Green Party leaders called last week on President Bush to cancel an order directing the CIA to interfere with todays voters' referendum in Venezuela and to cease actions intended to stabilize the Chavez government (ooohps that should read destabilise as noted in 'Comment' left below).
Photo: Man stands under a mural depicting Venezuela's president Hugo Chavez in Caracas (sent to me so sorry I can't credit original source)
Jill Bussiere, Wisconsin representative to the Green Party's International Committee said: "President Chavez and the people of Venezuela are not America's enemy. We demand that the White House respect the sovereignty of other countries and the democratic will of the Venezuelan people, who have repeatedly affirmed their support for President Chavez and his policies."
The memo describes secret US-supported actions against the Chavez government that constitute acts of war against a nation at peace with the US (see more here). These operations are consistent with other US acts of aggression against Venezuela, including the failed 2002 coup attempt, to which the Bush Administration lent active support. The Venezuelan government uncovered an alleged confidential memo on November 26 from US embassy official Michael Middleton Steere to the CIA director Michael Hayden which reveals clandestine operations to influence the referendum and to coordinate a military overthrow of the elected Chavez government.
The referendum will measure public approval for constitutional amendments proposed by Chavez and the National Assembly; polls show 60% support for the amendments. Greens note that the Bush Administration has targeted President Chavez for numerous reasons: his nationalization of several industries, especially oil, which has angered US corporate interests; provision of financial security, jobs, and health care for Venezuela's severely impoverished multiracial majority; and expansion of democracy in a nation formerly ruled by a small white elite. President Chavez has refused to take Washington's orders to make his country a source of cheap oil and other resources for US corporate profits.
Clifford W, Thornton, Jr., co-chair of the Green Party of the United States commented: "That's why the CIA's 'Operation Tenaza' has been authorized - to reopen markets for the benefit of corporations, and to teach Venezuela and all of Latin America a lesson. The US media blackout on the uncovered memo recalls the blackout by most media on the revelation of Republican operations to manipulate the US election in Ohio and other states in 2004."
Yesterday there was a demo in London in support against a coup in Caracas - there was also a good letter in The Guardian (www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,,2220120,00.html) from various MPs and others including Green MEP Caroline Lucas celebrating Venezuelas democratic system - he has certainly made some extraordinary changes that are and will bring very tangible benefits to the many - public services have improved masses and what other leader seeks to develop a fair trade system that aims to counter poverty rather than the free trade system being pushed by the WTO? It is no wonder he has come up against the establishment and opposition. Chavez is by no means perfect - indeed it is important that we voice concerns - but he shines out as a wonderful exception to virtually all other world leaders whose policies are concentrating power and wealth with the few.
6 comments:
Hi Philip
I think you probably meant 'destabilise' in the first sentence, not stabilise! I'm not upto speed on everything that's happening in Venzuela, but I'm v uncomfortable with the way Chavez is lumping together admirable proposals to improve social justice with proposals that abolish any limit to the number of terms of office a president can have. Lukashenko in Belarus did smthg similar a couple of years ago - a combined referendum to abolish the death penalty with proposals to extend his term of office. Then again, it's v difficult to know where the truth lies as there is so much propaganda on both sides and it's difficult to know what media to trust.
Thanks - yes destabilise - have noted that in text above - I have been reading regular reports re Venezuela but agree it is very hard to determine truth - especially with some sections of the media determined to criticise Chavez at any opportunity - and as you note he is extending his powers - even if it is being done by a vote - he has also achieved remarkable things...extreme poverty has been halved, illiteracy nearly eliminated, participation in education has more than doubled and free basic healthcare extended to nearly 20 million people. Unemployment has fallen to a historic low......
See Derek Walls comment on US press today:
http://another-green-world.blogspot.com/2007/12/chavez-wins-referendum.html
Venezuela's voters narrowly rejected the proposed
constitutional changes in the referendum by 51 to 49
percent.
It is clear that the powers of darkness have managed
to temporarily set back the progress of the Bolivarian
Revolution in Venezuela, which is all the more reason
to continue to show solidarity with them and to
highlight the positive gains which have already been
achieved.
You mentioned Palast in a blog - here is his view on this:
FEAR OF CHAVEZ IS FEAR OF DEMOCRACY
Bush: If it's our oil, why do Venezuelans get to vote on it?
GOP panicked that counting votes in Venezuela will spread to Florida
by Greg Palast
Monday December 3, 2007
The Family Bush can fix Florida. They can fix Ohio. But it's just driving them crazy that they can't fix the vote in Venezuela.
[Note: Watch the reports taken from the Palast BBC investigations in Venezuela in the newly released DVD, " The Assassination of Hugo Chavez."]
The Bush Administration and its press puppies - the same ones who couldn't get enough of the purple thumbs of voters of Iraq - are absolutely livid that this weekend the electorate of Venezuela had the opportunity to vote.
Typical was the mouth-breathing editorial by the San Francisco Chronicle, that the referendum could make Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's President, "a constitutional dictator for life." And no less a freedom fighter than Donald Rumsfeld, from the height of the Washington Post, said that by voting, Venezuela was "receding into dictatorship." Oh, my!
Given that Chavez' referendum was defeated at the ballot box, we now that, as a dictator, Chavez is a flop. Of course, without meaning to gainsay Secretary Rumsfeld, maybe Chavez is not a dictator.
Let's get clear exactly what this vote was about. Firstly, it was a referendum to change the nation's constitution to end term limits for President.
Oh, horror! Imagine if we eliminated term limits in the US! We could end up stuck with a president - like Franklin Roosevelt. Worse, if Bill Clinton could have run again, we'd have missed out on the statesmanship of Junior Bush. While US media called Chavez a "tyrant" for suggesting an end to term limits, they somehow forgot to smear the tyrant tag on Mr. Clinton for suggesting the same for the America.
We were not told this weekend's referendum was a vote on term limits, rather, we were told by virtually every US news outlet that the referendum was to make Chavez, "President for Life." The "President for Life" canard was mis-reported by no less than The New York Times.
But ending term limits does not mean winning the term. As Chavez himself told me, "It's up to the people" whether he gets reelected. And that infuriates the US Powers That Be.
Secondly, beyond ending term limits, the referendum would have loaded the nation's constitution with changes in property law, work hours and so many other complex economic adjustments that the entire referendum sank of its own weight.
It's the Oil.
Term limits and work hours in Venezuela? Why was this a crisis for Washington?
Why is the Bush crew so bonkers about Hugo? Is it because Venezuela sits on the world's largest reserve of coconuts?
Like Operation Iraqi Liberation ("OIL") - it's all about the crude, dude. And lots of it. The US Department of Energy documents I obtained indicate that the guys holding Bush's dipstick figure that Venezuela is sitting on 1.36 trillion barrels of crude, five times the reserves of Saudi Arabia.
Chavez' continuing tenure means that Venezuelans' huge supply of oil will now be in the hands of … Venezuelans!
As Arturo Quiran, resident of a poor folks' housing complex, told me, "Ten, fifteen years ago … there was a lot of oil money here in Venezuela but we didn't see it." Notably, Quiran doesn't particularly agree with Chavez' politics. But, he thought Americans should understand that under Chavez' Administration, there's a doctor's office in his building with "free operations, x-rays, medicines. Education also. People who never knew how to read and write now know how to sign their own papers."
Not everyone is pleased. As one TV news anchor, violently anti-Chavez, told me in derisive tones, "Chavez gives them (the poor) bricks and bread!" - how dare he! - so, they vote for him.
Big Oil has better ideas for Venezuela, best expressed in several Wall Street Journal articles attacking Chavez for spending his nation's oil wealth on "social programs" rather than on more drilling platforms to better fill the SUVs of Texas.
Chavez has committed other crimes in Washington's eyes. Not only has this uppity brown man spent Venezuela's oil wealth in Venezuela, he withdrew $20 billion from the US Federal Reserve. Weirdly, Venezuela's previous leaders, though the nation was dirt poor, lent billions to the US Treasury on crap terms. Chavez has said, Basta! to this game, and has called for keeping South America's capital in … South America! Oh, no!
Oh, and did I mention that Chavez told Exxon it had to pay more than a 1% royalty to his nation on the heavy crude the company extracted?
And that's why they have to kill him. In 2002, The New York Times sickeningly applauded the coup d'etat against Chavez. But that failed. Therefore, as the electorate of Venezuela is obstinately refusing to vote as Condi Rice tells them, there's only one solution left for democracy-loving Bush-niks, the view express out loud by our President's spiritual advisor, Pat Robertson:
"We have this enemy to our south controlling a huge pool of oil. Hugo Chavez thinks we're trying to assassinate him. I think we ought to go ahead and do it. … … We don't need another $200 billion war … It's a whole lot easier to have some covert operatives do the job."
But Hugo's not my enemy. Indeed, he's made a damn good offer to the American people: oil for $50 a barrel - nearly half of what it sells today. By locking in a long-term price, Venezuela loses its crazy Iraq war oil-price windfall. In return, we agree not to let oil prices fall through the floor (it dropped to $9 a barrel in 1998) and bankrupt his nation. But Saudi Arabia doesn't like that deal. And Abdullah's wish is George Bush's command. (Interestingly, Chavez' fellow no-term-limits dictator Bill Clinton endorsed the concept.)
I don't agree with everything Chavez does. And I've found some of his opponents' point well taken. But unlike Bush, I don't think I should have a veto over the Venezuelan vote.
And the locals' sentiments are quite clear. I drove with one opposition candidate, Julio Borges, on a campaign stop to a small town three hours from Caracas. We met his supporters - or, more accurately, his lone supporter. The "rally" was in her kitchen. She served us delicious arepas.
The next day, I returned to that very same town when Chavez arrived. Nearly a thousand screaming fans showed up - and an equal number were turned away. (The British Telegraph laughably reports that Chavez' boosters appear "under duress.") You'd think they were showing for a taping of "South American Idol." (Well, the Venezuelan President did break into song a few times.)
It's worth noting that Chavez' personal popularity doesn't extend to all his plans for "Bolivarian" socialism. And that killed his referendum at the ballot box. I guess Chavez should have asked Jeb bush how to count votes in a democracy.
So there you have it. Some guy who thinks he can take Venezuela's oil and oil money and just give it away to Venezuelans. And these same Venezuelans have the temerity to demand the right to pick the president of their choice! What is the world coming to?
In Orwellian Bush-speak and Times-talk, Chavez' referendum was portrayed before the vote as a trick, Saddam goes Latin. Maybe their real fear is that Chavez has brought a bit of economic justice through the ballot box, a trend that could spread northward. Think about it: Chavez is funding full health care for all Venezuelans. What if that happened here?
*****************
Greg Palast has just returned from South America. Catch his investigations for BBC Television and Democracy Now! in the newly-released DVD, The Assassination of Hugo Chavez, including Palast's interviews with Chavez, his opponents - even the man who kidnapped Chavez.
See goods article here about why defeat was victory:
http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/democracy_power/why_chavez_lost
Post a Comment