Speech on the crisis in Venezuela
By way of an update on the crisis in Venezuela this is the text of an introduction I gave at a UK Labour Party meeting.
 |
| Venezuela: Pro-government demonstration |
[Intro]
“Thank you for inviting me to introduce this discussion. Given the short amount of time [10-15 minutes], I'll only be able to give a very general overview and concentrate on the situation as it is today.A lot of the reporting and talk on Venezuela is characterised by double standards. We see the spectacle of British journalists filing hang wringing reports on hungry people in Venezuela while 500k children relying on food banks this summer got barely a passing mention.
The West accuses Maduro of forming a dictatorship, they've imposed sanctions and threatened military action. Turkey's Erdogan has gathered huge powers to himself as president, sacked 10,000s of public servants, jailed dozens of journalists on trumped up charges. Hear a lot of tut tutting but no talk of sanctions or military options on the table.
That’s not to avoid or distract from the very real problems in Venezuela, but to point out the hypocrisy of many of those attacking Venezuela. But there is a deep economic crisis in Venezuela, what brought it to this point? What were the mistakes, what lessons can we draw? More importantly what is the way forward?
[Background]
I’ll start with a potted history. Chávez came to power in 1999 on a radical programme of reform.Many worthwhile achievements including; poverty rates falling from 50% in 1999 to under 30% in 2013; 1.5 million affordable homes built since 2011. Universal health care has also been achieved and illiteracy nearly eliminated.
This progress ended with the oil price fall in 2014. Oil accounts for 95% of Venezuela's export earnings so the economy took quite a hit, also the case for other oil economies such as Russia and Saudi Arabia. We've seen a roll back of some of the gains, for example infant mortality.
Some figures suggest that for 2016 Venezuela's infant mortality rate was at 18.5/1000, which put it back to the levels in 2000. Just for context, Brazil since the removal of Rousseff, embarked on a harsh programme of austerity. Their infant mortality rate has been set back to the mid 2000s at 18/1000. Venezuela and Brazil are the only two countries in South America where these mortality rates have increased.
These problems have been exacerbated by rampant corruption and some Government policies. All this impacted the middle classes, their savings ruined by inflation, which gave an impetus to the opposition [Opposition Democratic Unity Roundtable (MUD)] who won the 2016 National Assembly elections.
The opposition set about rolling back gains made under Chávez and the early part of Maduro's term and removing Maduro. They launched waves of protests, blockades and strikes, which were mostly employer lock outs.
[The opposition]
It's worth taking a look at the character of opposition. They're painted as plucky victims fighting against the odds. Much of the oppositions leadership come from the 2002 coup which overthrew Chávez for a few days.Leopoldo López, a poster boy for western media, during 2002 coup illegally detained the Justice Minister. He's also been involved in financial scandals that got him suspended from office. Basically a corrupt individual.
There's also an impression given that the violence is one-sided, carried out by the state. But the figures don't back that up: From April 4, when the current protests started, up to July 31, 126 people were killed. 50 of these were opposition supporters; 14 killed by the state; 3 by pro-government civilians. The remaining 33 are attributed to various causes, looting (14), killed by own hand, one died when his home made mortar blew up.
What's not reported is the sinister nature of some attacks by the opposition. There have been 4 political assassinations of pro-government supporters. 2 were shot in their home and 2 assassinated at public meetings.
The opposition have also engaged in racist violence, for example an Afro-Venezuelan was burnt to death for being a suspected Chavista. Just to explain, Chavista is also an interchangeable racist term for some of the opposition. That's because many ethnic minority and indigenous people support Chávez/Maduro.
That's not to tar all opponents of the government with the same brush. Early on in the protests there were large mass rallies against the government, many of those have genuine grievances. But what can't be avoided is the fact that many of the leading elements of the opposition are quite unsavoury characters...
[Stalemate]
These latest protests and the stalemate in the National Assembly resulted in Maduro calling a Constituent Assembly, a decision which in turn set off another wave of opposition protests. These protests failed to prevent the forming of the Constituent Assembly.[Options]
Which brings us to situation today.Venezuela is at an impasse: Looking at the options there seems to be 2-3 possibilities of where events will develop.
First possibility is that Maduro is overthrown. The gains are rolled back. Privatisation; land awarded to indigenous people taken back; social housing and universal health care disposed of.
Given recent events I think this unlikely. The opposition have been demoralised by their failure to prevent the Constituent Assembly, so a coup is unlikely. The Trump sanctions and the threats of military intervention is actually an acknowledgement the the opposition is not capable of overthrowing Maduro under their own resources.
Another option is that Maduro consolidates power to himself. The talk of dictatorship at this stage is nonsense and is a long way off. There are signs of Maduro consolidating support in military so we have to acknowledge the risk of Maduro moving from being a 'guardian of Bolivarian revolution' to the 'guardian of order'.
Neither option serves interests of the working classes. The question is what will protect their gains? What can take those gains forward? What organisations and institutions are best able to do that?
[Critical support for the Constituent Assembly]
The clear response after Constituent Assembly elections, the mass demonstrations in support at the inauguration, the military and civil authorities defer to Constituent Assembly, shows that the Constituent Assembly is seen as a legitimate body. Even some opponents accept its legitimacy.In so far as it defend gains and takes them forward we should give critical support to the Constituent Assembly. But we should make clear that the Constituent Assembly's role is to protect and carry forward gains for ordinary people - not maintain this or that individual in power.
[Conclude]
Just to conclude my remarks.The situation as it stands is of dual power. The National Assembly under the control of the opposition and the Constituent Assembly controlled by the Socialists. The balance favours the Constituent Assembly at the moment but that can't last forever.
The problem is that the Constituent Assembly is tinkering round the edges of crisis, which could play into opposition hands.
They issued a decree on currency regulations where the real problem is monopoly control of the distribution of some foodstuffs like rice and private control of imports.
The Constituent Assembly needs to take those into democratic control if they are to have any hope of tackling shortages.
What can we do? We can show solidarity, we should oppose sanctions and foreign intervention.
And we should give whatever practical support to those genuinely fighting for interests of the working class, the poor and indigenous peoples of Venezuela…”
Gary Hollands
7 September 2017
Read on Facebook:
