The U.S. shows its contempt for Venezuelan democracy
Pots and Pans and Uncle Sam Weren't Enough This Time
Venezuela Survives Another Attempt at Regime Change
by MARK WEISBROT
While most of the news on Venezuela in the week since the April 14 presidential election focused on the efforts of losing candidate Henrique Capriles to challenge the results, there was another campaign based in Washington that was quite revealing. And the two were most definitely related. Without Washington’s strong support – the first time it had refused to recognize a Venezuelan election result – it is unlikely that Capriles would have joined the hard core elements of his camp in pretending that the election was stolen.
Washington’s efforts to de-legitimize the election mark a significant escalation of U.S. efforts at “regime change” in Venezuela. Not since its involvement in the 2002 military coup has the U.S. government done this much to promote open conflict in Venezuela. When the White House first announced on Monday that a 100 percent audit of the votes was “an important, prudent and necessary step,” this was not an effort to promote a “recount.” They had to know that this was a form of hate speech – telling the government of Venezuela what was necessary to make their elections legitimate. They also had to know that it would not make such a recount more likely. And this was also their quick reply to Maduro’s efforts, according to the New York Times of April 15, to reach out to the Obama administration for better relations through former Clinton Energy Secretary Bill Richardson.
Washington’s clumsy efforts had also helped highlight the election as an issue of national sovereignty, something that is deeply cherished in the region. “Americans should take care of their own business a little and let us decide our own destiny,” saidLula da Silva at a rally in Brazil. Of course, there were screaming ironies: George W. Bush “defeated” Gore in 2000, losing the popular vote and “winning” Florida officially by perhaps 900 votes (and quite possibly losing it altogether), with no recount.
But the demand for a “recount” was farcical from the beginning. In Venezuela, voters mark their choice by pressing a touch screen on a computer, which prints out a receipt of the vote. The voter checks the receipt and deposits it in a ballot box. When the polls close, 53 percent of the machines are randomly selected and their results compared with the paper, in front of witnesses from all sides. There were no reports of mismatches, so far not even from the opposition camp. The opposition representative on the National Electoral Council, Vicente Díaz, acknowledged that he had “no doubt” that the vote count was accurate.
“No doubt” is an understatement. My colleague David Rosnick calculated the probability that extending the audit to the remaining 47 percent of machines could change the result of the election: about one in 25 thousand trillion.
On Thursday night Venezuela’s CNE agreed to do a complete audit of the remaining votes and Capriles called off his protests. But it’s not clear what the audit entails. The legal vote in Venezuela is the machine vote (as in parts of the United States where there is electronic voting); the paper receipt is not a vote, and it’s not clear that it would be possible to audit the remaining votes in the way that the first 53 percent were audited on site.
On Wednesday, Secretary of State John Kerry, affirming before Congress the U.S. refusal to recognize Venezuela’s elections, referred to Latin America as the United States’ “back yard.” Oops. Well, the contempt was obvious anyway, no?
Mark Weisbrot is an economist and co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. He is co-author, with Dean Baker, of Social Security: the Phony Crisis.
Originally posted at The Guardian
Click here for video from Democracy Now!
A historic trial against former U.S.-backed Guatemalan dictator Efraín Ríos Montt on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity came to an abrupt end Thursday when an appeals court suspended the trial before a criminal court was scheduled to reach a verdict. Ríos Montt on was charged in connection with the slaughter of more than 1,700 people in Guatemala’s Ixil region after he seized power in 1982. His 17-month rule is seen as one of the bloodiest chapters in Guatemala’s decades-long campaign against Maya indigenous people, which resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands. Thursday’s decision is seen as a major blow to indigenous victims. Investigative journalist Allan Nairn reported last night Guatemalan army associates had threatened the lives of case judges and prosecutors and that the case had been annulled after intervention by Guatemala’s president, General Otto Pérez Molina. Ríos Montt was the first head of state in the Americas to stand trial for genocide. Nairn flew to Guatemala last week after he was called to testify in Ríos Montt’s trial. He was listed by the court as a "qualified witness" and was tentatively scheduled to testify on Monday. But at the last minute, Nairn was kept off the stand "in order," he was told, "to avoid a confrontation" with the president, General Pérez Molina, and for fear that if he took the stand, military elements might respond with violence. In the 1980s, Nairn extensively documented broad army responsibility for the massacres and was prepared to present evidence that personally implicated Pérez Molina, who was field commander during the very Mayan Ixil region massacres for which the ex-dictator, Ríos Montt, had been charged with genocide. [includes rush transcript]
Transcript
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: An historic trial against former U.S.-backed Guatemalan dictator Efraín Ríos Montt on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity came to an abrupt end Thursday when an appeals court suspended the trial before a criminal court was scheduled to reach a verdict. Investigative journalist Allan Nairn reported last night Guatemalan army associates had threatened the lives of case judges and prosecutors and that the case had been annulled after intervention by Guatemala’s president, General Otto Pérez Molina.
Ríos Montt was the first head of state in the Americas to stand trial for genocide.
He was charged in connection with the slaughter of more than 1,700 people in Guatemala’s Ixil region after he seized power in 1982. His 17-month rule is seen as one of the bloodiest chapters in Guatemala’s decades-long campaign against Maya indigenous people, which resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands.
On Thursday, survivors of the genocide attempted to approach Ríos Montt inside the courtroom, screaming "Murderer!"
The US Continues to Undermine Democracy in Venezuela
by DANIEL KOVALIK
I just returned from Venezuela where I was one of 170 international election observers from around the world, including India, Guyana, Surinam, Colombia, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Scotland, England, the United States, Guatemala, Argentina, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Ethiopia, Jamaica, Brazil, Chile, Greece, France, Panama and Mexico. These observers included two former Presidents (of Guatemala and the Dominican Republic), judges, lawyers and numerous high ranking officials of national electoral councils. What we found was an election system which was transparent, inherently reliable, well-run and thoroughly audited.
Indeed, as to the auditing, what has been barely mentioned by the mainstream press is the fact that over 54% of all votes are, and indeed have already been, audited to ensure that the electronic votes match up with the paper receipts which serve as back-up for the electronic votes. And, this auditing is done in the presence of witnesses from both the governing and opposition parties right in the local polling place itself. I witnessed just such an audit at the end of election day on Sunday. And, as is the usual case, the paper results matched up perfectly with the electronic ones. As the former Guatemalan President, Alvaro Colom, who served as an observer, opined, the vote in Venezuela is “secure” and easily verifiable.
Proud Voter: Acevedo, Venezuela. Photo: Dan Kovalik 2013.
And so, what were the results of the election? With an impressive 79% of registered voters going to the polls, Nicolas Maduro won by over 260,000 votes, with a 1.6 percentage point margin over Henrique Capriles (50.7 to 49.1 percent). While this was certainly a close race, 260,000 votes is a comfortable victory, certainly by U.S. election standards. Thus, recall that John F. Kennedy beat Richard Nixon in 1960 with 49.7% of the vote to Nixon’s 49.6%. In addition, George W. Bush became President in 2000, though losing the popular vote to Al Gore, with 47.87% of the vote to Gore’s 48.38 percent, and with the entire race coming down to several hundred votes in Florida. And, while the State of Florida itself decided that it was necessary to have a hand re-count of the ballots there, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned this decision and blocked the re-count. In none of these cases did any nation in the world insist upon a recount or hesitate in recognizing the man declared to be the winner. Indeed, had a country like Venezuela done so, we would have found such a position absurd. The U.S.’s current position vis a vis Venezuela is no less absurd.
The U.S.’s position is all the more ridiculous given its quick recognition of the coup government in Paraguay after the former Bishop turned President, Fernando Lugo, was ousted in 2012, and its recognition of the 2009 elections in Honduras despite the fact that the U.S.’s previously-stated precondition for recognizing this election – the return of President Manual Zelaya to power after his forcible ouster by the military – never occurred. Of course, this even pales in comparison to the U.S.’s active involvement in violent coups against democratically-elected leaders in Latin America (e.g., against President Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954, against President Allende in Chile in 1973, and against President Aristide in Haiti in 2004).
And, the U.S.’s failure to recognize the Venezuelan elections is having devastating consequences in Venezuela, for it is emboldening the Venezuelan opposition to carry out violence in Venezuela in order to destabilize that country. Unlike Al Gore in 2000 who stepped aside for George W. Bush in the interest of his country and the U.S. Constitution, the Venezuelan opposition, being led by Henrique Capriles, clearly wants to foster chaos and crisis in Venezuela in order to topple the Maduro government by force (just as the same forces represented by Capriles forcibly kidnapped and briefly overthrew President Chavez, with U.S. support, in 2002). Thus, reasonably believing itself to have the backing of the U.S. and its military, the opposition is causing mayhem in Venezuela, including burning down clinics, destroying property, attacking Cuban doctors and destroying ruling party building. In all, 7 Venezuelans are dead and dozens injured in this opposition-led violence.
There is no doubt that the U.S. could halt this violence right now by recognizing the results of the Venezuelan elections, just as the nations of the world recognized, without question, the results of the election which put John F. Kennedy in power in 1960 and George W. Bush in power in 2000.
The reason the U.S. is not doing so is obvious – it does not like the Venezuelan’s chosen form of government, and welcomes that government’s demise, even through violence. The U.S., therefore, is not supporting democracy and stability in Venezuela; it is intentionally undermining it.
Daniel Kovalik is a labor and human rights lawyer living in Pittsburgh, and teaches International Human Rights at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
source: Counterpunch.org
ALERTA! NEW INFORMATION HAS BEEN POSTED. URGENT CALL TO ACTION!
Once again The Bolivarian Revolution is under attack and Venezuela's democracy is being threatened by the right wing backed by U.S. impirialism! As Constitutional Elected President Nicolas Maduro gets sworn into office, we will stand in solidarity with the people of Venezuela and SAY NO to U.S. intervention and coup attempt in Venezuela.
JOIN THE NATIONAL DAY OF SOLIDARITY WITH
VENEZUELA FRIDAY, APRIL 19
In New York City @ 4-630pm in front of the Venezuelan Consulate
7 East 51st. St. Take the “M” or “E” to 5th Ave, “F” to 47-50 Rockefeller Center
Well, thank you very much, Congressman Meeks. I am very, very hopeful. I am planning a trip shortly to both Columbia and Brazil, and other countries, hopefully, as time permits.
We've had some issues, obviously, with Argentina, (inaudible) over some debt issues and repayment, so forth, which we need to work through. But look, the Western Hemisphere is our backyard. It's critical to us.
Too often, countries in the Western Hemisphere think that the United States doesn't pay enough attention to them. And on occasion, it's probably been true. I think we need to reach out vigorously. We plan to. The president will be traveling to Mexico very shortly. And then south, I think he's going -- I can't remember which other countries. But he's going to the region. I will be going, other high-level visits.
And we intend to do everything possible to try to change the attitude of a number of nations where we've had, obviously, sort of a breach in the relationship over the course of the last few years."
Source: Foreign Relations Committee Hearing on April 17, 2013.
Last sunday, we had presidential elections here in Venezuela. After several incidents that, in any other democratic country, would invalidate the process, it was determined by the CNE (the “impartial” organization that manages elections in Venezuela, which is not impartial at all,...
Opposition protests turned deadly yesterday, with at least seven people having been reported killed and over 61 others injured as opposition groups reportedly burned the homes of PSUV leaders, community hospitals, and mercales (subsidized grocery stores), attacked Cuban doctors, attacked state and community media stations, and threatened CNE president Tibisay Lucena and other officials. Violence is likely to continue today, as both Capriles and Maduro have called for their supporters to demonstrate in the streets. Maduro and other senior government officials have condemned the acts and have warned that the opposition is attempting a coup d'etat. PSUV legislators have suggested they may pursue legal action against Capriles for promoting instability.
The campaign of violent protest, in conjunction with opposition candidate Henrique Capriles' refusal to recognize the election results, represents the first major extra-legal destabilization attempt by Venezuela's opposition since the failed coup in 2002 and oil strike in 2003. It is also significant in that the U.S. is backing Capriles' position, thereby helping to provoke conflict in Venezuela -- even though most Latin American nations and many other governments around the world have congratulated Maduro on his victory and called for the results to be respected.
The opposition strategy is predictably divisive, however. Factions within Venezuela's opposition have long opposed extra-legal and especially violent methods of attempting to force change. Some in the opposition have also hinted that Capriles' cries of "fraud" are not credible. Opposition-aligned CNE rector Vicente Diaz has said that, while he supports a full audit of the votes, he has no doubt in that the results given by the CNE are correct. Diaz made comments to this effect on opposition station Globovision yesterday; the TV hosts then quickly concluded the interview.
Read full article at MRzine
What the right wing in Venezuela needs to get through their thick heads is that the only thing protecting them from the deluge was Chavez himself. They really don't understand that, and if they keep poking, they will learn soon enough.
US government directly interfering in Venezuelan elections
US calls for Venezuela election recount after narrow win for Nicolás Maduro
Hesitation over recognising Hugo Chávez's successor as president is likely to enrage left in Latin America
The US secretary of state, John Kerry, said he had yet to evaluate whether the disputed result in Venezuela was legitimate. Photograph: Carolyn Kaster/AP
The United States is hesitating to recognise Nicolás Maduro as president of Venezuela and has called for a recount of the vote from Sunday's closely fought election.
The procrastination is likely to embolden Venezuela's opposition and enrage many on the left in Latin America, who have long accused the US of interfering in the region's politics.
The US secretary of state, John Kerry, said he had yet to evaluate whether the disputed result was legitimate when asked about the matter by members of the House of Representatives.
"We think there ought to be a recount," he told the foreign affairs committee in reference to Venezuelan opposition demands for a full audit of the vote.
At least seven people have died in the protests that have riven Venezuela following Sunday's narrow presidential poll. The National Electoral Council declared Maduro the winner by 262,000 votes out of 14.9m cast.
Henrique Capriles, the opposition candidate, claims the count may have been rigged and says he considers the outcome illegitimate unless it is checked in full.
Maduro initially agreed to a recount. But the electoral council as declared the result "irreversible".
read full article in The Guardian
Even before the election, Henrique Capriles promised to force Maduro out of office even if Maduro won the elections. Read that again!
On April 5, 2013, in an interview with the Associated Press, Henrique Capriles promised a strategy of tension and coup d'etat should Nicolas Maduro win the elections. Maduro and the Socialst Party won the elections, and now Capriles is following up on his promise.
Read the whole article, but here is the threat:
"He will have to resign, abandon (the presidency) if he's able to win," Capriles said.
It's right there. There was no electoral fraud, though there is an attempt to nullify the result by Capriles, a two-time loser.
Venezuela has transparent elections and besides the majority of Venezuelan citizens who voted for the Socialist Party (PSV), the victory of Maduro has been recognized by the other Latin American governments.
Henrique Capriles also lost a recent election to an ailing Hugo Chavez. Despite back-to-back defeats, he has made clear in this AP interview what his agenda is, who his sponsors are, and that he will find a way to over-ride the democratic mandate of the Chavistas.
CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuela's acting president said on Wednesday that far right figures in the United States were plotting to kill opposition leader Henrique Capriles in an increasingly volatile atmosphere
Beware of war,nd rumors of war. If Capriles is killed, it will only point to US elements seeking to foment civil war in place of elections. Beware provocations and rumors.
amandla
gracieabrams
prguitarman
areudirty
discoholicmusic
jimmyeatworldofficial
blakekathryn
