PING – Hugo is at it again!
Please FReepmail me if you would like on/off the Hugo/Venezuela Ping list.
HugoPing Archive
Posted on 09/25/2006 2:46:04 PM PDT by StJacques
Bachelet's price for supporting Chavez After the speech of the Venezuelan president, the critical comments of the [Venezuelan] Ambassador in Santiago Victor Delgado are what has endangered the inclination of the Chief Executive for this country [to support Venezuela's candidacy for a seat on the UN Security Council] By Sergio Espinosa V. When Hugo Chavez abandoned the podium of the General Assembly of the United Nations, Wednesday the 20th, the echo of his inflammatory speech against the President of the United States, George W. Bush, and his histrionic gestures still resounded in the ears of incredulous listeners. The members of the Chilean delegation who are escorting President Michelle Bachelet count themselves among them. In later conversations in the corridor, the subject was broached between the delegates of different countries, and several Chilean diplomats criticized the attacks of the Venezuelan ruler. "Here several countries who are with Venezuela told us that they are now revising their support," one of them assured (see picture box). But, as the same witness remembered, far from adding to the chorus of criticism, Bachelet showed herself less emphatic and adopted a neutral posture. "At no time did she openly reproach him," the same source maintained. An attitude which continues down the footpath of inscrutability that was shown regarding the decision which will have to be taken with respect to supporting Venezuela or Guatemala for the Security Council of the organizational body. And on which her inclination for the first country [Venezuela] is a source of friction within the government. But if Chavez's anti-imperialist diatribes were not sufficient to change her mind, a few hours later the less subdued comments of the [Venezuelan] ambassador in Santiago managed to irritate her in the extreme. Darts without Diplomacy "We are learning who our true friends are, and many of those who opposed the entry of Venezuela to the Security Council supported the coup d'état against Chavez in April, 2002." The interview granted by the Venezuelan Ambassador Victor Delgado to the [internet] portal Terra provoked a strong reaction in [the Chilean presidential palace of] La Moneda. Especially because the [Venezuelan] representative left no doubts about the correct interpretation of his statements. "The 12th of April, the communiqué of the U.S. Department of State, supporting the coup d'état against Chavez, was the same text of the Chilean Chancellery," he explained with respect to what occurred in April, 2002. His darts were aimed even further, when he openly criticized the clear rejection of Christian Democracy favoring Caracas in the voting of next October 16 [for the UN Security Council]. "The position of the Christian Democrats towards Chavez is the same that they had towards President Allende. This attitude does not surprise me, the Christian Democrats were themselves opposed to Allende's socialist, progressive, and renewing project, and they are resisting the same project of President Chavez. There is an international organization which is called ODCA [i.e. American Christian Democratic Organization], whose president is the husband of Mrs. Alvear, Gutenberg Martinez, who supported the coup d'état in Venezuela," he concluded. As the news reports advanced last Sunday, the chavista government still does not pardon the Martinez-Alvear marriage, which unites the principal detractors of the Caracas government in our country. But what were mere accusations up to now covered up as "off the record," in the mouth of the ambassador they recovered their nerve and, even more so, they drew a direct line with Chavez himself. Losing patience Bachelet was furious. Finishing an act of tribute to the ex Chancellor Orlando Letelier on the new premises of the Chilean mission before the UN, she held a meeting in an office with Chancellor Alejandro Foxley, the Director of Foreign Policy Carlos Portales, and her "second floor" advisor in international affairs, Marcos Robledo. There, the four of them prepared the strong declaration with which the [Chilean] government would respond to Delgado. After determining who would read it, whether Foxley himself from New York or the Undersecretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (RR.EE.), Alberto van Klaveren in Santiago. Finally, they opted for the latter so that it did not seem that the minister -- of Christian Democratic sympathies -- was defending his own party. For Bachelet, the affair was much more than this: an open rupture with the principles that govern diplomatic performance and a flagrant interference in the internal affairs of Chile. "Irreparable" is the term with which the Chancellery qualified the damage provoked by the ambassador from Caracas. For the same reason, the tough communiqué endorsed by the President left no doubts about her final intention: Chavez must remove Delgado because "the terms used by him are disqualifying for an ambassador and, if he does not return to his country, this [affair] will convert itself into a permanent problem between both nations," a high functionary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs explained. Bachelet insists In addition to the attacks on a pro-government Senator, the diplomat's darts also left Bachelet in an uncomfortable situation facing a key party of [her coalition] government and they hit the target in ex President Lagos. An explosive cocktail that explained the President's discomfort and the toughness of the response. Friday, in New York, at the end of an Ibero-American Community lunch, a pressurized Foxley prepared to go to the airport to take a return flight to Santiago. He then received the message by which his Venezuelan counterpart, Nicolas Maduro, wanted to meet with him. Already notified of the tough communiqué emitted by Van Klaveren -- to which a timid apology for Delgado followed -- the minister understood that Venezuela desired to explore the Chilean will to negotiate a way out of the conflict. Nevertheless, he could not miss his flight and it was the Ambassador to the UN, Heraldo Muñoz, who finally received the Vice Chancellor of the petroleum-producing country. Following the instructions ordered by Bachelet -- who at that hour had already landed in Santiago -- he insisted to his interlocutor that the damage was irreparable and that an apology was not enough. "Heraldo clearly sent the message for which we had hoped," the Chancellery related. Something that the President herself would take charge of stating. After finalizing an act in [the Chilean presidential palace of] La Moneda, she went with Van Klaveren by the presidential elevator up to his office. There both agreed upon that which the Undersecretary would say to the press 30 minutes later, contradicting the ambassador's excuse of having been distorted and insisting that they would wait for the response from Caracas to the formal complaint brought by the government. In diplomatic language, they were awaiting Delgado's recall. Two members of the Chilean delegation in New York confirmed that the Venezuelan Vice Chancellor advanced to Muñoz that in the short term there would be a reparatory gesture dealing with the Chilean complaint. But he did not specify what. The Scales Balance Curiously, whether or not this gesture is what La Moneda is waiting for, in the Christian Democratic Party itself they are not preoccupied with it. The words of Senator Jorge Pizarro, demanding the exit of the [Venezuelan] diplomat, were a personal view but were stated collectively. "It does not matter to us that Delgado remains, because as much as Chavez's speech in the UN the critical comments of the ambassador have made it very difficult to continue thinking that we can vote for Venezuela," a member of the party's directorate commented graphically. "If before this 90% of Chileans opposed it, it now must be 99%," he adds. While Alvear follows the episode from the U.S., where she journeyed with her husband to visit her son, the party received the government's message which included the ill feelings of the Christian Democrats, but which would not insist on an anti-Chavez vote. The recall of the ambassador is not a collective negotiation. Precisely because the fear of the Chancellery -- which is aligned behind Foxley in his rejection of favoring Chavez's pretensions -- is that the toughness demonstrated by Bachelet, her insistence in not recognizing Delgado as interlocutor and his possible return to Caracas, might end the crisis. And, what is even worse, the newly-balanced scales favor Venezuela. "If Delgado goes, there are those who believe that Bachelet will have an argument to justify anew the Chilean vote for that country [i.e. Venezuela]," a highly-placed person in the Ministry of Affairs admitted. Chavez knows that the ambassador's head is worth a vote, but neither the Chancellery nor the Christian Democrats knows whether it agrees to accept that price. Measuring Strength: How the voting for Venezuela and Guatemala will come before the UN The forecasts which were made this week at the UN -- prior to Chavez's speech -- pointed to Guatemala gathering 80 votes and Venezuela 40, with a little more than 60 countries who still had not made a decision or would vote without manifesting their preference for filling the non-permanent posts in the Security Council of the organization for the next two years. For the same reason, according to these calculations neither country would bring together the two thirds necessary to prevail the first time around, and several rounds of voting will probably be necessary to determine the winner. With all this, the interceding intervention of the Venezuelan ruler in the General Assembly could alter things if some supporters already won by him change their minds at the last minute. The man charged with voting on the 16th of October in Chile's name will be Ambassador Heraldo Muñoz, who will maintain a direct line with Santiago while the voting lasts. As soon as Bachelet officializes here decision in favor of Venezuela or Guatemala, Foxley will transmit it to Muñoz and thus will he proceed to vote. In any case, the competition between the two Latin American countries to accompany Peru in the two seats assigned to the region is not the only one [taking place at the UN]. While the rest of the regions have a consensus candidate, Asia is also living through a dispute between Indonesia and Nepal for being seated in this body. During the two days the General Assembly lasted, the Presidents, Chancellors, and Ambassadors of both countries undertook an intense lobbying effort with the rest of the nations to assure the necessary votes. Nevertheless, in this case the result is also uncertain, according to a Chilean diplomat.
Many thanks for the information. It is clear that Chavez's arrogant, bombastic style is not restricted to the man himself. Communist diplomats in the early Cold War days used to display similar histrionics until it became clear that it hurt more than it helped. So will this.
South American leftists often gave their kids Russian first names; I've met several. In fact, I'm working with a Venezuelan "Vladimir" right now.
BTTT
Yes, its usually a dead giveaway, if a south american is named after Lenin or Stalin, his parents were usually leftists. I have met Mexicans, Venezuelans, and Ecuadorians named "Vladimir" especially, sometimes Vladimir Ilyich just to make sure you don't miss the point. In some cases they were not themselves leftists, it was their dad's thing.
One guy's entire family, brothers and sisters, had Russian first names, his dad was a proud communist, and he himself studied in the Ukraine on a Soviet scholarship and married a Ukrainian girl. He eventually lost interest himself in communist politics, but his dad never did.
My current work pal is a "Vlad" who is on the run from Chavez. His entire family is communist and pro-Chavez, and he is the black sheep in his family as a result. Good guy.
Then there is the Jackal, the Venezuelan terrorist, whose name is, guess, Ilich. His brother Lenin Ramirez serves as Venezuela's Energy Minister. Not hard to figure out their dad was a marxist (as are they).
There is extreme unease here at Chavez cozying up to Ahmadinejad - with Chavez' crude meddling in Chilean domestic politics (particularly after Chileans seeing his crude meddling in Bolivia, Peru and Mexico) and questioning events during the administration of the much revered Ricardo Lagos (who is Bachelet's political mentor and godfather), all bets on what was once a certain vote for Venezuela vote are now off.
Chavez has the Midas touch in reverse.
ironically, it is *still* possible Chile will vote for Venezuela - Bachelet is a *very* weak President.
You have probably read Chavez' love letter to the Jackal, written in 1999...
Swimming in the depths of your letter of solidarity I could hear the pulse of our shared insight that everything has its due time: time to pile up stones or hurl them, to ignite revolution or to ignore it; to pursue dialectically a unity between our warring classes or to stir the conflict between them—a time when you can fight outright for principles and a time when you must choose the proper fight, lying in wait with a keen sense for the moment of truth, in the same way that Ariadne, invested with these same principles, lays the thread that leads her out of the labyrinth.
Our liberator Simon Bolivar, whose theories and example are fundamental to our doctrine of revolution, whispered briefly this question before he passed away: "How will I find the way out of this labyrinth?" We agree with Bolivar that Time delivers miracles only to those who maintain a righteous spirit, to those who understand the true meaning of things. There is no measure of distance or time that can undermine these thoughts of our Caracan hero.
I feel that my spirit's own strength will always rise to the magnitude of the dangers that threaten it. My doctor has told me that my spirit must nourish itself on danger to preserve my sanity, in the manner that God intended, with this stormy revolution to guide me in my great destiny.
With profound faith in our cause and our mission, now and forever!
http://www.harpers.org/1999-10-MyStruggle.html
http://www.analitica.com/bitblioteca/hchavez/carta_chacal.asp
Its a bit creepy, really. My understanding is that he tried early in his presidency to get Carlos released, and failing that, directed the embassy in Paris to do whatever it could to help Carlos. Then, of course, he went on to hire Carlos' brother as a cabinet member.
You'll notice that the Harper's translation is abridged; if anything the original is nerdier than the Harper's version.
Thank you for the link marron. I'm here during a commercial for my Saints game and I'll get to it later.
Ping
>>I was hoping to hear more news from the Venezuelan people, do you know how they reacted, generally?<<
From The Devil's Excrement:
http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/
Funny how Chavez' stunt at the United Nations led so much traffic to my blog. You see, if you combine the words Chavez and Devil in any decent search engine, guess who is right at the top with many entries? Thus, I had a Devilanche of visitors as people tried to read more about what Chavez was saying about the leader of the country that buys the most oil from Venezela in the world. Fortunately I had made a post of the subject from work, which I rarely do, so that those arriving here could actually read about what happened.
As usual, and as expected, we got our share of PSF's and superficial Chavez admirers, who came to tell us what a great guy he is for daring to tell it like it is.As if disliking Bush is enough of a reason for liking our autocratic President. Well, I will tell them what it is like here: While Chavez was talking about peace and the rights of people, he continues to neglect his own country where, since Chavez took over in 1998, 90,000 people have died on homicides as murders have tripled in these eight years Chavez has been President. To put it in perspective this is more deaths under the "caring Chavez" than in the armed conflict in Colombia (73,000), The Persian Gulf War (63500), the Chchen war (50,000) or the war in Afghanistan (33,000).And those who die come from the lowest social strata, the "pueblo" that Chavze claims to care so much for. Meanwhile, 44 Venezulans die daily in homicides as Venzuela has 40 violent deaths per 100,000 inhabitants per year, an achievement that can be blamed completely on the Chavez Government which has tripled the numbers in eight years by ignoring the problem as well as its total incapacity to attack it.Venezuela now has the dubious honor of being the number one country in the world in deaths by firearms according to UNESCO.
Meanwhile, the country's judicial system, the cornerstone of Chavez accomplishments in the first three years in office can claim the following:
--90,000 monthly crime complaints are filed and processed.
--There are 98 cops per 100,000 people, less than one third of what is needed.
--Prosecutors handle 3,000 cases monthly each
--Judges decide on 1.6 complaints per hour
--93% of homicides go unpunished.
--Deaths by confrontation with police have increased by a factor of 5.
--Kidnappings have doubled in eight years.
--Over half the judges are temporary.
Thus, our "caring", "daring" President spends his time abroad insulting others and accusing them of the same crimes he is responsible for in Venezuela: His total neglect for his people as he travels and has become an absentee President, who in the end cares only about his personal project and not the "peace", "rights" or welfare of his Venezuelans citizens. Hopefully, he will spend sometime here in the next few months and leave his US$ 83 million Airbus parked, stop buying more weapons, planes and helicopters and worry about and work for his own people. But I doubt it.
The rest is simply a charade. But that is all we have seen for the last eight years. Ask what Vargas state is, what happened there in 2000 and what conditions are like today. Ask what inflation has been in the last eight months or in the last eight years. Ask what corruption is like at the highest levels of power. Ask how many corrupt politicians have been prosecuted. Ask what the fascist Chavez/Maisanta/Tascon list is. Ask who pays Chavez' campaign. Ask what the gag law is. Ask if the same person is the Minister of Information and spokesman for Chavez political party. Ask how many people have died in opposition rallies in the last eight years. Ask how many political prisoners there are. Ask who the El Llaguno shooters are and why they are free. Ask if Chavez' relatives owned so much land before he became President. Ask what has happened to the thousands of hectares of expropriated land. Ask how many military are part of the civilian Government. Ask how many fascist dictators Chavez has visited and embraced in the last eight years. Ask what happened to the 2.4 billionUS dollars missing from the FIEM fund. There are hundreds of questions like this you can ask and the answers are all absolutely terrifying and horrifying.
Just don't believe the charade.
Thanks for posting this and for your very informative assessment. It's good to see that all South American nations are not going along with his ridiculous actions.
You are amazing. Your translations and commentary bring a richness to FR that is unrivalled in the blogosphere.
May his festering, maggot ridden, corpulent corpse be strung up by the ankles on a hoist, like Mussolini.
(Am I being too graphic here?)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.