Attempted Coup And Misguided U.S. Sanctions in Venezuela

Attempted Coup And Misguided U.S. Sanctions in Venezuela

On February 11, 2015, the government of President Nicolas Maduro, along with a number of his senior officials, declared that Venezuela had faced an attempted coup. Contrarily, the mainstream media in the United States and in Europe viewed such allegations as ridiculous, opposing the arrest of alleged conspirators, calling these arrests human rights violations. However, the history of coups and attempted coups in Latin America since 2002 proves paramount, and there is significant evidence to support their reality.1 Recent diplomatic moves carried out by United States President Obama impose sanctions against seven Venezuelan officials and qualify the country as a “national security threat,” calling attention to a growing isolation of the United States within the hemisphere.2 With the exception of Canada, every other government in the region has condemned U.S. interference in Venezuela through the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) and the Union of South American Nations (Unión de Naciones Suramericanas, UNASUR).3

History of coups in Latin America

According to Maurice Lemoine with Le Monde Diplo, as a member of the counter-hegemonic organization the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América, or ALBA), Honduras has been a laboratory for such “constitutional coup[s]”.4 This type of coup is typically tolerated by the international community and leads to the “forced resignation” of elected and legitimate authorities by eliciting the support of the private media, the military, and the corporate sector.5

Former president of Honduras Zelaya wanted to hold a non-binding consultation to convene a national constituent assembly, and pressure his political opponents into redrafting the Constitution.6 However, the political opposition to President Zelaya, consisting mostly of conservatives, claimed that the president was looking to secure his re-election, and also violating the Constitution in doing so. Thus, the opposition staged a coup against Zelaya to protect their economic and political security.

This coup enjoyed support from the Honduran Supreme Court, which had ordered to place President Zelaya under military arrest and exile him to Costa Rica, considering his decision to held a referendum un-constitutional. Romeo Vasquez, a Honduran general, subsequently took power, and immediately transferred it to the president of the country’s Congress, Roberto Micheletti. Vaquez’s actions attempted to mask the military’s participation in the coup by placing it under civilian control causing it to appear “constitutional.”7 In the meantime, the Honduran Supreme Court stated that President Zelaya was “abusing his authority” and committing “treason against the fatherland” because he could not constitutionally hold a referendum.8 However, the President maintained that he was merely trying to seek non-binding consultation and not a referendum, insinuating the hypocrisy of the Supreme Court.

Micheletti claimed its regime was a transitional government. President Zelaya enjoyed overwhelming support in his country, throughout the hemisphere, and internationally, including from the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and the European Union.9

In 2010, a situation in Ecuador mirrored the events in Honduras. On September 29, as reported by Maurice Lemoine, Galo Lara, a member of the Patriotic Society Party, appeared on Ecuadorian television criticizing the new Public Service Law, which President Correa had promoted.10 Lara stated that the law ended privileges, such as bonuses and cash payments, for civil servants, including the police, and stated that “President Correa has snatched the toys out of the hands of the policemen children […and] that’s why he is packing his bags and getting ready to flee the country.”11 This public appearance led to a protest against the new law by police in Quito the same day. President Correa chose to meet with the protestors in attempt at a personal negotiation. At the barracks, President Correa was met by an aggressive crowd of 800 policemen, organized by men in sunglasses, with radios and mobile phones in hand, shouting “communists” and “chavistas” in protest.12 President Correa’s bodyguards managed to usher him into a building to saftely, through a thick wall of insults and tear gas. The protest escalated, and “kill him” was heard amidst the crowd.13

Simultaneously, 400 soldiers took Quito’s Mariscal Sucre airport, the air base at Tacunga, the national assembly building, and the port and airport of Guayaquil, the economic capital of the country.14 Around 8:00 PM, a special operations group rescued President Correa, as tens of thousands of citizens took the streets in support of the elected president. On the police radio, a voice contested, “get Correa out and take him away before the chuspangos (military) arrive,” and aggressively advocated, “kill him, kill the president.”15 A resulting firefight broke out, and a bodyguard of Correa’s suffered a gunshot. Despite the chaos, at the end of the day Constitutional order had reestablished, at the cost of ten dead and 300 injured.16

Of greater importance to this analysis is the case of Venezuela. In 2002, a small group of military leaders kidnapped President Hugo Chavez, and administered power to the President of the Venezuelan Federation of Chambers of Commerce (Fedecamaras), Pedro Carmona.17 As stated by the Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA), at the time, “the U.S. provided de facto recognition for a short-lived coup regime that came to power by overthrowing the democratically-elected Chávez government. During that coup, all of Venezuela’s democratic institutions were suspended, including the National Assembly, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution.”18 However, a massive popular movement backed by key sectors of the military spontaneously took the streets to return Chavez to office.19 During the days of the attempted coup, the mainstream media backed the coup against Constitutional order in Venezuela, contributing an increasingly high level of polarization in the country.20

The situation in Venezuela has maintained such polarization. The Council on Hemispheric Affairs reports, “since President Hugo Chavez’s first electoral victory in 1998, the United States has provided support for regime change in Caracas, funneling U.S. AID and National Endowment for Democracy funds to right-wing Venezuelan opposition organizations. An additional $5.5 million proposed for FY 2016.”21 In nearly every country of the world, it is illegal to receive funds from a sovereign state to finance internal policy and elections. In Venezuela, the illegality of this is enshrined in the Constitution. However, the government did not take drastic actions against illegal funding provided by the United States.

During the first months of 2014, once again the opposition political parties seemed keen to overthrow the elected government with the promotion of violent protests, which lead to the death of 46 people, most of the victims police officers and supporters of the Maduro government.22 International media also had a significant impact, and was primarily led by U.S.-based entities seeking to delegitimize the Maduro government.23

The Heavy Hands of Washington Policy Makers:

A number of searing instances have demonstrated that U.S. authorities have been involved in staging a series of Latin American coups and attempted coups. To take one example, former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton acknowledged that she played a deciding role in the prevention of former President Zelaya of returning to office in Honduras in 2009.24 As reported by Al Jazeera, Clinton wrote, “we strategized on a plan to restore order in Honduras and ensure that free and fair elections could be held quickly and legitimately, which would render the question of Zelaya moot.”25 Also, one of the first moves of the plotters of the coup was to facilitate the Honduras’ exit from ALBA to promote pro-U.S. diplomacy. Furthermore, in Ecuador, the U.S. State Department had encouraged the coup, and has been considered guilty of orchestrating the operation by many.26

The New York Times found that in Venezuela, the CIA knew about the 2002 coup plot, and pointed to documents that prove this.27 A senior CIA intelligence included in brief issued on April 6, 2002, that “disgruntled senior officers and a group of radical junior officers are stepping up efforts to organize a coup against President Chávez, possibly as early as this month.”28 The same brief continued in stating that the conspirators would “exploit unrest stemming from opposition demonstrations slated for later this month.”29 On April 8, 2002, a separate brief reiterated that “disgruntled officers are planning a coup.”30 The Guardian also found that “the failed coup in Venezuela was closely tied to senior officials in the US government […which] have long histories in the ‘dirty wars’ of the 1980s, and links to death squads working in Central America at that time.”31

And there other cases of actual or threatened coups against elected governments; such as the coups against elected Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide in Haiti, which occurred twice, in 1991 and in 2004, or the attempted coup against elected President Evo Morales in 2008 in Bolivia, and against Fernando Lugo in Paraguay in 2012.32 In all these cases, the responsibility of Washington is suspected, if not explicitly demonstrated.33

A New Attempted Coup in Venezuela ?

On February 11, 2015, Venezuelan officials arrested a retired Air Force general and 13 other individuals allegedly involved in a plot to overthrow President Nicolás Maduro.34 Plans for the attempted coup included an attack on the presidential palace and other government buildings.35 On February 19, the government arrested Antonio Ledezma, a member of the opposition, and the mayor of Caracas since 2008.36

On February 25, the President of the National Assembly of Venezuela, Diosdado Cabello, and the elected representative of the capital district of Caracas, Jorge Rodriguez, provided proof of the attempted coup. As reported by various media outlets, including French newspaper l’Humanité, Pagina 12 of Argentina, La Jornada in Mexico, and various local media in Venezuela, Jorge Rodriguez presented a series of videos in which the retired First Deputy of Aviation Luis Hernando Lugo Calderon said he was “implicated in the [planned] bombing,” and confirmed his intention of attacking selected targets in Caracas with a Tucano, a light training attack aircraft.37 In addition, Calderon had recorded a video of himself demanding the resignation of President Nicolas Maduro.38 Air Force Captain Héctor José Noguera Figueroa, recorded alongside Jorge Rodriguez, also testified to affirm video’s authenticity.39 Figueroa reported that he did not know how to fly a Tucano, in attempt to maintain his innocence.40

As reported by L’Humanité, many of the conspirators had been in contact with the U.S. embassy in Venezuela, which promised to grant the necessary visas to leave the country, as well as payment in U.S. dollars.41 The British embassy also faces accusations of involvement, having promised visas if the coup attempt failed.42 Many military officials were also implicated, such as Air Force General Oswaldo Hernandez Sanchez, and Julio Borges, legislator and head of the political party Primero Justicia.43 Allegedly U.S.-supported conspirators include ex-military personnel that the government released after the 2002 coup attempt, such as General Maximiliano Hernandez Sanchez, Colonel José Suarez Romular, Major César Arnoldo Pérez Carrero, Captain Hector José Noguera Figueroa, and Lieutenants Peter Alexander Moreno Guevera, Carlos Esqueda and Wilfredo Castillo.44

As stated by many international newspapers, such as the French Nouvel Observateur, l’Humanité, Venezuela Analysis, La Jornada, and Pagina 12, prior to the attempted coup, Antonio Ledezma signed a statement released 24 hours prior to the coup attempt which called for the ouster of President Nicolas Maduro as part of a “national transition.”45 Other signatories to the statement include former legislator Maria Corina Machado, who was dismissed of her legislative duties after speaking on behalf of the legislative power without the Venezuelan Congress’ authorization, violating the Constitution.46 Her various NGOs have received millions in funding from the U.S. government.47 The third signatory is Leopoldo Lopez, who is currently in jail, awaiting his trial for charges related to his role in leading violent opposition protests in 2014.48

As reported by The Guardian, President Maduro stated that, “opposition radicals sought to carry out a coup in 2014, and still harbor the same ambition.”49 he high military command in Venezuela additionally denounced the military’s involvement in the attempted coup, and exhibited support of President Maduro.50 Also, on March 3, President Maduro revealed the conspirator’s 100-day plan to lead a transitional government in the post-coup environment. The planned coup was to take place in 90 days, and called for an election within 180 days after overthrowing the current elected government.51

Regional Support For Venezuelan Government

The regional reaction to this attempted coup has been diverse, but firmly supportive of the elected President Maduro. As reported by Al-Jazeera, on February 11, 2015, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), which include every hemispheric country except Canada and the United States, reiterated: “its strong repudiation of the application of unilateral coercive measures that are contrary to international law.”52 Bolivian President Evo Morales and former president of Uruguay, Pedro Mujica, have both recognized and quickly condemned the attempted coup.53 The former leader denounced the hand that Washington played and the latter accused leftist military officials in the alleged coup, illustrating the confusion in the region regarding the sequence of the events.54 On February 24, the Partido Dos Trablhadores, the leading Brazilian political party, and party of President Dilma Roussef, condemned the attempted coup against President Maduro.55 However, the foreign ministry in Brazil stated that the actions of President Maduro were of concern.56 But most Latin American and Caribbean governments, continue to back the Venezuelan government.57 On March 6, 2015, the Union of South American Nations (Unión de Naciones Suramericanas, UNASUR), which congregates each country in South America (including Colombia, Paraguay and Chile, countries not exactly considered to be close allies of Venezuela,) declared, through Secretary General Ernesto Samper, that “[e]very member state of UNASUR, without exception, rejects any destabilization efforts in Venezuela,” after reviewing evidence presented by the government of Venezuela.58 Local opposition immediately rejected the UNASUR official Statement.59

Consequently, On March 9, 2015, U.S. President Obama declared that Venezuela has become a threat to the U.S. national security.60 This speech led to several critical reactions. First, Secretary General of the OAS José Miguel Insulza, an organization known for its moderate positions, said that President Obama’s statement would only further complicate the situation in Venezuela and U.S.-Venezuelan relations.61 Additionally, Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa called President Obama’s announcement as a “bad joke.”62 Also, as reported by Al-Jazeera, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro asked “special decree powers to preserve Latin American nation’s “peace, integrity and sovereignty.””63 Nicolas Maduro obtained these powers from the Venezuelan National Assembly on March 11, 2015.64 The U.S. State Department move against the elected President and top officials ultimately resulted in a high concentration of power in Venezuela, the reverse of the U.S. government’s declared intentions.65

Human Rights, Criticism and Selective Indignation

Mainstream media has a short memory, and a majority of it considers the alleged plot to be ridiculous.66 However, considering the interventionist policy Washington has historically implemented in the hemisphere, these allegations deserve fair analysis. The media’s silence on the evidence presented by the Venezuelan government is astonishing.67 The hypothesis that the Maduro government is under attack from an attempted coup must be considered. Just because an individual may believe these allegations does not indicate support of Maduro’s policies. There is a big difference between criticizing a country for its policies and intervening in the democratic processes of other countries, which is intolerable.

In the case of Venezuela, the lack of transparency regarding the current events should serve as a reminder to read public statements with caution. It is foolish to not consider the voice of the Venezuelan elected government, and other challenging perspectives. The attempted coup could have been fabricated, but the evidence presented by the Maduro government must also be assessed. Until now, the evidence that the government of Venezuela has revealed have not been proven false. Instead, several actors, such as UNASUR, deemed the evidence to be valid, supporting the Venezuelan government.68

While it is wise to be skeptical of conspiracies, especially in such a politically charged atmosphere, the rush to ridicule the reports of a coup plot by Maduro’s adversaries should also be viewed with some suspicion. The U.S. has made real threats against Venezuela, stemming from historical proof of U.S. interference and violence in the hemisphere. Even the U.S.-based intelligence enterprise Stratfor foresaw an attempted coup in January 2015, clearly demonstrating that tension, polarization, and the dire economic situation in Venezuela could lead to violent actions aimed at overthrowing the government.69

Additionally, human rights violations against the press, social activists, political leaders, and ordinary citizens occur throughout the Americas, including Venezuela.70 Denouncing human rights violations only in Venezuela, while situations in Colombia, Mexico, and Central America pose far worse, demonstrates a selective indignation on behalf of the United States.71

The same holds true for corruption and other governmental problems, such as transparency. Venezuela is not the only country with human rights blunders, corruption and lack of transparency.72 And despite the somewhat dire situation, Venezuela is also not the only regional actor that faces difficulty in its economy and crime rate. But mainstream media does not seem to recognize the relativity of the present affair.

As many publications on the left have explained, the media distortion of reality in Venezuela is fact, not allegation.73 The ultra-right in the U.S. Congress that opposes normalization with Cuba, and supports sanctions against Venezuela, claims that reestablishing relations with Cuba opposes the Democratic Charter of the Organization of American States (signed in 2001), but at the same time, it actively supports conspirators in Venezuela, yet fails to criticize the return to one-man rule regimes in Haiti or Egypt supported by the United States.74 However, double standards apply when it comes to U.S. hegemony, distorting reality and jeopardizing the truth.

Will President Obama revise U.S. policy in order to promote new cooperation in the region?Given President Obama’s tough rhetoric toward Venezuela, and the UNASUR announcement that it will back the elected government in Venezuelan, the Summit of the Americas, planned for April 10-11 in Panama, will highlight the growing tensions in the region. The divisions in the hemisphere are deeper than ever.75

ENDS

© Scoop Media