May  16th., 2006

Chavez’s setbacks

Summary:

• The last long voyage of the Lieutenant Colonel began in Havana, and then he went to London, then Rome, the Vatican, Vienna and it concludes in Algerians and Libya.

•  In Havana, he evidenced his influence on Evo Morales, deeply discomforting Lula.

•  Lula’s advisors warn him that the reelection depends, to a great extent, on his disconnection from Chavez

•  In Vienna, Evo Morales eclipsed Chavez’s image, but in London he had a great time with the left-wing jet set

• Unexpected letter from the Pope

•  The meeting between Chavez and Benedict XVI, was the most important aspect of his tour, because he wanted to prove that there is no confrontation with the Catholic Church

•  His Holiness did not ignore the discredit campaign against Cardinal Castillo Lara, Archbishop Balthazar Porras and the former Nuncio, Monsignor André Dupuy

•  The Pope asked respect for the rights of Catholics in Venezuela and delivered a private letter

•  Benedict XVI expressed him his concern for the human rights, free speech, peaceful coexistence and reformation of education.

•  Rejected in the UN Human Rights Commission

•  The battle ordered to his diplomats to achieve Venezuela’s admission in the UN Human Rights Commission was unsuccessful

• The IACHR’s report is a long list of serious denounces against the regime. It evidences the Venezuelan paradox of a Constitution that is claimed to be a model regarding human rights and the continuing disregard and violation of the same

•  In the luxurious Savoy Hotel, in London, he talked about his concerns about poverty while enjoying caviar and champaign.

Chavez’s setbacks

“Left-wing ‘aristocracy’ greets their hero Chavez”; it was the headline in The Independent upon his arrival in London. A Venezuelan journalist began his article stating that the lieutenant colonel is joining the third world’s jet set. May’s international agenda began in Havana, where a few hours after Evo Morale’s decree on hydrocarbons, Chavez assumed its justification with the clear purpose of confirming his influence on the Bolivian president. On the 3dr, he traveled to La Paz to agree with Morales the handling of the meeting to be held the next day with Kirchner and Lula. Upon questions of Bolivarian journalists, he said that PDVSA’s officers collaborated with the drafting of the decree’s technical aspects. On Thursday 4^th, the TV news broadcasted, from Iguaçu, the image of the four presidents shaking hands to announce that they had reached an agreement to solve the conflict of interests created by the decree. Lula’s face, unusually serious, attracted the attention, in contrast with the smiles of his three colleagues. The facial language showed in Iguaçu was translated by Marco Aurelio Garcia. According his foreign policy adviser, Lula had expressed to Chavez his disagreement on some of his actions. The foreign minister Amorin was more forthright before the Parliamentary Commission of Foreign Relations: “President Lula’s discomfort with some of his actions has been unequivocally conveyed to President Chavez, and his influence in Morale’s decree is undeniable.”

Brazilian media mirrored the general discomfort with Bolivian measures against Petrobras, highlighting Chavez’s intellectual authorship. Politicians close to Lula informed that he had complained bitterly to Chavez that he had not informed Evo’s plans in advance. According to one of Lula’s companions, the excuse was: “Brother, I swear I tried making contact with you from Havana, but the call didn’t get through!” Most analysts state that the Planalto support to the Bolivarian revolution has ended. Lula’s most radial adversaries have dusted off the security doctrine of the Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies, alleged by Brazilian generals to assume power in the last third of the twentieth century.  Lula’s advisors warn him that his reelection depends, to an important extent, on his disconnection from Chavez, who faces a dilemma: to be under the umbrella of the first Latin-American power, or affirm himself as the most important leader of the Latin-American left wing, competing with Castro and Lula. In the European-Latin American summit, his image was eclipsed by Evo, who used the airplane intended to Chavez’s retinue. The attempt for an anti-establishment mini-summit in Vienna, with abundant petrodollars, was a languid spectacle only covered by Venezuelan official television cameras. But in Rome and London, the lieutenant colonel had a great time with the jet set of the third-world causes.

THE UNEXPECTED LETTER OF THE POPE

Upon his arrival in Rome, Chavez announced that he was going to have an interview with Benedict XVI, to discuss about poverty. This meeting was the most important aspect of the presidential tour. Having in mind his reelection project in next December, he was interested in announcing, from the Vatican, a new stage in the relations with the Church, of hard confrontation so far, given that the opinion polls rank it as the most reliable institution in the country.

However, he underestimated the fact the His Holiness couldn’t ignore the ugly discredit campaign against Cardinal Castillo Lara for criticizing the regime, and against the Archbishop Baltazar Porras, who performed bravely as the President of the Episcopal Conference during several years, without keeping silence against Chavez’s aggressions, defending the catholic church’s right to advise in significant civil issues.

The 11^th of April, 2002, when Chavez decided to surrender to the military officers in rebellion, he asked Porras to accompany him, because he feared for his life, reason why the Archbishop became a witness of Chavez’s behavior and above all, of his offer to resign if he was allowed to ask political asylum in Cuba. Monsignor André Dupuy, a former Nuncio, was very close to be declared personae non-grata given his solidarity with the Venezuelan Church and his obvious discomfort with the regime’s authoritarianism.  The archbishopric of Caracas was vacant for two years, because Chavez intends to have a right of veto in the designation of bishops. The relations with the Holy See reached a situation of de facto breaking off, since there was no ambassador accredited in Rome or Nuncio appointed to Caracas.

Chavez understands the importance of the Catholic vote. The new Archbishop and the new Nuncio of Caracas, Cardinal Urosa and Monsignor Giacinto Berlocco respectively, have showed they are willing to begin a dialogue. Thus, Chavez imagined that the time to request an audience with the Pope and appear in a photograph with him in testimony of reconciliation had come. He actually got the picture, but he didn’t attain the coverage or impact expected. It was a private audience of 30 minutes, unnoticed for the Italian media and reported to Caracas by press agencies, according to a bulletin read by the official speaker of The Vatican. Pursuant to said bulletin, Benedict XVI asked respect for the rights of Catholics in Venezuela and delivered Chavez a personal letter summarizing his pastoral concerns for the good of the country. Such letter, according to the AFP correspondent, is a very unusual action within the protocol of the Holy See, reserved for interviews where it is desired to state officially that there are unsolved issues with the addressee. Among the pastoral concerns of the Pope, he agrees with the visitor regarding poverty, but he also includes those related to human rights, free speech, peaceful coexistence, the new bill on education reform and catholic children’s right to receive religious teaching.

One of the contents of the letter attacked the attention of correspondents: The   freedom of the Holy See to appoint bishops. At the exit of San Peter, Chavez was asked if his administration had exerted pressures to define designations. Surprised, he returned the question: “Freedom to appoint bishops? No one is going to substitute the Church to designate its bishops”. According to the correspondent, this is the first time these pressures are discussed in The Vatican.

REJECTED IN THE DD.HH COMMISSION

Another setback in May was the failure at the UN. No admission in the Human Right Commission. The battle ordered by Chavez to his diplomats was unsuccessful. Like in the Vatican, he didn’t realize how unfavorable the situation was. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights devoted 26 pages of its Annual Report to Venezuela; reason enough to reject Chavez’s attempt.

The list of serious denounces is quite long: a justice administration obedient to power, the provisional status of more than 80% judges and more than 90% prosecutors of the Public Ministry; in the competent tribunals to control acts of government, the judges were removed and replaced by provisional judges; The Attorney General, former Vice President of Chavez, appoints prosecutors taking into account political considerations, and replaces them when they make decisions that might discomfort this administration; the use of military courts for trying civilians, the situation of impunity, in particular in cases involving extrajudicial executions; the ineffectiveness of habeas corpus in cases of forced disappearance; the continuing suspension and postponements of hearings, and the removal of trials to places other than where the victims reside, and where the facts occurred.

The report refuses that the State, in exercise of sovereignty, may enforce decisions of international organs of human rights. It highlights the discrimination faced by persons for their political dissent. There is a strong condemnatory to the so-called Tascon list, which contains the signatures of those persons who in 2004 submitted the request to call a referendum to revoke the mandate of Chavez, and which led to the dismissal of a large number of employees without recognition of their labor benefits, actually segregated in an apartheid. The intimidation and harassment of advocates of human rights is also severely condemned. This Report, jointly with the previous five, evidences the Venezuelan paradox of a Constitution that is claimed to be a model regarding human rights and the continuing disregard and violation of the same.

Is Chavez worried about the IACHR’s report? Probably not. “Those bureaucrats act like lackeys of the empire, and the empire lacks moral authority to talk about human rights”. That is his usual response when he is disturbed by the Commission’s disapprovals. But at the Ministry of Foreign Relations there is certain concern, not because of the report, but because of the outcome in the UN: Why is Cuba admitted on the UN Human Rights Commission and Venezuela is not? A national newspaper affirms that Fidel wants to teach a lesson: he is the one who pulls the strings of an efficient diplomacy. If this were true, it would explain President Chavez’s travel to Algiers, where among other activities, he signed an agreement with Bouteflika on exchanges of diplomatic institutions. The oil diplomacy would have a better school in Maghreb than in Havana, especially in Libya, where he will finish the tour. The issue is that the aged and wise North African leaders are coming back from the revolutionary socialism and the old anti-imperialistic cliché. Chavez, in contrast, thinks that they left an empty space that he is willing to fill up. This idea was supported in London by his guests at the luxurious Savoy, where he talked about his concerns about poverty while enjoying champaign and caviar