Opinion
- Editorial- Commentary
Gwynne
Dyer: A
choice for Chavez
Hugo Chavez showed some class when
the news came through early Monday morning that
the referendum
on his proposed changes to the Venezuelan constitution
had gone against him. "I thank you and I congratulate
you," he said on television, addressing his
opponents. "I recognise a decision a people
have made. Those of you who were nervous that I
wouldn't recognise the results, you can go home
quietly and celebrate."
It was the first time Chavez had
lost a vote since he was elected president of
Venezuela in 1998,
and there were many who doubted that he would accept
defeat, especially since it was what he himself
called a "photo-finish": 51 per cent
for the no, 49 per cent for the yes. And the question
is still whether he really means it, for only a
week ago he was calling his opponents "fascists", "traitors" and "mental
retards".
Nobody believed Chavez's threat
last week to "pack
my bags" and leave politics if the referendum
didn't pass. He is much more inclined (as he also
said last week) "to stay as long as God wills!
Until the last bone of my skeleton dries up! Until
the last bit of my body dries up!" He even
suggested 2050 (when he will be 95) as a possible
retirement date.
The referendum would have made that theoretically
possible, by changing the constitution so that
presidents are no longer limited to two terms.
As it stands, he must leave power when his second
term ends in 2013, and that is clearly not part
of his plan. So what does he do now? The risk is
that he does a Mugabe.
Robert Mugabe had already been Zimbabwe's leader
for 20 years when he held a referendum in 2000
on a new constitution that would have extended
his own rule until 2012 and allowed him to carry
out the revolution (consisting mainly of seizing
the land of white farmers without compensation)
that he had always dreamed of. For the first time
ever, he lost, but he seemed to accept his defeat
gracefully. However, it was the last even remotely
free vote in Zimbabwe.
Since then, elections have been plagued by extensive
vote-rigging and a lot of government-sponsored
violence. Mugabe used his parliamentary majority
to push through laws that resurrected the radical
provisions of the rejected constitution on the
seizure of white-owned land, and the predicted
economic disaster ensued: Zimbabwe is now a basket-case
with 8,000 per cent inflation and a quarter of
its population living abroad. The rule of law is
dead, and Mugabe plans to stay in power well past
2012. (After all, he's only 83.)
It is possible that Chavez will now choose to go
down a similar road. He has played by the democratic
rules for nine years, and until now they have
enabled him to get most of what he wants. The
69 changes proposed in the referendum were his
attempt to move on legally to the next stage
of his revolution, not only prolonging his own
rule indefinitely but entrenching "socialism" in
the constitution.
Together with crowd-pleasers like cutting the
working day from eight hours to six, the package
of proposed changes would have ended the autonomy
of the central bank and given Chavez control of
monetary policy.
It would have shifted power from
elected mayors and state governors to local "committees" dominated
by his followers, and allowed him to expropriate
private property and even censor the media in an
emergency.
Venezuelans, obviously including
many "soft
chavistas" who always voted for him in the
past, rejected Chavez's proposals because they
thought he was going too far too fast. They have
not rejected him, but they have shown that what
they want is the "soft Chavez", the one
who has vastly improved the living standards of
the poor by spending some of the country's massive
oil revenues on them, but abides by the law.
Like Mugabe, Chavez is an ex-Catholic Marxist,
but he is a much more complex and modern person.
Though he is a demagogue, he has so far adhered
to the democratic rules. There is no hint of corruption
about him.
He has messianic tendencies, but he still listens
to rival opinions at least sometimes. And now he
is at a fork in the road.
If Chavez really does abide by the outcome of the
referendum, he could yet turn out to be the man
who transformed Venezuela from a poverty-ridden
oligarchy into a modern democratic state-sufficiently
modern and democratic that it will eventually
have no further use for an old-fashioned populist
demagogue like him. Or he could find other ways
to force through the changes that were rejected
in the referendum, and drag Venezuela down the
road to dictatorship, repression and even deeper
poverty.
Which way will he jump? Nobody knows. Least of
all him.
Gwynne
Dyer is
a London-based independent journalist whose articles
are published
in 45 countries.
Petroleumworld not necessarily share these
views.
Editor's
Note: This article was first publish in Trinidad
Express, Sunday, November 18th 2007. Petroleumworld
reprint this article in the interest
of our readers.
Fair
use Notice: This site contains copyrighted material
the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making
such material available in our efforts to advance
understanding of issues of environmental and
humanitarian significance. We believe this constitutes
a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section
107. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
All
works published by Petroleumworld are in accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research and educational purposes.
Petroleumworld has no affiliation whatsoever
with the originator of this article nor is Petroleumworld
endorsed or sponsored by the originator. Petroleumworld
encourages persons to reproduce, reprint, or
broadcast
Petroleumworld
articles provided that any such reproduction
identify the original source, http://www.petroleumworld.com
or else and it is done within the fair use as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. If you wish to use copyrighted material
from this site for purposes of your own that
go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.
Internet
web links to http://www.petroleumworld.com are
appreciated.
Petroleumworld
12/ 10/07
Copyright ©2006
Gwynne
Dyer.
All Rights Reserved.
