The Chavez challenge

The Washington Times ^ | March 7, 2004 | staff

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has convulsed the democratic process once again

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Tens of thousands march to demand a referendum on Chavez (500,000)

U.S. ignores turmoil in Americas, analysts say

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Most serious observers believe Mr. Chavez would likely win an early election if he were to lose a recall referendum, given his level of support and the opposition's disorganization.

If this is true, why has Chavez fought tooth and nail to keep a referendum from happening?

[Paleo Conservative]

Interesting how former British colonies are prosperous and peaceful. Former Spanish colonies never seem to be able to join the first world. Former French colonies are basket cases.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

The British promoted civilized behavior, making the point to discourage barbarism and establish the rule of law. They built a damn fine railway system too.

[FastCoyote]

A 25 cent bullet would have solved all this two years ago.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

They really are trying to do this the democratic way, but alas they have sputtered along the way by giving Chavez too much power, not having a strong two party system or a sound judicial system.

[Paleo Conservative]

A 25 cent bullet would have solved all this two years ago.

If recovered afterwards, it could have been sold on eBay for quite a bit more.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

An anti-President Hugo Chavez protester dressed as death rallies with other opponents of Chavez in Caracas, Venezuela, Saturday. (AP/Javier Galeano)

[risk]

If this is true, why has Chavez fought tooth and nail to keep a referendum from happening?

Good point. In a truly democratic society, there is no use for kings, emperors, strong men, or lifetime populist rulership. No exectutive leader is "indespensible." The public changes its mind as often as the wind changes direction. Chavez knows even if he had popularity, the winds of change could take it away. Since he's actually a Castro-style dictator, there's no way he'll risk such a loss until it can't be avoided. Once the law dictates a new election, he'll make up an excuse to avoid that, too.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Since he's actually a Castro-style dictator, there's no way he'll risk such a loss until it can't be avoided. Once the law dictates a new election, he'll make up an excuse to avoid that, too.

Spot on!

[Cincinatus' Wife]

In a war of words with Bush, Chávez would win***…….. In his speech Sunday, Chávez cast Venezuela as a victim of ''Mr. Bush's interventionist, invading, colonialist government.'' Days later, Venezuela announced that it would call for an urgent Organization of American States meeting to condemn ''the American intervention in Haiti'' and alleged U.S. efforts to oust Venezuela's democratically elected government.

It's the old David vs. Goliath card, which Cuba's Fidel Castro has been successfully playing for the past four decades. And at a time when anti-Americanism in Latin America is at its highest levels in recent decades, Chávez thinks it's his best way to cling to power.

Third, by radicalizing his ''Bolivarian revolution,'' Chávez may be trying to provoke turmoil to have a pretext to impose martial law and rule by decree. He could do this through a ''self-coup,'' or simply by leading opposition leaders to conclude that they have no chance other than political violence.

''Venezuelans are fed up with violence, and whoever is seen as encouraging violence loses the game,'' says political analyst Graciela Roemer.

Will the Bush administration fall into Chávez's trap? So far, its coolest heads are prevailing. ''I've seen some of his comments, and I'm not just going to dignify them with a response from this podium,'' White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Wednesday.

But even well-placed Washington insiders say it is not clear whether this position will prevail.

There is growing evidence of Chávez support for Colombian guerrilla groups, and violent groups in Bolivia, Argentina and other South American countries. But the CIA has so far prevailed in keeping that information classified because of fears of new embarrassments such as the weapons of mass destruction fiasco after the Iraq war, well-placed Washington sources say.

The Bush administration and the Venezuelan opposition should avoid falling into Chávez's trap. If Chávez continues along the path of breaking democratic rule, the OAS and Carter Center observers should withdraw from Venezuela with a big splash, and deprive Chávez of his last claims to legitimacy.

Then, the United States should work with its Latin American and European allies -- especially with France, America's latest ally in the Haiti crisis -- to put pressure on Chávez to bring back the OAS and Carter Center observers and give them a supervisory role in the verification of the petition signatures being questioned.

In a U.S. vs. Venezuela war of words, Chávez would win. He knows that, and that's why he's raising the stakes.***

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Oil-rich Venezuela could end up like Haiti or maybe Cuba***The violence stems from the inability of the opposition to get a recall election off the ground. Twice they have collected the millions of signatures required for the recall, and twice the signatures have been invalidated on technicalities by pro-Chavez election authorities.

Chavez, a former military coup leader, was elected by a wide margin in 1998 and then was re-elected after a plebiscite that reformed the constitution. But his government has since been accused of becoming corrupt, authoritarian and repressive.

His close relationship with Cuban leader Fidel Castro has led thousands to flee in fear that he might be leading the country toward a Cuban-style dictatorship. Chavez vows to stay in power until 2012, confident that he will win yet another re- election.

The U.S. government denies Chavez's accusations that it was behind a coup attempt against him in 2002, but President Bush has now publicly expressed his support for the opposition's effort to hold a recall election. Chavez's reaction has been to attack Bush, calling him an illegitimate president and challenging his tenure: "Let's see who will last longer Bush in the White House or me in Miraflores (the Venezuelan presidential palace).'

Aristide did not resort to rhetoric or verbal confrontation with world leaders, as Chavez has. But his pleas for help in controlling the incessant violence were ignored. His inability to work with opposing forces made him lose credibility and the support of the international community.

In Venezuela, the Organization for American States and the Carter Center for Democracy have been trying to mediate between the opposing factions, but the country remains polarized.

The Bush administration does not hide its disdain for Chavez, much the same way it criticized Aristide up until the day he headed out of Haiti on a flight to Africa.

But removing democratically elected Chavez from office will be a much more difficult task. Venezuela will probably not be the next Haiti, but if something is not done soon, it could end up being the next Cuba.***

[livius]

Former Spanish colonies would be doing just fine if it had not been for the influence of Marxism just at the time that they were modernizing their governments.

Many of them have huge indigenous populations - who are a little difficult to integrate, simply because they are living the life style of European peasants of about 5 centuries ago - but in Spanish colonies there was a lot of intermarriage and Spanish colonies were also given the governmental structure common to the period of their founding. After their revolutions, they adopted newer forms of 19th century government, although with some difficulty because they were used to living under a system of heavy external control with the consequent dependence upon favoritism and influence. However, reform movements were definitely underway, and had they not been short circuited by the rise of Marxism, I think we'd be seeing a much different Latin America now - prosperous and probably better off than Mexico, in many cases.

The French, however, were always lousy colonists. They were cruel to their subjects (mostly Africans or imported Africans), did not intermarry much, and did not really expect to establish a governmental structure that would actively involve the people of the colony in any way.

[Jim Noble]

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has convulsed the democratic process once again — challenging "the international community" to come up with an effective response.

Please explain the words in quotes.

What is an "international community"?

How does it come into being?

Whence derives its authority?

And why should we care about it?

[Cincinatus' Wife]

"the international community"

That means friends of communism and enemies of the U.S.