The Colombia/Ecuador/Venezuela Mess or Let's Place Bets on How Long Before the U.S. Backs a Colombian War With Venezuela

That didn't last long
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-40843494

https://deleteyouraccount.libsyn.com/renovate-the-state

Might be worth a listen.

Anti-imperialism = still good k tx bye

Athletics Weekly‏Verified account @AthleticsWeekly 35m35 minutes ago

Before London 2017, Venezuela's best placing in a World Champs event was 8th. They now have gold (W triple jump) and bronze (W pole vault).

Dunphy and Giles vindicated

Really nice piece -- written around August -- on all sides of the conflict:

https://monthlyreview.org/2017/10/01/venezuelas-fragile-revolution/

And then there's this:

Some upper-class pockets in Venezuela can still afford to eat out. Inside Casa Bistro in Caracas: https://t.co/WOi1zeAICL

— The New York Times (@nytimes) October 20, 2017

Yes, we know there is food scarcity driving up prices. The piece explores some of it and adds more.

The tension between social justice and socialist efficiency plays out on other fronts. One issue is the widespread practice of granting free or excessively low-priced goods and services to poor and working-class communities. The case for the policy is compelling, namely that the government has a responsibility to pay what Chavistas call the “social debt” owed to the most exploited sectors. Yet such artificially low prices on goods produced by state companies undermine their ability to achieve self-sufficiency, and are partly responsible for the chronic scarcity of many products and the emergence of an exploitative black market.

Last night @NicolasMaduro told the #Venezuelan people that the ultra-right in Colombia & Venezuela were responsible for the attack, which he also said was "financed from #Florida". Maduro said ex-Colombian President @JuanManSantos was involved in the plan https://t.co/JnLt4DNESr

— venezuelanalysis.com (@venanalysis) August 5, 2018

Yeah.

Misery links ahead...

With that in mind, where are we now? Between 2.3 and 3 million Venezuelans have now left their country since 2014. As of August 2018, at least seven percent of Venezuela’s total population (as measured in 2014) had fled, and at least 5,000 more Venezuelans leave their homes every day. Assuming that this migration rate continues, 1.8 million Venezuelans will have left their homes in 2018. As of last year, Venezuela was the fourth most prevalent refugee sending country in the world—behind only Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq. But with no end in sight, Venezuela’s crisis is in fact on track to become one of the largest national exoduses in world history.

Instead of sidelining those accused of drug trafficking, Maduro has promoted them to the highest offices, perhaps calculating that they have the most to lose if his regime falls and will therefore fight the hardest to preserve it.

"Venezuela’s Refugee Crisis: why don’t we care?"
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/venezuela-humanitarian-crisis-refugees-borders-photography-a8579311.html

With respect Senator Durbin, the US should not anoint the leader of the opposition in Venezuela during an internal, polarized conflict. Let us support Uruguay, Mexico, & the Vatican's efforts for a negotiated settlement & end sanctions that are making the hyperinflation worse. https://t.co/qoAb2ou95g

— Ro Khanna (@RoKhanna) January 24, 2019

Agreed that a lifting of sanctions and increase of humanitarian aid is probably the most urgent necessity, it is just that those need to happen via a legitimate government. Maduro's election was a sham and so is the judiciary atm, so an interim executive appointed by the legislative opposition is not the worst solution. Seems obvious to me, thanks to reading experts of actual Latin America geopolitics, that the wave of recognition was carefully planned: Guaidó gets to be recognized as a legitimate figure by some key nations (US, Colombia) which could allow humanitarian relief, while other stress the importance of free and fair elections (EU), while other key nations propose a neutral role for the settlements to come (Uruguay, Mexico).

After that there is a whole bunch of stuff from the rose-emoji-in-their-twitter-handle-crew stuff that I feel the need to addressed: the legitimacy of Guaidó can be discussed, sure, but his role in all of this has not yet translated unto real power over the nation of Venezuela so one can at least wait before calling it a coup. Or admit that the sham elections of Maduro + his handling of the judiciary and military + the backing of Russia has constituted a much larger coup and he is still firmly in power. Guaidó legitimacy can be discussed sure, but its important that he appointed himself as an interim and that discussion belongs to the Venezuelan people, not a way for say... the American director of one successful indie film to signal is understanding of geopolitics and class struggle. Also, sanctions are only a part of the hyperinflation and aren't the only strain on Venezuela's economy at the moment.

Yeah, the Coup was in 2017, no matter what The Coup says.

Freeland spoke to Venezuelan opposition leader two weeks before he declared himself interim president, source says https://t.co/WqFuN4uHUV @GlobePolitics pic.twitter.com/vKZL3tI0Mu

— The Globe and Mail (@globeandmail) January 25, 2019

Chrystia Freeland representing Canada the merciless capitalist empire.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/30/world/americas/venezuela-maduro-protests-faes.html

This seems like a pretty good summary of the various goings on: https://nacla.org/news/2019/01/24/venezuela-another-crossroads

(Touched on it in the UK politics thread today so was reminded to post this)

It looks like, despite the thinly-veiled threats from the US, CARICOM is pretty strongly behind the Uruguay / Mexico plan at this stage. The outline of the Montevideo Mechanism doesn't say a great deal, and Guaido has already refused to participate, but if the outcomes are on the surface fairly defensible (new elections on a set timetable, international monitors, etc), it'll give the opposition (and some of the countries supporting it) an interesting decision to make.

Wait, why is CARICOM suddenly so important? Neither Venezuela, Columbia or Brazil are full members? And what has Maduro said about the plan, I thought he had shut down elections for anything other than parliament already?

Just to be clear, you're asking why CARICOM countries, some of which border (or are within swimming distance of) Venezuela, that have substantial trade relations with Venezuela - including agreements covering oil, natural gas and food, that are currently experiencing a spike in the number of refugees from Venezuela, present some of the primary opposition to the OAS formally recognising Guaido as President of Venezuela and who are actively participating in the Uruguay / Mexico peace plan are important to the situation in Venezuela?

Do they have any leverage over Brazil?

So... this is the Montevideo Mechanism?

1. Dialogue Phase: Creating conditions for direct contacts among the actors involved, in an environment of security.
2. Negotiation Phase: Strategic presentation of the results of the previous phase to the counterparts, seeking to find common ground and areas of opportunity to allow the relaxation of positions and identify potential agreements.
3. Commitments Phase: Construction and subscription of agreements based on the results of the negotiation phase, with the characteristics and time-frame, previously agreed upon.
4. Implementation Phase: Materialization of the commitments assumed in the previous phase with the international accompaniment.

Does Brazil have any leverage over China, Russia or Mexico? Do they need it?

At this stage, Brazil isn't likely to mount a full-scale invasion. The primary pressure Guaido's backers can exert comes through sanctions and formal diplomatic recognition of the opposition. If regional partners can outline a credible, peaceful solution - aligning to some extent with some of the demands the EU, etc, have been making about new elections, the international case for pressing forward with more sanctions, more countries backing Guaido, etc, is likely to weaken - or at least ensure that Guaido has to outline his own proposals for elections.

Maduro has said he's backing the Montevideo Mechanism and is open to having a full constitutional discussion. The processes have been outlined, albeit somewhat vaguely, but the outcomes (whether there will be elections or not, etc) are still TBC. It's too early to assume what they'll be but it will clearly have an impact on what comes next.

Do you have a link to Maduros comments? I do believe that he would support it, it sounds hilariously vague and mostly designed to take the pressure off, which obviously benefits him.

There's some coverage in the Mexican press from yesterday here:

https://www.excelsior.com.mx/global/maduro-aplaude-a-mexico-y-uruguay-por-propuesta-de-dialogo/1295008

But has has said for some time that he'll actively participate in the dialogue. From the CARICOM perspective, it's less about taking the pressure off, more about avoiding a civil war on their doorstep.

Yeah, sure. And too bad about the Venezuelans who then might be massacred by their own government.

That's snarky, but a solution where the Maduro regime stays in power obviously just kicks the can down the road.

"Yeah, sure". ffs Fred.

The idea that Maduro must be removed from power by someone other than the electorate is central to a lot of the interventionist assumptions. Guaido hasn't set out a proposed timeline for elections but has made it pretty clear that Maduro and his close allies wouldn't be allowed to participate in them, if and when they did happen. I'm not sure how, from that starting point, you'd ever have a process seen as legitimate by the substantial proportion of the country that still backs him. Equally, the opposition is unlikely to participate in any elections run strictly on Maduro's terms. A regionally-managed compromise, however remote the prospect might seem, looks like the only way to square the circle and Uruguay, Mexico and CARICOM (whose members are more or less united on negotiation, but individually split on support for Maduro) are the only ones i can see who might be able to attempt that in good faith.

https://www.lrb.co.uk/2019/02/08/greg-grandin/whats-at-stake-in-venezuela

If we are to assume that the US backing the Gaido regime a coup, or imperialism, which I don't necessarily agree with but find fair. What name do we give to Rosneft providing billions in loans to PDVSA? The Russia backing of the Maduro regime and his fraudulent elections? The selling of weapons to the Venezuelan military, who are obviously breaking bank while people can't afford basic medicine and hold true power over the citizens? Is that something we can call latin sovereignty? Is that the exercise of democracy?

some of the other greater powers also have a relationship with some latin american states which is neocolonial in nature. not really sure what the aim of such whatabouttery is, mind you.

Well how do you create a democratic situation in Venezuela when a colonial power is acting very hard against it? I believe it is a legit question. Which colonial power has been the most destructive force over the past 5 years? That is another one.

you have the US carry out a coup is your answer i'm assuming?

It is not whatabboutism to debunk the naive understanding that Venezuela is an underdog from latin america facing a colonial power on its own and keeping its precious from oil from it.

sharivari's most recent post is literally just there

It is not whatabboutism to debunk the naive understanding that Venezuela is an underdog from latin america facing a colonial power on its own and keeping its precious from oil from it.

― Van Horn Street, Friday, February 8, 2019 3:13 PM (twenty-eight seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

flag on the play. straw man argument

I'm firmly against US military intervention, I believe in Gaido being used as an interim president that can oversee new fair elections without himself and Maduro as contenders, with Mexico/Uruguay easing transition for the dictatorship and Western nations ending sanctions and providing aid.

I was responding to the article you posted.

point stands

I believe in Gaido being used as an interim president that can oversee new fair elections without himself and Maduro as contenders, with Mexico/Uruguay easing transition

Going in from the perspective that Maduro isn’t legally the President, I can definitely see how this could look like the best-case-scenario at some level. I can’t see how it could be easily executed though.

Guaido clearly doesn’t see his role as just transferring power to the next person who can get elected fairly. He is setting out policy - including completely overhauling the oil industry in a way favourable to the US. He has said he will ‘restore democracy’ but has, afaik, pointedly ruled out giving a timetable for when elections might happen. He has stated that, as part of his ‘interim’ presidency Maduro and other senior figures in the PSUV may, if they are lucky, have a choice between jail or (if they remove themselves from politics) some form of amnesty. He has currently ruled out discussions with Mexico and Uruguay - preferring to work with countries who have had an ongoing, long term project not to guarantee free elections but to destroy Chavismo in Venezuela and remove leftist leaders from the whole of South America.

If he could work with MX and UY to resolve the impasse, giving a clear timetable for both PSUV and the opposition to have a meaningful chance of winning a fair election, I can’t imagine Maduro being on board with it, necessarily, but it would be a show of good faith to the PSUV supporters in the country and potentially increase internal pressure on Maduro to quit in favour of someone less divisive. That is not his plan or the plan for the people engineering his push.

Thanks ShariVari for the updates and clarity you bring to what you comment on.

If we are to assume that the US backing the Gaido regime a coup, or imperialism, which I don't necessarily agree with but find fair.

What's fair about it? Don't be shy to answer now you are bound to look like a genius next to Fred's incoherence.

He's saying that he doesn't agree it's a US backed coup, but finds the interpretation fair. I don't, I find it laughable. And then Jim just goes on and says US is carrying out a coup.

It's really easy to look like a genius when there's such a large rung under me who can't even read. And if I'm an idiot...

The PSUV has rigged the latest elections, and when they couldn't rig the elections to the National Assembly, they just got rid of it in what is still a much clearer 'coup' than anything going on right now. I do get if Guaido isn't that concerned with giving the PSUV a 'meaningful' chance of winning the next election, when they've clearly not done the same, and all the momentum is against them. What on earth does a meaningful chance for the PSUV even look like? They're still allowed to rig it just a little?

I do get if Guaido isn't that concerned with giving the PSUV a 'meaningful' chance of winning the next election, when they've clearly not done the same, and all the momentum is against them

PSUV is the largest party in Venezuela, controls the majority of state governorships, has millions of active members / supporters, has the backing of a substantial amount of the army and, if Maduro stepped aside, would have a decent chance of making any fair presidential election extremely competitive against a divided opposition.

Even if you aren’t particularly bothered about the right of the Venezuelan people to make a meaningful choice about who their leaders are, surely it’s pretty clear that ousting them from power and hobbling their ability to fight elections would be incredibly dangerous. This would all be more straightforward if PSUV was a tiny clique struggling to hold on to power - it isn’t, it’s a mass movement that still represents a huge proportion of Venezuelans. Whether or not that is enough to keep winning elections like they did during the Chavez era under new leadership is debatable, but they can’t be brushed aside without serious consequences.

Equally, if much of the opposition wasn’t transparently trying to turn the clock back 25 years, or embracing the support of fascists in Brazil and the US, they might have a better chance of engaging some of the voters who aren’t keen on Maduro but don’t want to see all the social gains of the Chavez era undone. The only way the Bolsonaro / Abrams vision of a new Venezuelan political landscape, which Guaido has chosen to represent, can come about and be maintained in the long term is undemocratically.

He's saying that he doesn't agree it's a US backed coup, but finds the interpretation fair. I don't, I find it laughable. And then Jim just goes on and says US is carrying out a coup.

― Frederik B, Saturday, 9 February 2019 Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

There is no finding 'fair' about it - there is a desire for regime change. Just because it isn't moving the army against a government like in Chile (because in this case the US can't quite do that) there are moves to shut Venezuela out economically and to exacerbate people's suffering and turn the clock back.

Is Maduro to be allowed to compete in the elections?

There is currently no plan for new elections - Guaido hasn’t suggested one and the Uruguay / Mexico discussions with Maduro haven’t started yet.

What is clear, however, is that Guaido is intent on removing any possibility that Maduro could run, if he is successful. He has talked about being open to the idea of offering Maduro and colleagues amnesty from criminal prosecution if he steps down immediately - the options would probably be something like exile in Cuba or jail in Venezuela.

I hope we can all agree that one of the punishments for rigging elections should be to lose your electability, right? That's fair, no?