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.
Not at all. If anything, you're being too understated where that fat hemorroid is concerned.
He wants to be like his idol Vladimir Putin.
So Latin America has known all along what Americans learned this week; Chavez is simply the latest in a long line of thugs who have run South American countries. He shouldn't be worrying about whether or not President Bush will have him killed. There is a better chance that some of his own countrymen or fellow dwellers of South America will do it.
Bachelet is under enormous pressure in Chile for her vacillation, evidenced in her attitude of appeasement in the present case. It's becoming evident that she doesn't know how to rule. She could learn, I guess.
Thanks for the compliments JCE. I pinged you because you seemed to care about these things, so I'm glad you showed up. I think I'm going to be keeping a closer eye on Chavez now that the Mexican situation, which I will continue to monitor, is calming down a bit.
Thanks for translating this - you've done us a tremendous service that is very valuable.
The members of the U.N. consider themselves to be intelligent, sophisticated, and learned. Speakers at the U.N. are generally expected to be eloquent and they are expected to give educated or perhaps inspiring and uplifting speeches. Thus, I believe that many in the U.N. viewed Chavez' speech as a low class clown act. I think that many of the elites at the U.N. felt a sense of mortification and embarrassment. Imagine if you welcomed someone to a nice dinner with friends. Your expectation was that the man would be interesting and engaging. Instead, he stinks and picks his nose at the table, gets drunk, tells crude jokes, belches loudly, breaks wind and challenges other to do better, and grinds his cigarettes out in the beautiful rug. That, in essence, is the impression he made on many of the people at the U.N.
And BTW, he didn't exactly ingratiate himself with the Democrats either. Perhaps privately, they enjoyed it. But I think it is possible that they too felt some sense of mortification, and didn't want to be publicly associated with such a low class jerk. They have some pride and their sense is: "I can't be seen in public with you. It doesn't look good for me and you're an embarrassment." Rather, they would prefer that he return to Venezuela so they can admire him from afar. And there won't be any more dinner invitations.
I concur, StJacques. Founding Father's post was the last thing I read on Freep last night. I was far too sleepy to post; but I almost added data to his on the "fascist Chavez/Maisanta/Tascon list"; which I've posted elsewhere. I'm *really* glad to know Freep Posters are watching and reaching out to South America through concern and interest.
Latin America's Axis of Socialism
--snips:
However, most instructive of the intentions of the Lula government has been its approach to Paraguay. Paraguay lies on the southwest border of Brazil, historically functioning as a buffer state between the country and Argentina. As a result of President Nicanor Duarte’s pro-marker policies and strong relations with the United States, the Paraguayan president has become increasingly isolated.
Castro dispatched 700 Cuban agents masquerading as doctors in an attempt the depose Duarte and put in place a socialist government. By August the plot was uncovered and the agents were expelled. Castro’s comrade Chavez also makes little attempt to disguise his displeasure for a rightist government on his continent. On April 8, 2005, the Paraguayan ambassador to Caracas, Ana Maria Figueredo, was beaten unconscious in broad-daylight in the streets of Caracas only to find the Venezuelan foreign ministry [MY NOTE: MADURO] unwilling to help her after she regained consciousness. No apology was offered by Chavez’s government until a weak after the incident.
The news is not as encouraging in Chile. The early favorite in the forthcoming elections is a female socialist by the name of Michelle Bachelet. This former torture victim of Augusto Pinochet’s dictatorship has been involved in various socialist movements from her years as a student in the early 1970’s. While her radicalism reaches nowhere near the level of Chavez, her political orientation certainly leans closer to him and his ilk than to the United States. Furthermore, Bachelet will act as a walking reminder of the United States’ support for Pinichet’s 1973 coup, something that is hardly looked fondly upon in many circles of the Chilean population.
--end snips
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.