Maria Corina Machado of SUMATE received by President Bush

Originally published here

The stunning news of the week, if not the quarter, is the reception today at the White House of Maria Corina Machado, the leader of SUMATE (1).


Poise, class and dignity at the White House
(interview of MCM with audio here)


I learned it on the radio on my way to a dinner engagement. If I could not write about it earlier, I can assure you that the meal was even more delicious than it probably was. This is a stunning coup for SUMATE and some of Venezuela's opposition, and yet another stinging hit for Chavez who is not having a good time at all these recent days.

Analysis of this spectacular move by the State Department will require days. So tonight this humble blogger, just arriving from a delicious meal will be brief in his speculations and analysis.

The message is clear at several levels:

• By receiving the leader of SUMATE the US declares that in Venezuela there is a problem with free and fair elections (to Hell with the Carter Center who somehow managed to convince Colin Powell that all was fine and dandy down here).
• By receiving SUMATE, the most organized and efficient and democratic component of the Venezuelan opposition, the State Department sends a clear message to the opposition: be democratic, be organized, work hard, and we will help you if needed to make sure that elections are fair.
• By receiving Maria Corina Machado, the US looks at the new class of Venezuelan politicians, modern folks, not encumbered by the weight of the corrupted past AND present.
  
• And perhaps most important, by receiving Maria Corina Machado, likely political prisoner of Chavez, Bush goes beyond extending protection: he tells Chavez that all his B.S. of recent weeks is having no effect on the US administration who will chose its friends as it pleases. He also tells that he is really far from receiving chavistas at the White House where we suspect that more than one would love to be seen. Indeed, a few days ago the US suspended its visa to the High Court chief Omar Mora who was greatly upset about it. Today's visitor must be compared to the non-visitor who wanted to go himself to the White House to demand the skin of Posada. In other words, bluntly, the US tells that Chavez better watch out his foul mouth or further humiliations are in stock for him.
  

And it hurts really bad in the chavista camp as a totally decomposed and hysterical Cilia Flores, a factor in the National Assembly, went out to say that Maria Corina Machado had better stay in the US, that she should be sent to trial for betrayal to the fatherland. The poor and deranged woman did not realize how idiotic, and revealing, her declarations were. And how they could easily be used against her cause in the US. For example such declarations could be used as an excuse not to extradite Posada Cariles since in a country with such deranged legislators justice is clearly impossible (2). Or it could be used to send Eva Golinger to jail under the Patriot Act as Ms. Golinger dealings are certainly not any less guilt free as the alleged ones of SUMATE that she so eagerly denounces. But we know that diplomacy is an alien concept to Chavez and even more to chavismo.

Well, at least there is something good for Chavez there: tomorrow Venezuela will talk less about PDVSA and its corrupt and inefficient management. See Hugo, always a silver lining.

__________________

1) Story speedily translated by El Universal.

2) At a moment, by the way, where Venezuela seems to have the greatest of difficulties to put together a dossier to ask for Posada's extradition. Indeed, the confusion in the Chavez camp is spectacular as some declare that the US is refusing to extradite Posada while the dossier has not even be sent complete to the US.... But rabble rousers seem to be in surnumerary these days.

_________________

Update: for some colorful local rejoicing, and to stress how important is the news of that visit for Venezuela, check the comment section of the Noticiero Digital thread. Venezuela's wit in display, to be compared to witless Cilia Flores and Iris Varela :-)

A new diplomatic set back for Chavez

Originally published here

In spite of efforts from Venezuela at the OAS to block the invitation of the SUMATE ONG to an OAS meeting, the council went ahead and ratified that SUMATE was invited along a few other Venezuelan ONG. The excuse presented by Venezuela's ambassador to block the invitation of SUMATE because this one was involved in events of 2002 was rather lame as SUMATE in those days barely existed. But of course the real reason is that chavismo cannot forgive that SUMATE organized the successful Recall Election drive in spite of ALL THE ABUSES committed by chavismo to derail the effort (and their own failure at raising a credible recall election for opposition assemblymen).

I think that Valero sensed the exasperation of his colleagues as he decided at the last minute to back down to avoid a full frontal vote second vote that would have established the growing isolation of Venezuela in the OAS.

The good news there is that the problems of the electoral system in Venezuela are now been noticed outside and SUMATE is considered as one of the best defender of the right to vote, and certainly technically the most informed one. Let's hope that this well deserved recognition of Maria Corina Machado and SUMATE's work will boost the growing movement inside Venezuela to put due pressure on the obscenely partial CNE.

Chavez 's milestones

Originally published here

Up to August 2004, I had followed Chavez revolution from afar. I had not voted for Chavez and I could not understand why anybody would vote for him. I have a very deep social conscience and I believed that something had to be done in Venezuela to improve the standard of living of everybody, but Chavez? A caudillo? A putchist? A populist? A man with no clear vision of how to run a country? At the time, I had just accepted with resignation that the countries deserved the rulers that they elect. Every time I read the newspapers I would get mad about the situation and I decided to just try to forget about it.

Among all the many events that have taken place during Chavez term, there were three that took me out of my political lethargy. They are critical points in my political assessment of Chavez government and, in my view, constitute the three most dangerous milestones in the Venezuela path leading away from democracy. They are:

1. - the persecution of the Sumate directive,

2. - the refusal of the CNE to open the boxes after the Revocatory Referendum,

3. - the changing of the law to pack the Supreme Court and, consequently, the use of the single majority in the National Assembly to elect the judges.

The first event, persecuting the directive of Sumate, showed me the intimidation face of the Chavistas. The government really worked hard to find an obscure article, dating from the time of Dictator Juan Vicente Gomez that could be applied to the only effective opposition organization that was in place in Venezuela. The article (article 132 of the Penal Code) is so archaic that any democratic government would have removed it from its law. Chavez government not only did not remove it, but gave them a convoluted interpretation that could put in prison for 8 to 16 years the directors of Sumate. Their crime? Accepting a small grant from the National Endowment for Democracy. Even if the grant had been illegal, in any democratic country the penalty would be to pay a fine, but not 8 to 16 years in jail!

The second event of importance was the refusal of the CNE to open the boxes after the claims of fraud made by the opposition and after the publication of numerous studies showing inconsistencies in the results. Even though the Carter Center carried out the audit of 1% of the ballot boxes, that audit was considered inadequate and many Venezuelans still believed that there had been a widespread fraud in the Referendum. Under such circumstances, the obligation of any democratic government is to do whatever is necessary to replace people’s confidence in their system. Venezuela CNE refused to take any further steps. This brings two possibilities to my mind: either the government really had something to hide and, therefore, refused to open the boxes or Chavez had won as claimed but was determined to show everybody in Venezuela who was really the boss. Neither possibility is reassuring from the democratic standpoint. One indicates that the results of the RR may not be correct and the other shows an arrogance of power that cannot be accepted in a modern democratic society.

The last event is the latest strike to Venezuela’s fragile democracy. In a country where everything is regulated by law and where there is an abundance of laws to be interpreted, those that have the power to control the interpretation of the laws have, the facto, the absolute power. To get to that control, Chavez strategy was a proposal to increase the number of judges of the Tribunal Supremo de Justicia. The so-called ``Court Packing”, condemned by Human Rights Watch, was followed by a swift election of new chavista judges by a single majority vote in the National Assembly instead of the 2/3 of the votes usually stipulated.

Sadly, we are quickly witnessing the results of the last milestone. The TSJ recently reconsidered its own ruling on the acquittal of the military involved in the events of April 11, 2002 opening a dangerous judicial Pandora Box (see Viaje a la Semilla).

To complete the dark portrait given by those three milestones, there is, of course, the infamous Tascon list according to which those that signed to ask for a referendum to revoke the president are blacklisted. There are also two new laws that have been recently added: the muzzle law, which controls the content in radio and television and the modification of the penal code that imposes tougher jail sentences that may restrict in some cases the freedom of expression. More recently, we have also witnessed the increasing militarization of the country, for instance, the government has proposed that 10% of the Venezuelan population be military reservists! (see here and here).

And, going back to the penal code, you may think that since the government had to change the code, they would have got rid of its anachronisms like the infamous Juan Vicente Gomez article, right? No such luck: article 132 is still there.

I really miss my days of political lethargy!

Harrassment of Sumate noticed by The Economist

Originally published The Economist,Nov 4th 2004

Having consolidated a near-total grip on power, Hugo Chávez is preparing a set of laws to repress many forms of dissent. JUST last August, after months of unrest and an attempted coup, 4m Venezuelans voted against Hugo Chávez in a recall referendum, more than had voted him in as president in 2000. Yet he won the referendum, and has now completed a stunning turnaround. Local elections on October 31st left his allies controlling 20 of the country's 23 states, plus Caracas, the capital, and they looked likely to bag the state of Carabobo too after the completion of a disputed recount.

No elected leader of the country has ever wielded such power. With a majority in parliament, a tightening grip on the judiciary, the unquestioning loyalty of the military high command and a seemingly endless flow of revenues thanks to high oil prices, the “red tide” that the self-styled revolutionary predicted, referring to his own party colours, is now lapping around the necks of his opponents.

After their referendum defeat, the two dozen anti-Chávez parties could not agree on a common electoral strategy. In some regions they competed against each other, virtually guaranteeing a chavista victory. A commission of experts set up to analyse their allegations of fraud called for voter abstention, compounding the damage. Virtually the only survivors of stature are Manuel Rosales, governor of the far-western state of Zulia, and a couple of young mayors from the fledgling Justice First party, whose base is Caracas and the adjoining state of Miranda.

What will Mr Chávez do with all this power? Part of the answer lies in a set of repressive laws, currently in the legislative pipeline, which critics say will outlaw most forms of dissent and severely restrict freedom of expression. First in line is a radio and TV bill ostensibly aimed at protecting children by curbing violent and sexually explicit content. But its vague wording will, for example, allow the government to suspend transmission or, ultimately, withdraw a licence, for content which is “contrary to the security of the nation”. Already, private TV stations which have been fierce critics of Mr Chávez are showing signs of self-censorship.

Then there is the partial reform of the penal code, which would outlaw virtually every form of protest the opposition has attempted over the past three years. “Intimidating” a senior public official (for example, by banging pots and pans outside his or her house, a popular form of protest) would carry a sentence of three to eight years in jail. Causing panic by spreading “false information”: two to five years. Promoting “disobedience”, even in private: up to six years behind bars.
Article 350 of the 1999 constitution, drafted by the chavistas themselves, enshrines the right to disobey a government that undermines human rights. But a proposed terrorism law would turn many forms of civil disobedience, such as blocking streets, into terrorist acts, with correspondingly severe penalties. And a national police bill would put control of all local police forces, in effect, into the hands of the interior ministry.

The government has already begun to harass dissidents. Leading members of Súmate, an NGO which amounts to an opposition elections unit, face jail terms of up to 16 years. Their alleged crime is to have conspired with a foreign power—the United States—to overthrow the government. Súmate accepted a grant from the National Endowment for Democracy, which is funded by America's Congress and which, prosecutors allege, is a front for the CIA. A neutral judge might well throw the case out. Unfortunately, judges who defy the government tend to lose their jobs; most have only provisional positions. And the supreme court, already largely pro-Chávez, is to be expanded from 20 to 32 justices, who will be appointed by the pro-Chávez majority in parliament.

An even clearer case of distortion of justice is that of General Francisco Usón, a former finance minister in Mr Chávez's government, who was jailed last month for five-and-a-half years by a military tribunal for allegedly slandering the armed forces. The general had offered a technical opinion on television, as a combat engineer, on the workings of a flame-thrower, in the context of press allegations that one had been used on soldiers in a punishment cell. Two of the soldiers died, but seven months later no one has been charged, much less sentenced, for their deaths; the only person in jail is General Usón. The defence minister, General Jorge Luis García Carneiro, minces no words when asked about the case. Anyone, he says, civilian or military, who insults the armed forces can expect similar treatment. Viva la revolución.

Signing On To Challenge Hugo Chavez

Originally published in the Washington Post

By Nora Boustany
Friday, July 9, 2004; Page A15

Hers is a heroic fight. Maria Corina Machado smiles bravely but admits she is terrified. They are after her, she explained; the machinery of the state.


Machado is vice president of Sumate, a Venezuelan civic organization that has helped organize the drive for a recall referendum on President Hugo Chavez. She recently found out that she was under investigation for conspiracy and treason because Sumate accepted $53,400 from the National Endowment for Democracy, which receives funding from the U.S. Congress. Chavez has accused Machado, Alejandro Plaz, the president of Sumate, and two other members of the group of treason.

For the uninitiated, democracy is never simple. But the group's slow, systematic collection of signatures has empowered Venezuelans to hold a referendum next month that could force Chavez to step down.

Chavez, a former army lieutenant colonel who led a coup attempt against the government in 1992, was elected in 1998 on a vow to lift up the country's impoverished majority. Many Venezuelans have rejected his populist programs and rhetoric, and critics say his rule is headed toward authoritarianism.

Machado, 36, was invited to the United States by the Council of the Americas to address members in New York and Washington. She said she also plans to meet with U.S.-based human rights organizations and with officials from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

This week, on a recent bright, sunny day at a coffee shop in Bethesda, she explained how a movement was born.

In 2001, during a hurried conversation in the lobby of a hotel in Caracas, Machado and Plaz fretted about the course that was being shaped for Venezuela as they watched from the sideline.

"Something clicked," Machado said about the encounter with Plaz, a former regional director of an American firm. "I had this unsettling feeling that I could not stay at home and watch the country get polarized and collapse. . . . We had to keep the electoral process but change the course, to give Venezuelans the chance to count ourselves, to dissipate tensions before they built up. It was a choice of ballots over bullets."

Sumate, originally composed of professionals, now has 30,000 volunteers nationwide from all walks of life.

When Chavez came to office, he overhauled the constitution. Machado said: "We realized he established tools giving citizens the power to recall officials in midterm by referendum. If 10 percent of all registered voters signed a petition to have a referendum -- 1.2 million signatures out of 12 million by Aug. 19, 2003 -- it was enough to have a recall of any elected official."

There have been several attempts to collect signatures since 2002. A drive completed last November, with international observers -- the Organization of American States, the Carter Center and the United Nations Development Program -- six months after those organizations brokered an agreement between the government and the opposition that the constitution must be upheld.

"Now we have a referendum," she said. Machado, the eldest of four daughters born to a steel entrepreneur and an accomplished psychologist, had a good education. She graduated as an engineer at the top of her class, later earned a master's degree in finance and worked in the auto-parts industry in Valencia before moving to Caracas in 1993.

Politics had never interested her, and she had been indifferent to the economic and social ills plaguing less fortunate families. But one day, she joined her mother on a tour of a center that housed homeless orphans and abandoned youngsters brought in from the streets. The complex was like a prison, she said, and the children often ran away, scaling walls and leaping into a stream leading out, seeking to return to street life. Machado, who was pregnant with her second child, became physically ill from the stench.

The visit transformed her life.

She quit her job and began lobbying to have the management of the facility privatized, ultimately devoting eight years to its betterment.

She then ran an Internet-based services firm for three years before joining Sumate.

"This is God's work," Moises Naim, editor of Foreign Policy magazine, said of Sumate's drive. He was once Venezuela's minister of finance.

Chavez remains charismatic, in control and calling the shots at each twist and turn of the saga. A week before he finally agreed to the referendum, he signed a law packing the Supreme Court with 12 extra justices and giving his coalition's majority in the legislature authority to nullify the terms of sitting justices.

"Yet another example that democracy is not just about voting -- this is a delusion," Naim said. "It is also about checks and balances, independent arbiters and referees supervising the electoral process. It is not just one man, one vote, one time."

Newspapers have run pictures of Machado with headlines calling her the country's Enemy No. 1. Her children cannot understand her predicament. She has learned to steel herself against Blackberry messages urging her to run away and telephone calls pleading with her to hide.

She is trapped between formidable foes and a sea of sympathizers. "It is scary . . . all public powers of the state are stacked against you, but at the same time, people stop to tell you they are relying on you," she said. "I feel greater responsibility and I'm terrified."