Ricardo Pascoe Pierce
With the telephone call between President Lula and President Biden a few hours after the closing of the polls in the Venezuelan presidential election, it seemed that sanity might prevail in the face of an irrefutable fact that both leaders recognized: the opposition had won the election, and it was time to operate a peaceful political transition in that country.
But the Maduro government quickly made it clear that it believed it had won the election and had the country’s Electoral Commission announce its victory shortly after the polls closed. It did not present box-by-box figures but suggested sufficient totals: 52% Maduro and 44% Gonzalez.
On the other hand, the opposition presented the results by polling places showing another result: Maduro 30%, Gonzalez 67%. What is the qualitative difference between them? Maduro offers global data (52-44), while the opposition offers data box by box. The opposition is in a position to prove which overall data is correct, proving that Maduro’s overall data was generated in an office, following the boss’s instructions.
Maduro’s government denied the validity of the opposition’s box-by-box data but did not present its own disaggregated data. It then began attacking the opposition, first verbally and then physically. He is determined not to relinquish power under any circumstances. He must be very confident that he has the unrestricted support of the Venezuelan Armed Forces.
There are dozens of dead and more than a thousand arrested among the opposition as a result of the repressive actions of the Maduro government that refuses to accept the verdict of the people. Government “civilian” brigades, among them some Cubans, attack the opposition in their homes and workplaces. Maduro calls for the imprisonment of the main opposition leaders and announces the creation of two more Bukele-style prisons….
The Lula-Biden initiative obviously foundered. The breaking point in the effort to peacefully channel the transitional process occurred when Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico decided to oppose the OAS resolution that demanded the Venezuelan official electoral body provide box-by-box data to sustain their claim that Maduro had won the election. Given the opposition’s box-by-box data, this concluded another radically different result.
Maduro seeks to insert Venezuela into the world of “the other data”, where supposedly it is possible to confront verifiable data and come up with entirely different conclusions. It is a time tunnel where Maduro has to gain time to wear down the opposition, with only one purpose: not to give up power. For the time being, he has already managed to divide Latin America into three blocks: his cronies (Cuba, Nicaragua, and Bolivia), the three useful fools that allow him to extend his stay in power (Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico) and those resolutely opposed to his continuation in power (United States, Costa Rica, Panama, Ecuador, Peru, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, among others). Chile is between the useful fools and those opposed to his stay in power without clearly defining itself.
The three useful fools are today the great obstacle to achieving an agreed-upon political transition in Venezuela. The reason is elementary: to the extent that Maduro can play for the umpteenth time the card that he will negotiate with the opposition but without the slightest intention to agree on anything other than his permanence in power, he will be protected by the influence of the three useful fools.
Each of the three useful fools has reasons for helping Maduro stay in power. The first common reason is that all three probably received money from Maduro’s government to finance their campaigns, as with Cristina Kirchner in Argentina. The second reason is that there is a certain ideological identity similarity. While fighting for the poor, some accept the challenge of doing so within the parameters of democracy; others choose to be dictators, “improving the living conditions of the poor”, like Maduro.
President Lula is more concerned about his international reputation and is trying to be a world player because Brazil is a member of BRICS and wants to be appointed a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. For these reasons, Lula is trying to maintain the reputation of being a world-class statesman and an operator capable of solving major conflicts. Venezuela should be a great test for him. But he stumbled upon two allies going in opposite directions.
President Petro is a historic activist for the Bolivarian cause, but the country he governs does not agree with him. Colombia has a solid institutional structure that opposes Maduro’s dictatorial pretensions and categorically rejects his political ideology if he has one. The close alliance between Venezuela and Cuba has been an issue of discord among the Colombian political class. Therefore, President Petro prefers Maduro’s permanence in power in Venezuela rather than the arrival of new forces to govern that country, probably more identified with his own opponents in the Colombian Congress. For Petro, defending Maduro is an act of self-defense, even though he claims, sotto voce, the polling station results.
The case of President López Obrador is very similar to Petro’s case, but with two circumstantial situations that make him the “radical wing” of the triad of countries of the useful fools. His obvious preference is to keep Maduro in power and defeat the forces of neoliberal evil that beset him. His initial ambiguity regarding the elections in Venezuela has been transformed into a militancy “in defense of the sovereignty and the right to self-determination” of the Venezuelan people. He has rejected and repudiated the OAS and its participation in the continental discussion on the case. He has also severely criticized the United States when it fully supports the opposition candidate. AMLO says that it is unacceptable interventionism, but when he supports Maduro, he does not consider it interventionism.
But the Mexican context has another ingredient. AMLO is still furious with Biden for the capture of “Mayo” Zambada in national territory and that he was taken, with or without his consent, to the United States. The whole incident is surrounded by contradictory versions that obviously serve as a smokescreen, so the truth about the event, its origin, and its development is never known. AMLO’s demand to Biden for more information about the incident has not been answered. He feels offended and furious. And it comes from AMLO leaving the presidency in two months. He is the famous “lame duck” that no one takes seriously. Because of all this, AMLO militates against everything Washington proposes in the Venezuelan case and pushes Brazil and Colombia to do the same.
Hence, the three countries have abandoned the role of being instruments for a peaceful transition in Venezuela and have become useful fools of Maduro and his intention to remain in power.
A long night is coming for Venezuela. The countries that should have served as mediators to achieve a peaceful political transition in that country have given up their role and responsibility to the historical shame of Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico.
[email protected]
@rpascoep
Further Reading: