Friday, March 14, 2014

Some people never learn: Jennifer McCoy of the Carter Center promotes herself

I am dumbfounded to read an article of Jennifer McCoy at Al Jazeera where she actually sorts of offers her services to mediate in Venezuela. For those who do not know who she is, McCoy is the director of the Carter Center after Carter gave up direct involvement due to old age. She was participating a lot in the 2002-2004 dialogue fiasco of which she at least admits "The Carter Center, facilitated a seven-month negotiation that resulted in an agreement, though it failed to include an enforcement mechanism." My emphasis.

Since she brought it up, let's start with the rather nefarious role of the Carter Center then of which she is guilty in part (large part? mostly?) since she was the figurehead in quite a few stays in Venezuela. To get any credibility in Venezuela at this stage of the game she could start by some form of apology of having helped the Chavez regime get away with its first electoral fraud in 2004 and also, even worse, to have say little bit more than peep squeak on things like the "Tascon List" and other chavismo abuse of power in the decade that followed. In short, what I am trying to say again, that I said clearly in my open letter to the former president Carter, her help to the Chavez regime, willingly or not, is at the direct source of the troubles of today that she dares to write about as a diffident intellectual, good enough for Al Jazeera.

I am not going to retake the arguments I advanced in that open letter to Jimmy Carter: I am tired to rehash over and over what a fraud he has been vis a vis Venezuela.  I am just going to use excerpts of the Al Jazeera piece which proves that McCoy may not be as much a fraud as Carter, but she comes across rather heartless, unapologetic and disingenuous.

A main offense is that she compares Venezuela with the Tunisia and Egypt situation as if the realities of these countries had any link with Latin America. Not even this blogger who is prone to the occasional lyric excess has dared to go beyond a wishful call of a Venezuelan Spring, without elaborating further. Certainly there are some lessons about negotiations in Tunisia that could be used anywhere, but she would have more credibility with her words if she had recognized that her 2003-2004 participation had been in the end a big failure, and that she learned something out of it instead of blaming someone else by meekly writing "though it failed to include and enforcing mechanism". Did she not know about such needs then? Was she not already the heir of Carter, a faculty professor?

The other thing is that either her information in Venezuela, or her conclusions are biased or misinformed. Your choice.  She actually claims that Maduro dialogue attempt were genuine and that these were trashed when the students start protesting in February. She just needed to be more direct and say that poor Maduro was trumped. She is of course deadly wrong.

There is one part of the "negotiation" that Maduro team attempted and that was trashed duly in November when he sent his goons to ransack electronic stores to shore up his electoral support for the December election that seemed lost to him. Actually I am wrong, by June we already knew that the regime was not going to ease anything on its tight economic grip on the economy when Merentes overture petered as he soon was removed from the front line. The Dakazo of November was a mere codicil to the negotiations obituaries. How can McCoy ignore that? How can she ignore all the fake negotiations that Chavez offered in the last decade of which the one she was involved in was the mere first prominent installment?

There are more stuff that I could call her upon such as ignoring the electoral fraud of April 2013. But that would not be the first time that the Carter Center has failed to take an energetic position on that, so what else is new?

This is all a fraud and the Venezuelan opposition would be a fool to welcome back such "bate quebrados" who are going to help Maduro without even wanting to do it.  There are much better people, much more credible to mediate here. Heck, even Lula would be better because at least we know were he stands at, which is more than can be said for the Carter Center, at least in its Venezuelan applications which have brought us such misery.


  1. Dr. Faustus8:24 AM

    Jennifer McCoy and her cohorts at the Carter Center live in a bubble where intellectual give-and-take has been abandoned. They have a political agenda, all of them. Real consequences as a result of THEIR actions/recommendations are ignored. The use of computer technology to target your political opponents, a concept that even Orwell failed to grasp, is a new, 21st century phenomenon. It's frightening. It's pure evil. It first came to light in this century with the development of the "Tascon List" in Venezuela. It could eventually destroy fragile democracies all around the world. "We know who you are! You can't hide from us!" Someone should ask ole Jennifer what would happen in the US if ALL employees of the federal government, state and local governments, the military, and social services programs were ALL required to be of one party? Say, the Democrats. If the Republicans were to somehow, someway, come back to political power would they then be in their rights, according to the rules of the Carter Center, to replace/fire ALL of those employees with Republicans? Every single one. "Is this how a democracy works, Jennifer?" That is, according to the Carter Center? Hmmm? This is insanity.....

    1. Excellent comment, Dr. Faustus


    2. Absolutely on point after going to a higher learning institution in the USA I can tell you they are full of semi-communists. They are ready to indoctrinate as a more libertarian freedom loving human being is a tough environment. I can tell you it cost me some but i never let them get away with uneducated stupid comments in front of me.

    3. Roberto Carlos8:59 PM

      Dr Faustus you say: "They have a political agenda, all of them." but you don't elaborate.
      Please tell us what is "all of them" 's political agenda -whoever all of them is.

      Samer Sader: Daniel went to a higher learning institution in the US and guess which political party he prefers in the US? Surprise surprise, the same party that Carter belongs to. The same party that is following the Chavez footsteps in corrupting the bureaucracy and using the bureaucracy against political opponents, the same party that whose leaders are trying to divide the country just like Chavez did. However you will never hear a peep about the Democrats from this blog while Daniel will not miss an opportunity to take stab at any "evil" Republican that will not let him "love" whoever he wants. Pathetic.

    4. Anonymous1:12 PM

      Regarding the indifference to the plight of all Venezuelans under an increasingly proven incompetent Chavismo: there is plenty of credit for both Republicans and Democrats to take in the US. Each party has some unique reasons, each shares some. Both generally affected a depraved indifference towards Latin America and Cuba's accelerating take-over of the continent, both generally watched Fox and/or CNN and their navels.

    5. Roberto Carlos

      And it seems that even if there is no opportunity you will invent one to take a stab at me for not eating my red meat raw.

  2. Lemmy Caution9:24 AM

    For me as an outside observer, its absolutedly unacceptable that she doesn't mention the oppositions claim that part of the colectivos or motorizados or however you label that mob goes extremely violently after peacefull demonstrators.
    Thats just one example.

    1. I do not want to defend her, but an article can already be so long and she was talking abut ways to conduct a mediation. What I brought forward were details that disqualify her and the Carter Center for such a role in Venezuela. Damning enough as it is!

  3. Anonymous1:24 PM

    Daniel- Electoral fraud? I am beyond supsicious as I believe thatas Stalin said , it's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes that count. My dilema is this however, in a country where most aka majority of the electoral population is uneducated and live day by day, why would they vote for anyone else other than the people who have helped them the most during the last 15 years, before Chavez they had no help. Bottom line if I am living in a hut with a dirt floor and whoever you are you improve my living situation- you have my vote always. So in truth I am encouraged that the last election was so close, maybe next time common sense will rule. It's great to help the needy, but there is no need to do it at the expense of the rest of the population, the "rich" students , teachers , bank clerks etc, Chavez divided the country, just for that he should be condemned

    1. Anonymous1:35 PM

      Maduro has wasted the little improvements in the poor had been made. Moreover, freedoms are gone and the poor like everyone else now have no choice of government

    2. 7;54

      Let not forget one thing: more than preying on poverty regimes like chavismo prey on ignorance. Poor people life is not improved, it is subjected to conditions that a single giver can make better or worse at will.

    3. Boludo Tejano6:50 PM

      Bottom line if I am living in a hut with a dirt floor and whoever you are you improve my living situation- you have my vote always.

      Interesting that you would use housing as a reason to support Chavismo, as Chavismo's record of housing construction does not compare well to housing construction during the last 20 years of the Fourth Republic.

      Housing Units constructed per year per 100,000 population:

      1979-1998 346
      1999-2012 200 [using pop average 1999-2012]
      1999-2012 201 [using pop average 1999-2011]

      And you are telling me that Chavismo's performance on housing construction should win them votes?

      As is said in Venezuela, "Decime/Dime otro de vaqueros." Tell me another cowboy story. Tell me another one.

    4. Anonymous12:22 PM

      First: apparently your reading comprehension skills are minimal, I did not tell you housing construction 'should' get them votes, I said it does get them votes, feel the difference? or are you denying that it gets the government votes? ps. Having lived in Venezuela I have seen with my own eyes the government housing that has been constructed. Your figures are imaginary. Bottom line the majority of the electoral are ignorant, and the government likes it that way- Think Mao and China, he gave the peasants land ( but not really) to sway their loyalty. When your on the fringe you do not envision a brighter long term future, just a better tomorrow. as it is said on Earth: best to be silent and let everyone think your deep rather than opening your mouth and proving your shallow- Feel the difference yet?

    5. Anonymous1:14 PM

      Well said on behalf of the useful idiots who are Cuba's new cannon-fodder! As they march to the vast mausoleos that lie in their destiny, I am sure they thanks your bleeding heart!

    6. Anonymous2:32 PM

      Somehow you still miss my point?, reality bites, ther majority rules is why Voltaire said: democracy was flawed because it propigates the idiocy of the masses.

    7. Boludo Tejano9:12 PM

      Por no tener nombre, se llama Anonymous @ 6:52 a.m.

      I did not tell you housing construction 'should' get them votes, I said it does get them.
      You are correct, housing construction does get Chavismo votes. My point is that with such a shoddy record, housing construction shouldn't get Chavismo votes. Which again shows that the Chavismo propaganda machine is much more competent than the Chavismo governing machine. Nothing new there.

      Bottom line the majority of the electoral are ignorant, and the government likes it that way.
      You appear to be correct, as the Chavismo record on housing construction shouldn't get them votes, but it does get them votes.

      Having lived in Venezuela I have seen with my own eyes the government housing that has been constructed.

      Have your eyes also seen examples of shoddy government-constructed housing, such as in the CC link I provided ?

      The figures I cited- from Transparencia Venezuela via Caracas Chronicles- also show increased housing construction in the last 5 years, so your observation doesn't contradict the figures I cited. Nonetheless, overall, Chavismo doesn't have a good record for housing construction compared to the final two decades of the Fourth Republic.

    8. Boludo Tejano9:24 PM

      Por no tener nombre, se llama Anonymous @ 6:52 a.m.
      Your figures are imaginary.
      Au contraire, my figures are well documented. If the figures I cite were "imaginary," and Chavismo had a good 15 year record on housing construction, would the government want to have an ignorant electorate regarding housing? You have previously pointed out- and I agree with you- that Chavismo wants an ignorant electorate

      Last year Caracas Chronicles had a posting on housing construction::Gran Mision Mad Rush to Catch Up After Years of Broken Promises. Quico made a table of average number of houses built per year during the administrations of Venezuelan Presidents from 1979-2012. He also broke it down into average number of houses/housing units built per year during the last 20 years of the Fourth Republic 1979-1998 .

      The basic theme of the table was that housing construction crashed during Chávez's first term, and has increased since then, but that overall housing construction during Chavismo has not kept pace with the final 20 years of the Fourth Republic.

      In a comment, Quico informed us that he got the housing construction data from Transparencia Venezuela: Analysís de riesgos dee corrupción e integridad en Gran Misión Vivienda Venezuela. Transparencia Venezuela had housing construction broken down by Presidency.

      79-83 365,589
      84-88 331,665
      89-93 305,420
      94-98 314,741
      99-03 100,569
      04-08 247,749
      09-12 400,412
      For comparison, El Universal: Diez años perdidos has annual housing- public + private combined- from 1978-2005. Data is from CVC.
      79-83 365,589
      84-88 331,665
      89-93 305,422
      94-98 341,216
      99-03 100,569

      Except for 1994-1998 where Transparencia Venezuela has 314,741 housing units constructed, but the El Universal figures has 341,246 housing units constructed, these figures are in pretty good agreement.
      These are imaginary figures? I don't think so.

      I took those figures and broke them down into housing construction per 100,000 per year.
      Average population, from World Bank. See my link. I see no need to reproduce my methodology for average population. If you have any questions, please inform me

      For further corroboration on page 9 of El Déficit y la Producción Formal de Viviendas Fecha: 2006-08-05, we find a table with data for housing construction public and private combined for 1990-2005.

      1999 31,090
      2000 23,152
      2001 22,800
      2002 14,716
      2003 8,811
      Total: 100,569. Exact match with Transparencia Venezuela's figures and the El Universal article..
      For 1994-1998, there is not an exact match, but close enough.
      1994 40,728
      1995 77,626
      1996 69,538
      1997 91,979
      1998 61,795
      CVC has 341,666 units constructed for 1994-1998, whereas Transparencia Venezuela has 314,741. In any event, my figure uses the lower Transparencia figure.

      These checks say that the Transparencia Venezuela data for housing construction, which I cited, are anything but "imaginary."

    9. Anonymous1:24 PM

      Bottom bottom line is that democracy propigates the idiocy of the masses, Venezuela is living proof of that age old adage.Hence the election does not have to be rigged , it inherently is, for democracy says that an ignorant persons vote is worth exactly as much as an educated person's vote. Interesting concept. Which is why in China when the government is asked why no democracy? they cite the treuth : if China had democracy the uneducated would call the shots, bad bad idea.

  4. Using Cuba as a model for change really takes the cake.

  5. To Jennifer Mc Coy:

    I know exactly who you are: If you decide to be confused, it’s difficult not to be confused.


  6. Daniel: have you tweeted this link to the Carter Center and to Al Jazeera? You should.

    1. I rely on my devoted readers to proselytize my message :-)

  7. I am trying to think of a successful example of international conflict mediation that actually succeeded (putting the conflict on the back burner to flare up again later doesn't count). Anyone?

  8. Anonymous7:04 PM

    Do you know what "tontos utiles" are? Or better "vendidos"?

  9. Anonymous7:48 PM

    Hey Daniel, someday we will met at the Fuerzas Armadas and joke a few minutes then go forever final ways. They are lost, don't worry about that we have survive pal. God bless the venezuelans gens...I am quiet and prezise. Wie kann man anders sein...

  10. Anonymous2:57 AM

    Yes she is what you would locally term a " cara dura con personalidad nefasta". One can not easily fathom the gall of Mr. Jimmy Carter's personal lap dog now wanting to be the big cheese (though her stink of aged cheese might qualify her).
    She proved her value as an apologist and facilitator for autocracy way back in 2004. It was of course on her boss' watch that regimes with dictatorial tendencies in Afghanistan, Iran, Nicaragua, etc all were pushed aside by mendacious,
    kleptocratic, absolute autocracies .
    We are sure that a vermin like Mr. Maduro, Venezuela's usurper president, already feels a warm fuzzy feeling engulf his black, heartless soul as he thinks of McCoy coming over for an encore performance.

  11. Auuuvienelobo7:41 AM

  12. Anonymous5:43 PM

    Have you been to any of the protests Daniel?

    1. No, which makes it even more noteworthy because I rarely missed one before, at least if I was in Caracas. This time around there are enough of El Pueblo attending that I am not needed and I can attend my own problems which are pressing also.

      This being said, why is your question relevant on any aspect to this blog or to this thread?

  13. Carter was a terrible president , his "Center" is an even bigger disgrace

  14. Obama has now had his "jimmy carter moment" in Ukraine and will now be remembered as the 2 term Jimmy Carter.


Comments policy:

1) Comments are moderated after the sixth day of publication. It may take up to a day or two for your note to appear then.

2) Your post will appear if you follow the basic polite rules of discourse. I will be ruthless in erasing, as well as those who replied to any off rule comment.