"Hugo Chavez Dies" - March 5th, 2013 
Watch, Listen or Read Democracy Now's Coverage Today: Wednesday, March 6th,
2013
www.democracynow.org/2013/3/6/hugo_chvez_dead_venezuelan_leader_leaves 

Hugo Chávez Dies: He Transformed Venezuela & Survived U.S.-Backed Coup, Now
Leaves Uncertainty Behind  
With the death of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez after a two-year fight
with cancer, we host a roundtable discussion on a revolutionary leader whose
democratic-socialist policies not only transformed his country, but helped
steer the entire Latin American region away from U.S.-backed neoliberalism.
We're joined by five guests: Miguel Tinker Salas, Pomona College professor
and author of two books on Venezuela; Venezuelan-American attorney Eva
Golinger, a friend and adviser to Chávez; New York University professor and
author Greg Grandin; Gregory Wilpert, founder of Venezuelanalysis.com; and
Michael Shifter, president of the Inter-American Dialogue, a
Washington-based policy forum on Western Hemisphere affairs. We spend the
hour on the life of Chávez, his legacy, and what may come next in Venezuela.

Guests:
Miguel Tinker Salas
<http://www.democracynow.org/appearances/miguel_tinker_salas> , professor at
Pomona College in Claremont, California. He is the author of The Enduring
Legacy: Oil, Culture, and Society in Venezuela and the forthcoming
Venezuela: What Everyone Needs to Know. 
Eva Golinger <http://www.democracynow.org/appearances/eva_golinger> , friend
and adviser to President Hugo Chávez, who referred to her as the "girlfriend
of Venezuela." She's a lawyer and author of numerous books, including The
Chávez Code: Cracking U.S. Intervention in Venezuela. She edits the
English-language edition of the Venezuelan newspaper Correo del Orinoco and
hosts a weekly program on RT called Behind the News. 
Gregory Wilpert <http://www.democracynow.org/appearances/gregory_wilpert> ,
founder of venezuelanalysis.com and author of Changing Venezuela by Taking
Power: The History and Policies of the Chávez Government. 
Greg Grandin <http://www.democracynow.org/appearances/greg_grandin> ,
Cullman fellow at the New York Public Library. He is the author of Empire's
Workshop: Latin America, the United States, and the Rise of the New
Imperialism. His most recent book, Fordlandia, was a finalist for the
Pulitzer Prize in History. His new book, Empire of Necessity, will be
published later this year. 
Michael Shifter <http://www.democracynow.org/appearances/michael_shifter> ,
president of the Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington-based policy forum on
Western Hemisphere affairs. He is also an adjunct professor of Latin
American politics at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Venezuela has announced seven days of mourning for its
president, Hugo Chávez, who has died at the age of 58. Chávez died after a
two-year battle with cancer that was first detected in his pelvis in June of
2011. He had suffered multiple complications following his latest operation
in Cuba on December 11th and had not been seen in public since then. News of
Chávez's death was delivered Tuesday in an emotional address by Vice
President Nicolás Maduro.
VICE PRESIDENT NICOLÁS MADURO: [translated] We accompanied his daughters,
his brother, his family members, and we received the hardest and the most
tragic of news that we will ever transmit to our people: At 4:25 in the
afternoon today, the 5th of March, Comandante President Hugo Chávez Frías
died.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Hugo Chávez's body will be taken in a procession to the
Military Academy in Caracas, where it will lie in state until his funeral on
Friday. Venezuela's schools and universities have been shut for the week.
Vice President Maduro will assume the presidency until an election is called
within 30 days. Foreign Minister Elías Jaua told state television that
Maduro would also be the candidate of Chávez's governing United Socialist
Party.
FOREIGN MINISTER ELÍAS JAUA: [translated] The president read the
constitution correctly on December 8th during his last public speech that he
was able to give, and it is clearly established what will follow and what we
always defended. He is gone now, and the vice president assumes power, and
we hold elections in the next 30 days. That's the mandate that Hugo Chávez
issued last December 8th, and he asked all of his Bolivarian revolutionaries
to accompany Nicolás Maduro in this task. And that is what we are going to
do.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Meanwhile, Venezuelan opposition leader Henrique Capriles,
who was defeated by Chávez last October, offered his condolences to the
president's family and called for unity as the nation mourns.
HENRIQUE CAPRILES: [translated] To the government, who are burdened with the
principal responsibility of guaranteeing coexistence in freedom and in
peace, we hope, like all Venezuelans do, that they act in strict accordance
with their constitutional duties. And our national armed forces should
remain for all, because they belong to everyone, as it is in the
constitution and its proud history.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Leaders from around the world sent their condolences to the
Chávez family. Some allies, like Ecuador, called for national days of
mourning in their own country. This is Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff
and Peruvian President Ollanta Humala, but first this is Bolivian President
Evo Morales remembering Chávez.
PRESIDENT EVO MORALES: [translated] He fought for his country, for the great
nation, like Simón Bolívar, a friend who gave his entire life for the
liberation of the Venezuelan people, the people of Latin America and all
anti-imperialists and anti-capitalists of the world.
PRESIDENT DILMA ROUSSEFF: [translated] On many occasions, the Brazilian
government did not completely agree with President Hugo Chávez. But today,
as always, we must recognize that he was a great leader, an irreparable
loss, and above all, a friend of Brazil, a friend of the Brazilian people.
PRESIDENT OLLANTA HUMALA: [translated] To the Venezuelan people, we wish to
express our unity of reflection and our hope that things can progress in a
passive manner with the cause of democracy in mind. We want to express our
solidarity with the Venezuelan people, with the family of our friend,
President Hugo Chávez Frías.
AMY GOODMAN: The presidents of Peru, Bolivia and Brazil.
Here in the United States, President Obama called Chávez's passing a
"challenging time" for Venezuela. This comes as Vice President Maduro of
Venezuela announced Tuesday he is expelling a U.S. embassy military attaché,
accusing him of spying on the Venezuelan military and meeting with
right-wing military officers in a plan to destabilize Venezuela. Maduro also
said a "scientific commission" would look into Chávez's death and the
possibility his "historical enemies" had somehow induced his cancer.
Well, today we host a roundtable to look at the life of Hugo Chávez, his
legacy and what may come next for Venezuela. We'll begin in California,
where we're joined by Miguel Tinker Salas, professor at Pomona College of
Claremont, California, author of The Enduring Legacy: Oil, Culture, and
Society in Venezuela and the forthcoming Venezuela: What Everyone Needs to
Know.
Your response to the death of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez?
MIGUEL TINKER SALAS: Good morning.
I think it's a tremendous loss for Venezuela and a loss for Latin America
and as an advocate for South-South relationships. Just recall where
Venezuela was in 1998. It had no real presence on the international stage.
He had this oil-producing country that had 60 percent people living in
poverty. Today, that has dramatically changed. Poverty has been reduced
significantly within Venezuela, and you have a new sense, a new empowerment,
a new feeling and a new sentiment, not only within Venezuela but within
Latin America as a whole, and as an advocate of South-South relationships.
And I think that, even in death, he will continue to be an important symbol
for the very policies he advocated in life and for the integration of Latin
America and its new role on the international stage.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And I'd like to also welcome Eva Golinger. She has been well
known as an American lawyer who has worked with the Venezuelan government
and was close to President Chávez. Your reaction on this day after his
death?
EVA GOLINGER: Well, it's incredibly sad, of course. It's a tremendous
tragedy for Venezuela, for people of Venezuela, for people of Latin America,
I would say also for people around the world who fight for social justice.
Chávez was a champion for the poor, for social justice, against imperialism,
against aggression, against war. He's someone who has left an extraordinary
legacy, not just in his own country, I think, but around the world. It's an
unbelievable tragedy that someone so young, with so much energy, with so
much charisma, and with so much determination to continue building his great
country and this concept of la Patria Grande, the Great Homeland, in Latin
America, would leave us so soon. So I think that Venezuelans and peoples
around the world are going to mourn seriously his loss.
AMY GOODMAN: From two Venezuelan Americans, we go to Greg Grandin, also in
our New York studio, currently a Cullman fellow at the New York Public
Library, author of Empire's Workshop: Latin America, the United States, and
the Rise of the New Imperialism. His most recent book, Fordlandia, was a
finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in History. His new book is called Empire of
Necessity. It will be published later this year. Greg Grandin, talk about
who Hugo Chávez was. Give us a little, short history of his life.
GREG GRANDIN: Well, in many ways, if you look at how his life tracks the
history of Latin America, it's quite amazing. He was born a few days after
the 1954 coup in Guatemala that drove Jacobo Árbenz from power. And that
coup, in many ways, culminated the subordination of Latin America to the
United States in the Cold War.
AMY GOODMAN: Because the U.S. was involved.
GREG GRANDIN: The U.S. led that coup, yeah. And that happened in a few days.
And his life pretty much ran the whole trajectory, from that moment forward,
of U.S. power in Latin America. It saw the rise and extension of U.S.-backed
militarism throughout the region, Venezuela a little bit less than some of
the other more homicidal anti-communist countries, but nonetheless Venezuela
was closely allied to the United States during the Cold War. He came of age
under a political regime that was often held up as a little United States,
in which two ideologically indistinguishable parties traded power back and
forth between 1958, '59 up through the 1990s.
And then he died, and Latin America has largely led this remarkable movement
for independence that he was-that he helped broker. When he came to power
in-elected in 1998, when you think about it, the whole region was governed
by neoliberals or, you know, pretty much allies and executors of the
Washington Consensus neoliberalism. And he was the first person that began
to challenge that in power. Lula in Brazil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, was
elected in 2002; Néstor Kirchner in 2002; Evo Morales a few years later;
Rafael Correa in Ecuador. But it really was, in some ways, Chávez that led
that remarkable, incredible movement that's world historical. It's
unprecedented.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And one point I made in my column
<http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/latin-america-changed-big-guy-hugo-ch
avez-article-1.1280503>  in the Daily News today on Chávez is that, to the
degree that he was seen by the United States and Europe as the most radical
of Latin American leaders, he created space for an enormous diversity of
other left-oriented leaders that seemed almost more acceptable to the West
up against the figure, the lightning-rod figure, of Chávez.
GREG GRANDIN: Yeah, for a long time, Washington policymakers and opinion
makers were trying to create this idea that there were two lefts-a good left
and a bad left-in Latin America, vegetarian left and a carnivore left. And
the kind of emblematic leaders of that was Lula in Brazil, a reformist, you
know, administered within the institutions of law, and Chávez. You know,
fiery populist is a word-a description that I'm sure has been used kind of
like Mad Libs, you know, in obituaries of Chávez. But in reality, they
actually worked together very nicely. I mean, if you read the WikiLeaks
cables, it was no-the U.S. was constantly trying to push this notion of a
division or a divide between Brazil and Venezuela, and Brazil constantly
rebuffed it. And certainly, Chávez's more flamboyant style on the world
stage created a much more willingness to work with so-called more moderate
reformers like Lula. And I would argue that their differences had more to do
with the political structures that they inherited than anything. And I think
they both, in very real ways, had exactly the same goal.
AMY GOODMAN: We're going to go to break and continue this roundtable
discussion and also bring you clips of our exclusive discussions with
President Hugo Chávez, as well as the vice president, Nicolás Maduro, who
will run for president in this next 30 days. And the question is: Where will
Venezuela go? This is Democracy Now! We'll be back in a minute.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: You can go to our website to see an in-depth look at Democracy
Now!'s coverage of Hugo Chávez over the years and related stories
<http://www.democracynow.org/special/venezuelan_president_hugo_chvez_dies>
at democracynow.org, as we continue on this day after the death of the
Venezuelan president, Hugo Chávez. Juan?
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Well, I'd like to ask Gregory Wilpert, you have written
extensively on the Venezuelan revolution, but especially you have focused on
what most of the rest of the people in the United States and other parts of
the world have not seen, which is the domestic impact of Chávez's revolution
on the everyday life of the Venezuelan people. I'm wondering if you could
talk about that. For instance, you've written that the number of
cooperatives in Venezuela escalated from about a thousand to 100,000 during
the Chávez years. Could you speak about that?
GREGORY WILPERT: Yeah. I mean, Miguel Tinker Salas mentioned a couple of
those changes, such as the decline in poverty, which is very important. I
mean, there are certain things that people always focus on, and certainly
the poverty one is very important, which declined by half during the-during
Chávez's presidency. Also, extreme poverty declined by more than two-thirds.
But in addition to these kind of standard-of-living improvements that
happened for Venezuela's poor majority, there were also these elements of
participatory democracy that had been introduced with Chávez's election. One
of the most important, I think, is actually the introduction of communal
councils in Venezuela. Over 30,000 communal councils were introduced, which
are basically direct participatory, direct democratic structures throughout
the country where people work on neighborhood improvement projects, and they
really feel like they have a stake and acquire an ownership of their
community. This is just one example. And, of course, the cooperatives and
self-managed workplaces are others.
I mean, Chávez was really trying to introduce socialism and putting it on
the map, really, back again on the map for the 21st century. And it wasn't
just an economic socialism, but also a political socialism, by which he
meant a participatory democracy, which is what he was trying to create.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And that's an image quite different from what we receive here
of an authoritarian leader.
GREGORY WILPERT: Yes, absolutely. I mean, certainly Chávez had his top-down
management style, which certainly clashed and bothered many people. But on
the other hand, one cannot deny, I think, that participation in Venezuela
increased, from any measure that you look at, whether it's the
Latinobarómetro polls, which show that Venezuelans believe that their
democracy is more democratic than it had ever been and in comparison to what
other people say of other countries in Latin America, and also that
they've-they're participating much more in elections. I mean, participation
and registration have increased dramatically. Voting centers and polling
stations throughout the country have been distributed to poor neighborhoods
where people used to have to wait a whole day in order to vote. Now it's
reduced tremendously, and it's much faster. So there's-just in every
measure, like I said, there's more participation in the democratic process.
AMY GOODMAN: Tens of thousands celebrated in the streets of the capital
Caracas after the results of the 2012 election were announced. Chávez held a
replica of the sword of independence hero Simón Bolívar during the victory
celebration at a rally outside the presidential palace. Chávez reached out
to the political opposition and called for unity among Venezuelans.
PRESIDENT HUGO CHÁVEZ: [translated] To those who promote hate, to those who
promote social poison, to those who are always trying to deny all the good
things that happen in Venezuela, I invite them to dialogue, to debate and to
work together for Venezuela, for the Bolivarian people, for the Bolivarian
Venezuela. That's why I start by sending these greetings to them and
extending these two hands and heart to them in the name of all of us,
because we are brothers in the fatherland of Bolívar.
AMY GOODMAN: That was Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez last year after his
election. We're also joined by Michael Shifter, president of the
Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington-based policy forum on Western
Hemisphere affairs, adjunct professor of Latin American politics at
Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. Your assessment of
President Chávez's legacy and what he represented?
MICHAEL SHIFTER: Well, I think he did-Chávez really put his finger on
legitimate grievance of social injustice and social inequality in Venezuela
and throughout much of Latin America. He deserves a lot of credit for that,
and I think that was his great contribution.
The problem is, I don't think he really constructed an alternative after 14
years, and I think mainly because his style, his approach, was that he made
all the decisions. He concentrated power in his own hands. And that's very,
very difficult to construct an effective system, a governance model, when
only one person makes all the decisions. So, my sense is that he had a great
opportunity because he had tremendous charisma, connected with the
Venezuelan people, cared about the Venezuelan people, and the Venezuelans
felt that. And he had a lot of resources. Oil prices went up substantially
from the time he came in in 1999 'til now. He really had an opportunity to
reshape in a significant way and put the country on a sustainable path of
development. I'm not sure that if one looks at Venezuela today that it's on
that path.
And I think you have enormous problems that are there. There are shortages
of basic goods. There is the highest inflation rate in Latin America. Crime
is off the charts. If you look at the crime rate when he came in versus the
crime rate today, there's tremendous insecurity. Caracas is one of the most
crime-ridden cities in the world today. So, this is not a government that I
think has been very competent and very effective. And I think it's a product
of the fact that he is somebody who believed that he represents the general
will of Venezuelan people. He is a legitimate president, there's no question
about that, but you also need to, I think, bring in other sectors of the
society, and he was a very polarizing figure. So I think he deserves credit.
I think his legacy is a mixed one. But I think, in the end, this will be
seen as a great opportunity for Venezuela that was squandered in the end.
AMY GOODMAN: Eva Golinger, your response?
EVA GOLINGER: Well, I think that at least Michael Shifter recognized
Chávez's legacy in terms of changing the lives of Venezuelans, and
particularly the poor, but I strongly disagree with the assessment of the
fact that he didn't build, one, a sustainable model, two, an alternative,
viable alternative, for the country and for the region, because, before as
Greg was saying, Chávez opened the door, opened a pathway, began that
pathway and took that road to transforming Latin America forever. I mean,
Venezuela has been transformed forever.
Talking about the level of participation, today in Venezuela more
Venezuelans participate than ever before in history. Everyone has a voice.
Everyone wants to be active and involved. Before Chávez came into power-and
I lived there during that time-it was a country full of apathy, full of
apathy, full of exclusion, people who didn't even care about participating
because their participation meant nothing. That's changed 100 percent and
will never reverse its course.
At the same time, much has been focused on Chávez the man, Chávez Chávez,
because he was an all-encompassing figure, he was larger than life. You
know, he had this enormous personality and tremendous charisma. But at the
same time, the vision that he had and that he began to implement
collectively along with the people of Venezuela was about power to the
people. And I think there's no question that that has taken root in the
country today. And we've seen it: Even after Chávez was elected in October
and then was diagnosed again that the cancer had returned, and he was unable
to participate in elections that followed after that for governors, for
regional elections, nonetheless-he didn't appear in one campaign event-his
party won in 20 out of 23 states in the country. I mean, it was a clear
showing of the leadership that was growing within the ranks of his party. At
the same time, we've seen, you know, people are pouring into the streets of
Venezuela, and have been throughout this time period, saying, "I am Chávez."
And that doesn't just mean, you know, "I love Chávez." It means "Chávez
represented me, represented my family, my community, my interests."
And I think that today what we're seeing in Venezuela, through these
communal councils, through all this popular participation, is a collective
leadership that has grown. And I think that in the end, that was Chávez's
overall objective, how to transfer that power into the hands of the people,
empower the people so that they feel they have the capacity to govern their
nation. And I think that that has unquestionably happened in Venezuela, and
that's one of the strongest elements of Chávez's legacy.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Yeah, Greg Wilpert, what about these issues that Michael
Shifter raises of the increasing crime rate in Venezuela-I'm not sure that
Caracas is yet at the level of the place of my birth, Puerto Rico, in terms
of crime rates, but it certainly has escalated dramatically-and the
inflation situation and the unsustainability of the economic model that
Chávez has developed?
GREGORY WILPERT: Well, I mean, I obviously disagree, as well, that I think
it's definitely sustainable. Venezuela, for example-I mean, people keep
mentioning the inflation. True, it's very high, but it's lower than it was
in the pre-Chávez years. It averaged 50 percent per year in the two
presidents before Chávez. And he brought it-Chávez brought it down to around
20 percent in these last couple years. The average, I think, is around 22
percent per year. So that's a decent achievement for an oil-producing
country that basically earns its foreign currency in oil and funnels it back
into the social programs, into the economy. And that, of course, generates
inflation. But as long as incomes rise faster than inflation, it's not
really that big a deal. I mean, it's a hassle, it's a problem, but it's not
unsustainable.
The other thing is, I think that certainly crime is an issue, and it is a
serious problem. I think it was basically based on a miscalculation on the
part of the government. They believed that once you get poverty down, crime
would go down by itself. And they didn't do enough to actually make sure
that there's enough police, a decently functioning judicial system. And
that's really one of the big areas where a lot more needs to be done. But
other than that, really, I think that, like I said, economically and
socially, there's been tremendous achievements in the last couple of years.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Miguel Tinker Salas, I'd like to ask you about the issue
of oil and the importance of oil in Venezuela to the Chávez revolution. But
first, I'd like to play a clip of an interview
<http://www.democracynow.org/2005/9/20/venezuelas_president_chavez_offers_ch
eap_oil>  that we did back in 2005 when President Chávez was here for the
United Nations General Assembly, one of the first televised interviews that
he did here in the United States, where he spoke to Democracy Now! about the
role of oil in his country.
PRESIDENT HUGO CHÁVEZ: [translated] So we're now providing-first we're
ensuring the supply of oil, direct supply of oil from state to state, in
order to avoid the speculation of multinationals and traders. They buy
gasoline in Venezuela, and then they go to a Caribbean country and they
charge double. So we are selling the products to the states directly. We are
not charging for freight. We assume the cost of freight. But apart from
that, this discount is not of 25 percent. It goes to 40 percent of the
total. And this money will be paid back in 25 years' time, with two years of
grace and 1 percent interest rates. So, if you make all of the mathematical
calculations, the donation percentage is almost 70 percent, because it's a
long-term adjusted 1 percent. So what Venezuela's doing is supplying 200,000
barrels of oil to the Caribbean and other Central American and South
American countries, such as Paraguay, Uruguay and smaller nations in South
America-200,000 millions of barrels. If you apply calculations, mathematical
calculations, by 1.5 percent of our GDP-1.5 percent of the GDP is devoted to
this cooperation-it means that we are financing these sister nations that
next year will reach $1.7 billion a year. In 10 years, it's $17 billion.
It's a way for us to share, to share our resources with these countries.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: That was President Hugo Chávez in September of 2005 in an
interview, exclusive interview, with Democracy Now! that he held with Amy
and myself. I wanted to ask you, Miguel Tinker Salas, the impact of the oil
policies of President Chávez on the independence of the Latin American
region and the ability to export the idea of a social revolution throughout
Latin America?
MIGUEL TINKER SALAS: Yeah, I think oil has to be understood as something
that is not simply an economic question for Venezuela. It's also a very
important political, symbolic and cultural element within Venezuelan
society. For Venezuelans, it was supposed to be the vehicle to
modernization. And when Chávez comes to power in 1998, oil prices were less
than $7 a barrel. So, in many ways, what the government had to do was to
reconstruct a vision of Venezuela that included oil as part of the motor of
change, of social change in Venezuela, not only for Venezuela, but also for
the region. And oil was its most important cachet.
So, the first stage we saw was an effort to reclaim the oil industry, which
began to operate essentially as an international conglomerate that was
housed in Venezuela but did not really consider itself Venezuelan. So that
was the first stage we saw in the context of reclaiming oil and attempting
to create oil within a sustainable bandwidth in which Venezuela could sell
oil commercially and then also initiate social programs and then also be
able to provide it, as it did in the San José Accords in the 1970s, along
with Mexico, to Central American countries, to Caribbean countries, that had
to pay very onerous prices. So what Chávez's government does is to use oil
not simply to buttress relations with the U.S., but to buttress relations
with Latin America in a very important way, to provide oil and long-term
credits to countries like Nicaragua, like Dominican Republic, like Jamaica
and other countries in the region, and including Cuba, and using that to
create a tremendous amount of political goodwill, because it recognized that
Venezuela has an important role, not simply as a purveyor of energy to the
First World, to the U.S., which was its dominant trading partner, but really
to Latin America.
And then that notion of economic nationalism, of economic sovereignty,
spread throughout Latin America. We saw the same example in Bolivia
nationalizing the gas industry. We saw Ecuador rejoining OPEC. We saw the
creation of Petrocaribe, a Caribbean initiative that provided oil at
short-term-long-term credit rates to the Caribbean. We saw the provision of
oil to-of heating oil to communities in the U.S. under the banner of Citgo,
so that Northeastern communities that had to pay onerous prices received
oils at subsidized prices, as well. And we saw also Petrosur, the creation
of a South American oil body that actually helped negotiate conditions for
oil industry.
So, in many ways, many of that is attributable to the policies that the
Chávez government instituted. And I think that's what was sustainable. I
think the previous system that had existed before 1998 was unsustainable.
And the reality is that with that kind of recasting of oil, and of its
symbolic importance as a part of the integral development of social
development of Venezuela, we saw that clash between the imaginary Venezuela
that saw itself simply as an international oil-producing country, and now
reclaiming the oil industry as part and parcel of the social development
within Venezuela, a major chasm had developed. And I think that's what was
healed under the Chávez administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Miguel Tinker Salas; and Gregory Wilpert of Venezuelanalysis;
Eva Golinger, Venezuelan-American attorney, close friend of President
Chávez; Greg Grandin of New York University, New York Public Library; and
Michael Shifter of the Inter-American Dialogue, we're going to break and
then come back to this discussion-also ask the question: How is it that
President Chávez managed to survive a coup against him, that other leaders,
from Aristide to Salvador Allende, to President Zelaya of Honduras, did not
manage to survive? Stay with us.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: On this day after the death of Venezuelan President Hugo
Chávez, we're going to talk right now about how it is that he survived an
attempted coup when other Latin American and Caribbean leaders could not. I
want to turn to an excerpt of a documentary made by two filmmakers who were
in Caracas during the 2002 coup. The film is called The Revolution Will Not
Be Televised. The excerpt begins with then-White House Press Secretary Ari
Fleischer.
PRESS SECRETARY ARI FLEISCHER: Let me share with you the administration's
thoughts about what's taking place in Venezuela. We know that the action
encouraged by the Chávez government provoked this crisis. The Chávez
government suppressed peaceful demonstrations, fired on unarmed peaceful
protesters, resulting in 10 killed and 100 wounded. That is what took place.
And a transitional civilian government has been installed.
NARRATOR: Despite the blackout by the Venezuelan private media, members of
Chávez's government had managed to communicate with international television
networks, getting the message back to Venezuela via cable TV that Chávez had
not resigned and was being held captive.
The palace guard, who had remained loyal to Chávez decided to act. Behind
Carmona's back, a plot was being hatched by Chávez's men to retake the
palace. The plan was for the guard to take up key positions, surround the
palace and to wait for a given signal.
With all their positions secured, the signal was given, and the presidential
guard moved in. Several members of the newly installed government were taken
prisoner, but in the confusion, Carmona and the generals had managed to slip
away.
As the guards secured the building, Chávez's ministers, who had been in
hiding for the last two days, began to arrive back to the palace to try and
reestablish the legitimate Cabinet.
AMY GOODMAN: That's a clip from the documentary The Revolution Will Not Be
Televised. Michael Shifter in Washington, D.C., of the Inter-American
Dialogue, how is it that President Chávez managed to survive this coup and
retain power, when so many, from President Aristide of Haiti to Honduras's
Zelaya, to, well, famously, of course, President Allende in Chile, did not
survive their coups?
MICHAEL SHIFTER: Well, there's a lot of-
AMY GOODMAN: The coups against them, I should say, that the U.S. was
involved with.
MICHAEL SHIFTER: Sure. There's a lot of history of failed coups in Latin
America. And there are other cases, as well. President Chávez himself
attempted a coup in 1992 in Venezuela that failed. And this one failed, as
well. Fortunately, I think, it failed. And, you know, there are a lot of
cases where there's an attempted overthrow of a democratically elected
legitimate government, like Chávez in April of 2002. And obviously, he had a
lot of support. Obviously this was, you know, terribly done. And I'm glad
that it failed. I think that the statement from the White House was terrible
and shameful and disgraceful.
But I think that this is-you know, this is why he didn't follow the-you
know, of Allende and others, I think that the circumstances were just very,
very different. I don't think you can compare this and put this in the same
category. The time was different. The circumstances were different. The role
of the United States was different. And again, I think that if one looks at
a variety of countries, one can see other cases and examples of coups that
didn't succeed. And I'm happy when they don't succeed, because I think when
you have a legitimate government that's elected by the people and you have
an interruption in democracy, that that is a very serious, troubling
development.
AMY GOODMAN: Juan, there's an old Latin-
MICHAEL SHIFTER: So I'm glad it didn't succeed in April 2002.
AMY GOODMAN: There's an old Latin American-
MICHAEL SHIFTER: And I'm glad Chávez's didn't, either.
AMY GOODMAN: There's an old Latin American joke that says, "Why hasn't the
U.S. ever undergone a coup?" And that's because there's no U.S. embassy
here.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Well, I'd like to ask Michael Shifter, your sense of
where-what the future now holds in terms of Venezuela, the ability of the
opposition to mount a strong campaign against Nicolás Maduro, because
obviously Maduro is going to be the candidate of the Chávez forces? What do
you look for now in the coming days in terms of indications of where the
situation in Venezuela will go?
MICHAEL SHIFTER: Well, I think there are going to be elections. I think
Maduro is going to be the candidate. I think he has-the chances are that
he's going to be elected. All the polls show that. The opposition is very,
very demoralized, very fragmented. They lost in October by 11 points. They
lost the governorships in December. They're looking for a strategy. They're
wondering about their leadership. So I think the government certainly has
the upper hand, and I think that the government will come together. There
are different factions within Chavismo, but I think they'll come together,
certainly in the short term. So I look, for the short term, for things to be
fairly stable and fairly steady under the leadership of Nicolás Maduro. I
think that's probably the likely scenario.
What I'm going to look for is more in the next six to eight months when, if
the economic situation continues to deteriorate, and you might want to look
for some strains and infighting within the Chávez camp. Nobody can match
Chávez's charisma and his ability to hold together the different forces
within Chavismo. He had that unique ability. Maduro, for all of his whatever
skills he has, he doesn't have that talent. And I think that we could see
developing some real tensions within the Chávez camp that could really-has
the potential, at least, to create some turmoil.
But for the short term, my guess is that things will-that Maduro will be the
president. The opposition has a long way to go to regroup and come up with
an alternative strategy. Hopefully they'll work on that and do that. But
they just suffered two defeats, and they are figuring out what to do.
AMY GOODMAN: Nicolás Maduro, of course, now is the Venezuelan vice
president. In October 2007, when he was Venezuela's foreign minister, we had
a chance to interview him. It was a year after President Chávez had famously
referred to then-President George W. Bush as the devil in a speech before
the General Assembly. Before we hear from Maduro, let's go to that clip of
Chávez at the U.N. in 2006.
PRESIDENT HUGO CHÁVEZ: [translated] And the devil came here yesterday.
Yesterday, the devil came here, right here, right here. And it smells of
sulfur still today.
AMY GOODMAN: That was Hugo Chávez, Venezuela's president, speaking at the
U.N. in 2006, referring to George W. Bush. Well, the next year, in 2007, I
asked Nicolás Maduro
<http://www.democracynow.org/2007/10/2/exclusive_venezuelan_foreign_minister
_on_iran>  what message he had for the United States.
NICOLÁS MADURO: [translated] Our message is a message, first of all, to draw
a balance of what has happened over the last months in the world, what
happened in the world, what's been the role of the United Nations to
guarantee peace, how much the world has lost as a result of this crazy
policy that apparently will be prolonged with this attack against the
Islamic Republic of Iran. It could reach a crazy level if we pretend to take
the way of war to aggress, to attack the Iranian people.
Our message remains the same. The world should open their eyes. The U.S.
society should react. The U.S. people can do a lot for peace, for stability
in the planet, for the recovery of the planet. The awareness in the world
today, it's also expressed in the United States, and we need a large humane
alliance between the U.S. people and the peoples of the world, respecting
our diversity, cultural diversity, our different ways to see the world, and
establishing a relationship of equality. That's the main message, and that's
been the message of President Chávez a year ago.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: That was Vice President Nicolás Maduro, then foreign minister
of Venezuela, talking with Democracy Now! I wanted to ask you, Eva, you know
Nicolás Maduro well. Could you tell us who is he, his origins and
development as part of the Chávez movement? And there are some who say that
he's actually more politically to the left than Chávez was in terms of his
perspectives and his analysis.
EVA GOLINGER: Yeah, well, I think also the previous response, when talking
about the coup and why it didn't function in Venezuela, even though it did
for a 48-hour period-and that needs to be remembered-and talking about, you
know, what will happen from now on, showed the sort of position that you see
out of a lot of analysts in the United States and around the world that
underestimates entirely the Venezuelan people and their capacity, the
capacity of President Chávez, as well as others, like Nicolás Maduro.
Nicolás comes from working-class roots. He was a bus driver. He was a union
organizer. He's someone who, you know, was a part of grassroots movements.
And he became a part of Chávez's movement when Chávez led a military
rebellion in 1992 to try to oust a murderous and corrupt president at the
time, that most of Venezuelans actually supported that rebellion, which did
fail. And that's when Chávez came on the scene, took responsibility for that
publicly. He actually went to prison. While he was in prison, Nicolás joined
in his movement. And the movement that Chávez had built had originally been
out of the military. Chávez was a soldier. He was a lieutenant colonel in
the armed forces, in the army.
AMY GOODMAN: And, as Shifter said, attempted a coup first, before he did
become-
EVA GOLINGER: Attempted a military rebellion to overthrow the then-President
Carlos Andrés Pérez, who had, in two-and-a-half years before, ordered the
state security forces to massacre the people of Venezuela when they
protested his implementing neoliberal reforms in the country, privatization.
More than 3,000 Venezuelans were killed. Mass grave sites were dug. And, you
know, no one really knows the numbers that were killed by the government of
that time. So a lot of people supported what Chávez was trying to do. Nobody
knew him at the time. I mean, that's when he became known. And that's when
Nicolás Maduro also began to know him.
And so, Chávez began to build, together with this group of grassroots
organizers, a movement based on civil-military unity. And that was one of
the key factors, actually, that defeated the coup in April 2002 against
Chávez, was the fact that the military and the people came together, that
people in Venezuela, who had begun a transformation of the country-because a
lot of times also what happens in Venezuela is underestimated. It's seen as,
you know, this government came into power, Chávez was elected, and he began
to do all these radical reforms. But it's actually-we call it a revolution
because that's what it is. It's a systematic transformation of every sector
of society. And, you know, that was beginning to take root in 2002 when the
coup happened.
And so, that movement of people that Nicolás Maduro was a part of, he was
then a member of parliament. He later became the head of parliament, of
Venezuela's National Assembly, president of the assembly. Chávez named him
foreign minister in 2006, and he continued in that movement in that
position. He was ridiculed nonstop by Venezuelan media, internationally, by
the opposition, saying, you know, "Oh, he's a bus driver. You know, he knows
nothing. He has no education. How could he be the top diplomat of the
country?" But he became, I think, one of Venezuela's best foreign ministers
that they've ever had. I mean, he has led all kinds of treaties and
agreements that Venezuela has entered into with countries throughout the
world that have benefited Venezuela substantially. You know, most of
Venezuelan foreign policy is now based on integration, cooperation and
mutual benefit, transfer of technology. I mean, no longer it's about just
what can we get from the other guy.
And so, Nicolás has then become the most intimate adviser of the president,
by his side, especially throughout this very difficult period. He was the
one who was always with Chávez while he was undergoing his treatments in
Cuba, and he was the one that clearly came through as the person with the
most capacity to unify Chavismo and to carry on those policies. And I would
definitely say that he certainly maintains a very radical and profound
leftist position and wholeheartedly will carry on the movement led by
Chávez.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Gregory Wilpert, I wanted to ask you about the role of the
Venezuelan media, both in opposition to Chávez all this time, especially its
role in Venezuelan society, because he's often been criticized as attempting
to muzzle the media.
GREGORY WILPERT: Right. Well, you know, that's one of the things that
constantly critics point out to, is that the media is somehow being
repressed in Venezuela. But if you turn on the TV or look at the newspapers,
you see constant diatribes and constant criticisms and raising of problems
that exist in Venezuela. And so, I mean, it's very difficult to reconcile
that with this claim that there's some kind of repression against the
private media.
The other thing is, people say that Chávez created all these other media
outlets that are completely swamping their airwaves, but that's not true.
It's true that there are many new media outlets, but they only actually get
a very small percentage of the viewership. And so, the private media
actually still predominates in Venezuela, despite what-the impression that
people get from what's going on. And so-but there's a much greater diversity
of opinions and of freedom of speech, really, because you also have tons of
community media. So there's an incredible amount of debate going on in
Venezuela.
AMY GOODMAN: We're going to continue this discussion. There will be a
seven-day period of mourning. President Hugo Chávez will be buried on
Friday. That's when his funeral will be. That does it for our show, and I
want to thank all of our guests: Gregory Wilpert, founder of
Venezuelanalysis.com <http://www.venezuelanalysis.com> ; Eva Golinger,
friend and adviser to President Hugo Chávez, author of The Chávez Code ;
Miguel Tinker Salas, professor at Pomona College in Claremont, California;
Michael Shifter, president of the Inter-American Dialogue in Washington; and
Greg Grandin, currently Cullman fellow at the New York Public Library. You
can go to our website at democracynow.org for complete coverage of Hugo
Chávez
<http://www.democracynow.org/special/venezuelan_president_hugo_chvez_dies>
with our exclusive interviews of both Chávez and Maduro. That's:
www.democracynow.org +


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to