Nikolas Kozloff

On the surface, Venezuela seemed to have become much more independent and combative towards its northern neighbor. However, on closer inspection, one senses a much more ambiguous and contradictory attitude.

 

I have just returned from a fruitful six week trip to Venezuela, where I interviewed people from across the political spectrum.  The country is in the midst of cultural and political ferment and in many ways is trying to seek greater autonomy from the United States.

Though I spent almost a year in Venezuela in 2000-2001, I had not returned to the country since that time and physically Caracas looked quite different from what I remembered.

Walking around Caracas, I was struck by the anti-imperialist murals which had proliferated throughout the city.  One particularly jarring mural depicts an image of Uncle Sam wielding a dagger reading "CIA."

 

There is no face underneath the hat, just a bare skull.

 

Later, as I walked inside the Venezuelan National Assembly, I spotted an interesting exhibit: a series of billboards, each one displaying a key, separate date in the history of U.S. interventions in Latin America.

 

One billboard discussed the U.S. invasion of Panama in 1989 under George Bush Senior and the bombing of the civilian population in El Chorrillo, a poor district of Panama City.

 

On a separate trip I visited Catia, a district located on the outskirts of Caracas.  There, I toured a so-called "Endogenous Center of Development," where working class women had organized themselves into a cooperative. The women were busily working on sewing machines, producing red T-shirts.

 

Peering closer, I glimpsed an image on the shirts: a profile of the famous Communist revolutionary and arch nemesis of the United States, Che Guevara.

 

Back in my Caracas hotel room, I was struck by the stridently anti-U.S. tone on state run media.  On my last trip several years ago, state TV routinely aired Chavez's anti-imperialist broadsides against the United States.

 

But since then, in response to Washington's support for the Venezuelan opposition and the neo-conservatives' relentless demonization of Chavez, which has gone so far as to label Chavez a modern day Adolf Hitler, the tone on state TV had become more shrill.

Again and again on ViveTV, a state run station, the channel would broadcast a short segment showing stark, bombed out images of Iraq. "Imagine if your city was invaded and destroyed by a foreign army," intoned a solemn voiceover.

 

Vive TV is designed to instill a sense of cultural pride in ordinary Venezuelans.  Under Chavez, there has been a great drive towards cultural autonomy as a means of counterbalancing the pervasive influence of U.S. media (for a more in depth discussion of the issue, see my recently released book from St. Martin's Press, Hugo Chavez: Oil, Politics, and The Challenge To the U.S.).

 

On Vive, I watched intellectual round table discussions on such themes as Venezuela's cultural and political relationship to the African continent. But the station also specialized in cinema verité style footage of rural life in the Venezuelan plain or llano.

 

At one point I saw a long segment with no narration showing poor farmers making blocks of cheese.  During another segment, I watched as young Venezuelans danced the joropo, a traditional dance common in the plain.

 

On the surface, Venezuela seemed to have become much more independent and combative towards its northern neighbor.  However, on closer inspection, one senses a much more ambiguous and contradictory attitude.

 

Venezuelans have strong cultural ties to the United States, and one is struck by the gigantic U.S. style shopping malls in the capital of Caracas. Centro Comercial Sambil, a shopping complex in the area of Chacao, boasted several floors chock full of U.S. fast food chains such as Pizza Hut, Wendy's and KFC.

 

There were two movie theaters screening the latest summer fare from Hollywood, including The Da Vinci Code and The Poseidon Adventure.  During my stay in Caracas, I visited Sambil several times and the entrance to the mall was frequently so clogged with people that it was difficult to walk.

 

Compared to other Latin American countries that I have traveled to, Venezuela seems to have more of an insatiable desire for the trappings of U.S. consumerism.  On the crass private TV stations, which provide a bizarre daily contrast to Chavez's state TV, commercials advertise the latest U.S.-style consumer products.

 

In the Andean city of Mérida, I interviewed one state politician from Chavez's MVR (Movimiento Quinta República, or Fifth Republic Movement) party. A flamboyant former guerilla fighter during the 1960s, he tried to get me to come to a Chavista meeting where I could acquire a red beret.  He insisted that Venezuela was becoming less culturally dependent on the United States.

 

"Now we don't drink so much Pepsi Cola, we're drinking more guarapo!" he exclaimed, referring to a delicious Venezuelan drink made from sugar cane juice.

 

On the other hand, during my entire six week stay I did not see anyone drinking guarapo, though many drank soda pop from the United States.  In Caracas, I used to buy guarapo from a street vendor.  He had a special machine that would grind up the sugar cane.  When I returned he was no longer there.

 

Billboards throughout Caracas display cosmetic ads depicting European and white looking women.  One hears American pop music everywhere and I found Venezuelan youth to be very knowledgeable about the latest musical trends from the U.S.

 

Meanwhile, commercial ties with the U.S. could not be better.  Though the oil companies may grouse about higher royalty taxes and the government's move to create "mixed companies" in which the state company, PdVSA, holds a majority stake, the vast majority of companies do not wish to be frozen out of one of the most lucrative oil markets in the world.  Accordingly they have chosen to stay and do business in Venezuela.

 

Given the acrimonious war of words between Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and the Bush administration, I expected to encounter a high degree of anti-Americanism.  Some hard core Chavez supporters still decried the Bush administration's funding of the opposition and Washington's alleged role in the April 2002 coup.  Surprisingly however, many others who I spoke with seemed unconcerned about the prospect of further U.S. meddling.

 

As an American, I never felt any hostility from the population, even in poor urban areas where Chavez's support was strongest.

 

On the other hand, it's clear that opposition and antipathy to Washington is spreading. One manifestation of this is the growing number of anti-U.S. protests in Caracas.

 

Chavez has been a vocal critic of the recent Israeli assault on Lebanon and U.S. support for Israel.  Recently, anti-war demonstrators marched through the capital, protesting the war in Lebanon.

 

Caracas has also been the frequent scene of protests against the U.S. war in Iraq.  The demonstrations have been organized by Chavez supporters. However, even within the opposition antipathy towards the war in Iraq is growing.

 

In the offices of the anti-Chavez political party Primero Justicia, located conveniently at the Chacaito metro stop in Caracas, I interviewed the general secretary, Gerardo Blyde.  At party headquarters the situation was chaotic, as the opposition was in the midst of trying to select a candidate to run against Chavez in the December presidential election.

 

Primero Justica has received U.S. financial support through the National Endowment for Democracy, and I expected Blyde to unconditionally support U.S. foreign policy.  But when I pried, Blyde, who had slicked back hair and was dressed in a dapper blazer, was very circumspect about the war in Iraq.

 

"I'm not a Republican," he told me, "we don't like the war."

 

Though Blyde derided Chavez for frontally attacking the U.S. on the Iraq issue (he personally would have preferred to bring up the issue in a more diplomatic and collective fashion at such international bodies as the United Nations), nevertheless he declared that his party's official policy was against the war.

 

Given the long standing political, economic, and cultural ties between the United States and Venezuela, my guess is that Chavez's anti-imperialist speeches and state media will have little impact on most Venezuelans' views of their northern neighbor.

 

However, one cannot discount the possibility that the neo-conservatives in Washington will succeed in squandering much of the historic goodwill that has existed between the two nations through bluster, misguided policies, and sheer ineptitude.

An academic article published in Bulletin of Latin American Research, Volume 25, Number 2 (April 2006), 282-300.  No online link but click here to go to the journal.

An academic article published in Estudios Interdisciplinarios de America Latina y el Caribe (Volume 17-2, 2007), 7-33.  Click here to go to the link.

In a move that is surely bound to alienate the United States yet further, Chavez decided to expel an American missionary group, the New Tribes Mission. What was merely a war of words has seemingly escalated into a religious battle. Or has it? What is truly behind Chavez's decision to expel New Tribes and where is the conflict likely to lead?

 

Reportedly, hyperactive Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez has cut down on his espresso intake, from a full 26 cups a day to 16.  Judging from his actions, however, you'd never know that "Hurricane Hugo" has slowed down.  In a move that is surely bound to alienate the United States yet further, Chavez decided to expel an American missionary group, the New Tribes Mission, on October 12th.  In an inflammatory speech, Chavez proclaimed that New Tribes constituted a "true imperialist invasion" and was working with the CIA.  Remarking that he didn't "give a damn," what people thought about his decision in Venezuela or "other imperialist countries," Chavez said the missionary group would shortly have to abandon its jungle bases.  The decision comes in the wake of a long and simmering war of words between Chavez and Reverend Pat Robertson, who called for the Venezuelan president's assassination on his TV Show "The 700 Club" back in August.  In response, Chavez blasted Robertson as "a terrorist," and said his government was interested in pursuing extradition of the U.S. minister.  Now, however, what was merely a war of words has seemingly escalated into a religious battle.  Or has it?  What is truly behind Chavez's decision to expel New Tribes and where is the conflict likely to lead?

 

New Tribes: A State Within A State?

 

Though Chavez's move was certainly dramatic, it is not as if the issue of New Tribes is a novel one in Venezuela.  For years, accusations have swirled that the evangelical outfit was involved in espionage and committed ethnocide while carrying out its missionary work amongst indigenous peoples.  However, the missionaries were able to count on high-level support from the corrupt two party system, the Venezuelan Evangelical Council, as well as the U.S. Embassy in Caracas.  Though Congress and the military launched separate investigations, high-level action was never taken.  In August 1981, José Vicente Rangel, then a deputy in Congress, requested that the investigation into New Tribes be reopened.  Rangel, a long time fixture of Venezuelan politics, had unsuccessfully run for president twice on the MAS (Movement Towards Socialism) ticket, in 1973 and 1978.  An aggressive opponent of U.S.-backed military regimes in Venezuela, Rangel was particularly incensed by the case of New Tribes.  Though the Ministry of Justice and Interior Relations ultimately heeded Rangel's calls and carried out another investigation, the results were never made public.  Despite the investigations and media attention, no missionary was ever put in jail (for a more complete accounting of New Tribes and their long and tangled history in Venezuela, see my report for the Council on Hemispheric Affairs, "Evangelical Protestants in Venezuela: Robertson Only The Latest Controversy in a Long and Bizarre History").

 

Initially, Chavez is Partial to New Tribes

 

The tide however was beginning to turn.  In 1999, after Hugo Chávez was elected president, he named Rangel as Minister of External Relations. The veteran politician went on to serve as Minister of Defense under Chávez and later as his vice president.  Increasingly, New Tribes was becoming more vulnerable and isolated in Venezuela.  Formerly, the missionaries could count on the support of many members of the traditional two party system.  But those parties, by the time of Chavez's rise to prominence, had fallen into disgrace.  What is more, while New Tribes had earlier lobbied the U.S. Embassy in Caracas to protect its interests, American diplomats now had little sway over Chavez.  Indeed, by April 2002 relations had sunk to a new low, with Chavez accusing the CIA of having helped to force his ouster in an attempted coup d'état.

 

On the other hand, until the controversy with Pat Robertson erupted in August, Chavez's relations with evangelical groups had been smooth.  In fact, Chávez was initially somewhat partial to Protestants and evangelical groups.  Before Chávez came to power in 1999, Christian radio and TV were outlawed, a policy reversed by Chávez.  Even Robertson was allowed to broadcast his show 700 Club to Venezuela over TV station Televen.  Though Venezuelan officials declared that they had grown suspicious of U.S. evangelical organizations before Pat Robertson's remarks, the record suggests that the government did not view New Tribes as a threat.  Indeed, the missionary group was allowed to continue its work in Venezuela, with over 160 missionaries operating within the country.  New Tribes worked with 12 indigenous groups in Amazonas and several other states.  According to Venezuelan officials, the missionaries had 29 landing strips within the country.

 

Robertson's Fatwa Results in New Tribes Expulsion

 

The situation shifted drastically however when Pat Robertson put out his fatwa on Chavez's head.  Robertson, a former presidential candidate in 1988, said that the U.S. government should kill Chavez to protect American petroleum interests and because the Venezuelan president "has destroyed the Venezuelan economy, and he's going to make that a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism all over the continent."  Though Robertson later apologized, the Venezuelan government was alarmed and suspended missionary visas.  Shortly after, Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel, a politician who has had a long and combative history dealing with U.S. evangelical groups, remarked that Venezuela was weighing court action against Robertson.  The indefatigable Robertson, forgetting about his earlier apology, continued his tirade.  Appearing on CNN he remarked that Chavez was "negotiating with the Iranians to get nuclear material.  And he also sent $1.2 million in cash to Osama bin Laden right after 9/11."  The preacher offered no evidence to support his startling accusations.  Venezuelan officials dismissed Robertson's remarks as totally false and "crazy."

 

Robertson's attack alarmed David Zelenak, Director of the Resource Department for New Tribes.  Speaking to me over the phone, Zelenak remarked that Robertson's strong words "did not help us in Venezuela."  The missionary added that other missionary groups were concerned about Robertson's comments and worried that the war of words might escalate.  New Tribes later condemned Robertson's statements on its website, but such efforts would not save the missionary group.  According to New Tribes, Venezuelan officials stepped up investigations of its activities in the wake of the controversy.  Retired general Alberto Müller Rojas, a military advisor to the Chavez government and former governor of Amazonas state, was not surprised by the increased pressure on New Tribes.  Within the missionary organization, he commented, "there are distinct [religious] denominations, principally those Protestant groups of the Baptist tendency which Pat Robertson belongs to."  According to Muller, Robertson and New Tribes were "tightly linked."  New Tribes and Robertson, he continued, were part of the same Protestant movement that so strongly supported President George Bush.

 

As it turns out, Zelenak's fears were not unfounded.  Amidst the escalating war of words between the Venezuelans and Robertson, Chavez expelled the Florida based New Tribes altogether.  The president announced that he would sign the official expulsion order as soon as he had received a definitive report from the Ministry of Interior, and that the decision was "irreversible."  In a further barb, he added "We don't want the New Tribes here.  Enough colonialism!  500 years is enough!"  Chavez said he had become aware of New Tribes' espionage through his own military intelligence, though officials have offered no concrete proof of the allegations.  Chavez confided that he had seen an "incredible" report and video concerning the matter.  The Venezuelan president did not set a fixed date for the expulsion.  However, he did say it would occur in an orderly fashion and that the missionaries would be allowed sufficient time to "gather their stuff."  Recently, Venezuelan military officials remarked that they were studying how to remove New Tribes' missionary bases.  However, according to New Tribes the Venezuelan military has already swung into action, occupying some of its facilities in areas inhabited by the Pume tribe.  The governor of Amazonas state, Liborio Guarulla, has sought to comply with the expulsion order.  Within Amazonas, Guarulla will request the withdrawal of missionaries operating in the Upper Orinoco, home to Yekuana and Yanomami Indians.  Guarulla added that he will comply with the law without resorting to force. 

 

New Tribes Responds

 

For its own part New Tribes offered a measured response on its website, remarking "We would welcome any opportunity to address the President's concerns and help him better understand our organization and the work of New Tribes Mission in Venezuela."  The missionary organization added, "We hope that President Chavez will reconsider his decision and allow us an opportunity to clarify misunderstandings and misinformation that exists regarding the work of New Tribes Mission in Venezuela.  New Tribes Mission is not and has never been connected in any way with any government agencies.  Our goal is to serve indigenous people." 

 

Meanwhile, New Tribes representatives took to Venezuelan TV and radio airwaves to present their point of view.  Additionally, the missionaries have declared that they will take their case to the country's Supreme Court of Justice.  A lawyer for New Tribes implied that Chavez was being dishonest and had no video or military report about missionary activities.  New Tribes has also appealed to the Venezuelan Evangelical Council for support.

 

The question remains though: why did Chavez decide to make this decision now?  It's not as if the charges against New Tribes are anything new.  On a certain level, it would seem that Chavez has simply been opportunistic.  Robertson's inflammatory comments made Chavez look like a persecuted martyr and allowed the Venezuelan president to place the issue of Protestant missionaries front and center.  In fact, Chavez may have calculated that he had nothing to lose and everything to gain by expelling the missionaries. 

 

Playing on Wounded Pride

 

The case allows the regime to play on nationalist sentiment.  Take for example the reaction of Jose Vicente Rangel, who has been gunning for New Tribes for twenty-five years.  Speaking with the press, Rangel remarked that the government's decision was designed to restore national sovereignty.  That kind of remark plays well in Venezuela, a small country that was pushed around by the European powers in the 19th century and the United States in the last century.  Playing to Venezuelans' sense of wounded pride, Chavez said that New Tribes had set up a state within a state, made unauthorized flights, and set up luxurious settlements in the midst of poverty.  "These violations of our national sovereignty have to stop," he thundered. 

 

Moving Ahead on Indigenous Policy

 

Chavez announced the expulsion order while handing over indigenous land titles, boat motors, vehicles and credits in the village of Barranco Yopal.  The settlement is located 500 kilometers south of Caracas within the remote plains state of Apure.  Chavez too is from the plains region and was born in the neighboring state of Barinas.  The president has never sought to distance himself from his ethnic heritage. "My Indian roots are from my father's side," he remarked. "He [my father] is mixed Indian and black, which makes me very proud."  What is more, Chávez has boasted of his grandmother, who he says was a Pumé Indian.

 

For the president, Barranco Yopal carries personal meaning.  In his youth, Chavez used to visit the town.  In an interview with Marta Harnecker, he explained, "I used to go to Barranco Yopal and bring cans and sticks to the Indians, because they made houses with those materials to spend the winter season there, but in the summer they used to go away.  They were nomads: hunters and gatherers, as they were 500 years ago.  I saw Indian women giving birth there…The majority of those babies died of malaria, tuberculosis, of any type of illness.  They [the Indians] used to spend the time drunk in town.  The Indian women used to prostitute themselves, many times they were raped.  They were ghosts, disrespected by the majority of the population.  They used to steal to eat.  They didn't have any conception of private property: for them it wasn't robbery to go into an area and grab a pig to eat it if they were hungry."

 

The announcement of New Tribes' expulsion was timed perfectly to coincide with Columbus Day, which Chavez has renamed Indigenous Resistance Day.  Alexander Luzardo, a sociologist and longtime New Tribes critic, remarked that Chavez's decision "complies with what is stipulated in the constitution of 1999, which establishes indigenous peoples' right to self-determination and to respect for their beliefs, values and customs."  Indeed, helping the nation's 300,000 indigenous peoples has been a great priority for Hugo Chavez.  Article 9 of the new constitution states that while Spanish is the official language of Venezuela, "Indigenous languages are also for official use for Indigenous peoples and must be respected throughout the Republic's territory for being part of the nation's and humanity's patrimonial culture." In chapter eight of the constitution, the state recognizes the social, political, and economic organization within indigenous communities, in addition to their cultures, languages, rights, and lands. What is more, in a critical provision the government recognizes land rights as collective, inalienable, and non-transferable.  Later articles declare the government's pledge not to engage in extraction of natural resources without prior consultation with indigenous groups. Three long time indigenous activists have been elected to the Venezuelan National Assembly, and prominent leaders hold positions in government.  In a novel move, Chávez has even had the constitution translated into all of Venezuela's languages.

 

While Chavez was in Barranco Yopal, he distributed 1.65 million acres to indigenous communities in the states of Apure, Anzoategui, Delta Amacuro, and Sucre.  The move forms part of the so-called Mission Guaicaipuro, which shall provide land titles to all of Venezuela's 28 indigenous peoples.  By the end of 2006, Chávez' Mission Guaicaipuro plans to award land titles to 15 more indigenous groups.  In Barranco Yopal, Chavez granted titles recognizing collective ownership of ancestral lands to the Cuiba, Yuaruro, Warao and Karina tribes.  It was in fact the second such land transfer, the first having been decreed in August.  Chavez awarded those communal lands during the 16th World Festival of Students and Youth in Caracas.  At the ceremony, Chavez handed out 313,824 acres to six Kariña indigenous communities living in the states of Monagas and Anzoategui.

 

Some Indians at Barranco Yopal felt that the government still needed to provide more assistance.  "We want the government to help us with hunger, with credit," remarked Pedro Mendez, a Yuaruro Indian.  He related that his community had requested an electrical generator and loans to help plant more crops.  On the other hand, some Indians clearly applaud the government's moves.  Present during Chavez's ceremony in Barranco Yopal was Librado Moraleda, a 52-year-old Warao Indian from a remote village in the Orinoco River Delta. "Previously," he declared, "the indigenous people of Venezuela were removed from our lands. This is historic. It is a joyful day."  Moraleda received a land title and government pledge of $27,000 to construct homes as well as plant cassava and plantains.

 

Attacking Protestants, Appeasing Catholics

 

By expelling New Tribes, Chavez also appeases prominent Catholics.  For years, church leaders have been a thorn in Chavez's side.  During the April 2002 coup, prominent Catholics such as Cardinal Ignacio Velasco sided with the opposition against Chavez.  Velasco even offered his residence as a meeting place for the coup plotters.  What is more, he, as well as top Catholic leaders and members of Opus Dei later signed a decree that swept away Venezuela's democratic institutions.  Senior Catholic bishops also attended the inauguration ceremony for Pedro Carmona, Venezuela's Dictator-For-a-Day.  Chavez has shot back against the church hierarchy, saying that the Church is a "tumor."  In a further jibe, he stated that "there are bishops from the Catholic Church who knew a coup was on the way, and they used church installations to bring coup plotters together ... those clerics are immoral and spokesmen for the opposition."

 

Chief amongst the president's critics on the right has been Monsignor Baltazar Porras, who has backed efforts to recall Chavez as president and helped draft anti-Chavez statements by the Venezuelan Catholic Church Episcopal Conference.  Another leading figure leading the charge has been Cardinal Rosalio Castillo Lara, who has called Chavez "a paranoid dictator" in need of an exorcism.  He has accused Chavez of encouraging "Cubanization" of the country and receiving direct orders from Cuban leader Fidel Castro. "Venezuela," he continued, "is the richest country in Latin America, but the impression that I have is that Chavez wants to end this…He wants, like Castro, to eliminate social distinctions so that we are all poor."  Chavez has shot back, calling Castillo Lara an "outlaw, bandit, immoral Pharisee, and a pantomime."

While Chavez's recent move expelling New Tribes is unlikely to totally appease these Catholic leaders, it may buy him a slight respite.  The Catholic Church has long viewed the growing Protestant presence in Latin America with concern; in Venezuela Catholics joined anthropologists and others who criticized New Tribes as far back as the 1970s.  Even some of Chavez's arch enemies such as Castillo Lara hailed the government's decision.  "We have the blessing of the Cardinal in this decision," Rangel announced proudly. 

 

And meanwhile, what of Protestants?  Though the Evangelical Council of Venezuela has defended New Tribes, Chavez has little to fear.  Protestants only number 2% of the population and have historically constituted a loyal working class Chavez constituency.  What is more, according to Samuel Olson, president of the Evangelical Council of Venezuela, Protestants have not bought into anti-Chavez propaganda.  Olson says that Protestants didn't give much credence to Pat Robertson and viewed the minister as "goofy." 

 

The Fall Out For U.S.-Venezuelan Relations

 

Speaking with the Venezuelan newspaper El Universal, U.S. ambassador William Brownfield noted that he would seek to facilitate negotiations between New Tribes and the Venezuelan government.  Brownfield categorically denied any link between the CIA and New Tribes.  The Department of State is apparently following the matter with concern, and holds out hope that the missionaries may be yet be allowed to stay as the Venezuelan government has not given any official expulsion order. 

 

What does this incident portend for the future of U.S.-Venezuelan relations?  Though Chavez's moves have proven destabilizing, the issue of New Tribes on its own is unlikely to produce an irrevocable breach.  On the other hand, the cumulative effect of Chavez's actions seems to be moving the two countries towards greater and greater confrontation.  In August, Chavez suspended cooperation with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency; the president said DEA agents were spying.  And just this month, Chavez sold off Venezuela's foreign currency reserves, held in U.S. treasury bonds, and deposited them in European banks.  "We have had to withdraw our international reserves from U.S. banks, due to the threats we have," Chavez remarked. 

 

These are only two incidents but they demonstrate the extent to which relations have soured in recent days.  Chavez might calculate that President Bush and the Republican party are too distracted with their own internal scandals and the mess in Iraq to focus much attention on Venezuela.  It's also true that the Venezuelan opposition is fractured and as a result the United States has precious little leverage in the country.  As Bush's popularity plummets, Chavez becomes more and more emboldened.  For the time being, he seems to be politically secure, but he is surely playing a dangerous game.

While Chávez's strategy of appealing to racial minorities in the U.S. is certainly bold, it is hardly surprising given his and Venezuela's history. Chávez support for Venezuela's indigenous and afro-Venezuelan population has inspired not only oppressed minorities within his own country but also blacks living outside Venezuela.

 

As the war of words heats up between the Bush White House and Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez, the firebrand South American leader has boldly sought to forge ties with poor communities of color in the United States. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Chávez provided relief assistance to the poverty stricken and largely African American victims of the disaster. The head of Citgo, the U.S. subsidiary of Venezuela's state owned oil company, set up disaster relief centers in Louisiana and Texas in the wake of the hurricane and provided humanitarian to thousands of victims. Volunteers based at Citgo refineries in Lake Charles, Louisiana and Corpus Christi, Texas, provided medical care, food and water to approximately 5,000 people. In Houston, volunteers from Citgo headquarters provided similar assistance to 40,000 victims. What is more, Venezuela has provided hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil in energy assistance to the United States. Chávez followed up his bold initiative by announcing that he would soon begin to ship heating and diesel oil at rock bottom prices to schools, nursing homes, hospitals and poor communities within the U.S. The Venezuelan president has also offered to provide free eye surgery for poor Americans suffering from certain eye conditions. The firebrand South American leader, who proclaimed the plan during a recent visit to New York, will begin his oil program through an October pilot project in Chicago. There, the Venezuelan government will target poor Mexican Americans for assistance.

 

In November, Chávez intends to expand the program to the South Bronx and Boston. Chávez has even offered to ship low cost gasoline to Native American tribal communities in the United States. "There is a lot of poverty in the U.S. and I don't believe that reflects the American Way of Life. Many people die of cold in the winter. Many die of heat in the summer," Chávez recently remarked during his weekly TV show. "We could have an impact on seven to eight million persons," he added. During his time in New York, Chávez toured the largely African American and Latino populated Bronx and was treated like a veritable rock star. Democratic Congress member Jose Serrano, who invited the Venezuelan president to the Bronx, remarked, "Chávez went to the poorest congressional district in the nation's richest city, and people on the street there just went crazy. A lot of people told me they were really mesmerized by him. He made quite an impression." Chávez's trip is reminiscent of similar moves by Cuban leader Fidel Castro, a figure who Chávez frankly admires. In a celebrated trip in 1960, Castro stayed at a cheap hotel in Harlem where he met with important political figures of the day such as Malcolm X.

 

Chávez's moves are sure to play well in the inner city. In light of the high price of oil this year, which has reached $70 a barrel, it is expected that the price of heating oil will skyrocket and become unaffordable to many poor people of color. By providing cheap oil to marginalized communities fed up with price gouging, Chávez shrewdly overshadows George Bush. The U.S. president, along with the Republican party, have long ignored the social needs of America's inner cities as evidenced by the botched hurricane relief operation in New Orleans. Unlike the U.S. government, which was hobbled by Hurricane Katrina and which had to redirect much of the winter's energy assistance program to hurricane victims, Chávez is ideally positioned to help poor communities of color. Venezuela owns 14,000 gas stations and eight refineries in the United States through Citgo, none of whose oil infrastructure was damaged by Hurricane Katrina. Chávez has stated he will reserve 10% of the 800,000 barrels of Citgo oil and ship the petroleum directly to poor communities. Unnamed Venezuelan officials claimed that their country would not lose money through the deal, as the idea was to "cut the middle man" out of the deal. Rafael Ramirez, Venezuela's Minister of Energy and Petroleum, says the move will relieve urban suffering as beneficiaries could see price reductions of up to 30%. Chávez's moves are sure to play well in the Bronx, but unlikely to be received with any sign of gratitude in Washington. "Cutting oil prices must seem like the worst sort of radicalism to the Big Oil companies and their buddies at the Bush-Cheney White House," writes Juan Gonzalez of the New York Daily News.

 

Forging Ties With Communities of Color: Chávez's Political Imperative

 

Chávez's moves seem to form part of a larger, long term strategy of building alliances with racial minorities such as African Americans. By aiding the poor, Chávez will certainly do much to reverse the negative media onslaught that has taken its cue from the White House and which has sought to portray him as "totalitarian" and a threat to this country (see for example my earlier Counterpunch piece, "Fair and Balanced or US Govt. Propaganda? Fox News vs. Hugo Chávez," April 30-May 1, 2005). Julia Buxton, a scholar at Bradford University who has written extensively on Venezuela, remarked that Chávez's gambit reflects ideological as well as pragmatic considerations. "He's been deeply, deeply frustrated by coverage in the U.S. media and the attitude of the U.S. government, and he's trying to counter a very Republican-directed vendetta," she said. That vendetta has included, most recently, calls by U.S. evangelist Pat Robertson for Chávez's assassination (see my earlier article, "Demeaner of the Faith, Rev. Pat Robertson and Gen. Rios Montt," September 17-18, 2005). "He clearly needed to build constructive alliances with more liberal sections of American society," Buxton added, "and open a way to insulate himself against his Washington enemies."

 

For Chávez, the task of recruiting domestic support within the United States has become a political imperative. The Venezuelan president has fallen afoul of the White House for his criticism of the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, the U.S. supported drug war in the Andean region, and the U.S. sponsored Free Trade Agreement of the Americas. What is more, Chávez has increased royalty taxes on U.S. oil companies doing business in Venezuela, and even shipped petroleum to the island nation of Cuba in exchange for Cuban medical assistance. With the added oil money Chávez has funded ambitious social programs in health and education. The Bush White House chose to confront Chávez: in April 2002 the U.S. government provided taxpayer funds to the Venezuelan opposition through the National Endowment For Democracy. Bush and the neo-conservatives nearly succeeded in removing Chávez from power when the opposition staged a short-lived coup d'etat. Since then however, Chávez has consolidated his position and emerged as the most charismatic leader in South America. Chávez's calls for greater regional unity, including the formation of Petrosur, a South American oil company, and Telesur, a South American satellite TV station, have further enraged the Bush White House. Not surprisingly, the U.S. has forged ahead in seeking to isolate Chávez, as evidenced by the recent strong statements coming from the likes of National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice. In a meeting with the New York Times editorial board, Rice remarked that oil was "warping" international politics and "It [oil] gives certain power and leverage to certain countries and not to others. We're experiencing it with Venezuela, for instance, where the oil profits are being put to use across the region to, you know, push forward Chávez's particular view of the world." Chávez has struck back by threatening to cut off oil shipments to the United States if he is assassinated. Venezuela is the United States' fourth largest oil supplier currently accounting for 12% of imports. As such, a cut off of oil supplies could exert a significant impact on the U.S. energy supply (see my earlier Counterpunch column: "Chávez's Gambit 'Oil is a Geopolitical Weapon;" April 6, 2005). Chávez's recent oil for the poor idea, closely following on the heels of the hostile war of words, will most certainly fan the flames yet further and lead the Bush White House to continue its bellicose strategy in Venezuela.

 

"I was a farm kid from the plains of South Venezuela"

 

While Chávez's strategy of appealing to racial minorities is certainly bold, it is hardly surprising given the history. Chávez himself was born in the Venezuelan plain or llano, and has a provincial accent. A forbidding area with a harsh tropical climate, the area has had a long history of racial conflict going back centuries. During the Spanish colonial period, rebellious black slaves managed to escape from plantations and haciendas, fled to the llano and became a problem for the authorities. Slaves started to live in cumbes or escaped communities where collective forms of work were practiced. The blacks mixed with the Indian population and carried out daring raids on cattle ranches. The whites grew alarmed by inter-racial mixing: escaped slaves, they feared, might have a radicalizing effect on the Indian population. Accordingly, in 1785 the authorities drafted laws prohibiting blacks from living with Indians "because they only corrupt them with the bad customs which they generally acquire in their breedingand they sow discord among the same Indians."

 

Physically, Hugo Chávez is a pardo, a term used in the colonial period to denote someone of mixed racial roots. "Chávez's features," writes a magazine columnist, "are a dark-copper color and as thick as clay; he has protruding, sensuous lips and deep-set eyes under a heavy brow. His hair is black and kinky. He is a burly man of medium height, with a long, hatchet-shaped nose and a massive chin and jaw." In an interview, Chávez remarked that when he first applied to the military academy he had an Afro. From an ethno-racial standpoint, Chávez is similar to many of his fellow Venezuelans. Indeed, today 67 per cent of the population is mestizo, 10 per cent black and 23 per cent white. Chávez himself has not sought to distance himself from his ethnic heritage. "My Indian roots are from my father's side," he remarked. "He [my father] is mixed Indian and black, which makes me very proud." What is more, Chávez has boasted of his grandmother, who he says was a Pumé Indian. Like many other Venezuelans of mixed race, Chávez grew up in poverty. One of six children, Chávez was born in extremely humbling conditions in the llano. "I was a farm kid from the plains of South Venezuela," he remarked to Ted Koppel on ABC's Nightline. "I grew up in a palm tree house with an earthen floor," he added. Chávez entered the military, which historically has been one of the few paths towards social advancement for men of mixed race. While on duty with the military he toured the country and became aware of economic exploitation and racial discrimination.

 

Venezuela: A "Racial Democracy"?

 

Unlike the United States, Venezuela has not experienced poisonous anti black racism. But the idea of racial democracy does not stand up under scrutiny: the caste like divisions of the colonial period are still latent in society. "Venezuelan elites," one scholar has remarked, "judged people by their appearances. Accordingly, individuals with 'anxious hair' or 'hair like springs' lived in the shadow of their black slave ancestors. The elites considered respectable the whiter Venezuelans who had 'hair flat as rainwater, of an indefinite light brown color which is neither fair nor dark.'" Though some blacks were able to enter white society through marriage and miscegenation, "in the long run, such individuals provided the exceptions that proved the rule." Blacks who sought social acceptance had to adopt the clothing, education, and language of the white elite. In present day Venezuelan society, notes respected commentator Gregory Wilpert, "The correspondence between skin color and class membership is quite stunning at times. To confirm this observation, all one has to do is compare middle to upper class neighborhoods, where predominantly lighter colored folks live, with the barrios, which are clearly predominantly inhabited by darker skinned Venezuelans." Meanwhile, journalist Greg Palast noted that rich whites had "command of the oil wealth, the best jobs, the English-language lessons, the imported clothes, the vacations in Miami, the plantations."

 

Chávez and Indigenous Peoples

 

In 1998 while campaigning for president, Chávez made a commitment to champion the rights of Venezuela's half-million indigenous peoples. After he was elected, Chávez put the issue of indigenous rights front and center by addressing it on his weekly call-in program, Aló Presidente. But actions speak greater than words, and Chávez made good on his promises by working to codify the rights of indigenous people in the new 1999 constitution. Article 9 proclaims that while Spanish is the official language of Venezuela, "Indigenous languages are also for official use for Indigenous peoples and must be respected throughout the Republic's territory for being part of the nation's and humanity's patrimonial culture." In chapter eight of the constitution, the state recognizes the social, political, and economic organization within indigenous communities, in addition to their cultures, languages, rights, and lands. What is more, in a critical provision the government recognizes land rights as collective, inalienable, and non-transferable. Later articles declare the government's pledge not to engage in extraction of natural resources without prior consultation with indigenous groups. Three long time indigenous activists have been elected to the Venezuelan National Assembly, and prominent leaders hold positions in government. In a novel move, Chávez has even had the constitution translated into all of Venezuela's languages.

 

Chávez has lived up to the constitution by awarding communal land titles to six Kariña indigenous communities. The land titles will be handed out to 4,000 people and encompass 317,000 acres in the Venezuelan states of Monagas and Anzoategui. The land transfers form part of Mission Guaicaipuro, a plan to provide land titles to all of Venezuela's 28 indigenous peoples. Chávez awarded the communal titles to the Kariña in August during the 16th World Festival of Students and Youth. The conference, which was attended by 40,000 people, was held in Caracas. During the opening procession of nations Chávez gave a "thumbs up" to a banner which displayed the words "Leonard Peltier." An indigenous woman speaker at the conference, one of three indigenous representatives in the Venezuela Assembly, praised recent advances for indigenous people. One conference participant reported, "Chávez hugged all the indigenous leaders in front of the world and gave deeds of territory to the tribes." By the end of 2006, Chávez' Mission Guaicaipuro plans to award land titles to 15 more indigenous groups. Participants at the conference were also pleased by Chávez's moves to halt the celebration of Columbus Day, which he has replaced with "Indigenous Resistance Day."

 

Chávez and Afro-Venezuelans

 

On the other hand, while the new constitution recognizes indigenous rights, it mentions nothing about blacks in Venezuela, leading Bill Fletcher of the Washington-based TransAfrica Forum to comment, "I feel that black issues need to be injected into politics." On the other hand, there are signs that Chávez government is at least aware of the problem. From March to May 2004, Afro Venezuelan groups celebrated the 150th anniversary of the end of slavery in Caracas. At the end of the conference Chávez made an appearance and the audience heard a lecture from Afro-Venezuelan historian José Marcial Ramos Guedez. Some participants expressed optimism that racial progress would be made under the Chávez government.

 

"Representatives of Venezuela's Afro-descendants are so positive about the current reforms in government [under Chávez]," said Máryori Márquez, assistant to the director of culture in the city of Sucre, "that we are now also trying to have legislation drafted that will mandate the acceptance and the recognition of the traditional and current human rights of Black Venezuelans." Máryori added that Chávez was "completely open to this initiative, we just have to work to make this come true, we have to develop this. Because this won't just benefit a few people, it would be to everyone's benefit."

 

The White Elite Strikes Back

 

The white elite has not been amused by Chávez's recent moves. For them, the new president was an outsider. In contrast to previous leaders in Venezuela and throughout the region who identified with the outside European world, Chávez loudly proclaimed his indigenous and African roots. Chávez himself seems well aware of the race issue. According to the Venezuelan president, racial tensions have increased since his election. "There is racism here," Chávez remarked. "It used to be more hidden and now it is more open." Chávez's opponents, who argue that racism does not exist in the country, charged that the president exploits the race card for political gain. According to Fletcher, the Chávez opposition "has attacked him [Chávez] using racist language and imagery which would be totally unacceptable in public discourse in the USA." The Venezuelan elite has used racial slurs to taint Chávez, denouncing him as a black monkey. According to author Tariq Ali, "A puppet show to this effect with a monkey playing Chávez was even organized at the U.S. Embassy in Caracas. But Colin Powell was not amused and the Ambassador was compelled to issue an apology." The attacks continued when Venezuelan media commentators referred to the Minister of Education, Aristobulo Isturiz, who is black, as "a monkey" and "an ape." Meanwhile, analysts have remarked upon the racial undertones of political conflict in Chávez's Venezuela. "Class and skin color differences," remarks Wilpert, "clearly correlate very highly at demonstrations, such that the darker skinned (and presumably lower class) support the Chávez government and the lighter skinned (and presumably middle and upper class) oppose the Chávez government."

 

Race and the Venezuelan Media

 

This difference in skin color was clearly evident during the demonstrations both for and against Chávez in the days preceding the April 2002 coup, and during an oil lockout in December 2002-January 2003. What is more, the Venezuelan TV media, which is dominated by whites or light skinned individuals, and which relegates blacks or dark skinned people to play roles as criminals or servants in soap operas, played a significant role in the April 2002 coup. In the days leading up to Chávez's ouster, Venevisión, RCTV, Globovisión and Televen substituted their regular programming with non-stop vitriolic anti-Chávez propaganda, which some of their staff later acknowledged as unprofessional behavior. This relentless barrage was interrupted by commercials urging TV viewers to go into the streets. Inflammatory ads blaring, "Not one step backward. Out! Leave now!" were carried by the stations as public service announcements. Later on the day of the coup, Gustavo Cisneros allowed his television station Venevision to serve as the meeting place for anti-Chávez coup plotters. Reportedly, interim coup president Pedro Carmona was present.

 

Chávez has struck back against the established media through Vive TV, a state sponsored station. In contrast to TV stations like RCTV, which airs shows such as "Quien Quiere Ser Millionario" ("Who Wants To Be A Millionaire"), Vive TV shuns American-style consumerism. According to its website, Vive TV promotes "the common citizen, the millions of Venezuelans and Latin Americans who have been made invisible by imperialism and its cultural domination." Through Vive's programming, claim the station's managers, "it is possible to acquaint oneself with the reality, lives and struggle of people of African descent [and] indigenous peoples." As Blanca Eekhout, the former manager of Vive explains, people of color previously "have appeared in the media but in a stigmatized way; they are shown as marginal people, criminals. They are not shown building, constructing, which is part of the struggle for the development of the country. That's one thing we are trying to change." The result of that changed attitude was plain to see during Vive TV's extended coverage of the Social Forum of the Americas in Ecuador. According to Eekhout, Venezuelan Indians attended the event and "The [Venezuelan] indigenous movement was excited; they could see not only movements there, but also their own Venezuelan delegates." Chávez has also increased the visibility of Latin America's indigenous peoples through the launching of the government-sponsored Televisora del Sur (Telesur). The network, which offers news and opinion programming, has hired Ati Kiwa as a presenter, an indigenous Colombian woman who wears traditional dress. The station provides a stark contrast to Univisión celebrity anchor Jorge Ramos, who wears a jacket and tie.

 

Chávez, Glover, and Martin Luther King

 

Even as he forges ahead with his media initiatives, the indefatigable Chávez has also moved to increase his political ties with the African American community. In January, 2004 TransAfrica Forum sent a delegation of influential artists, actors, activists and scholars to Caracas to meet with government officials. The group included the likes of screen actor Danny Glover ("Lethal Weapon," "The Color Purple"), who expressed his excitement at the social changes taking place in Venezuela. Glover remarked that the U.S. media's portrayal of Venezuela "has nothing to do with reality." Glover stated that his presence in Venezuela was "to listen and learn, not only from government and opposition politicians, but to share with the people, those who are promoting the changes in this country and we want to be in contact with those who benefit from those changes." Glover and others later presided over the inauguration of a new "Martin Luther King., Jr." school in the coastal town of Naiguata. The area is home to large numbers of Afro-Venezuelans. The school inauguration was the first official Venezuelan recognition of the importance of the slain civil rights leader. What is more, the government launched a photo exposition to honor Dr. King. Speaking at the event, the Venezuelan Ambassador to the United States, Bernardo Alvarez, declared that "The visit by members of the TransAfrica Forum represents a struggle that goes beyond the figure of Martin Luther King; his struggle, his ideas and the African-American social movements inspired by him. This is a struggle aimed at defending people's rights, not only in the United States, but in the hemisphere and the world." Glover, clearly touched by the occasion, commented, ""This isn't Danny Glover the artist. I'm here as a citizen, not only of the US, but a citizen of the world. We understand fully the importance of this historical moment." Chávez later honored the late Dr. King during his radio and TV show Alo Presidente; Glover and others were invited on air to participate.

 

Predictably, the TransAfrica Forum delegates came under heavy attack from the Venezuelan opposition. "In the Opposition-oriented media, racist language and imagery wereused to characterize, if not caricaturize, our visit," Fletcher remarked. According to him, the delegation received racist e mail, and newspaper editorials and cartoons depicted the delegation in a racist manner. During a press conference, however, TransAfrica participants held their own against the media. James Early, Director of Cultural Studies and Communication at the Center for Folklife Programs and Cultural Studies at the Smithsonian Institution, expressed dismay with Venezuelan journalists. Early said he was surprised that none of the journalist's questions had to do with issues of cultural or racial diversity. "What are you journalists doing to educate the Venezuelan people about racial and cultural diversity? Democracy in the hemisphere relies heavily on the social responsibility of journalists, and asking questions only about the government or the opposition isn't going to help reach that goal. Democracy is not the government or the opposition, it is the people, being the people of Venezuela or the people of the United States," he said. Sitting in the audience was Education and Sports Minister Aristobulo Isturiz, the same black man who had been described by opposition reporters as "a monkey" in the past. Reportedly, Isturiz couldn't hide his satisfaction at the way the delegation handled the combative journalists.

 

Jackson, Glover, Belafonte: Chávez's New Friends

 

Chávez has maintained his close relationships with prominent black entertainers in the United States. In July 2005, Danny Glover and singer Harry Belafonte were invited to the ceremonial launching of Chávez's new TV station Telesur. Glover was impressed with the new media initiative, but criticized the station for not having any people of African or indigenous descent on its advisory board. Chávez himself called in to the inauguration shortly after and said to Glover, in English, "Danny, I am with you."

 

Meanwhile, Chávez has cultivated ties with civil rights leader Jesse Jackson. During a visit to Caracas, the veteran African American activist condemned Pat Robertson's call for Chávez's assassination. Coinciding with Jackson's stay in the country, the Venezuelan National Assembly declared a special session to commemorate Dr. King's "I Have A Dream" speech. National Assembly member Nohelí Pocaterra, an indigenous woman of Wayuú descent, addressed parliament in her native language and later in Spanish. Pocaterra compared Chávez's struggle for equality in Venezuela with Dr. King's civil rights work. Speaking later at the National Assembly, Jackson discussed the role of Martin Luther King Jr. during the civil rights struggle. Jackson praised Venezuela for making slavery illegal prior to the United States. "You in Venezuela ended the system of slavery in 1854," he remarked. At the end of his speech Jackson was cheered with thunderous applause from Venezuelan lawmakers.

 

The Future of Hemispheric Racial Politics

 

Chávez's international diplomacy and his warm ties with prominent African Americans will surely enrage the Bush White House yet further. Just at the time when Bush's popularity is flagging over the war in Iraq and botched relief efforts at home, Chávez has emerged as the most charismatic South American leader in recent times. For Bush, who tried and failed to dislodge Chávez in 2002, it is hardly a promising picture. Meanwhile, Chávez has inspired not only oppressed minorities within his own country but also blacks living outside Venezuela. "Advanced by individuals such as President Chávez," Fletcher remarks, "the recognition of the on-going reality of racism, and the struggles against it by the African descendant and Indigenous populations, could have a momentous impact on the politics and future of Latin America, let alone the entire Western Hemisphere."

To read my article, click here.

While Pat Robertson’s recent remarks on the Christian Broadcast Network’s The 700 Club that the United States should “take out” Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez certainly caught the media spotlight, the statement by the evangelical minister was only the latest episode in a long and troubled story. Since the 1970s Robertson has loyally served hawkish U.S. foreign policy objectives in Latin America and played a particularly pernicious role in the region. Christian organizations nation wide would do well to heed the history and to rigorously challenge Robertson on his record.

As a young man, Robertson dreamed about profitable business deals in Latin America. After graduating from college, he briefly worked for the W.R. Grace & Co. in New York. Robertson was specifically assigned to Grace’s Foreign Service School to analyze South American economic conditions in South America. There, Robertson collaborated with the company’s chief executives of the company. According to one of Robertson’s biographers, “during the months he worked with the Grace company he viewed Latin America as the ‘land of opportunity’ where he would find some way to enrich himself. Though Robertson left the company after only about nine months, he later achieved his dream by extending Christian televangelism to Central America. By the 1980s, Pat Robertson’s program “The 700 Club,” reached 3.1 million viewers in Guatemala. Robertson took a personal interest in the strife torn Central American nation, developing warm ties to General Efrain Rios Montt, a born again evangelical Christian. When Rios Montt took power in a military coup d’etat in March of 1982, Robertson immediately flew to Guatemala, meeting with the incoming president a scant five days after he came to power. Later, Robertson aired an interview with Rios Montt on “The 700 Club” and extolled the new military government.

Robertson’s visit came at a particularly sensitive time. Guatemala’s dirt poor indigenous peoples, who made up half the country’s population, were suffering greatly at the hands of the U.S. funded military. The armed forces had taken over Indian lands that seemed fertile for cattle exporting or a promising site to drill for oil. Those Indians who dared to resist were massacred. Rios Montt, a staunch anti-Communist supported by U.S. president Reagan, was determined to wipe out the Marxist URNG, the Guatemalan National Revolutionary Union rebels. However, according to Amnesty International, thousands of people with no connection to the armed struggle were killed by the regime. Not surprisingly, many Indians turned to armed resistance. To deal with the ever worsening situation, Rios Montt proposed a so called “guns and beans” campaign. Rios Montt explained the plan very succinctly: “If you are with us, we’ll feed you, if not, we’ll kill you.” For Robertson, however, Rios Montt’s extermination policy was of little account. Astonishingly, the televangelist wrote “I found [Rios Montt] to be a man of humilityimpeccable personal integrity, and a deep faith in Jesus Christ.”

One reason that Rios Montt may have appealed to Robertson was the dictator’s dislike of Catholic priests. In the 1980s, they had become an obstacle to the expansion of evangelical Protestantism. Working within indigenous communities, Catholic priests had been driven out or murdered. Protestant sects, on the other hand, allied to the Guatemalan military. They preached individual conversion, the importance of obedience to military and political authority, the merits of capitalism, and the value of inequality. Rios Montt’s own Church of the Word went so far as to define priests and nuns as the enemy. According to Walter LaFeber, a historian of Central America, three priests were killed within a thirty-six month period in just one province. With the Catholic Church out of the way, Rios Montt conducted a scorched earth policy. His forces massacred as many as 15,000 Indians. Whole villages were leveled and the army set up “Civilian Self-Defense Patrols” which forced 900,000 villagers to “voluntarily” aid police in tracking down suspects. Rios Montt created “model” villages, similar to concentration camps, which housed Indian refugees. However, when 40,000 survivors sought safety in Mexico, Guatemalan helicopters machine gunned the camps. Rios Montt justified the genocidal policy by claiming that the Indians were suspected of cooperating with the URNG, the Guatemalan National Revolutionary Union, or “might” cooperate in future. Amnesty International noted that extra judicial killings carried out the by the military “were done in terrible ways: people of all ages were not only shot to death, they were burned alive, hacked to death, disemboweled, drowned, beheaded. Small children were smashed against rocks or bayoneted to death.”

Far from denouncing such practices, Robertson rushed to defend Rios Montt. “Little by little the miracle began to unfold,” he wrote of the regime. “The country was stabilized. Democratic processes, never a reality in Guatemala, began to be put into place.” Robertson also praised Rios Montt for eliminating death squads, despite recent estimates that tens of thousands were killed by death squads in the second half of 1982 and throughout 1983. Most damning of all, even as Rios Montt was carrying out the extermination of the Mayan population, Robertson held a fundraising telethon for the Guatemalan military. The televangelist urged donations for International Love Lift, Rios Montt’s relief program linked to Gospel Outreach, the dictator’s U.S. church. Meanwhile, Robertson’s Christian Broadcasting Network reportedly sponsored a campaign to provide money as well as agricultural and medical technicians to aid in the design of Rios Montt’s first model villages. Rios Montt was ultimately overthrown in another military coup d’etat in August 1983.

Unfortunately, Robertson’s involvement in Guatemalan politics did not discredit his career. He also led efforts to back the Nicaraguan contras in the 1980s, who sought to overthrow the Sandinista regime. More recently, he has been an important backer of President Bush and currently commands a captive audience of one million U.S. television viewers. Judging from his recent remarks, Robertson has not chosen to re-evaluate his hawkish views. The latest target drawing Robertson’s fire is Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. Unlike General Rios Montt, who came to power in a military coup, Chavez enjoys significant popular support. He has won two presidential elections, in 1998 and 2000, defeated an opposition led recall referendum in August 2004 and according to recent polls, has an approval rating of 70%. Not surprisingly, he is favored to win re-election in 2006. But to Robertson, the will of the Venezuelan people is of no account. Chavez, unlike Rios Montt, has not been compliant with U.S. interests. Not only has Chavez had the audaciousness to criticize the U.S. war in Iraq, but he also questions the fairness of Bush initiatives like the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas. The world’s fifth largest oil producer, Venezuela has significant political and economic clout in the region, and Chavez has poured oil proceeds into health and education programs. To the ire of Robertson, Chavez has pursued an independent course by providing oil to Cuba. In exchange, the island nation has sent thousands of doctors who have assisted the Venezuelan poor. Unfortunately for Bush and the Christian right, Chavez has not been easily dislodged from power. Though the U.S. provided material assistance to Venezuelan opposition figures seeking to topple Chavez, a coup d’etat in April of 2002 proved a miserable failure when popular protest led to Chavez’s reinstatement. Since that time, Chavez has consolidated power and has become a hemispheric leader. Robertson’s attack surely will not alter the political equation in Venezuela. Though the televangelist has a presence in Venezuela, broadcasting in Spanish over Venezuelan station Televen, Venezuelan Protestants only number 2% of the population and are by and large a working class Chavez constituency. Nevertheless, Robertson’s remark has cast a pall over U.S.-Venezuelan relations, which had in recent months already hit a record low.

Though some Protestant ministers have criticized Robertson, arguing that the televangelist has demeaned the faith, this trickle needs to turn into a torrent. By all reckoning, Robertson’s career should have been destroyed as a result of his support for genocidal dictator Rios Montt. Now, Protestants nation-wide have the opportunity to voice their dissent over Robertson’s most recent outburst. Hopefully, they will act soon or Robertson will continue to make un-Christian statements that contribute to ill will between the United States and its neighbors.

Given recent friction between Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez and the White House it inevitably was only a matter of time before Rupert Murdoch's Fox News would start to ratchet up its shrill ideological pressure. Since taking office in 1998, Chávez has had a stormy relationship with his powerful northern neighbor. Chávez, who established close ties with Washington's anathema, Cuban President Fidel Castro, criticized U.S.-led efforts for a free trade zone in the Americas, which he insisted would primarily benefit the U.S., while opposing the war in Iraq, resulting in no mystery as to why he has long been so reviled by the Bush administration. Tensions have been bristling between the two nations particularly since April 2002 when Chávez, the democratically elected president, was briefly removed from power in a coup which involved U.S. funding.

 

A maverick politician and former paratrooper, Chávez accused (not without merit) Washington of sponsoring his attempted overthrow as well as supporting a devastating oil lockout in 2002-3. Not one to easily soften his language, Chávez bluntly referred to the United States as "an imperialist power." What is more, according to the Venezuelan leader, Bush had plans to have him assassinated. In a further rhetorical sortie, Chávez warned that if he were killed the United States would have to "forget Venezuelan oil."

 

In a series of recent television reports Fox News has derided the firebrand leftist leader, presenting the current Venezuelan political habitat entirely from the perspective of the country's conservative middle-class opposition as well as the Bush administration.

In siding with the opposition, Fox News joins the ranks of almost all of the Venezuelan television stations including Radio Caracas TV and Venevision which have launched a vitriolic and highly personalized savaging of Chávez over the past few years. In his reports, Fox reporter Steve Harrigan speaks solely with members of the Venezuelan opposition and shows Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice critical of Chávez. Of course, Fox News has the right to present the news as distortedly as it sees fit. However, its exclusive adherence to anti-Chávez sources completely caricatures the station's claim to be "fair and balanced." In fact, when it comes to Venezuela, it strives to be a propaganda mill.

Fox Source #1: Leopoldo Lopez

In short bits scarcely lasting longer than a television commercial, Harrigan, a former CNN Moscow correspondent, intones that Chávez is "moving towards totalitarian rule." To support this view he turns to such redoubtable Venezuelan political figures as Leopoldo Lopez. "The danger we are facing as Venezuelans," says Lopez, "is the possibility of one day waking up and all of the sudden not having any of our liberties." What Harrigan failed to disclose however is that Lopez, as the municipal mayor of the Caracas district of Chacao, has worked closely with the Primero Justicia party. According to Venezuelan human rights lawyer Eva Golinger, Primero Justicia is the "most extreme opposition party to Chávez." What is more, Golinger has written that after the April 2002 coup against Chávez, Lopez signed the "Carmona Decree" which dissolved all democratic institutions including the National Assembly, the Supreme Court, the Attorney General and Public Defender. Additionally, the Carmona Decree did away with "an overwhelming number of laws and constitutional rights implemented during the Chávez administration." At the time, this action was denounced by almost all of Latin America's leaders.

 

Lopez's colleague at Primero Justicia, Leopoldo Martinez, was promoted to Minister of Finance under the Carmona coup regime. Even more revealing, Golinger reports that Primero Justicia received training and support from the International Republican Institute, a nonprofit U.S. organization which receives millions of dollars in laundered funding from the U.S. taxpayer funded National Endowment for Democracy and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). This piece further corroded Harrigan's fast disappearing reputation as a professional by failing to disclose vital information to Fox viewers about the political biases and special interests of his sources.

 

Fox Fails to Disclose Lopez' Record

What is more, Fox viewers were left woefully uninformed about Lopez's track record during the April 2002 coup. The day after Chávez was removed from power on April 12, Lopez and Baruta Mayor Henrique Capriles Radonski (see below) placed Chávez's Interior and Justice Minister Ramon Rodriguez Chacin under arrest. Chacin later claimed that as he was being escorted out of his residence into a police car, he was physically attacked by a mob. Lopez responded by saying that he was innocent and was ordered to carry out the order by the Public Ministry, now under the control of the leader of coup regime, Pedro Carmona. However, after Chávez was restored to power, Chacin asked the country's attorney general to open an investigation of the incident. In late 2004 Lopez was indicted by the Caracas metropolitan attorney for his involvement in the raid on Chacin's home and the subsequent arrest of the minister.

 

Fox Source #2: Capriles Radonski

Harrigan continued his assault against accuracy by once again indulging in over simplification when he interviewed the mayor of the Caracas municipality of Baruta (bordering Leopoldo Lopez's Chacao district), Henrique Capriles Radonski. Capriles remarks, "I spent 20 days without looking at the sun, without looking at the sky, without having open air." While it is true that Capriles was imprisoned in a highly controversial, politically-charged case, Harrigan omits important information that would help American viewers to better comprehend Venezuela's volatile politics and give some rare perspective to the course of events there. For example, in his report, Harrigan doesn't mention that Capriles was head of the U.S.-partly funded Primero Justicia party. This is not an insignificant point. Indeed, one can only imagine the reaction from Fox were the Democratic Party to accept money from a foreign government which was interested in getting rid of the Bush administration.

 

Radonski and the April 2002 Coup

What is the controversy swirling around Capriles and what did Fox neglect to tell its viewers? During the April 2002 coup against Chávez, hundreds of angry middle-class opposition demonstrators destroyed cars parked outside the Cuban embassy in Baruta. Not stopping there, the mob cut off water and electricity to the building and threatened to forcibly enter the facility and do harm to the frightened occupants inside. Later, Chávez officials charged that Capriles, as the leading authority in Baruta, did not enforce the law and allowed the demonstrators to run amok. Irate staff at the Cuban embassy later issued a statement reading, "The immediate responsibility of Mr. Capriles Radonsky and other Venezuelan state authorities was demonstrated when they failed to act diligently in order to prevent an increase in the aggression to which our embassy was subjected, causing serious damage and endangering the lives of officials and their families in clear violation of national and international law."

 

Meanwhile, the Baruta mayor insisted that he was merely trying to defuse a volatile situation. Later, the Cuban embassy denied assertions made by Primero Justicia deputy Julio Borges that the Cubans had asked for Capriles's mediation at the scene. In an official statement issued by the embassy, the Cubans claimed that "these actions (the mob-incited acts of vandalism) occurred with impunity in the presence of the Baruta police who had instructions not to impede these actions." Capriles claims that he notified authorities and asked for assistance. ``I talked with the people outside," he has stated. "I said, 'This is an embassy, you cannot go inside.'"

 

During the incident Capriles was videotaped at the scene asking Cuban officials for permission to inspect the embassy on behalf of the angry mob. Though the tape supports his claim that he tried to calm the crowd, it also shows him speaking with the Cuban ambassador. In fact, what he is shown asking is for the Cuban ambassador to supply him with proof that there are no members of the government hiding inside the embassy (in another court case, the tape was used as evidence by both prosecutors and defense). For their part, Chávez officials charged that Capriles was demanding the right to inspect the embassy, which was a violation of international norms.

 

Capriles Radonski Arrested

In March 2004, a warrant was issued for Capriles's arrest. On May 11 he turned himself in. Prosecutor Danilo Anderson, who had apparently developed a convincing case which linked US agencies to the coup, charged Capriles with property damage, intimidation, violating international principles and trespassing. Meanwhile, Leopoldo Lopez led a march of Chacao residents to the town hall to support Capriles. In an ironic twist, Lopez, who himself signed the Carmona Decree in 2002, remarked that the government was "kidnapping" the country's institutions in order to engage in "political persecutions." Lopez rejected the charges against Capriles and argued that Venezuelans should be outraged about "undemocratic maneuvers." Capriles was held for four months and was released conditionally in September. In October, an appeals court dismissed the case against him.

 

In a dramatic development however, Anderson was the victim of a car bomb assassination when his SUV blew up in Caracas. Anderson was in charge of prosecuting several Chávez opponents involved in the April 2002 coup, including Capriles. Though no arrests were made, early suspicions focused on the Chávez opposition. Capriles remarked, "The government and the judicial system must find those responsible and do justice." He added, "I had many differences with Danilo Anderson, but these were fought out in the public prosecutor's office." Since late last year, Venezuelan authorities have taken into custody a number of suspects who they accuse of playing a role in Anderson's assassination. Despite the irretrievable loss of Anderson, the state has chosen to go on appealing the Capriles case.

 

Capriles Radonski: Democratic defender or menace to democracy?  Once again, Fox fails to report

In his report on Venezuela, Harrigan again interviews Capriles who remarks, "If you don't have a rule or somebody who respects the rules, they can do whatever they want. They can be Fidel Castro second part." Clearly the young and somewhat flashily charismatic Capriles has become a symbol of popular resistance to the Chávez government. His supporters claim that he has been unfairly railroaded by the regime and that attacks against him have been politically motivated. But, does Capriles himself have any regard for the democratic process and "the rules?" Recent developments have cast some doubt on Capriles' legitimacy. In early 2004, the Chávez opposition, frustrated by the failed coup attempt of 2002 and by an unsuccessful lock out in 2002-3, initiated the "Guarimba Plan." As Venezuela analyst Steve Ellner has written, under this urban sabotage plan "small groups blocked traffic and burned trash on key avenues in Caracas and other cities. Street damage in Caracas alone, according to Infrastructure Ministry estimates, reached $1 million in the first week. In addition, armed bands of opposition organizations, including the ex-leftist guerrilla group Red Flag, hurled Molotov cocktails and attacked the National Guard—violence that police in areas controlled by opposition parties refused to stop." As Ellner reports, as mayor of Baruta, Capriles "said police were right not to interfere because protestors were doing 'nothing less than exercising their legal right to protest.'"

 

Fox's Over-Simplifications

Though recent developments have cast doubt on Lopez's and Capriles' self-serving claims to be militants in the cause of good government, Fox oversimplifies the bitter political fracturing of the country by ignoring its complex history. It would seem that it is far easier to lop Capriles and Lopez amongst the forces of good than to actually investigate, from the perspective of both sides, a far more complex picture that would better conform to reality. But this would not hold true to tabloid tendencies that Fox's Washington bureau, under Brit Hume, is universally seen as incorporating. If the network started to question Capriles's and Lopez's democratic credentials too closely, this might interfere with the underlying narrative with which Fox is very comfortable. In this scenario, Condoleezza Rice and the State Department fight for democracy and economic modernization and Hugo Chávez is a "totalitarian" who needs to be controlled, if not eliminated.

To read the article, click here.

For George Bush the news could not have been worse. Having failed, according to credible accounts, to dislodge firebrand Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez by force in an April 2002 coup d’etat, Bush now must come to terms with the fact that Venezuela has cultivated strong European ties. That point was underscored this week when Spanish prime minister Jorge Luis Rodriguez Zapatero agreed to sell ten C-295 military transport planes, two CN-235 naval patrol planes and eight coastal patrol vessels worth 1.3bn euros ($1.7bn) to Venezuela. Though both Zapatero and Chavez stated that the military equipment would be used to peacefully patrol land and sea borders and to prevent drug smuggling, and Zapatero also announced that he would donate three troop transport planes to Colombia, a close U.S. ally, the developments could not have pleased the Bush administration. The Spanish sale follows close on the heels of Venezuela’s plans to purchase 100,000 AK-47 assault rifles and 22 helicopters from Russia. The US state department has accused Venezuela of sparking an arms race. The rifles, claim U.S. diplomats, could wind up in the hands of the FARC, Colombia’s left-wing rebels. Now, the Spanish sale is adding fuel to the fire. The Spanish sale surely did not come as a surprise to the U.S. As early as January the Spanish minister of Defense, José Bono, made what Zapatero termed a “discreet” visit to Caracas where the Spanish official discussed the arms sales with Chavez. Currently, the U.S. is trying its best to deal with the diplomatic fall out from the sales. American diplomats in Spain stated the U.S. “was worried” but had not “complained” to the Spanish government about the arms transfers. When asked to clarify the U.S. position on Spanish arms sales to Venezuela, Robert Zimmerman of the State Department’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs commented delicately, “our concerns about arms sales to Venezuela are known to all the relevant parties.”

Chavez: a Thorn in The Side of the U.S.

Chavez has long been a thorn in the side of the Bush administration. A frequent critic of the White House, Chavez has lambasted U.S. led efforts for a free trade zone in the Americas. What is more he has criticized the U.S. war in Iraq and furthered ties to traditional U.S. enemies such as Cuba. For the United States, Venezuela is a nation of key geopolitical importance. The world’s fifth largest oil producer, Venezuela is also the fourth largest supplier of oil to the United States after Canada, Mexico, and Saudi Arabia. Last year, Venezuela’s state owned oil company, Petroleos de Venezuela (Pdvsa) accounted for 11.8% (1.52-million barrels a day) of U.S. imports. However, Chavez has used oil as a geopolitical weapon. In a provocative move he has shipped oil to the communist island nation of Cuba. In a further threat to U.S. interests, Chavez has sought to form a regional oil cartel with other left-leaning South American countries. For taking such unpopular positions, Chavez stated, the United States has sought to have him killed. If he were assassinated, Chavez remarked, the U.S. could “forget Venezuelan oil.”

Though the U.S. has tried to diplomatically isolate Chavez, with State Department spokesperson Richard Boucher accusing Venezuela of playing a “destabilizing role” in regional affairs, these efforts have not yielded tangible result. To the contrary U.S. efforts to pressure Venezuela through third parties such as Spain seem to have backfired. How did things go amiss for the Bush administration in Venezuela?

The Ties That Bind: Aznar and Bush

During Bush’s first term it seemed that the United States enjoyed a willing foreign partner in Spain. José María Aznar, who had reorganized Spanish conservatives into the People’s Party (Partido Popular or PP) had been Prime Minister of Spain since 1996. Aznar, whose grandfather served as Franco’s ambassador to Morocco and the United Nations and whose father was a pro-Franco journalist, was re-elected with an absolute majority in the 2000 general election. The Spanish prime minister, who had narrowly escaped a 1995 assassination attempt by the Basque terrorist group ETA, made fighting terrorism one of the hallmarks of his administration. Aznar’s emphasis on combating terrorism fit well with the Bush agenda after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York. What is more, despite robust public opposition (with polls indicating 90% of the Spanish public opposed to the war) and street protests, Aznar supported Bush’s 2003 invasion of Iraq. In August 2003 Aznar sent 1,300 Spanish peace keeping troops to Iraq as part of the government’s support for the U.S. invasion.

Bush and Aznar: Anti-Chavista Allies

Simultaneously Aznar was Washington’s willing ally in opposing Chavez. In 2002 the maverick Venezuelan president was looking increasingly vulnerable. Faced with a growing wave of protests supported by the United States, Chavez was briefly removed from power by the military in a coup d’etat. In his place, Pedro Carmona, previously the head of Venezuela’s largest business association, Fedecamaras, became interim president. However, after poor and marginalized residents of Caracas massed at the presidential palace Chavez was able to return to power and defeat the coup plotters.

Prior to the April 12 2002 coup Venezuelan businessman Carmona visited high level government officials in Madrid as well as prominent Spanish businessmen. Once the coup had been carried out Carmona called Aznar and met with the Spanish ambassador in Caracas, Manuel Viturro de la Torre. The Spanish ambassador was accompanied at the meeting by the U.S. Ambassador, Charles Shapiro. As Chavez languished in a military barracks, PP parliamentary spokesman Gustavo de Arístegui wrote an article in the Spanish newspaper El Mundo supporting the coup. According to anonymous diplomatic sources who spoke with Inter Press Service, the Spanish foreign ministry holds documents which reveal the Spanish role. The documents reportedly prove that de la Torre had written instructions from the Aznar government to recognize Carmona as the new president of Venezuela.

The diplomatic tit-for-tat continued. After the coup Chavez detained the president of Fedecámaras, Carlos Fernández, who was accused of helping to foment a lock out which reduced oil output in 2002-03. Fernández was charged with inciting unrest and sedition. In February 2003 Ana Palacio, the Spanish Minister of External Affairs, criticized the detention. During his Sunday radio and TV show, Chavez angrily shot back that Spain should not interfere in Venezuela’s internal affairs. “We must respect each other,” said Chavez. “Don’t get involved in our things and we won’t involve ourselves in your things. Is it necessary to remember that the Spanish ambassador was here applauding the April coup?” Chavez added, “Aznar, please, each one in his own place.” The diplomatic chill continued late into 2003 when Aznar criticized Chavez for adopting “failed models” like those of Cuba’s Fidel Castro. Chavez retorted that Aznar’s statements were “unacceptable” and added that “perhaps Aznar thinks he is Fernando VII and we are still a colony. No, Carabobo [a battle of independence] already happened. Aznar, Ayacucho [another battle during the wars of independence] already occurred. The Spanish empire was already thrown out of here almost 200 years ago Aznar. Let those whostick their noses in Venezuela take note that we will not accept it.” In a further snub Chavez stated that Aznar should respond to the Spanish public which protested PP support for the invasion of Iraq. “He should definitely take responsibility for that,” Chavez concluded.

The Tide Starts To Turn

In March 2004 the tide turned. Despite the unpopularity of the war in Iraq, Jorge Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, the leader of the Partido Socialista Obrero Español (PSOE, or Spanish Socialists’ Workers Party) trailed in the polls. With general elections called Aznar’s hand picked successor in the PP, Mariano Rajoy, looked likely to win. In part the PP owed its popularity due to its tough stand on Basque terrorism and ETA. Then, three days prior to the election the Madrid commuter train bombings killed 201 people and injured 1,500. The PP hastily blamed ETA for the bombings but as suspicions grew of al Qaeda involvement Aznar’s party suffered. Some analysts argued that the PP held some responsibility for the Madrid bombings because it sent troops to Iraq and acquiesced in U.S. foreign policy. Thousands poured out on to the streets to protest the PP. Zapatero was thrust to an upset victory in the election. The socialists quickly shifted away from the strongly pro-U.S. focus of the PP, allying closer to the nations of “Old Europe” such as France and Germany. Zapatero described Spain’s participation in the Iraq war as “a total error.” In May, two months after his electoral victory, he withdrew Spain’s 1,430 troops.

Chavez Receives A “Rock Star” Welcome

Needless to say Chavez was ecstatic about the socialist win and made no effort to conceal his high spirits. Shortly after Zapatero’s victory Chavez praised the Spanish government for withdrawing its troops from Iraq. The firebrand Venezuelan politician was further emboldened after an August 2004 recall referendum failed to force him from office. The final result showed that 59.25% of voters approved of Chavez and opposed his recall. Having then survived a coup attempt, a lock out in 2002-3 and a recall effort Chavez looked increasingly secure [what is more, in the October 2004 regional elections governing coalition candidates garnered 90% of the state governments and more than 70% of city governments]. Despite U.S. political pressure Chavez was now becoming a hemispheric leader with real clout. With Zapatero now in power Chavez traveled to Spain in November 2004. Chavez expressed his satisfaction with the change of government in Spain, commenting “How happy the Spain of today, and how sad the Spain that was subordinate to Washington’s mandate.” According to Reuters, Chavez received a “rock star welcome” in Madrid. Once in the Spanish capitol Chavez paid homage to the victims of “M-11.” At the Atocha train station where scores of Spanish had perished in the attack, Chavez was mobbed by the media and hundreds of supporters. Many waved Venezuelan flags and chanted, “Chavez, friend, the people are with you.” The indefatigable Chavez buoyed his supporters by criticizing the war in Iraq, the U.S. economic embargo against Cuba and U.S. threats against Iran. During a joint news conference Chavez advocated “a new progressive, transforming and liberating way of thinking,” that should confront the negative effects of the free market neo-liberal economic model. That model, he maintained, “is only useful for a world at war.” During the press conference, Zapatero agreed with the Venezuelan’s comments.

The Moratinos Bombshell

Just as Chavez was touring the Spanish capitol, however, a scandal erupted which turned the government inside out. Miguel Angel Moratinos, the Spanish Foreign Minister, accused the previous PP administration of supporting the failed coup d’etat against Chavez in April 2002. Speaking on the Spanish TV program “59 segundos,” Moratinos remarked that Aznar’s policy in Venezuela “was something unheard of in Spanish diplomacy, the Spanish ambassador received instructions to support the coup.” Before the cameras Moratinos declared, “that won’t happen in the future, because we respect the popular will.” Adding fuel to the fire Chavez remarked “I have no doubt that it [the Spanish involvement] happened. It was a very serious error on the part of the former government.” Chavez declared that Venezuela had no problem with the PP nor with Spain, and that for a brief moment the two countries enjoyed good relations. But later Aznar’s political as well as personal views changed. “With Aznar,” Chavez stated, “there was neither chemistry, nor physics, nor math.”

Arms Only Tip of The Iceberg

With political upset in Spain the path was now clear for greater economic and political coordination. In fact, the recent Spanish arms sales were only the tip of the iceberg. Of key importance was the Spanish oil company Repsol. As of December, Repsol produced 100,000 barrels of oil per day in Venezuela. But under a recent deal that figure will go up to 160,000 barrels per day as Repsol expands its operations. Under the deal Repsol will double its reserves, raise production 60% and become a joint partner with Pdvsa in a gas liquefaction plant and an 80-megawatt electricity generating plant. Furthermore, under another deal Chavez will buy three ships from Spain including an oil tanker.

The Boomerang Effect

Arguably the United States itself has brought about this political realignment. Analysts have suggested that voters held Aznar responsible for the M-11 attacks, a result of Spain’s close alliance with the U.S. Now Zapatero has punished Bush, first by withdrawing Spain’s forces from Iraq and allying more closely with “Old Europe,” and secondly by pursuing a more independent policy in South America. In this sense Zapatero seems to agree with Chavez’s desire to create a more “multipolar” world in which smaller nations unite and deal with the U.S. on more equal terms. Now that Chavez has consolidated power and is extending economic and political ties not only with neighboring South American countries but also with Europe, the United States looks increasingly bereft.

What a difference three years can make.