U.S. Supports Anti-democratic Forces In Venezuela Recall

ZNet Commentary
U.S. Supports Anti-democratic Forces In Venezuela Recall
August 11, 2004
By Robert Jensen

Imagine the scandal if a foreign government had for years funneled millions of 
dollars to political groups in the United States in an attempt to affect the 
outcome of a U.S. election. Even worse, what if some of the groups that 
received money had been involved in a failed coup attempt against a 
democratically elected U.S. president? Would the U.S. public not have a right 
to be outraged at the attempt to manipulate our political process?

Of course we would -- which is why the people of Venezuela have a right to be 
outraged at the U.S. government's ongoing attempts to meddle in the electoral 
process in Venezuela.

On Sunday (Aug. 15), Venezuelans will go to the polls for a referendum on the 
recall of President Hugo Chavez. Polls show Chavez running 8 to 31 percentage 
points ahead. But whatever the result, Bush administration actions in 
Venezuela should alert the U.S. public that the commitment to "expanding 
democracy" we hear so much about is largely rhetorical cover for the typical 
U.S. interference in the politics of nations in Latin America -- and around 
the world.

The vehicle for this meddling in Venezuela is the National Endowment for 
Democracy, which calls itself "a private, nonprofit organization" but is 
funded by U.S. taxpayers. Its self-described mission is "to strengthen 
democratic institutions around the world through nongovernmental efforts."

In the case of Venezuela, "strengthening democratic institutions" has meant 
financing groups that helped carry out the failed coup attempt against Chavez 
in April 2002. Coup leaders representing the traditional oligarchy in 
Venezuela, and their supporters in the U.S. government, saw a "problem": 
Chavez is genuinely interested in a fairer distribution of wealth and refuses 
to subordinate his country to U.S. policy. Their "solution" was a coup that 
lasted for 48 hours, during which an illegal decree installed a businessman as 
president and dissolved the National Assembly and the Supreme Court. The 
United States quickly backed the coup, until loyal officers and civilian 
groups restored Chavez to office.

In the continued quest to promote "democracy," the NED kept funding some of 
those same opposition figures as they shifted to a strategy of work stoppages 
and lockouts aimed at crippling the country's vital oil industry.
When that failed to dislodge Chavez, they finally took up a legal route, the 
recall election. (Documents regarding NED funding obtained through the Freedom 
of Information Act are available online at http://www.venezuelafoia.info/)

Whatever objections U.S. officials might have to the Venezuelan president's 
policies, it is clear the attempts to push Chavez from power have nothing to 
do with the charge that he is an authoritarian president (or 
"quasi-authoritarian," as one U.S. newspaper described him in an editorial, or 
perhaps a "quasi-editorial"). Since his 1998 election, Chavez's real "crimes" 
have been not just consistently speaking out against the unjust distribution 
of resources in his country but taking tangible steps to help the poor, such 
as literacy programs and community-based health clinics.

Unlike so many U.S.-backed leaders in Latin America in over the years, Chavez 
has respected freedom of speech and an open political process. Most of the 
private media outlets, in fact, are rabidly anti-Chavez, representing the 
interests of the Venezuelan elite. Those television stations remain on the 
air. Chavez has consistently stated he would abide by the results of the 
referendum, which the opposition leadership refuses to do. The fact is that 
Chavez has acted in a less repressive manner than any prior Venezuelan president.

And for all this, Chavez has been demonized by the Bush administration, a 
strategy that John Kerry seems determined to mimic. This suggests that the 
current fashionable rhetoric among U.S. policymakers about supporting 
democracy around the world is -- as it was during the Cold War -- empty 
rhetoric. If democratic elections put into power leaders willing to back U.S. 
policy, then all is well. If people around the world reject U.S.-backed 
"leaders," then those people are likely to get some timely instruction in 
democracy -- Washington style.


For independent information on events in Venezuela in English, go to 
http://venezuelanalysis.com/, http://www.zmag.org/venezuela_watch.cfm, and 
http://www.cepr.net/pages/americas.htm.


Robert Jensen is a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin 
and the author of "Citizens of the Empire: The Struggle to Claim Our Humanity" 
from City Lights Books. He can be reached at
[email protected]

_______________________________________________
heads mailing list
[email protected]
http://ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/heads/
http://ballistichelmet.org/donate/