Venezuela: People power in slow motion?
Credit to Author: JAIME J. YAMBAO| Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2019 16:39:25 +0000
BY the measure of efficiency by which people of all ideological persuasions ultimately determine the legitimacy of their rulers, Nicolas Maduro has no business holding power in Venezuela. Under his watch, the richest country in South America, with the greatest known oil reserves in the world, fell to incredible economic depths. Inflation rose to an unbelievable 1 million plus percent, and still counting. Venezuelans have experienced shortages in food, medicine, and of all things, electricity. Facing certain death by starvation and health issues that hospitals, sans doctors and medicines, could not treat, 3 million of them have fled the country and become refugees in neighboring countries.
Somewhere in Asia, the holder of such an abysmal record would have been driven to hara-kiri. But Maduro is apparently possessed of a thicker hide beyond shame or remorse. Denying that many of his people are in a humanitarian crisis, Maduro, alternatively, seems to be living in a world of fantasy of his own.
In May of last year Maduro was reelected in elections widely regarded as fraudulent. Before that, Maduro had the Constitution amended which put executive, legislative, and judicial powers in his hands. There were protests by the opposition, but it has taken some long months before the country seems to have come to the brink of a revolution. An interim president, Juan Guaido, has emerged and been recognized as the legitimate ruler by the United States and several South American countries. He has led mass protests but, to date, has not managed to draw the millions that forced even a Marcos or Suharto to question his appetite for carnage.
What appears to be protracting developments is the military’s steadfast support of Maduro. It may be recalled that Maduro’s late boss and predecessor, Hugo Chavez, was a military man who rode on the public’s disenchantment with the political parties. The military shared in the largesse enjoyed by the Maduro regime. The CEO of the National Oil Company, the regime’s milking cow, is a military general. Guaido has announced an amnesty for the military for whatever offenses they committed in power in a move to attract the latter to defect to the former’s side. In addition, he has been talking with military leaders, he says.
Like several other countries in the region, Venezuela has been ruled by caudillos or military dictators before. Could one rule out in the present situation the military thinking of pursuing a separate agenda and counting their chances of staging a comeback at the helm of their country?
The US government has been openly concerned about developments in Venezuela. President Trump had thought of military intervention but was prevailed against it by South American leaders. But Trump’s National Security Adviser has of late been quoted as saying all options are on the table. In the past, the US was able to have a dictator it had ceased to like arrested, brought to the US, and tried and jailed for corruption, drug trafficking or money laundering. Such swift and simple operations as kidnapping or assassination have had mixed results. US bungling at such attempts allowed Castro to rule Cuba to a ripe old age.
About those options, the US may now have to consider some lessons from the Arab Spring. It seems to have held it necessary that the opposition to Maduro should not just be composed of an amorphous band of quarreling factions held together only by a common animosity toward the status quo ruler and a common ambition to take his place. Liberated from Gaddafi, the militias in Libya have till now been unable to form a united government. The outcome of an upheaval in Venezuela may have been made clearer with the proclamation of Guaido as interim President charged with calling elections as soon as possible.
Another lesson of the Arab Spring on how not to bring about regime change is about acceding to the requests for arms from freedom fighters, such as some young Venezuelan army defectors have been making on TV. What you will surely get is not regime change but a bloody civil war. Moral support and a few sermons on the virtues of democracy should be all that is advisable. Trust in the naked courage and determination of the people themselves.
There are signs that the greatest lesson of the Arab Spring is relevant to the Venezuelan situation. This is the Assad Lesson. It is about encountering a dictator who, confident about the loyalty of his armed forces, would stop at nothing to hold on to power. He would have no qualms at ordering his men to fire at peaceful rallyists, reducing his country to rubble, sending women and children to a painful death with chemical weapons, and forcing his people to leave and look for safe havens in other countries where they are unwelcome. Finding himself outgunned, he would not think twice about inviting foreign powers to intervene.
Maduro has served notice that if things get bloody in his country, the Americans are the only ones to be blamed. How bloody they can be can be surmised from the fact that the same countries that supported Assad recognize Maduro as the legitimate leader of his country. Reminiscent of Russian intervention in Syria, the considerable military loans Russia and China have extended to the Maduro regime might well provide an excuse for military intervention.
In short, events in Venezuela seem to be coming to a most dangerous juncture for its people. Much depends on the determination and courage of the Venezuelan opposition.
People Power in Venezuela today lacks the drama, spontaneity and angry quality of the EDSA Revolution. There is no iconic martyr inspiring outrage and sacrifice on the part of the people. There are no Church figures whose active support gives the act of rallying a spiritual and moral purpose. The Latino Pope is not taking sides.
Should some bits of recent history be brought to the equation? The Chavez-Maduro regime came to power on the promise of social progress, particularly uplifting the poor. That promise yielded some spectacular accomplishments such as giving free housing to a considerable number of homeless families. During the Chavez presidency, poverty was recorded to have dropped significantly. Could this be a reason for the ongoing migration of Venezuelans to other countries? Those who benefited from the Chavista programs while the going was good may have preferred to leave the country rather than confront Maduro for his shortcomings.
Could the Venezuelans be suffering from revolution fatigue? After you get rid of the socialists, what do you really get from “the return of democracy and free enterprise?” In the aftermath of similar events in other parts of Latin America, the nationalized companies are privatized and the old predatory oligarchs become instant billionaires! What is driving US intervention? Democracy? Or control of the biggest oil reserves in the world?
Alas, we can only pray that the liberation of Venezuela from tyranny and want will be realized with a minimum of bloodshed, if not in peace. God save Venezuela from dictators and the predatory yanqui!
The post Venezuela: People power in slow motion? appeared first on The Manila Times Online.