The Referendum in Venezuela

by Alan Cisco

The situation in Venezuela is converging upon a point of crisis, again, and the opposition is threatening violent rebellion if it is proven that they committed electoral fraud. The object upon which the conflict is focused, in this go-round, is the count of signatures to see if 20% of the nations voters signed the petition to authorize a referendum to recall President Chavez. The new, progressive constitution, voted into law in 1999, provides for a recall referendum on any elected official after completing half their term, if it is petitioned by 20% of the eligible voters.

The opposition insists that in the 3.47 million signatures they presented, there are at least the required 2.4 million valid signatures, which constitute 20%. The Chavez supporters (Chavistas - or members of the governing political parties: MVR-Movement of the Fifth Republic, PPT - the Nation for All, or Podemos - we can) insist that there are only 1.9 million valid signatures, and the rest were obtained through a "megafraud".

The decision is in the hands of the National Electoral Council (CNE), which is directed by five rectors Two support Chavez and two the opposition, but
the president of the CNE, or the deciding vote, Francisco Carrasquero, was chosen by consensus of the national assembly, for his reputation as an honest and trustworthy individual. Also under examination are signatures to recall both Chavista and opposition deputies to the national assembly.

The onerous task of checking and registering all the signatures, then comparing them to the electoral rolls and then finally verifying the associated fingerprints of a statistically representative sample, is to be completed, and final tallies announced by Friday, February 13, 2004.

Representatives of the Carter Center, who are monitoring the process, reported that the CNE is performing a superhuman effort that will take an additional one to two weeks to complete. The stakes are high, especially for the opposition. If they've failed to obtain the 20% signatures, their claims that they are the majority will look pathetic, and they will have no constitutional means of getting Chavez out until his term ends in 2006.

The government currently has a one or two vote majority in the National Assembly, but the recall referendums for deputies could increase that margin substantially and allow the government to pass several laws that the opposition have been desperately blocking. In addition, if it is proven that the opposition didn't have enough valid signatures, and therefore fabricated them, they would be in a weak and discredited position that could result in a further loss of political power in this summer's elections for state governors and mayors.

Chavez and his supporters initially vacillated about whether they would accept the decision of the CNE, but in the past month they have repeatedly stated they will accept the decision, although at the same time insisting that the "megafraud" will be exposed and there will be no referendum.

The opposition, initially content with the selection of Dr. Carresquera as fifth member of the CNE, has refused to say that they will accept its decision, and have become progressively insistent that Chavez will manipulate the CNE to deprive them of the right to a referendum that their valid signatures have won. First they demanded that international observers--the OAS and the Carter Center-be present at all stages of the signature verification process, but when the CNE acceded to this, they began to find other supposed irregularities, often denounced by the CNE rectors belonging to the opposition. There has been a gradual increase in the forcefulness of the opposition's assertions that the referendum must be approved, and the threats of consequences if it is denied.

A quick glance at today's edition of the flagship newspaper of the opposition, El Nacional, shows that the threat is now explicit. There is a quote from a minister of a previous government saying that either there will be a referendum or a rebellion. There is also a columnist who states that the referendum must extirpate the cancer that is killing Venezuela-meaning Chavez, and that not approving the referendum is "unacceptable, and that if it is not approved, the democratic game is canceled and what happens will be God's will." Another story suggests that the opposition rectors of the CNE may resign to try to delegitimize the expected decision that there are not enough valid signatures.

There are also three articles about a strange and confused incident that happened over the weekend. Piecing together the facts from the three articles, it appears that, Edgar Zambrano, congressional deputy and a prominent member of the opposition leadership, the Democratic Coordinator, was at a restaurant Saturday night having dinner with Sobella Rosario Mejias, who is the director of the CNE, and presumably, like 80% of the employees of the CNE, an opposition supporter.

When someone (either three people, two men and a woman, or a young national guard, depending upon the version of the story) attempted to take a picture of the two together, Mr. Zambrano tried to grab the digital camera away from the photographer. He was then taken into custody by members of the National Guard, as the National Guard general in charge of protecting the whole CNE process happened also to be supping at the same establishment. According to the general, Marcos Rojas Figueroa, Mr. Zambrano also unleashed a few choice terms of endearment in his direction. Mr. Zambrano was put in handcuffs and taken away, but soon released without charges. The general subsequently presented a signed declaration from Mr. Zambrano stating that he was treated well, but Mr. Zambrano apparently went to the technical police and shows the results of a forensic examination finding hematomas on his hands and right cheek.

The opposition is now trying vigorously to portray this episode to the international observers and the international media as further evidence of the repressive nature of the Chavez government, and its intention to suppress the will of the people for the referendum. Another version might be that Zambrano didn't want to be photographed in what might be viewed as the compromising position of meeting, and perhaps discussing strategy with the supposedly impartial CNE director, especially after just returned from a visit to the Washington, where he did his best to drum up support for the opposition in their incipient battle over the signatures.

The behavior of the opposition increasingly suggests that they believe the CNE will conclude that there are not enough valid signatures for the referendum. They allege will be that the biased CNE will invalidate valid signatures. The Chavistas insist that it will be because the fraudulent signatures are disqualified. The Chavistas, who had observers at every table during the petition drive, have always stated that there were only about 1.9 million signatures, and to support this assertion, made public a secretly, and probably illegally, recorded conversation of an opposition figure anguished that they had only collected 1.9 million.

The pattern of signatures supposedly collected over the four days of the opposition petition drive is also suspect. While it is accepted by all that on the first day of the petition drive, Friday, November 28, there was a high turnout, which had significantly decreased by Saturday, the opposition asserts that the number of signers then increased on the Sunday and Monday.

However, from numerous reports, the signing tables were mostly empty by Saturday afternoon, and deserted on Sunday and Monday. There were also reports of workers who were required to present proof that they signed if they wished to keep their jobs, and hospital patients intimidated by their doctors into signing. President Chavez, who has a copy of all the signed petitions, has shown signatures of people he alleges to be deceased, including cases where a whole sheet of ten signatures is signed in the same handwriting. The charges of fraud are given also given credibility by the nature of the opposition as demonstrated over the past three years.

Reflecting their apparent affinity for the current Burger King White House - the home of the whopper, the most used and useful tools of the opposition have been lies and deceptions repeated a thousand times by the compliant media. It is taken for granted that the old political parties belonging to the opposition have extensive experience in stealing elections.

It is also likely that most of the hard-core opposition, or "Talibans" as they are known, wouldn't have any qualms about electoral fraud if it were to rid them of Chavez, whom they see as the Castro-communist, corrupt, incompetent, repressive great satan. For them, Hitler and Saddam Hussein were sweet babes compared to Chavez. Opposition members of the armed forces who fled to Miami were recently on the TV and radio there calling for a US invasion of Venezuela to free them of devil Chavez.

Two of their fugitive colleagues are being held by Interpol in Miami because the Venezuelan police have evidence linking them to bombings of the Spanish, Colombian, and Algerian embassies, and death squad style killings in early 2003. Last week the daily, El Nacional, had a full page paid ad by the, far-right, ironically named civic-military group "Democratic Block" overtly calling for a military overthrow of the Chavez government if the referendum is not approved. Given the violent coup in April of 2002, and Bush's need for another show of force to bolster his chances for reelection, these threats must be taken seriously.

The problem, for both the opposition and their Washington backers, is that the Chavez government is steadily gaining in popularity. It has shifted into high gear on social programs in education and medical care, is promoting land reform and agricultural development, and is giving loans for small and medium industries, especially those based around cooperatives.

The major complaint of the opposition over the past year has been that Chavez has destroyed the economy, but any serious analysis of the economic data shows that after Chavez came to power in 1999, the economy started to grow, and by 2001 was roaring. Then came 9/11 and a world economic downturn, but more important locally were the strikes and agitation by the opposition.

There is an exact correlation of opposition activity and the downturns in the economy, culminating in the devastating petroleum industry strike from December 2002 through January 2003. The petroleum industry, responsible for more than 60% of government revenue, closed down, and much of business and commerce, which depend upon the Christmas season to be profitable, also shut their doors.

The government lost at least 7 billion in oil revenue, and many businesses were forced to close, causing a major contraction in the economy and an increase ini unemployment up to 20%.

When the strike seemed likely to fail in its stated goal of forcing Chavez out, there was a run on the local currency, forcing the central bank to institute strict currency exchange controls. Although the opposition hypocritically continues to complain about the poor economy, much the result of their own, seemingly intentional efforts, the petroleum industry has been restored, the economy is growing, and unemployment is down to about 15%. In 2003 the Caracas stock exchange had the highest growth of any exchange in the world, 177%.

The government has also given budget increases and raises to much of the public sector, borrowed money principally from within the country, and the central bank has dollar reserves of some 22 billion dollars, about the size of the nation's external debt. Several US brokerage houses predict a 6% growth rate for the economy in 2004. This would make the case for the opposition even weaker, so another attempt by the opposition to sabotage the economy cannot be ruled out.

The majority of the population certainly needs social programs, and does not look kindly upon efforts to disrupt the economy: 80% live in poverty, 65% make the minimum wage of ~$150 or less per month, and 36% live on less than $1 a day. The basic monthly food basket for a family of 5 costs about $300. These, those masses that have always been excluded from the petroleum riches, are increasingly enthusiastic supporters of Chavez. His popular support rose throughout 2003, and by November even polls by the biased opposition pollsters were registering 46% support.

A realistic estimate would be that Chavez has the solid support of between 50 - 55% of the populace. In contrast, the opposition newspapers (basically all but one), and private TV stations (the real backbone of the opposition), will hardly print estimates of support for the opposition, but it appears to be less than 25%. The opposition media make much of the growth of the so-called "ni-ni's" those who aren't supporters of either side, but there are clear trends of support away from the opposition and towards Chavez.

The Chavez revolution-- participatory instead of representative democracy, promoting local industry and agriculture, educating and developing unused human resources, and developing regional, mutually beneficial integration, just might work. In some ways it copies elements of the Cuban revolution, but with big differences. First, there is no repression, no political prisoners, complete freedom of expression and protest. The government does indeed try to implement its policies against resistance from the entrenched, but through legal and constitutional means.

There are abuses and corruption: just because someone calls themselves a Chavista doesn't mean they aren't opportunist or corrupt, and won't try to replace a competent opposition supporter in a government job with an incompetent crony.

There is also the class resentment of the 80% impoverished against the 5-10% who've always lived a comfortable life and to whom all the benefits of the petrodollars were directed, and the very small and wealthy elite, who've always controlled the country. There is a sense that it is now the turn of the previously excluded to run the country for the benefit of the majority.

A second difference is that the economy is based upon a capitalist model that actively guided, stimulated, and regulated by the government for the benefit of the populace. The government has the responsibility for the welfare of the populace, so it takes an active role developing education and health care and in promoting cooperatives as well as small and medium enterprises. It does not hesitate to step in to fulfill any role to aid and stimulate the economy, especially if it is needed to bypass sabotaging or price gouging sectors. It also retains control of strategic industries, but is not opposed to strategic foreign investment, if it is on terms beneficial to Venezuela.

A third difference with Cuba is resources. Venezuela has vast natural resources: both the bauxite and huge dams to supply the electricity needed to make aluminum; whole mountain ranges that are 47% iron and a thriving steel industry; gold; lots of agricultural and cattle grazing land; fish beds; the Amazon; the Andes; lots of great beaches; and, of course, googobs of hydrocarbons. Venezuela is generally thought to have the world's fourth largest reserves of crude oil, and the third largest reserves of natural gas. However, if the reserves of very heavy crude are taken into account, and the technology is now becoming available to process this crude, Venezuela could have the world's largest reserves of petroleum.

The Chavez government, unable to finance the investment alone, is entering into partnerships with several multinational oil companies to develop these resources, but on terms that are much more advantageous for Venezuela than were sought under previous governments, who were covertly in the process of privatizing the state petroleum industry, PDVSA.

The Chavez process, "la revolución bonita" or the beautiful revolution, has a real chance of actually developing Venezuela, its economy and its people, and serving as an example to the rest of Latin America and rest of the globe that a new and different and more human world is possible. It poses no threat whatsoever to the national security of the US or any other country, but is a real and serious threat to the Washington Consensus that there is no alternative.
The IMF and World Bank and WTO measures have been repeatedly shown to be ineffective at developing anything except the income gap between the rich and the poor. There is a new model being implemented in Venezuela, and it just might lead to real change and positive development. To what lengths will the threatened and defensive opposition and their foreign backers go to stop this process?

Alan Cisco is an American born in North America, currently living in Venezuela.