Venezuela: Dozens Arrested in Short-Lived National Guard Mutiny
The National Guardsmen who rebelled in Caracas early Monday morning have been arrested and are reportedly providing information to authorities.
Armoured vehicles of the Bolivarian National Guard (GNB) and the National Anti-Extortion and Anti-Kidnapping Special Forces (CONAS) outside the San Jose de Cotiza Barracks in Caracas Monday. (Yuri Cortez / AFP)
Merida, January 21, 2019 (venezuelanalysis.com) – A small group of soldiers have been arrested in the San Jose de Cotiza barracks in Caracas after they reportedly stole armaments and attempted to raise a mutiny in the Venezuelan capital.
According to a statement released from the Bolivarian National Armed Forces (FANB), the mutiny began around 2:50am Monday morning, when several dozen soldiers from the 43th Command Post of the Bolivarian National Guard (GNB) in Macarao, west Caracas, overpowered their superior officer, Capitan Gerson Soto Martinez. They then proceeded to hijack two military vehicles which they used to penetrate the Urban Security Barracks in Petare, east Caracas, making away with armaments as well as kidnapping two officers and two guardsman.
The soldiers, which the FANB described as “criminals,” then moved on to the nearby GNB Waraira Repano barracks of San Jose de Cotiza in northern Caracas, where they reportedly encountered resistance from the troops stationed there. After an hour-long standoff with police special forces units, the group finally surrendered in the presence of a military prosecutor around 8.30am and were transported to Fort Tiuna military base by the National Guard. Authorities report that all of the stolen weapons were recovered.
In response to the soldiers’ arrest, several dozen local residents took to the streets, erecting burning street barricades in support of the insurgent soldiers and against the Maduro government as well as torching government symbols. In ensuing confrontations, authorities employed tear gas and rubber bullets to restore order, making several arrests.
The motive for the short-lived rebellion, as well as the intended target for the stolen weapons, remains unclear at the time of writing, with much speculation circulating on social media.
The detained soldiers, who released a series of videos to social media, seem to support the position taken by Venezuela’s National Assembly (AN), which has rejected the new mandate of President Maduro, calling it a “rupture” of the constitutional order.
One of the insurgent soldiers, Sergeant Major Bandres Figueroa, told the public, “Venezuela is united to restore the constitutional order, you wanted this, we do too, so enough!”
The Cotiza incident comes on the eve of the 61st anniversary of the overthrow of the Marcos Perez Jimenez dictatorship on January 23, 1958. President Nicolas Maduro and AN President Juan Guaido have both called for marches this Wednesday, with the latter promising to install a transition government in an escalation of the political confrontation. On January 11, Guaido declared he was prepared to assume the interim presidency of the country should “the people” and “the armed forces” support him..
Following the unrest in Cotiza, the far-right Popular Will party leader took to Twitter claiming “What happened in the GN command in Cotiza is a sample of a generalised sentiment which prevails within the FAN. Our soldiers know that the chain of command has been broken with the usurpation of the presidential post.”
Last week, Guaido promised amnesty to military officials who take up arms against the Maduro government in the event a transition government is installed.
“The National Assembly is committed to offering all necessary guarantees to members of the FAN who actively contribute to the restitution of the Constitution,” he reiterated this Monday.
For its part, Venezuela’s Defence Ministry has promised to prosecute to the fullest extent of the law the the insurgent soldiers, who, it claims, “betrayed their oath of loyalty to the homeland.”
The Ministry goes on to point the finger at the right-wing opposition, claiming, “with all certainty that these acts are motivated by dark interests of the extreme right.”
Similarly, Constituent Assembly President and retired military officer Diosdado Cabello alleged via Twitter that the guardsmen had been offered payment to participate in the plot and were “now confessing details.”
Edited and with additional reporting by Lucas Koerner from Caraca
GUARIMBAS AND CABILDOS ABIERTOS IN THE WEST OF CARACAS: AN INSURRECTIONAL CONNECTION
22 Jan 2019 , 8:56 pm .
One of the main weak points that the opposition has had over these years has been its lack of participation and convocation in popular areas, where social vulnerability is greater than in other Venezuelan territories. That link does not exist because of class orders and little political audacity to create a program that includes the historically excluded, a matter of which Chavismo is a banner since it is part of that same extraction, and therefore its conceptions and uses of the politics are fed by that societal tellurism.
Juan Guaidó, a member of Voluntad Popular, a party-laboratory that now heads the National Assembly (AN), because of its birthplace and skin color represents a crack of which the opposition suffered, characterized by having faces, speeches and very distant from what effectively symbolizes its contender: the chavismo as political and social subject. The current president of the Parliament is the one who must face, given the absences of Leopoldo López and Freddy Guevara, precisely at a time when some pockets of insurrection begin to penetrate populous territories and neighborhoods.
The color revolutions of 2014 and 2017 never managed to activate the population in those areas where it would be most convenient for anti-Chavism, except for selective episodes in which even terrorism techniques were manifested, such as the burning of hospitals with patients inside El Valle, Caracas , and other regions of Venezuela. The outbreaks of violence were generally neutralized almost quickly; in the barricades of Páez Avenue, in El Paraíso, Caracas, it was never stated that "the hills fell", for highlighting an example.
But on the night of Monday, January 21, small burning barricades, shots, pots and pans were recorded in what appeared to be pockets of insurrectionary violence, better known as guarimbas, in different areas that could never be the subject of a political call for the opposition. Although through social networks and the usual means to give them a spontaneous and popular character, they were clearly activated simultaneously, did not last more than a couple of hours in most of the points where they were, and had a coverage with the same argument line to that of the guidelines of the government of the United States and the AN.
The interest of having the map turned on, where generally this type of belligerent actions do not support, is manifested in the little audacity to generate a narrative where it is assumed that the "rejection of the Maduro dictatorship" is widespread. However, the east of Caracas - a fairly descriptive example of the artificiality of the events - remained silent .
The protests were linked to the illegitimacy matrix of President Maduro in his position, and the "usurpation" as the main legal device where there is none. At the same time, infrastructures of public institutions were attacked: the actors of the guarimbas burned the cultural house Robert Serra , a warehouse of PDVAL and the module of the Bolivarian National Police (PNB) in Puerta Caracas, La Pastora.
These manifestations of symbolic violence against Chavism follow the pattern used in the previous and failed revolutions of color, marking from the beginning that one of the concrete objectives of the war against Venezuela is the extermination of everything related to the Bolivarian Revolution.
But, as it has become evident in the multiple attempts of coup d'etat in the last lustrums, the antichavista leadership does not count with the support of the majority of the Venezuelan population, especially the one identified with the chavism, that could emerge as an army of reserve in the case of an armed insurrection in the most popular urban and rural centers. There the importance of activating new spaces that could help to harden the national context in the midst of a series of international moves that the government of Maduro does not know and openly supports the executive board of the AN.
WHAT OPEN COUNCILS ARE AND WHAT THEY ARE FOR
In this context, the figure of open councils comes into play, "means of participation and protagonism of the people in the exercise of their sovereignty, politically," according to Article 70 of the Constitution .
After the frauds and failures that the political leadership of the opposition has obtained as a result of their attempts to overthrow the Venezuelan government, the anti-Chavez mobilization has been less and less frequent until, in the whole of 2018, the political conflict ended up being resolved through the National Constituent Assembly (ANC) and, later, in the May presidential elections, both instances unknown to the actors of regime change.
For this reason, the figure of the open councils has been used as a symbolic-historical resource together with the date January 23.
As so many other times in which they proclaimed a specific day as the "end of the dictatorship" (call La Salida or plebiscite), this time they resort to a form of participation of the white Creoles during the Venezuelan Independence, after Fernando VII was kidnapped by Napoleon Bonaparte, which motivated the white owners to form a government outside the orbit of Spain in 1810. Then, with Francisco de Miranda and Simon Bolivar at the helm, the independence movement took another course, but the historical analogy lends itself to interpretations that interest in the agenda of Voluntad Popular and the rest of the following parties.
At the same time, January 23 is a date especially remembered for puntofijismo as the end of an era (the dictatorship of Marcos Pérez Jiménez, today related in an interested way with the government of Nicolás Maduro) and the beginning of another. It is a symbol to which they have already resorted in past years, but this time in a context of greater international siege, with Washington's hard support for a "transitional government" headed by the AN.
The popular factor certainly gets out of hand, but the open councils that have called the opposition deputies are used as a way to preach support for the insurrection and the coup to part of the traditionally anti-Chávez population and susceptible to join a seditious and violent agenda.
Open chapters are sold, slogan platforms and promotion of opposition politicians, as a direct link between the citizen and the deputies who promise the change of regime at all costs. They are spaces to measure and expand the weakened capacity of drag and diffusion, in clear convocation to the coup d'état. These are activities to accumulate forces with a view to the scenario projected for this January 23 and the following days.
According to the Constitution, they even have a binding nature, as long as, as clarified by the Organic Law of Municipal Public Power , they are convened by the Municipal Council, "the parish councils by agreement of the majority of its members," the "mayor or mayoress "and" the citizens "(article 261), which in fact does not happen. But also said organic law that will be binding on the decisions of open councils if they are "on matters pertaining to its spatial scope and without prejudice to the provisions of the respective legislation" (Article 262), being mere rhetorical devices, bombs smoke, for the mobilization of antichavism.
SWARM AND ARMED CONFLICT
That is the reason why the councils are organized as a swarm, in a decentralized and autonomous way, with a lot of support in social networks for the dissemination of their message and the meeting of activists (traditional media, NGOs, civil associations, influencers , etc.). Due to the fact that an adhesion is sought by the population of its agenda through activation by municipalities, the AN resorted to a resource susceptible to connect with the reserve army that they long for in Venezuelan neighborhoods and camps as agents of the insurrection , as it is observed with the last trials of guarimba.
Not in vain was the town hall in Caricuao on January 19 as a popular exercise and political organization "against the dictatorship," emphasizing the class spectrum that previously failed to convene and extolling the "presidential" figure of Juan Guaidó . In fact, the activities summoned by the Parliament are given, as a journalist from El Estímulo writes , "with the impetus that recalls a bit the spirit of mid-2017", in reference to the insurrectional groups that created chaos and destruction of life and public property in several regions of Venezuela.
How and where the convocation and presence of open councils is channeled is a question that most opposition supporters ask themselves. However, the territorial connection that exists between the facilities of these councils with the guarimberos foci on Monday, January 21st, suggests that violent and commotion events could occur, disguised as media of state repression, as dictated by the manual of previous years and scenarios. The important thing for the opposition is to maintain a street agitation that could be profitable for the propaganda purposes of the "transition government" of the AN, very Libyan in style in 2011.
All actions in Venezuela by antichavism would have their correlation with Venezuelan migrants abroad, where they already have meeting points in the form of councils in support of the "transition government" led by VP at this time. It is in the international arena where all decisions are made, with the White House as the main spokesperson in "support for the people of Venezuela."
The calculation of the leaders of Guaidó is synthesized in confronting the Venezuelan population in the streets (for this the convocation of the councils) and to finish installing a transitional council led by the AN that manages a correlation of actions with the institutional powers of the United States (Washington) to put even more pressure on the Venezuelan State in search of its destruction, while preparing the ground for an armed conflict. It is the scenario planned, which does not mean that it will happen à la lettre , as the security and intelligence agencies have already been able to disclose some details of the plan .
Riot in the Bolivarian National Guard: preparing the intervention?
The recent assault on a Caracas barracks was an attempt to create the atmosphere of internal confrontation in the country, and also to seek military support for a coup incited by the radical sectors of opposition to the government of Nicolás Maduro, which also has the backing of Washington, Bogotá and the so-called Lima Group.
by Victoria Korn
The destabilization and terror on the streets led by the opposition in 2014 and 2017 left more than 200 dead
The Bolivarian National Armed Forces (FANB) published a report on the detention of a group of public agents who identified themselves as members of Zone Command No. 43 of the Bolivarian National Guard (GNB) on Monday (21/1). They were arrested after assaulting a building of the Department of Urban Security, in the locality of Petare (surroundings of Caracas), where they stole armaments.
The assault, at dawn, was an attempt to create the atmosphere of internal confrontation in the country, and also to seek military support for a coup incited by the radical sectors of the opposition to the government of Nicolás Maduro, which also has the backing of Washington , Bogota and the so-called Lima Group. The destabilization and terror on the streets led by the opposition in 2014 and 2017 left more than 200 dead, did not achieve any of its objectives, but at least served to bombard the dialogues that took place with the government.
Curiously (or perhaps logically), the British-American news agency Reuters reported that Sergeant Valdrén Figueroa issued a manifesto in which he says that the National Guard opposes the "regime (of Maduro), which we are completely unaware of", and called for the support of members of the corporation, as well as inciting "the people to go to the streets." During the two hours of the attack, he sent photographs of wreckage near the barracks.
The group that made the fleeting action recorded videos that circulated on social networks and called for the support of the population. In one of them, Sergeant Figueroa sent a message (not known if directed to the opposition), which said: "you wanted us to light a spark, and here we are, with you, in the fight for Venezuela."
The mutiny of Figueroa provoked only a timid response. A group of inhabitants of Cotiza went to the streets to make a panelaço, and burned garbage cans, until the police intervened with tear gas.
The group was captured at the headquarters of the special security unit, and the stolen armament has already been recovered. The FANB expressed its repudiation of this act, "which was certainly motivated by the obscure interests of the extreme right, and which are contrary to the elementary norms of military discipline, to the honor and traditions of our institution," and ratified its unrestricted attachment to the Constitution and to the laws of the Republic.
The official communiqué reports that a small group of robbers "betrayed their oath of allegiance to the motherland and its institutions, subjected Captain Gerson Soto Martinez, commander of the Macarao police coordination post, which they attacked with two military vehicles, and then invading the building of the Department of Urban Security of the locality of Petare, to steal a batch of weapons of war and to kidnap two officers and two national guards of said detachment.
The assailants were surrendered and captured still in the headquarters of the special security unit, where they found firm resistance by the officers and professional troops posted there, according to the FANB statement.
Juan Guaidó, president of the National Assembly (majority opposition and also unaware of the government), acts to overthrow Maduro and take over the presidency. In a recent interview, he stated that "we do not want the Aramadas to divide or face internal struggles, but rather to stand united on the side of the people, the constitution and against usurpation. Our military know that the hierarchy is broken by the usurpation of the presidential post. The National Assembly undertakes to provide all necessary guarantees to the members of the Armed Forces who contribute actively to the restitution of the Constitution. "
Opposition leader Julio Borges said in a message on Twitter that "the same dissatisfaction and desire for change motivated the assault of GNB on Cotiza exists within the entire FANB."
Meanwhile, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court reiterated on Monday (21/1) the "unconstitutionality of the National Legislative Power" and stated that the "National Assembly does not have a valid board of directors, but an illegitimate board , which was elected on January 5, 2019, as well as those unconstitutionally designated during the years 2017 and 2018, usurping the authority of other State entities, which is why all of its acts are absolutely void, in accordance with the provisions in article 138 of the Constitution.
Colombian President Iván Duque said he is waiting for Guaidó to formally declare himself in charge of the Presidency of the Republic to be recognized by the Lima Group, in what is his "plan for the recovery of democracy in Venezuela." Duque explained that to recognize him as legitimate president of Venezuela, Guaidó must comply with the oath formalities.
The assailants' goal was to encourage other military personnel and citizens - who live in the midst of an acute economic and social crisis - to take to the streets, creating the climate to justify foreign intervention, US, Brazilian, and / or Colombian, with the endorsement of these governments and the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States (OAS) and its pro-American appendix, the so-called Lima Group.
Victoria Korn is a Venezuelan journalist, associated with the Latin American Center for Strategic Analysis (CLAE)
* Originally Posted by estrategia.la | Translation by Victor Farinelli - Reproduced Portuguese version of Carta Maior
Nicolás Maduro on the "Socialist Dystopia”
By United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) | January 22, 2019
The article was originally published on the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) website. It has been translated by Fight Back! staff.
They are fighting against a socialism that does not exist. They are fighting against an anti-utopia that does not relate to anyone. They imagine a world without families, without order, without markets, without freedom. The right-wing liberals of the world invented a ghost, they draped on the label of socialism and now they find it everywhere, among all, and every time they look at Venezuela. Enough with this.
Because this socialism against which they struggle is not the one that our inclusive democracy exists in, full of people that live in the 21st century. Our socialism is particular, popular and profoundly Latin American. As we clearly said during the UN General Assembly last September: Ours is an autonomous project of democratic revolution, of social assertion, it is a model and a path of our own, based in our own history and culture.
And clearly, our democracy is distinct because it was neither founded by nor for the elite, as the liberal democracies of Europe and the United States were. We rebelled against this model and that is why, 20 years ago, we proposed our own democracy, founded in the sovereign heart of the Venezuelan people.
What happened is that, at the end of the 20th century - when Latin America exited the period of dictatorship imposed by the United States - they tried, with their idea of liberal democracy, to wrap us in a gift package, some Trojan Horse, with all of the values of their own concept of modernity. But we want to say to them that here in Latin America we also have an identity and values, and we want to involve our own values before all others in our democracy. Not just those values of capital and the individual. But also those of solidarity and community. For us, the homeland is the latter.
We learned our lesson - well, it happened to us for centuries. Over time, by adding to our own culture with that from afar, the Latin American elite and their liberal modes tried to permanently re-found Europe in the heart of América. Destroying step-by-step everything that seemed different. Elites for whom the "other" - the native and the black - were more monkey than human.
We fervently believe in our own Latin American democracy, because in Venezuela we believe in and adhere to three fundamentals as essential and necessary: First, we hold elections systematically, regularly and peacefully. Over the past 20 years we have held 25 elections, each one observed by national and international institutions and political figures. Some we have won overwhelmingly, others we have lost. Second, in Venezuela the citizens - by mechanisms of direct democracy, fundamentally the neighborhood organizations and political parties - have access and control over public resources. And third, in Venezuela the people rule, not the elite. Before me Chávez governed, a soldier descended from blacks and natives who became the father of the homeland. For six years now, Venezuela has been governed by a modest trade unionist and bus driver. In Venezuela it is the people who govern, because it was their Constituent Assembly that conceived and wrote their constitution.
We are not nor do we want to become a model of democracy. We are, instead, a democracy defined and defended by its people, who gather in a daily effort against lies and false claims - an imperfect democracy, working every day for everyone and to be more just.
GUAIDÓ IS PRESIDENT OF VENEZUELA AND TRUMP RECOGNIZES HIM. NOW WHAT?
23 Jan 2019 , 6:05 pm .
It is done: Juan Guaidó proclaimed himself "president in charge of Venezuela" until the holding of elections, at a rally in Juan Pablo II Square, near Chacaíto, Caracas.
It does so in a political context in which the National Assembly (AN), still in contempt, previously decided to call President Nicolás Maduro a "usurper" of the national executive branch, at the same time that the Venezuelan opposition heated the streets through insurrectional and open councils and the Florida lobby convinced the White House to support a "transitional government" led, precisely, by the now maximum representative of Voluntad Popular (VP).
The question that many Venezuelans and Venezuelans are asking themselves at this moment is, then, about what will happen from now on, since the constitutional president is still Nicolás Maduro, since he exercises the functions as head of state and, also, as commander in chief of the Bolivarian National Armed Forces (FANB).
INSTALLATION OF THE "TRANSITION GOVERNMENT"
During the first weeks of January, the AN's board of directors, headed by Guaidó as its president, decided to promote a bill that authorized the creation of a "National Council for the Democratic Transition", whose members would be appointed by the same Parliament.
In that document all the references due to the effective usurpation, in the real terms dictated by the Venezuelan Constitution, of all the state responsibilities in the members of that "National Council for the Democratic Transition" are cited. Every management and interest in the political, economic, military, diplomatic, etc., areas of the country would automatically be competence of what that council decides.
What was missing for Guaidó to self-insult as President of Venezuela were the negotiations on the diplomatic side, with the governments of the Lima Group abiding by any decision emanating from the United States. All this happened simultaneously today, January 23, then minutes after Guaidó promised to take over executive power, because in the eyes of the AN there is a vacuum of power ("Maduro is not president, on May 20, 2018 it was an unconstitutional fraud "), the White House issued a statement of support to the VP as" interim president ".
Automatically, a series of governments (at the close of this note, 14) and the Secretary General of the Organization of American States (OAS) repeated the same gesture of Donald Trump, strongly influenced by the recommendations of Senator Marco Rubio.
The Spectator Index
@spectatorindex
Recognising Juan Guaido as president of Venezuela:
- US
- Canada
- Brazil
- Paraguay
- Colombia
- Argentina
- Peru
- Ecuador
- Costa Rica
- Chile
- Guatemala
- Panama
- Honduras
- Kosovo
- Georgia
2.669
18:59 - 23 ene. 2019
Información y privacidad de Twitter Ads
1.576 personas están hablando de esto
These would be the first steps to finish combining a "transitional government", because it is based on a fictitious floor but sufficiently propagated and supported by international factors that disguises the illegal acts before the Venezuelan State of Law as exercises of constitutional legitimacy. It is an exercise that they have been practicing since the AN, bastion with which they promoted the financial blockade on national soil (Julio Borges administration) and set the bases for a possible oil embargo with the de facto power of the United States.
FINANCING OF "THE TRANSITION" AND CALLS TO THE FANB
Guaidó told Bloomberg , after the session of January 22 in the Hemicycle: "Under the rule of law, we will have clear elements to obtain new financing to boost the economy, stabilize the country and serve the oil industry," and adhered "With a new government, the debt will not only be paid, but we could refinance with the confidence of a government that can pay."
He also said that he "extends his hand to the military." This is in the strategic framework of seeking support within the FANB for the coup plan that would definitively depose the Maduro government from the executive branch. For weeks, both US officials and opposition politicians have encouraged the Venezuelan military high command to back the now "interim president" Juan Guaidó instead of the current constitutional president.
To this end, the AN created a legal instrument as an amnesty offering (not binding for "anyone who has worked for the dictatorship and now comes to our side", in reference to those members of the FANB who wish to join the military wing of the National Council for the Democratic Transition ").
On the economic side, Bloomberg emphasizes that "Venezuela has not only lost access to international capital markets (via White House sanctions), but creditors are getting closer." Investors in debt have begun to group together to demand more than 9 billion dollars in past-due bonus payments. "
In fact, a group of bondholders came together as a block to refuse to negotiate with the government of Nicolás Maduro and to recognize the AN as "the only organ legitimately elected in the oil country," Reuters reported .
In another note, Bloomberg explains that "the Trump Administration is also prepared to sanction Venezuelan oil exports, according to people familiar with the issue, but it has not been decided when to take that step", issue that is expected for this week as some agencies have reported after Guaidó's self-regulation.
White House officials have already warned some US refiners earlier this month that the Trump Administration was considering expanding sanctions on the oil embargo, and recommended they seek alternatives to Venezuelan heavy oil sources.
The New York media highlights that the oil companies asked Washington not to take the action, arguing that it could harm the Gulf and East Coast refineries designed to handle the heavy crude oil of the United States and, by the way, make the Gas prices rise vertiginously.
However, energy, economic and legal analysts have placed at the center the warning of a possible seizure of the assets of CITGO , a US subsidiary of PDVSA, greed for debt creditors (vulture funds) and that it would serve as a turning point in the coordination of financing for the opposition grouped in the so-called "transition council". In Creole: they would use the Venezuelan money to finance a war between the Venezuelans themselves that would destroy their own State. That is the intention, although, as we already know, desires do not embark.
The countries of the Lima Group, likewise, would be willing to accompany the sanctions imposed by the White House against Venezuela, as has been the case politically and diplomatically.
POSSIBLE STEPS FROM THE NA ONWARDS
On January 22, the Parliament approved the appointment of Marcos Tarre Briceño as ambassador of Venezuela to the OAS, this being the first act of government of "the transition", in conformity with the figure of "parallel government" of which it is vested with Facto the AN. It should be remembered that Maduro ordered the departure of the country from that multilateral organization in 2017 because it was the pivot of actions that were harmful to the national institutions.
It is precisely abroad that the most important scenarios are played in the "transitional government" plan. That is why Venezuelan members of Harvard University insist, in an article for The New York Times (NYT) in Spanish , that "the National Assembly, as the only authority with legitimacy of origin in Venezuela, could act as representative of the Venezuelan State abroad, in order to exercise the defense and protection of their rights. "
And they add: "This new situation opens the possibility for the Venezuelan opposition to take the lead in an operation aimed at protecting the assets of the Venezuelan State abroad", in reference to the support by the bondholders, the demands they have made energy companies against PDVSA and the Venezuelan State before international tribunals of arbitration and the oil embargo that is posed in the corridors of the White House.
They continue: "Within the scope of the countries that recognize the AN as the sole legitimate authority, the actions of the assembly could go further: they could range from the taking of refineries and other assets owned by the Venezuelan State, through the appropriation of the liquid assets and oil sales events circulating in those countries, up to legal representation in proceedings against the Venezuelan State. "
"In this context, the National Assembly can request countries that recognize it as a legitimate authority to protect Venezuelan assets that are in their territories, which could benefit all creditors, since the values of recovery of their debts in the event of a collective attack may be less than what they would achieve in a more orderly restructuring process carried out as a consequence of a nationally and internationally recognized political transition.
"Regardless of the success of these actions, the image of the opposition acting as a government in charge of an operation to defend the assets of Venezuela would be very powerful, and the window to specify this possibility is relatively limited, not only because its period ends in 2021, but because the intense political fray threatens to wear it down and disintegrate it. "
Through these actions, the AN could generate income from financing its coup plans, along with the heating of Venezuelan streets and the attempt to form an army (mercenary, with military components out of exercise abroad) capable of doing in front of the FANB, this last scenario is unlikely given the conditions: the security and intelligence apparatus of the State has been working to neutralize any insurrectional action, such as what happened on January 21 at the headquarters of GNB in Cotiza, Caracas.
Also, the "National Council of Democratic Transition" can appeal to the private sectors of banking and industry in search of both organic-technical and infrastructural, as well as financial support.
THE LIBYAN (AND SYRIAN) CASE AND THE GEOPOLITICAL FACTOR
It is no coincidence that the authors of the NYT have referred to what happened in Libya and Syria at the dawn of the transnational war against their governments, their State and their population. Previously, Misión Verdad repeatedly insisted that the Libyan format was being transferred to the Caribbean basin.
The similarities in terms of the installation of the Libyan National Transitional Council (CNT) and the Venezuelan case are more than evident, since it is the same format updated to the political, economic, social and historical circumstances, which seeks the extermination of both of chavism as of the state institutions that have made politics possible as the main mediating element in Venezuela.
Recall: between March and September 2011, the Libyan CNT sought and achieved the recognition of several countries (Arab League, European countries, the United States, finally the UN) as the legitimate government of Libya over that of Muammar al-Qaddafi. The organism was extended with the representatives of the cities that were taking the armed groups (mercenary militias, the media calls "rebels") in conjunction with NATO.
By October of that year, that instance called for presidential and parliamentary elections for the following year, eight months later.
In September 2011, the CNT together with the armed forces took control of the Libyan territory and negotiated with the oil companies for the development of energy production, stopped by the war against Gaddafi.
Recognized by the British government as the "only government authority", the CNT represented the Libyan State before the courts of the United Kingdom to claim ownership of liquid assets deposited in the British Arab Commercial Bank as a financing measure, about 1 billion euros that then disappeared without the slightest trace.
The Libyan transition government installed committees in the areas of Economy, Politics and Legal Affairs of security and defense, taking control and reforming the Libyan state after the coup and assassination of Gaddafi.
It must be taken into account that the leaders of the CNT were once part of high positions in the government of Gaddafi, both in the public and military powers, just as in Venezuela Guaidó intends to do it. He also settled for figures resident abroad, especially in Europe and the United States.
Omar Hariri was an officer of the Libyan army and then imprisoned by the Gaddafi administration, however he led the military affairs of the CNT. In the same way, Ali Tarhuni returned to Libya from the United States to take the economic, financial and oil issues of the CNT.
However, the most outstanding thing is that the CNT was strongly supported by NATO since it was installed. The Atlantic alliance supported the "Libyan rebels" through the imposed leadership of the mercenaries from Al-Qaeda, as it was later known.
After the elections in 2012 (August), the CNT was dissolved to transfer the power to the General Congress of the Nation. During those dates, what happened in Libya was traced in Syria through the National Coalition for Revolutionary and Opposition Forces. The results, however, were different: Libya today is a broker dealing with white women, slaves and drug trafficking, managed by armed mercenary and religious fundamentalist groups; Syria, after almost eight years of war, has managed to emerge victorious after the Russian Federation, at the request of the government of Bashar al-Assad in 2015, intervened politically and militarily on the battlefield.
It is precisely the geopolitical factor that differentiates the context between what happened in the Middle East and what happens in the present continuous in Venezuela. China and Russia are the two main powers that support the government of Nicolás Maduro, after learning based on the Libyan experience and in defense of their own interests in the Caribbean basin.
China has economic-commercial capacity to put pressure on the United States to achieve some kind of negotiation, in a context of tension between both powers under the tariff policies of Trump and Xi Jinping. The Russians, on the other hand, are the generators of a military capacity superior to the North, and support the FANB in terms of arms in defense of Venezuelan sovereignty.
At the close of this note, President Nicolás Maduro announced the breakdown of diplomatic relations with the US government, and demanded the withdrawal of his diplomatic personnel immediately. The White House responded in the same way.
What shows clearly that the expansion of the battlefield no longer has border limits, is played in international terrain, although what is at stake is national stability and everything that comprises it: be its territory, its fundamental infrastructures, its political culture and its population.
China opposed to interference in Venezuela and supports its sovereignty
Beijing, Jan 24 (Prensa Latina) China today expressed opposition to foreign interference in Venezuela's affairs, ratified the support for the government of President Nicolás Maduro and its efforts to safeguard the sovereignty, independence and national stability of the country.
Hua Chunying, spokesman of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told a press conference that Beijing is aware of the massive rejection of possible military intervention in the South American country and advocates that the situation there be resolved peacefully, through negotiations and in accordance with the Constitution.
"China hopes that all parties in Venezuela will resolve their political differences through dialogue and consultation, avoid violent conflicts and restore normal order according to the fundamental interests of the country and the people ," he said.
At the same time, Hua rejected external interference in Venezuelan affairs and wished the international community to create favorable conditions to avoid that practice.
He considered that the United States and Venezuela are important countries in the Western Hemisphere and their relations should be governed on the basis of equal treatment and mutual respect.
The spokeswoman for the Foreign Ministry added that sanctions and interference in internal matters are mechanisms that only "tend to complicate the situation and do not contribute to the resolution of practical problems."
With his statements, China joins other governments that support Venezuela after the attempted coup promoted by the United States, recognizing the unconstitutional self-proclamation of Juan Guaidó as interim president.
Maduro announced the rupture of diplomatic relations with the North American country as a result of that fact.
The dignitary began his second term on January 10 after being re-elected last May with 67 percent of the valid votes cast in the presidential elections.
These elections were endorsed by international organizations for their development in accordance with the laws and respect for the guarantees of all parties, candidates and voters.
China might not be ready to confront the US 'in it's own backyard' but we don't get to make history the way we like. not even China. Time to step up, I think.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."
US-Led Efforts to Overthrow Maduro Spurred by Business Interests, Not Democracy
January 24, 2019
By Stephen Gowans
The US-led and coordinated intervention to overthrow Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro by recognizing Juan Guaidó, the leader of Venezuela’s National Assembly as the interim president, has nothing whatever to do with restoring democracy in Venezuela (which was never overturned) and everything to do with promoting US business interests.
Washington’s imperial arrogance in effectively appointing Guaidó as president, attempting to go over the heads of Venezuelans—who alone have the right to decide who their leaders are—is motivated by the same concerns that have motivated other US interventions around the world: toppling governments that put their citizens’ interests above those of US investors.
That Washington has a propensity to engage in destabilization operations against leftwing governments is hardly a secret. From 1898 to 2004, the US government undertook 41 successful regime change interventions in Latin America, an average of one every two-and-a-half years. And that excludes the unsuccessful ones, such as the Bay of Pigs invasion.
In almost every instance, US regime change interventions around the world have been motivated either directly or indirectly by commercial considerations, and were undertaken to restore or protect the primacy of US business interests in foreign lands. And in many cases, the interventions paved the way for the installation of rightwing dictatorships.
One ultimately unsuccessful US intervention was the 2002 coup d’état against Hugo Chavez, Maduro’s predecessor. Washington immediately recognized the coup, hailing it as a victory for democracy, but privately recognized it as a major win for US business interests in an oil-rich state teeming with potential profit-making opportunities for US free enterprise.
Washington disliked Chavez because the charismatic leftist leader promoted the welfare of ordinary Venezuelans, rather than pandering to US investors. But the coup against Chavez was short-lived. In a blow against tyranny, the regime change was quickly reversed and Chavez, the country’s legitimate leader, was restored to the presidency.
Determined to eliminate leftist governments in Latin America, Washington stepped up its campaign of economic warfare against the South American country, aiming to plunge its economy into ruin and the Venezuelan people into misery. This was a game plan Washington had followed countless times before and since, in China, Cuba, North Korea, Chile, Zimbabwe, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Syria, and Iran: ruin the target country’s economy, attribute the chaos to “the failures of socialism” and economic mismanagement, and wait for the people to rise in revolt against their misery.
The idea that Washington’s intervention in Venezuela has even the slightest connection to protecting democracy is laughable. The US government has notoriously supported a string of rightwing dictatorships throughout Latin America, including that of Augusto Pinochet, who was installed in the wake of a 1973 US-engineered coup against Salvador Allende. Allende crossed Washington by doing what Maduro, and a host of other Third World leaders, had done: put the interests of the local population ahead of those of corporate America.
In the Middle East, the United States’s closest Arab allies are a military dictatorship (Egypt) and absolutist monarchies, chief among them Saudi Arabia, whose abhorrence of democracy is absolute. Washington rewards Egypt with $1.3 billion in military aid annually, and robustly supports the Saudi tyranny.
Saudis regard their parasitical royal family as completely unacceptable. To protect itself from its own population, the monarchy maintains a 250,000 troop-strong National Guard. The Guard exists, not to defend Saudi Arabia from external aggression, but to protect the monarchy from its own subjects. The al-Saud family’s protectors are trained and equipped by the United States and its satellites, including Canada, which has a $10-billion contract to supply the force with armored personnel carriers, used to put down the frequent uprisings of disgruntled Saudi subjects.
The National Guard’s armorer, Canada, also recognized Guaidó as Venezuela’s interim president, dishonestly attributing its decision to follow the US-lead to its purported commitment to democracy. Ottawa has colluded with the dictators of Riyadh in their crackdown on long-suffering, democracy-deprived, Saudi citizens, at the same time supporting General Dynamics Canada’s efforts to rake in Pharaonic profits from arms sales to the democracy-hating Saudi despots.
Let’s be honest about a few things.
First, the agendas of US and Canadian political leaders are set by the economic elites and organized business interests on which they depend for campaign contributions, policy recommendations, and lucrative post political career job opportunities, and with which they’re tightly integrated personally and professionally. Accordingly, they care about the profits of US and Canadian investors, not about the welfare, freedoms or democracy of ordinary Venezuelans. Indeed, they secretly harbor contempt for the bulk of their own citizens and wouldn’t, for a moment, tolerate the flowering of an authentic, robust, democracy in their own countries. The idea that they care about the residents of a distant South American land is a fantasy for political innocents and the weakly naïve.
Second, US-led campaigns of economic warfare do make people’s lives miserable, and many people may attribute their misery to the actions of their own government and wish to see it step down. Others may recognize that sanctions are the cause of their misery, and may support regime change as a way of winning relief from foreign-imposed misery. Indeed, the logic of economic warfare depends on these assumptions being true.
Third, governments threatened by foreign-sponsored regime change face legitimate national emergencies. Maduro is not a dictator. He is the elected head of a government confronting a genuine national emergency engineered by hostile foreign powers. Measures taken by the government to defend its citizens against the determination of the United States to impose on Venezuela policies which cater to the interests of corporate America at Venezuelans’ expense are wholly legitimate; they represent the actions of a democracy against a US-led international tyranny.
It is important to remember that Maduro’s government, like Chavez’s, has sought to put the interests of ordinary Venezuelans ahead of those of US investors. As a result, it has provoked Washington’s enmity. The US intervention in Venezuela in recognizing Guaidó as interim president is emblematic of countless other US regime change interventions. Invariably, these interventions are targeted at leftwing governments that threaten the profit making interests of US businesses. The interventions have nothing whatever to do with democracy; on the contrary, where successful, they are almost always followed by rightwing regimes that build US investor-friendly business climates and integrate their countries economically, militarily, and diplomatically into the US-superintended and Wall Street-led global order. Foreign investors are indulged, and the local population is treated harshly. Far from spurring transitions to democracy, US regime change interventions aim to reverse democracy, and strengthen US global tyranny. The latest US-led intervention in Venezuela is no different, and is just a repeat, with local variations, on similar efforts in Syria, Iran, Cuba and North Korea.
Maduro much better elected and more legitimate than Trump ... and Macron
Nicolas Maduro is one of the most elected presidents of Latin America. A legitimate president chosen in a democratic, transparent and internationally monitored election. A president recognized by the international community and especially by all countries independent of the yoke of US imperialism. Democratic Bolivarian Venezuela certainly is. Much more than Colombia where fascist paramilitaries rule. Much more than Brazil, where the extreme right has seized power after a parliamentary coup. In Venezuelasince the election of Chavez, more than 19 elections have been held. Almost all won by the Bolivarian block. Knowing that they are in the minority, the far-right opposition has therefore only tried to try coup d'etats, and to refuse to submit to the votes of the people of Venezuela.
Maduro much better elected and more legitimate than Trump and Macron
The numbers are clear: Maduro is a much better elected president than Trump, and even better than Macron. The little banker who seized the chair of the Elysee in favor of an odious and timely blackmail to the Pen is indeed ultra-minority. His twitter illegitimacy lawsuits and his lessons in democracy make the world laugh that the reality of the Macron regime is to shoot peaceful and unarmed protesters. Causing hundreds of serious injuries, 1 death. And launching thousands of political arrests.
Maduro supported by the international community
Cuba, Russia, China, Mexico, Bolivia, Uruguay, Nicaragua, Iran, Turkey, support Venezuela are many.
Russia by the voice of its president responded firmly to the American aggression:
"The President of Russia has expressed his support for the legitimate authorities of Venezuela in the context of an exacerbated internal political crisis from outside"
China condemned the foreign interference in Venezuela, noting that it only recognized the democratically elected president as legitimate, Nicolas Maduro.
It is only the vassal states of the United States, its far-right regimes in Latin America, its extension in the European Union to support violence and coup d'etat.
The World Peace Council (WPC), an international platform of organizations from 192 countries around the world, on Wednesday condemned "the offensive against the legitimately elected government of President Nicolás Maduro" in Venezuela .
Dictatorships and coups d'etats: a capitalist specialty, the mode of action of American imperialism
The inauguration of Nicolas Maduro, this January 10, is already causing political and media unrest. Elected on May 20, 2018, the Venezuelan president faces a concerted and planned operation of the United States and its allies. Taking as an initial pretext the electoral conditions that led to the victory of Maduro, a handful of governments, repainted for the occasion in "international community" through the transnationals of communication, decided to increase by one notch the pressure on Bolivarian Venezuela.
As has become customary in the case of Venezuela, most mainstream media wallow in false information and forget the very meaning of journalistic ethics.
It is appropriate for the reader scrupulous and eager to unravel the truth of the false, to expose the facts, to return to the conditions of the election of Maduro, and to analyze the strategy of Washington to punish a people judged, since now 20 years old, too rebellious and cumbersome.
False pretexts for a new political offensive
In this new scenario of destabilization of Venezuela, the main justifications invoked by the governments opposed to Caracas all revolve around the conditions of the election of Nicolas Maduro last May.
In order to understand these fallacious pretexts, we have to go back a bit.
In May 2016, a few months after the victory of the opposition in the legislative elections, a process of dialogue between Chavismo and its opponents began in the Dominican Republic. A series of 150 meetings, led by former Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, former President of the Dominican Republic Leonel Fernandez and former President of Panama Martin Torrijos, led to the January 2018, the drafting of an agreement on the convening of an early presidential election and on its electoral guarantees.
But as Jorge Rodriguez, head of the dialogue commission for the government pointed out: "Everything was ready [for the signature of the agreement] to the desk where we had to make our official statements. And then, in the afternoon, Julio Borges, the former right-wing president of the National Assembly, received a phone call from Colombia's former US Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson [...] The opposition then told us it would not sign the agreement. Back in Caracas, José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero sent a letter to the opposition asking what his alternative was for refusing to participate in an election with the guarantees on which she herself had worked. " 1 .
The Venezuelan opposition is divided on the strategy to adopt. While its most radical fringe decides not to participate, the part of the opposition that has not given up on reclaiming power through the democratic path will present a candidate, Henri Falcon. Two other contenders will participate in this election 2
Let us note here that Bertucci's score is explained more by the novelty of this electoral offer in a climate of mistrust towards political parties than by a breakthrough of political evangelicalism in Venezuela. Indeed, the vote of the evangelists is itself divided. The Evangelist Party Organisación Renovadora Auténtica (ORA) supported Nicolas Maduro. . It is therefore simply wrong to claim that the opposition boycotted the vote or that Nicolas Maduro presented himself alone. 3 This is a story-telling with undemocratic political intentions.
A transparent and democratic electoral system
One of Washington's and its Latin American or European satellites is to say that elections in Venezuela do not align with international standards. This is obviously false, but necessary in this politico-media process aimed at not recognizing the legality of the election of May 20, 2018, and the legitimacy of the result. To grasp the hypocrisy of these governments on the war footing, let us dwell for a moment on the electoral conditions offered to the Venezuelan people since the approval by referendum of the Bolivarian Constitution, on December 15, 1999. Our readers can easily make themselves idea of electoral transparency in Venezuela by comparing these electoral mechanisms with those at work in one's own country.
In Venezuela, to avoid fraud, elections are not organized by the executive through the Ministry of the Interior. The 1999 Constitution, which recognizes the existence of five independent powers - the executive, the legislature, the judiciary, the moral and the electoral power - leaves to the latter the task of organizing electoral processes, according to the law. organic electoral processes.
This legal framework, adopted in 2009, has not been modified since 4 . In particular, it allowed the election of multiple opposition representatives to public authorities. None of them has ever cast doubt on the success of the vote that won it, and the opposition itself has never questioned the legal framework of the electoral process. What it could have done by means of a citizens' initiative referendum, planned to repeal laws by Article 74 of the Constitution. She has always been content to denounce the results of the elections when she lost, or preventively when she knew she was going to lose.
Regarding the citizens' vote 5 , Venezuela uses a dual electronic and manual system. When one enters the polling station, one identifies oneself with the assessors with his identity card and activates the voting machine by means of a biometric recognition. It is therefore impossible to vote twice. After choosing the candidate of his choice, the voting machine issues a ticket with the name of the candidate, which the voter places in an envelope and deposits in an urn. Finally, after signing the electoral register, he dipped his little finger in indelible ink to ensure a second time that he will not repeat his vote.
In the days leading up to the election, the National Electoral Center (CNE), the rector of the electoral power, calls all the political parties participating in the election to a series of 14 prior audits. Voter lists, the software used to collect election data, voting machines and their method of assembly, the biometric system for voter recognition, indelible ink, electoral data transmission network and the data aggregation system. 6
Observers from each political party participate in these various audits preceding the citizens' vote. Each step must be approved in advance by all participants to ensure the greatest transparency of the election. And indeed, they have always been accepted until now. Add to this that all political parties have the right to apply their supporters as assessors, as well as to involve national and international observers of their choice in the monitoring of polling stations.
On the evening of the results, the CNE will conduct a new audit where 54.4% (at least according to the law) of the polling stations will be drawn by lot before the leaders of the various parties or the electronic result will be checked. It will then be a question of comparing the results obtained in the urn after stripping with the electronic result. Never has an error been detected during the multiple electoral processes.
These guarantees to guarantee the result have led former US President Jimmy Carter to define the Venezuelan electoral system as "the best in the world" . 7
It was the same procedures that ensured the transparency of all elections in Venezuela, whether for example, for the parliamentary elections of December 5, 2015 (won by the opposition) or for the presidential election of May 20, 2018 (won by Chavismo).
As can be seen, Venezuela brings more electoral guarantees than in many Western countries, not to mention the Lima group countries. The transparency of the election of Nicolas Maduro has moreover been validated by more than 2000 international observers from the Caribbean Community (Caricom), the African Union and the Council of Latin American Electoral Experts (Ceela).
Given this system, we also understand why part of the opposition refused to run for an election that it would have lost. To agree to participate in the elections is to join in the audits and to validate the transparency of the Venezuelan electoral system. This refusal to take part in the democratic process paved the way for the destabilizing attempt we see today.
On the evening of the presidential election
Beyond the electoral guarantees, the countries that question the legitimacy of the Venezuelan president try to criticize the results of the presidential election. Once again, it is only a pretext for legitimizing the destabilization of Venezuela. Let's linger for a moment on these results.
The presidential election in Venezuela is an election by direct universal suffrage. The president is elected not according to parliamentary agreements or by the choice of "big voters" but directly by the people.
On May 20, 2018, 9,389,056 voters turned out at the polls, or 46.07% of the citizens registered on the electoral lists. The high abstention rate is still used today by opponents of the Bolivarian Revolution to disqualify the victory of Nicolas Maduro. Of course, none of these critics will mention the dozens of financial penalties and retaliations to the country's economy since 2014. 8 A persecution that strongly discouraged many Venezuelans, and increased their mistrust of an electoral solution to end the crisis . In addition, the call for the boycott of the ballot boxes by several opposition parties also had a consequence on voter turnout.
Despite this, 30.45% of registered voters voted for Nicolas Maduro in the first round. This is higher than that of Chilean President Sebastián Piñera (26.5%), Argentinian President Mauricio Macri (26.8%) and President Donald Trump (27.20%). Not to mention the scores made in the first round by the Colombian president (21%) or by the president Emmanuel Macron (18,19%). Obviously, no one disputes the legitimacy of their elections despite the small proportion of voters who chose them.
Coordinated and planned strategy from Washington
Upon the election of Nicolas Maduro, the United States will strengthen the coalition against Venezuela in the region. On June 27, 2018, US Vice President Mike Pence announced the color from Brazil: "Freedom and democracy will be restored in Venezuela. The United States calls on Brazil to take a firm stance against Nicolas Maduro's regime. " 9 Echoing this, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will state on September 21, 2018, that the United States" will continue to 'increase the level of pressure' against the Bolivarian country. This same Pompeo will make several meetings with the leaders of the Brazilian, Peruvian and Colombian governments to prepare the operation of January 10th.
But it is the meeting of the Lima Group, held on January 4, 2019, that will really define the scenario. During this cenacle, the member governments of this international anti-Bolivarian 10 , agreed on a series of actions against Caracas. Note that the Mexican government, now headed by Progressive President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, did not subscribe to this document and reaffirmed his country's desire not to interfere in the internal affairs of another nation, cutting edge with the warmongering positions of the previous government and the Lima group.
The document approved in Lima is a true declaration of war . 11 In the presence of the United States Secretary of State (via videoconference), governments opposed to the Bolivarian Revolution agreed to increase diplomatic pressure against Venezuela, and persevere in their intention to open an investigation at the Criminal Court International against the Venezuelan State. A sustained demand, moreover, by France . 12
The members of the Lima group condemn the economic crisis in Venezuela, but adopt a resolution to strengthen the financial blockade against that country. The adopted text provides for the establishment of lists of legal personalities with which these countries "will not have to work, will have to prevent access to their financial system, and if necessary freeze their assets and economic resources". Likewise, the resolution obliges the member countries of the Lima group to put pressure on the international financial institutions to which they belong to prevent the granting of new credits to the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.
More surprising still, this joint statement requires that the government "of Nicolas Maduro and the Armed Forces of Venezuela renounce all types of actions that would violate the sovereignty of its neighbors". This accusation is based on a recent reaction of Venezuela to an oil exploration authorized by Guyana in a territorial area claimed by the two neighboring nations. 13 This is again a pretext that echoes the facts denounced by the President of Venezuela on December 12, 2018.
In a televised speech, Nicolas Maduro spoke of the presence of 734 mercenaries on the military bases of Eglin in Florida and Tolemaida in Colombia. According to him, their supposed goal would have been to attack Venezuela or to prepare an attack in order to justify a military intervention against the Bolivarian nation. Maduro also said that US National Security Advisor John Bolton has prompted the new Brazilian Vice President Hamilton Mourao to organize military provocations on the Venezuelan border. 14 The Lima Group's statement therefore seems to reinforce the suspicions of aggression issued by the Venezuelan state.
After recalling that the election of Nicolas Maduro was illegitimate, the Lima group urges the Venezuelan president not to assume the presidency and to "transfer the executive power, temporarily, to the National Assembly". It does not matter that Nicolas Maduro was elected thanks to the same electoral system that allowed the election of the legislative power. The goal sought by Washington and its allies is not democratic, it is political: to put the opposition at the head of the oil country.
This institutional coup attempt, already implemented in other countries of the region 15 , is part of a strategy to substitute legitimate political powers. As early as July 2017, in all illegality, the opposition created a Supreme Court of Justice "in exile" based in Panama, as well as a post of Attorney General of the Nation "in exile" from Bogota. These puppet authorities have since tried to replace the legitimate Venezuelan powers.
In connection with a National Assembly, itself declared in contempt of court in March 2017, 16 these parodies of public authorities will carry out a mock trial from the seat of the Colombian Parliament (sic), and condemn the Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro to a penalty of 18 years and 3 months in prison . 17
To illustrate this absurd situation, let's imagine for a moment that a group of French Yellow Vests designates a Minister of Justice and a Court of Cassation "in exile" and that they organize a sham trial to convict Emmanuel Macron to 18 years in prison since the Russian Duma. That would make you smile, but what would happen if several states around the world recognized as legitimate these judicial powers "in exile"? It is a safe bet that we would hear a large number of voices cry out, rightly, the foreign interference or even the coup attempt. The example we just mentioned may seem ridiculous, but that is what is happening in Venezuela.
Do not take these maneuvers lightly. The failed attack by means of a C4 explosive-laden drone, which took place on 4 August 2018, was not only aimed at eliminating Nicolas Maduro but all the public authorities of the nation, with the aim of substituting their counterparts puppets and illegal. 18 The constitution of parallel powers is not a political and media circus but an integral part of an institutional coup d'state in preparation.
Similarly, declaring Nicolas Maduro illegitimate is a virulent message for the main economic partners of Caracas (China, Russia or Turkey) notifying them that agreements signed with the Bolivarian government will not be recognized when Nicolas Maduro was overthrown . A conflict with the Caribbean country could have repercussions far beyond its borders. Sergey Riabkov, the Russian vice-minister of foreign affairs, has in this sense called "the enthusiasts of Washington not to fall into the temptation of military intervention" in Venezuela. 19
On the other hand, it is also a message to the National Armed Forces, because if President Maduro is illegitimate, it amounts to decapitating the military power of his commander-in-chief.
It is in this light that the scenario developed by the United States and its allies must be deciphered. In accordance with the resolution of the Lima Group, the National Assembly of Venezuela, in contempt of court and whose decisions are null and void, 20 declared that the taking of office of Nicolas Maduro was a "usurpation of power". As a result, she is illegally preparing to assume executive power during a "transition period". On January 8, a law on the transition was discussed in the Venezuelan hemicycle in order to seize the executive power from January 10.
During the talks, Americo de Grazia called on all sectors to align with the parallel authorities created by the opposition and called on the streets to "harmonize international, national and institutional actions". 21
As for the new speaker of the legislative body, Juan Guaidó, he called on the Venezuelan military to overthrow the government from 10 January . 22 )
The stage is set. The impending showdown. It remains to be seen what political and media personalities will justify the violation of Venezuelan sovereignty and the non-respect of its institutions.
Source: Romainmigus.info , January 9, 2019
Article originally published on the RT France website. The opinions, assertions and points of view expressed in this section are the author's and can not be attributed to RT or Les-Crises.fr.
Maurice Lemoine's analysis:
Strong mobilization of people and governments around the world for the inauguration of President Nicolas Maduro (Brasil de Fato)
"I declare you president by the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, by the will of the people, for the period 2019-2025": this is how the judge Maikel Moreno, president of the Supreme Court of Venezuelan Justice (TSJ) to Nicolas Maduro. He was officially sworn in on Thursday, January 10, 2019. According to section 231 of the Constitution, in the event of legal disobedience of the Legislative Assembly - which has refused to recognize the verdict of Justice on electoral fraud - It is before the Supreme Court that the elected president must take an oath.
"I swear in the name of the people of Venezuela, I swear by the heritage of our ancestors as the indigenous leader Guaicaipuro, I swear by our hero Negro Primero and our peoples of African descent, I swear by the liberator Simón Bolívar and the liberating armies of our America, I swear by the legacy of our commander Hugo Chavez, I swear to the sons of Venezuela, that I will not rest my arm nor my soul to fulfill all the mandates of the Constitution of Venezuela "continued Nicolas Maduro, elected in May 2018 with nearly 68% of the vote , after 26 days of official campaign that allowed the four candidates to expose their conflicting projects in the private and public media. The National Electoral Centerhad installed 14,638 polling stations throughout the country. There were nearly 2,000 international observers from CARICOM, the African Union and CEELA, the respected and pluralist Council of Latin American Electoral Experts who fully validated the elections, as did the former Spanish President Rodriguez Zapatero for whom " if the Bolivarian government had wanted to defraud, he would not have invited the whole world to observe the elections ". 17 audits of the electoral system had been organized and the opposition had signed the report concluding the transparency of this voting system that Jimmy Carter described as "the best of the world " ... (1)
Outside the courthouse, a large crowd was waiting for the president. At the time of the oath, many raised their hands as a sign of loyalty. "It looks like they feel a little presidents," says a foreign journalist. Indeed. The population came in droves. Baralt Avenue, one of the most important in the center of Caracas, was packed. The atmosphere was solemn and calm. Dressed in red, as is the tradition of Chavis, Venezuelans arrived early from various parts of the country.
Photo: Fania Rodrigues
Beatriz Pinto, an adult literacy instructor, left her state, Anzoátegui, the day before at 11 pm and traveled all night to arrive at 4 am in Caracas. "We came to give our moral support to our president. We will not allow any satellite of the Empire to overthrow it, it has been elected by us and we want it to the presidency ".
Math teacher Elieser Mendonza has landed from the state of Monagas, 4 hours from Caracas, to defend what he believes is the best option for his country. " We came here to accompany the president when he took office because we are involved in this political process. We promised Commander Chavez to defend the revolution with our lives if necessary, well we are here to accompany Nicolas Maduro ".
Photo: Fania Rodrigues
Difficult not to notice the worker Wilmer José Valero, dressed in Che Guevara, and bearing on his back a picture of the face of the liberator Simón Bolívar: " These symbols are important for Venezuela and for the world, less for the Empire which wants to humiliate the Venezuelan people but we will not allow it "explains this inhabitant of Caracas.
Photos: AVN
International guests
The Venezuelan government has received delegations from over a hundred governments from India to Palestine and Mexico, from international organizations (OPEC, UN, OAU, CELAC, ALBA, CARICOM, OCS - Euro-Asian group from Shanghai, etc.) but also from social movements, intellectuals and youth organizations. Russia has sent the high representative of the Federation Council while its Chancellery has just reiterated its warning to the United States against the consequences of military intervention and firmly asks them to stop fomenting internal destabilization. Moscow also denounced Washington's intention to create a parallel government in Venezuela and reaffirmed its willingness to cooperate with the Venezuelan government and people. China sent its defense minister,
Among the presidents were Evo Morales from Bolivia, Miguel Díaz-Canel from Cuba, Daniel Ortega from Nicaragua, or Salvador Sánchez Cerén from El Salvador. But also Colombian Senator Piedad Cordoba, former presidential candidate and human rights activist, the former president of Honduras, overthrown by a coup, Mel Zelaya, or the former Chancellor and former Minister of Defense from Rafael Correa, Ricardo Patiño. For Brazil was present the MP and President of the Workers Party (PT) Gleisi Hoffmann, as well as the coordinator of the Movement of Landless Workers (MST), João Pedro Stedile.
The "Lima group" composed of right-wing regimes (Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Honduras, etc ..) under the influence of Washington and the European Union, declared this election "illegitimate" but those countries that the mainstream media are trying to pass for the "international community" are actually minority and isolated.
Gleisi Hoffmann, President of the Workers' Party of Brazil, stressed the need to provide support and solidarity to the people and President of Venezuela: " The aggressive attitude of the Bolsonaro government against Venezuela is strongly opposed in Brazil and contradicts our diplomatic tradition ". On behalf of the Landless Workers Movement, Joao Pedro Stedile " greeted Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, who is starting a new constitutional mandate. The Venezuelan people know that the opposition submitted to the United States does not intend to take the country out of the crisis. Venezuela is following its own path and will never accept the intervention of imperialism . "
Official records
On Monday, the President will deliver a speech to the National Constituent Assembly, where he will report on what has been undertaken during his previous mandate, give the deputies the Plan of the Fatherland 2019-2025 to propose to make it a law of constitutional rank, and will announce the most urgent economic measures in the face of an economic war that has seen the private sector increase prices to unheard-of levels while a little-known leader of the extreme right, Juan Guaido, co-organizer of deadly violence of 2017, elected president by the legislature in legal disobedience, tried to proclaim himself "president of the republic", with the immediate recognition of the United States and the Latin American right, and immediately demanded that "the armed forces are chasing the Maduro usurper "(sic).
In his inaugural speech, President Maduro called for national unity, stressing the importance of Venezuela's sovereignty: " The world is bigger than the American Empire and its satellite governments, the world is no longer homogeneous unipolar. Things have changed, there is a world standing, no longer wanting to obey, no longer going back, and Venezuela is opening its arms to this new world of respect, cooperation and fraternity ".
