Power and Interest News Report (PINR)

http://www.pinr.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------

04 April 2005

To contact Dr. Michael A. Weinstein, please e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Venezuela's Hugo Chavez Makes His Bid for a Bolivarian Revolution 
Drafted By: Dr. Michael A. Weinstein 

http://www.pinr.com 

Throughout the first three months of 2005, the chronic verbal jousting
between Washington and Venezuela's "populist" regime led by President
Hugo Chavez ratcheted up in intensity, with Chavez threatening to cut
off oil exports to the United States if Washington moved to
destabilize his rule, and Washington declaring that it was pursuing a
policy to "contain" him.

The latest round of rhetorical conflict began in January, when
recently appointed U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that
the Chavez regime was a "negative influence" in the Western
Hemisphere. With power passing to the State Department, Washington has
woken up to threats to its perceived interests around the world that
had been festering since the Iraq intervention diverted attention from
them. Despite the fact that Iraq continues to be an obstacle to fresh
initiatives, Washington has decided to move to restore its global
influence, including in South America, where left and center-left
governments have taken control in the southern cone and a cycle of
political instability has taken hold in the Andes.

Washington sees Chavez to be its greatest problem in South America,
because he is the most radically leftist regional leader and the only
one offering a clearly alternative and opposed model to Washington's
scenario of a Free Trade Area of the Americas (F.T.A.A.) composed of
market democracies led by the United States.

At the same time that Washington has become more assertive, Chavez has
sensed an opportunity to implement his vision of a united South
America that acts in accordance with its own interests, independent of
Washington, and a "new socialist society" based on cooperatives that
would eliminate poverty and subordinate private business to broader
social aims. Although the "Bolivarian" vision is utopian -- and Chavez
knows it -- it provides a framework for more practicable policies that
put him on a collision course with Washington.

The tensions between Washington and Caracas reflect Chavez's judgment
that the hemispheric balance of power has shifted against the United
States and that Washington is not in a position to stop him from
acting against its wishes. Since it is not clear that Chavez is
correct, the conflict between Caracas and Washington has become a test
of their relative influence in South America.

Chavez has espoused and attempted to implement his Bolivarian
revolution since his election as Venezuela's president in 1998, but
his progress was hindered by economic distress caused by depressed oil
prices that led to severe domestic social conflict culminating in an
unsuccessful coup attempt against him in April 2002 that was tacitly
supported by Washington, and a widespread general strike in December
of that year in which the state oil company P.D.V.S.A. was shut down.

Having weathered the attacks against his regime, Chavez's fortunes
changed as the price of oil began its recent rise, general economic
conditions improved and state coffers were replenished with funds that
could be allocated to social programs, military expenditures and
diplomatic initiatives. With the domestic opposition against him
dispersed and demoralized after a referendum to recall him in August
2004 was defeated by 59 percent of voters, Chavez also felt free to
consolidate power by taking greater control over the communications
media and pursuing land reform, renegotiation of energy contracts with
foreign oil companies, and diversion of oil revenues to infrastructure
and social programs, and a military build up.

Oil is the basis of Chavez's power. The world's fifth largest crude
oil exporter, Venezuela sells 60 percent of its output to the United
States, accounting for 15 percent of the latter's petroleum imports.
The Venezuelan state also has a major stake in refining and
distribution in the United States through its ownership of Citgo. The
recent high oil prices provided the stimulus for Venezuela's economy
to grow by 17.3 percent in 2004, leading to a decrease in unemployment
from 17 percent in early 2004 to 14 percent in February 2005.

U.S. dependence on Venezuelan oil puts a damper on any moves by
Washington to destabilize Chavez's regime, but it also makes regime
change in Caracas an ultimate aim for Washington. Chavez is aware of
Washington's predicament and seeks to exploit it. Washington responds
with efforts at damage control.

The Bolivarian Vision

With the exception of Cuban President Fidel Castro, with whom he
cultivates friendly ties, Chavez is the only Latin American leader who
stands for a model of development that deviates significantly from the
broad Western consensus on market democracy, including its more
competitive Anglo-American form and its more welfare-oriented
continental European variant. More than the demagogue, vague populist
and aspirant to a Castro-style dictatorship that his opponents in
Venezuela, Washington and the U.S. press make him out to be, Chavez is
a visionary attempting to consummate a social revolution in his
country that will put into place a "new socialism" based on
cooperativism and participation of all sectors of society in managing
local affairs, and will transform Venezuela into as self-sufficient
and developed a state as possible -- a "small major power," as he
calls it.

Inspired by the continentalist liberator of South America from Spanish
rule, Simon Bolivar, Chavez's Bolivarian revolution is neither an
old-fashioned systematic modern ideology like Castro's Communism, nor
the kind of ad hoc expedient appeal to the poor and disadvantaged
familiar in Latin American populism; instead, it is something in
between and with a distinctiveness of its own -- a set of broad
principles and goals around which to mobilize Venezuelan society that
reflect adaptation to the country's economic underdevelopment and its
sharp social divisions -- especially between rich and poor.

Like any other political vision -- for example, the polity of market
democracies in a globalized world advanced by his competitors --
Chavez's Bolivarism falls short in practice and might be impracticable
altogether, yet it provides relatively coherent direction for national
policy, does not seem to be simply a rationalization for power and --
if even moderately successful -- would constitute a concrete
alternative to capitalist market democracy. Chavez appears to be
serious and resistant to being bought off, which is why Washington
perceives him as a special threat.

In common with many of the ideologies that have emerged in the
post-Soviet era, Bolivarism is an eclectic combination of tendencies
that were normally kept apart in the great struggles of modern
politics. At its center, Chavez's vision, like Bolivar's, is
continentalist, projecting the scenario of a unified South America
composed of cooperating states that form an independent power bloc in
the world and do not follow U.S. leadership. Yet Chavez is also an
ardent nationalist, defending Venezuelan sovereignty and concentrating
his efforts at change on transforming the country's society. His
nationalism and continentalism are reconciled by the hope that by
creating a cooperativist society in Venezuela, the country will
provide a successful example for other states to emulate.

Chavez's domestic model -- a "new socialism" -- is an eclectic mixture
of state intervention in the economy, tolerance of an independent
private business sector, mobilization of society through a
revolutionary party that penetrates every community, yet tolerates
political opposition and adheres to constitutional procedures;
"participative democracy" at the local level that focuses on
"endogenous development" projects that bring the various sectors of
society together in pursuit of common purposes, yet are energized by
"Bolivarian circles" composed of his supporters; a dose of Catholic
"liberation theology" that emphasizes preference for the poor; and an
overarching nationalism that provides the rationale for patience and
sacrifice on the parts of the conflicting interests that constitute
the entire program.

To call Chavez a "populist" and leave the matter there dismissively --
as his opponents consistently do -- is a mistake. Instead, Bolivarism
is a complex vision that is riddled with tensions, yet provides a
basis for institutional development and a framework for particular
policies. The primary tension is between social mobilization through
state intervention, a revolutionary party, and the network of
Bolivarian circles; and the tolerance of a private business sector,
political opposition and inclusion of civil society at the local
level, all of which are capable of running counter to mobilization.

The balance between mobilization and inclusion is shaky and
susceptible to falling toward the Castro-style dictatorship that
Chavez's opponents foresee or toward the deadlock and disorder that
broke out in 2002. Success in implementing the vision depends on a
steady stream of funds from high oil prices, enabling Chavez to
improve the conditions of the poor, who form his base, and to keep the
more advantaged interests at bay.

Former Venezuelan diplomat Sadio Garavini Di Turno notes that there
are "three Venezuelas": the pro-Chavez sectors, the intransigent
opposition, and those in between who voted for Chavez in 1998, were
disaffected and joined the opposition in 2002, and returned to support
him in the 2004 referendum, when they became frustrated by civil
strife, the economy improved, and Chavez's development "missions"
began to bear some fruit. Di Turno anticipates that Chavez will again
disaffect the middle third by being unable to carry through his
revolution and urges the opposition parties to unite and offer a
credible program "to channel this disappointment."

It is far from clear that Di Turno is correct that Chavez will fail
and set off another cycle of instability. If the price of oil remains
high and enough development projects are successful, leading to an
improvement in the standard of living for the poor -- who compose
approximately half of Venezuela's population -- Chavez's parallel
institutions might begin to take root and alter the social system.

Bolivarism is a compromise formation adapted to a deeply divided
society, but unlike other experiments to promote social change through
social mobilization in underdeveloped countries, it is fueled by
wealth and not dependent on foreign patrons. It remains to be seen
whether Chavez will be able to keep the middle third of the Venezuelan
public acquiescent. Facing an election in 2006, he knows that he must
move rapidly to demonstrate progress and consolidate his power. He is
doing so aggressively on all fronts, having declared 2005 "the year of
the productive economy," in which Venezuela will make its "leap
forward."

Oil Policy

If Chavez is to effect his Bolivarian revolution, Venezuela must keep
pumping enough oil to finance it. On the surface, his prospects seem
to be promising. The country has the largest proven oil reserves in
the Western Hemisphere (78 billion barrels) and the largest in the
world (300 billion barrels) if the super-heavy crude in the Orinoco
tar belt is included. The Venezuelan state also owns significant
downstream refining and distribution assets through Houston-based
Citgo. The Citgo refineries are specially adapted to process
Venezuela's heavy crude and its chain of service stations in the
United States markets the output.

Beneath the surface, there are problems. In the aftermath of the 2002
strike, which dried up oil exports for two months, Chavez fired 18,000
oil workers, temporarily paralyzing P.D.V.S.A. Although production
recovered, it has not reached the peak of 3.5 million barrels a day
recorded in 1997 and analysts dispute the government's current figure
of 3.2 million barrels a day, estimating the actual amount to be 2.6
million.

The lagging production figures reflect depletion of Venezuela's
developed oil fields and insufficient investment in developing new
ones. With profits estimated at $6.5 billion for 2004, P.D.V.S.A.
claims to be investing $5 billion a year in development and
exploration, with the goal of bringing production up to 4.9 million
barrels a day by 2010. Yet Chavez is also estimated to be diverting $4
billion a year of the oil profits to finance the Bolivarian
revolution, leading analysts to posit an investment shortfall that can
only be made up by foreign investors.

Faced with the conflicting demands of expanding oil production and
funding the Bolivarian revolution, Chavez has moved to extract more
money from foreign producers operating in Venezuela. In October 2004,
he raised the royalty tax on companies working in the Orinoco belt
from one percent to 16.6 percent. All the affected companies except
Exxon Mobil have acquiesced in the tax hike so far. Exxon Mobil, which
argues that the original low tax compensates it for its capital
investment, has succeeded in getting the government to enter talks
with it on the issue, but Venezuelan Oil Minister Rafael Rodriguez
insists that the tax hike will not be rolled back. Under a law passed
in 2001, new projects will have a royalty rate of 30 percent, which
does not seem to have discouraged investors in the short term (for
example, on March 31, ChevronTexaco announced plans to pursue joint
development in the Orinoco belt with P.D.V.S.A.).

As a longer term growth strategy that has geostrategic implications,
Chavez has moved aggressively to diversify the market for Venezuelan
oil and the sources of investment for its oil industry. Caracas has
signed energy agreements with Beijing and Brasilia, and is negotiating
with New Delhi. Chavez's plan is to deal government-to-government,
rather than with private firms, and to make Venezuela less dependent
on exports to the U.S. and on private investment. He also wants to see
a cooperative energy agreement be made in South America to create a
complex -- Petrosur -- uniting all state hydrocarbons companies in the
region, with the goal of excluding the big multinational oil companies
from energy development.

Chavez's diversification strategy is still in its early stages. In its
favor is the escalating demand for oil in South and East Asia, and the
aspiration of Brazil to be a regional power. On the downside,
Venezuela's potential new markets do not presently have the capacity
to refine its heavy crude, and pipelines and shipping routes for
moving the oil east do not exist or are inefficient. For the moment,
Venezuela remains dependent on the U.S. market and that is not likely
to change in the short to medium term. Nonetheless, Washington is
studying alternatives to Venezuelan imports because of Chavez's
threats to cut off supplies to the U.S. if Washington attempts to
destabilize his regime or tries to assassinate him, as he suspects it
intends to do. Chavez has stated repeatedly that he wants to sell oil
to the U.S. and Rodriguez has reassured Washington that Venezuela's
new markets would be served only by expanded production.

It is not yet clear how much substance lies behind Chavez's oil
policies. Will the higher royalty fees and requirements that
P.D.V.S.A. have a majority stake in development projects discourage
investment? Will supply and refining problems in the new markets be
resolved? Chavez's domestic critics claim that he will not be able to
rectify the investment shortfall and that production will stagnate.
The administration responds that production is high and that there is
no investment shortfall.

In reality, the picture is mixed: there is strong demand for
Venezuelan oil and efforts to expand supply have an unknown
probability of success. The grand design of south-south cooperation
and of Petrosur remain visions, yet emerging regional powers are eager
to stake out positions in Venezuela's energy sector. How quickly
development proceeds -- if it does at all -- will determine whether
Chavez will be able to continue to finance the Bolivarian revolution
and avoid the scenarios of a slide into dictatorship or a breakdown of
his rule through renewed civil disorder.

Conclusion

Given the uncertain future of Venezuela's oil industry -- at least in
the short term -- it is far too early to predict with confidence the
degree of success that Chavez will achieve in realizing his vision.
With the rise in oil prices a relatively recent trend, he is still in
the deal-making phase and in the early stages of social development
and military expansion. Acting on all fronts, he is forging agreements
with Russia, Brazil and Spain to supply the Venezuelan military with
aircraft, naval vessels and 100,000 assault rifles; instituting
stricter press controls; expropriating land for distribution to
peasants; buying public debt from Argentina; making security
arrangements with Brazil; moving to gain access to currency reserves
held by the central bank; organizing citizen defense forces; starting
up agricultural and industrial development projects in Venezuela's
hinterland; and cutting energy deals with China, India, Russia and
Brazil.

Although Chavez's flurry of activity -- all undertaken in the past
several months -- might simply be scattered initiatives rather than a
set of synergistic policies, it has awakened Washington's concern and
opposition. In particular, Washington has attempted, without success,
to stop the arms deals, and has expressed concern over press
restrictions, as have international human rights organizations. In its
moves to "contain" the Bolivarian revolution, Washington has not been
able to gain the support it desires from other interested powers, each
of which has interests in cultivating good relations with Caracas.

Chavez is making his move. It is possible that he has bitten off more
than he can chew, but there is also a chance that his Bolivarian
revolution will gather momentum. Whatever the future holds, the
political situation in Venezuela bears close watching, as the only
major effort to implement an alternative model to the dominant
neo-liberalism unfolds.

Report Drafted By:
Dr. Michael A. Weinstein
                                   Serbian News Network - SNN

                                        [email protected]

                                    http://www.antic.org/

Reply via email to