed boxes containing the paper receipts that had not yet been audited.  After the Venezuelan Electoral Council’s (CNE’s) decision to grant their request, on April 18th, the main opposition party came up with a series of new demands suggesting that they did not believe that a full audit would provide evidence of any significant fraud.  On April 26 they announced that they would “boycott” the audit that they had requested the previous week.

What if it were true that there were enough mismatches in the 39,303 machines to have given Maduro a 50.8 percent majority, when Capriles had been the true winner?  CEPR calculated that the probability of getting the results of the first audit would then have been less than one in 25 thousand trillion.

“The results are pretty much intuitive,” said Weisbrot.  “With a sample that huge verified during the April 14 ‘hot audit,’ if there were any discrepancies between the machine count and the paper ballots, it would have shown up somewhere. But it didn’t.”

It is therefore practically impossible that an audit of the remaining 46 percent of ballot boxes could find enough discrepancies to reverse the result of the election.

The forthcoming paper also calculates the probability that the remaining 46 percent of ballot boxes, if audited, could change the outcome. It also looks at other possible scenarios, including allegations from Capriles that there were irregularities in some 12,000 of the remaining machines, and other ways that the unaudited machines could have enough errors to change the result.  The above calculation can be seen here.  The full paper will be available next week.

[i]  Another 1 percent was audited the next day.

Posted in Venezuela0 Comments

Human Rights Watch lies about Chávez and Venezuela

NOVANEWS

Answering the slanders

Venezuela’s President Hugo Chávez Frias has died, and true to form, the vultures are circling. The establishment press and so-called “human rights” organizations are dusting off all the old slanders and lies in new articles and reports. In this alternative version of history, Chávez was an incorrigible, populist autocrat, whose sunny-sounding vision of uplifting the poor was nothing but a façade covering a corrupt, decaying dictatorship offering only the opposite of its promises.

While a few pundits have the decency to obliquely mention a few of the achievements of the Chávez government, others have absolutely no shame. Human Rights Watch, for instance, self-appointed defender of all that is right and good, has truly outdone itself—publishing a denunciation of Chávez that, paying no attention to context, ignores all signals that point to social progress and speeds right past good taste.

In fact, despite the name, HRW has written a report that will be warmly welcomed in the camp of the serial violators of human dignity banded together in the Venezuelan opposition movement as well as in Western imperialist capitals.

What are ‘human rights’ anyway?

HRW opens the piece by saying in part:

“Hugo Chávez’s presidency (1999-2013) was characterized by … open disregard for basic human rights guarantees.”

This is, perhaps, the most laughable of all their claims. Starting from 1999, there has been a 37.6 percent decline in the poverty rate in Venezuela. If we start that measurement in 2004 after the consolidation of the Chavista movement in government, there has been a 49.7 percent reduction. Extreme poverty saw an even deeper reduction, 70 percent since 2004.

Such a massive reduction of poverty gives rise to a number of striking statistics. Just since 2011, 350,000 houses have been built, with a target of 380,000 in 2013, all part of a plan to provide an affordable and dignified home to all 3.7 million people in need of a home. In nine years, 1.5 million Venezuelans have received free eye surgery. In the same nine years, 1.75 million were taught to read.

Chávez’s impact on his nation can so easily be gauged that even the Washington Post admitted that the “poor masses”—that is, the majority of Venezuelans—mourned for Chávez. Hardly the response one would expect at the death of a hardened “autocrat.” Further, if access to decent housing, food and health care are not human rights, then what are they? Chávez based his entire term in office on providing rights like these. Viewed in this way, he might well have been considered  the greatest guarantor of human rights in the entire hemisphere.

‘Attacking judicial independence’—the context

HRW also accuses Chávez of “attacking judicial independence.” Once again, this is a criticism devoid of context. Since the beginning of his presidency, the right-wing opposition has done everything possible to impede the progress of the Bolivarian process, despite that Chávez again, and again, and yet again had his leadership reaffirmed at the ballot box.

In April 2002, the opposition coalition, an assortment of the super-rich and others whose privilege was curtailed by Chávez, launched a coup. A cabal of military officers, the police, and almost every television and radio station lined up against Chávez, who was detained by the coup plotters. Mass protest caused the coup to fail and Chávez was returned to power. This incident highlights the fact that prior to most of Chávez’s most radical reforms, the opposition was more than willing to use extralegal methods to preserve their special privileges.

Further, between November 2001 and December 2002, there were four significant lockouts by business owners attempting to weaken the Chávez government, including the oil lockout at the end of 2002 that caused almost $20 billion in lost revenue for the government.

The lockouts came on top of efforts by many of the big food production companies to create shortages through hoarding—which they are again doing in the run-up to the April 14 presidential election. Year after year, hundreds and sometimes thousands of tons of goods, like sugar, milk, flour, coffee and other staples, were found in warehouses being held off the market deliberately, filtering into black market distribution networks that undermined government attempts to improve access to food. Despite these efforts at sabotage, the government programs, including discount stores and increased acreage under cultivation, have led to increased consumption, even in the face of shortages.

The Venezuelan rich have also shown a keen penchant for using their capital not to invest in their own country but to live large in Miami. Even pro-capitalist Business Week admits this phenomenon is all about hiding money from the government, not “bad economics,” in Venezuela itself.

There is no leader anywhere else in the world over the past decade to more clearly receive the support of the vast majority of people in their country.

So considering just this brief list of destabilization efforts (which have taken place with the active encouragement of the U.S. government and media), it seems clear that Chávez faced unbelievable headwinds in exercising his own elected mandate. In 17 elections, Chávez and the Bolivarian process have had their direction ratified. In the most recent presidential election, Chávez was victorious with a clear majority. There is no leader anywhere else in the world over the past decade to more clearly receive the support of the vast majority of people in their country.

With this context established, one can see that HRW’s objections to Chávez’s efforts are so much chaff easily separated from the wheat. HRW is particularly indignant that Chávez increased the size of the Supreme Court and that the new appointees were supportive of the revolutionary process.

The expansion of the Supreme Court must be seen in the context of both continued electoral success in conjunction with repeated attempts to derail the Bolivarian process. It is clear that Chávez had a broad mandate from the masses of people not only to create social programs but to transform society. Transformations upset the entire established order, and as history shows, those who lose their privileged position will fight desperately to regain it.

The Bolivarian process is about more than legality. It is a process of determining what sort of society Venezuela is to become, a process taking place on all levels, and whose broad support required any true representative of the people to pursue every avenue possible to secure the future. Thus the expansion of the Supreme Court was not some sort of “power grab” for the sake of more power, but a tactic in the broader struggle with the forces of the right who were determined to use both legal and illegal avenues to stop the Bolivarian process.

HRW would rather Chávez to have “respected” the “rule of law” than feed or house people. They could care less about whether or not the people of Venezuela live decently, and preach instead only about their legally defined “human rights”—as defined and vetted by world elites.

Repression?

HRW and others made quite a bit of noise about the case of one judge, Maria Lourdes Afiuni. Afiuni spent one year in jail, was allegedly tortured, and remains under house arrest. Again, context is important here. In the face of the glee with which the opposition pursued every method possible to overthrow Chávez, if the only real form of “repression” of the judiciary is the arrest of one judge, Chávez by all measures is remarkably non-repressive. Carlos Andres Perez, a former president of Venezuela, in just a few days in 1989 killed 3,000 people who were protesting against IMF austerity policies he imposed.

Further context in which actions occur should affect how we view them. Abraham Lincoln several times abrogated the constitutional rights of Confederate sympathizers in the North; at one point, habeas corpus was suspended in several states. However, almost no one (other than Confederate sympathizers) views that as any real stain on his legacy, given the context of the war to end slavery.

Suppression of press freedom

HRW takes Chávez to task for allegedly suppressing press freedoms, acting as if the media had simply been an innocent bystander as the Bolivarian process was unfolding. In fact, as mentioned earlier, the media openly played a key role in the attempted coup by deliberately spreading misinformation. RCTV, one of the companies most often mentioned as a victim of government “authoritarianism,” is headed up by a man who once worked with the CIA during the “dirty wars” of the 1980s.

In addition, it is absurd to suggest that Chávez purged the media of any criticism. Venezuelan state media had only a 5.4 percent audience share as of 2010, compared to 37 percent in France. Almost every major newspaper in Venezuela is hostile to Chávez as are an array of channels available via cable and satellite.

Hugo Chávez, presente!

Hugo Chávez was not an authoritarian; he was a revolutionary. He stood not on legal formality, but on revolutionary principle. This is why Human Rights Watch and others must slander him. Hugo Chávez was a living example that it is possible to take on the powerful and rally the hopes of millions across the globe to end oppression and exploitation. While Human Rights Watch will never admit it, Hugo Chávez was the greatest humanitarian of the last decade.

Posted in Venezuela0 Comments

Venezuela to charge US filmmaker as ‘terrorist’

NOVANEWS

This undated family photo released on Thursday shows Timothy Tracy inside a vehicle in Venezuela (photo credit: AP/Courtesy of family)

Authorities nab Timothy Tracy, accused of fomenting post-election violence, on his way out of the country

Times of Israel

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — A 35-year-old filmmaker from California has been arrested by Venezuelan authorities who are accusing him of fomenting post-election violence on behalf of the US government.

President Nicolas Maduro said Thursday that he personally ordered Timothy Tracy’s arrest on suspicion of “creating violence in the cities of this country.” Venezuela’s interior minister said Tracy was working for US intelligence, paying right-wing youth groups to hold violent demonstrations in order to destabilize the country after Maduro’s narrow election win last week.

Friends and family of Tracy told The Associated Press that he had been in Venezuela since last year making a documentary about the country, which is bitterly divided politically as the socialist heirs of the late President Hugo Chavez struggle to maintain control of a country beset by economic and political turmoil

The Georgetown University English graduate was a story consultant on the 2009 documentary “American Harmony,” about competitive barbershop quartet singing, and produced the recent Discovery Channel program “Under Siege,” about terrorism and smuggling across the US-Canada border as well the History Channel series “Madhouse,” on modified race-car drivers in North Carolina.

“They don’t have CIA in custody. They don’t have a journalist in custody. They have a kid with a camera,” said Aengus James, a friend and associate of Tracy’s in Hollywood, California, and director of “American Harmony.”

James described Tracy as “fearless” but also somewhat quixotic.

“This whole thing came about with him at a party in South Florida,” he said. “He met this cute girl who says, ‘If you really are a documentary filmmaker you’ll come tell the story of what is happening in Venezuela,’ and if you say something like that to Tim he goes, whether or not he knows a single person there or knows anything about the political situation or the consequences.”

Tracy had been detained at least twice before by Venezuela’s SEBIN intelligence police. The last time was five days before the April 14 presidential election when he was taking video of a pro-government rally in the port city of Puerto Cabello, said an associate who spoke on condition of anonymity because he did not want to endanger people inside Venezuela.

The US Embassy in Caracas declined immediate comment, citing citizen privacy.

In Washington, State Department spokesman William Ostick said US consular officials in Venezuela are attempting to meet and speak with Tracy. He declined to discuss details of the man’s arrest.

Ostick rejected Maduro’s repeated allegations that the United States is attempting to undermine Venezuela’s government.

“The United States continues categorically to reject any allegations of US government efforts to destabilize the Venezuelan government or to harm anyone in Venezuela,” he said. “Tensions in Venezuelan society result from the fact that there was an extremely close election.”

Prosecutors said Tracy was arrested Wednesday evening as he tried to fly out of Simon Bolivar International Airport outside the capital, Caracas.

Tracy’s father Emmet, of Grosse Pointe Farms, Michigan, said that in his last email his son had asked for some airline miles so he could fly to the United States so they could be together for the father’s 80th birthday.

The prosecution said he would be brought to a court hearing Thursday to be formally charged under Venezuela’s anti-terrorism laws.

The police had been friendly to Tracy during the previous incidents, with some even agreeing to appear in his documentary, the filmmaker’s father said. Emmet Tracy said, however, that the family had begun urging his son to leave the country in light of the volatile political situation.

“Frankly it’s the kind of scenario that we were concerned about and kept telling him,” Emmet Tracy said.

Tensions in the country have been rising since Maduro beat opposition candidate Henrique Capriles in the April 14 election by less than 2 percentage points. The government insists the opposition fomented violence directed at ruling party supporters and official buildings in the days after the election. The opposition is demanding an audit of the vote, which it says was stolen.

Venezuela’s government has long accused the United States of trying to undermine it, moving closer to Cuba, Iran and Russia after a failed 2002 coup attempt against Chavez that the George W. Bush administration initially recognized.

Tracy is the first American in recent memory to be detained in Venezuela on politically related charges, however.

“I gave the order that they detain him immediately, hand him to prosecutors with the proof that there is because nobody can be destabilizing this country, whatever they believe, because they’re on the side of the bourgeoisie, no,” Maduro said.

James said Tracy’s Spanish is passable but not great.

He said Tracy “literally has no political agenda. He is very sympathetic to all sides. He’s telling stories about people and what their life is like there.”

“He has been involved in telling stories that told that international component. But he certainly never worked for the government,” said James.

“He’s trying to tell a human story,” said James. “My fear is that he’s gone in deeper than he should have.”

Posted in Venezuela0 Comments

Join our mailing list

* = required field

Archives