The Venezuelan Government Commemorates a Coup Attempt

February 4, 1992 is a special date in recent Venezuelan history. It was the day the democratic Pandora box was opened and lieutenant colonel Hugo Chavez was implicated in the coup to remove the democratically elected president Carlos Andres Perez. It is a special date because it was the first event that destabilized the democratic pattern that the country had been followed since 1958. Chavez was incarcerated and, later on, after doubtful political maneuvering, was pardoned by President Rafael Caldera.

I have always thought that in order to get a pardon, one has to repent. This does not seem to be Chavez’s case. Not only he makes no excuses about the 1992 coup attempt, but his government has even given the day a special name “Dignity Day” and proudly announces the marches that will take place today in Caracas in commemoration with that despicable act, where tens of young soldiers died, in the first page of the Ministry of Information web page.

This is the same government that calls any dissenting person a “golpista” (a putchist)!

I will now make a quick translation of the article published by the Ministry of Information..

March to commemorate Dignity Day

One of the two popular marches will start from Plaza Sucre in Catia and lead towards the Military History Museum, in the 23 de Enero. The second one will take place from Plaza Bolivar where members of parliament of Bloque de Cambio and some of the military that participated in the events of February 4, 1992, will pay its respects to Bolivar.

This Friday several events will take place all over the country to commemorate the Military Rebellion of February 4, 1992. In Caracas the central act will take place in the Military History Museum in the Urbanization 23 de Enero, a popular place in the West of Caracas.

This was informed by deputy Dario Vivas who indicated that among the commemorative events that will take place, there will be paying respect to the Libertador in Plaza Bolivar, at 11 o’clock, where there will be present Parliament members of Bloque de Cambio and some of the military that participated in that heroic gesture, which was a determinant event that marked the new political, social and economical reality of the country.

He indicated that the march will start in Plaza Sucre and will head towards the Military History Museum where the central act will take place for this historical date that allowed a new national situation. He underlined that as a consequence of that new situation a new National Constitution was approved “nowadays we can count with a National Assembly, linked and working as a function of the people”.

Venezuela Separation of Powers is Dead. Is this the end of democracy?

I grew up in a young democracy called Venezuela. I remember how proud I was at the time that ours was the most democratic country in Latin America. I was proud that refugees from Chile, Argentina and Uruguay came to Venezuela in search of a good, democratic place to live. I remember their telling the awful stories of Pinochet and Videla, and I thought at the time, with a bit of arrogance, that that could never happen in Venezuela.

It has not happened, yet. Despite my dislike of President Hugo Chavez, I consider it irresponsible to equate him to one of those brutal dictators that flourished in the seventies in Latin America or to the eternal Fidel Castro in Cuba. To say that Chavez’s regime is comparable to the aforementioned cases is equivalent to belittling the suffering of the people of those countries. However, I used the word “yet” (in Spanish: por ahora), that brings special memories to Venezuelans... That was the word used by lieutenant colonel Chavez when he was captured after his failed coup attempt to imply that he would come back. That is the word that we all have in our minds when assessing the current state of our democracy.

In the Venezuela I knew, they taught us that one of the fundamental bases of our young democracy was the Separation of Powers. We learned that we had the President and his ministers, the Congress and the Courts and that all those elements of power had to be separated, independent, for a real democracy to flourish. At that time, the elections for President and for Congress were held at the same time and people would vote with two cards: the big one for the President and the small one for Congress. Each party had a different color. Instinctively many Venezuelans mixed the colors, so that too much power was not concentrated.

Recently, the Venezuelan National Assembly increased the number of Supreme Court Judges and nominated them using a single majority instead of the usual 2/3 of the vote, despite the protest of the opposition that constitutes a very large minority in the Assembly. We all knew that that was a dangerous move towards totalitarism and even international organizations like Human Rights Watch voiced their concern.

Today, after reading the declarations of the newly elected Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Omar Mora Diaz, I realized that what we feared has become a reality. This judge, of which writer Manuel Caballero exposed the “excellent credentials” (see also The Devil’s citation), was elected almost unanimously, with 30 votes, by the newly designated Court. This, per se, is a bad sign. It indicates vote collusion rather than independence of spirit.

The new Chief declared in the press conference that he agreed with the view of revising the Supreme Court sentence that stated that what happened on April 11, 2002 was a “power vacuum” and not a coup attempt. This is a controversial political issue that if accepted by the Court would create the precedent that no decision is ever final in Venezuela. If revoked, the decision would give the government the green light to charge many political enemies .To me, it is quite surprising that a judge would voice beforehand his opinions on what he knows may be a coming issue to be decided. Two possibilities come to my mind: either he is doing it on purpose to inhibit himself later and clean his hands of the responsibility of deciding over a political hot potato or he just does not care about justice independence.

He also gave opinions about the judges that were responsible for liberating the military personnel involved in the events of April 11, 2002. Today he stated that those judges had been suspended.

Justice Mora made another surprising announcement. He confirmed that from now on the directive of the Supreme Court will have regular meetings with the Parliament, representatives of the Citizens’ Power, the Minister of the Interior as well as the Minister of Justice and the president Hugo Chavez. Therefore, that cherished independence of powers that is so important in modern democracies and that I learned by heart when I was growing up in young democratic Venezuela has now been totally discarded by someone that is supposed to be the guardian of those principles.

Some readers may argue that this is not “yet” the end of democracy. To them, I would answer that Chavez has been strategically placing his pieces for six years and, after this latest move, we are rapidly closing the gap towards a full bloom totalitarian regime.

Oppenheimer's Take On The Carter Proposal

Andres Oppenheimer, who's usually on perfect target about issues, has gone soft on us over a proposal from always-gullible former U.S. President Jimmy Carter. And I am disappointed.

He says that a proposal put forward by Carter about strengthening the Organization of American States on human rights is the best way to retire President Hugo Chavez.

I beg to differ. And I think the proposal, coming from Carter, is grotesque.

We already have an OAS in place and it's ineffective. It's supposed to advocate democracy and just look at the place! All we have to do is note its 'performance' in Venezuela last August. That's not because it didn't have enough power, but because it didn't have enough leadership.

There's little analysis about why multilaterals fail so often, but the fact is, they do. From what I can tell, one reason is they move only at the pace of their slowest member. Another reason is that gamy nations like to influence-hijack them, because they cannot be made to look respectable otherwise. Hence, we have Libya and Sudan at the UN judging the world on human rights. Some system!

According to The Nation correspondent Ian Williams, who studied the phenom in his book, "The UN for Beginners," nations put their own interests before any group's. One can argue about whether or how they should, or not, but the fact is, they do.

I can just see Carter favoring the 'unselfish' group approach through. And as usual, it will disappoint. Carter's not had a new idea in years, probably ever, as the smoking ruins of his presidency showed.

After all, the OAS was meant to foster democracy and it's done nothing of the sort. What's multilateral to Carter is buck-passing to me. And the OAS has gotten into the condition for the Williamsian reasons. All of this makes me think that anything Carter proposes for OAS effectiveness will have no impact whatsoever. In reality, Carter has no idea about the roots of the problem.

Perhaps I can explain why through this anecdote about Carter and the OAS here:

I have a leftist friend who attended the RR press conferences declaring all was 'free and fair' given by Jimmy Carter and OAS President Cesar Gaviria. My friend told me that Carter immediately declared it all 'free and fair' and then gave Gaviria a death-ray glare warning him not to undercut him by saying maybe it wasn't all so free and fair.

"His look was, 'I want to get out of here,'" my friend told me.

The net result? Gaviria meekly went along with the crapulent Carter and negated the vote.

With that kind of meddling, which influenced Gaviria, (and from that kind of a reliable source), it's pretty clear to me that any 'new powers' given to the OAS would have little impact. If the OAS leadership can be intimidated easily by the 'authority' of the rodent-like Jimmy Carter, then what is the point of additional new powers?

Carter never, ever, learned that there's no such thing as power without leadership. The biggest problem at the OAS is the lack of leadership. This shows in the impossibility of democrats and totalitarians agreeing on anyone to lead.

The OAS right now is in a battle over leadership and none of the candidates, all consensus-men (read: lowest common denominator) look attractive. What good is it to place power in the hands of wimps who do not lead?

I adore Oppenheimer but this time I think he's misreading the situation.

TV ratings war heats up in the EEUU

I wrote an item for American Thinker a few days ago here about a brewing ratings war between Fox News and CNN over who can do the best stories about Hugo Chavez. Ever since the Condi Rice senate confirmation hearings, Chavez's gotten their attention, and to their credit, they've taken the ball and run with it. These TV networks know a good dramatic story when they see one, and obviously, they've gotten an interested growing audience.

Today I got to watch one of these productions. It was an interesting experience because I watch television only about two or three times a year. Last year I turned on my television three times. I am totally unfamiliar with what televised news is. Anyway, it was an interesting, and different experience - the punchiness of the images, the impact of the short blurby news writing, the effort to command attention - all very fascinating.

Here is a rough transcript of today's Fox production:

The News with Sam Sheppard .... errrr, Sheppard Smith! (thanks, Scott!)

"Blood Money"

He was elected by the people. But now he's using their oil and their money against them. How dangerous is Hugo Chavez? That is the question being asked across America.

Critics say Hugo Chavez is using Venezuela's oil wealth to strengthen his regime. He's a leftwing leader who controls one sixth of America's oil supply. Critics say he is setting up a totalitarian regime. He could be the tough challenge for the new Bush administration.

(camera pans to Condi Rice at her hearings speaking of Chavez as a 'negative force.')

He's taking in billions from oil profits. And he's using it to destroy 50 years of democracy in Venezuela. He says he's using oil money to subsidize the poor. But oil is also sent to Cuba in exchange for Cuban teachers. Cuba is his model.

(camera pans to Henrique Capriles, speaking in English:)

"Without much accountability, they can do what they want with oil money."

Chavez has been accused of harboring FARC terrorists. His oil money is spent in the name of FARC terror.

(camera pans to Leopoldo Lopez, mayor of Chacao, speaking in English:)

"Chavists are capable of anything" (or the quote was something like that)

How dangerous is Chavez to his country, his neighbors and the U.S.?

(camera pans to Anibal Romero, a university guy)

"He has radical illusions" (or something like that.)

Oil money is being used as a weapon. He's buying rifles and soon, Soviet MiGs. It's four billion dollars.

In Caracas, I'm Steve Harrigan.

Now what was interesting is that this choppy (but effective with moving pictures) segment was followed immediately (and no break) with another segment on Fidel Castro.

It went like this:

Castro calls President Bush crazy. He says Bush's face (screen shot of a handsome composed Pres. Bush making a speech) is the face of a deranged person. If only he could put on a face. His comments follow the Bush administration's recent statement calling Cuba "an outpost of tyranny."

Anyway, as I said, it was interesting.

The chavista press has gone on to claim that Fox is just a Bush propaganda organ beating the drums of war against Venezuela. But if that were so, there would be no ratings war, no fierce competition with CNN over who can create the highest-impact Chavez coverage. The TV networks are competing with each other, not Chavez!

There is no mistake, Chavez is a great buffoon and therefore makes great television. He's great material. But he's just material. The bottom line for them is how much advertising they can draw from it. It turns out that these days, it's a lot.

Being commies, the Chavista media don't realize that the TV networks are looking out for the TV networks. They're trying to take each other out, not Venezuela. If a positive spin on Chavez would cause US viewers to tune in, they certainly would show such material.

But obviously, the US public sees something different and Chavez stories, such as they are, are attracting US viewers and ratings. May the best network win.

An interesting contest

Miguel has a hilarious predict-the-response contest about what one of El Supremo's minions will say in response to a FARC leader's assertion today saying he's got lotsa guerrilla camps in Venezuela. Go make your selection here.

Chavez's Mathematics

Today I was browsing again through the MINCI “positive notes” and I found a piece of news that was really interesting:

A Million and a half lands will be recuperated this year

Arriving to Porto Alegre International Airport Salgado Filho, Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez Frias said that 1.5 million Venezuelan lands will be recuperated from the “latifundio” this year. The President stated that with the application of the Land Law in 2001, “we took back the offensive and were able to assign in 2003 and 2004, through agrarian papers, 2 million hectares all over the country”.

He said that this year 2 more millions hectares will be assigned through agrarian papers of which 1.5 million will be recuperated in the war against “latifundio”.

This is indeed good news, Chavez has defied mathematical laws! If 1.5 million “lands” are going to be recuperated and that equates to 2 million hectares, this gives us a mean of 1.33 hectares per land. Now, the law says that in order for a land to be defined as a “latifundio”, it must have at least 100 hectares for lands of the first class and 5000 hectares for those of the sixth or seventh class (see article 74 of the land decree). How on earth can one get a mean of 1.33 hectares when all the land lots should be more than 100 hectares?

This is a student’s dream coming true: all marks are above the mean! Next time your kid comes home with bad grades, ask the school to use instead some Chavez mathematics to assess the class means and standard deviations.

There is of course a darker interpretation to this mathematical flop. That the government is not respecting its own law and that small lots of land are being or will be illegally seized. Thank goodness that president Chavez provides us with all the details! He can be accused of many things, but never, ever, accuse him of not telling what is on his mind.

Let him talk.

Chavez In Full Bloom