BRICS Needs a Unified Front Against US Intervention in Venezuela

Ramona WADI

Venezuela’s destabilisation by the US is understood best by the countries that have faced imperialist interference. Cuba’s revolutionary process, for example, has produced consistent political solidarity with Venezuela and is actively urging countries to reconsider their stance as regards the US sanctions which are creating severe humanitarian consequences.

The recent executive order signed by US President Donald Trump encompasses all entities that do business with Venezuela, thus creating an embargo that will further isolate the nation, even as the US moves to open a “Venezuela Affairs Unit” unit in its embassy in Bogota, Colombia. The unit would engage in diplomacy with the US-backed Juan Guaido, who is recognised by the Trump administration and its allies as the purported interim Venezuelan president. Its aim, according to US Special Representative to Venezuela Elliot Abrams, is in anticipation of “the day this regime falls”.

In a report titled “Economic Sanctions as Collective Punishment: The Case of Venezuela”, it is estimated that 40,000 people have died as a result of the US-imposed sanctions from 2017 to 2018. According to the US, Venezuela poses “an unusual and extraordinary threat” to its national security – unfounded claims as Trump continues with overt attempts to bring down Maduro’s democratically-elected presidency.

Political pressure against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro is instigated by the US, yet there is a backdrop of support from its allies in the region and, globally, from countries that spout the democracy line, even if there is nothing democratic about foreign interference.  While mostly in the background in comparison to the US, Canada has facilitated support for the Venezuelan opposition. In Europe, countries which have not explicitly backed Guaido have assumed an allegedly neutral stance which constitutes tacit agreement in terms of opposition support. The EU criticised US sanctions on Venezuela but has also threatened the country with similar punitive measures, as the European Parliament expressed its support for Guaido.

The international community is dominated by discourse that promotes foreign intervention according to the undemocratic agendas of the so-called democratic countries. Venezuela is urgently in need of a unified political strategy that stands in political solidarity against imperialist interests.

BRICS has positioned itself as one such alternative in terms of economic prospects, international security and stability. Russia and China have repeatedly affirmed their support for Maduro. South Africa and India have likewise followed suit. On the other hand, Brazil under President Jair Bolsonaro is preventing BRICS from promoting a political discourse that fully repudiates US interference in Venezuela.

Contrary to the rest of the BRICS countries, Brazil recognised Guaido as Venezuela’s interim president and it has expressed support for the international community to pay heed to “Venezuela’s cries for freedom”. Brazil has also adopting measures in line with the Lima Group, as well as prohibited Maduro and other senior Venezuelan officials from entering Brazil.

At the G20 summit in Japan, BRICS stated it supported dialogue between Maduro and the Venezuelan opposition to reach a solution. Yet the call is marred by the political divide between Brazil and the other BRICS members. This lack of consensus, including the divergence in terms of recognition of who is Venezuela’s legitimate leader, weakens its political diplomacy in the international arena. As Brazil aligns with the US, although reportedly holding back from endorsing military intervention in Venezuela, It is moving away from one of the organisation’s main aims, which is to establish itself in opposition to capitalist and imperialist exploitation.

In a recent interview, former Brazilian President Luis Ignacio Lula da Silva expressed his disappointment at BRICS not moving further politically. “BRICS was not created to be an instrument of defence, but to be an instrument of attack.” If this momentum is to be built, BRICS needs to find equilibrium in its politics, rather than allow itself to be swayed into a seemingly neutral position due to the US allegiances of Brazil under Bolsonaro. It is not enough to preach dialogue like the rest of the international community have done while weakening Venezuela’s autonomy. BRICS must evaluate its relevance, especially when it comes to one of its members demonstrating political opportunism that is contrary to the group’s aims.

Ramona WADI

Ramona Wadi is an independent researcher, freelance journalist, book reviewer and blogger. Her writing covers a range of themes in relation to Palestine, Chile and Latin America.

Roberto de la Madrid: West Expects Guaidó to Serve its Corporations’ Interests

• 
  

TEHRAN (FNA)- Roberto de la Madrid, an award-wining journalist and political commentator, says the support of the West for the Venezuelan opposition leader “has nothing to do with democracy”; but serving the commercial, military, political and geopolitical interests of the Western corporations.

Speaking in an exclusive interview with FNA, Roberto de la Madrid related Washington’s intervention in Venezuela’s affairs to the US historical regime change policy which allows it to control the natural resources of other countries through their puppet regimes.

Roberto de la Madrd is a Mexican journalist with extensive career in international media. He has won several important journalism prizes, including Mexican National Communication Prize (2011), National Journalism Prize awarded by the Journalists Club and UNAM National Service Award.

Below is the full text of the interview:

Q: Why is Guaidó more supported outside Venezuela than inside?

A: Guaidó is well known both at home and abroad. He probably has more support abroad because the Venezuelan right-wing is supported by the US government and, therefore, by many Western commercial media, and many governments that are aligned with Washington. The media plays a crucial role in presenting news in such a way that Guaidó is portrayed as the savior and Maduro as the bad guy. However, a very accurate study should be done within Venezuela to see what percentage of the people really support Maduro and what percentage Guiadó. It should be remembered that in the last elections for the National Assembly, people supported the opposition and the right-wing won over the Chavistas. Afterwards, Maduro called for general elections where the majority of the opposition parties did not participate. The Chavistas won. Therefore, the percentage of real support to each side remains unknown. Meanwhile, the US sanctions have suffocated Venezuela's economy; we cannot deny that there are people who are unhappy because the average salary of a professional who works with a lot of energy is $6 a month, which means he has to work for a whole month to be able to buy only 2 kilograms of meat and nothing more.

Q: Why does the US see itself entitled to declare an unknown unelected person as the President of Venezuela, as it has done with Guaidó? 

A: There is no law, neither in local legislation nor in International Laws which allows the United States or any other countries to recognize or impose a president who has proclaimed himself on the streets of another country. The most logical thing and the most lawful way to do it is to have the United Nations Security Council to evaluate the situation. In this case, the UNSC can declare an intervention and call for elections to restore democracy. However, this has not taken place; so, any coalition of nations would be illegal as they have no approval of the UNSC or the International Law.

Q: Does the West expect Guaidó to lead Venezuela toward democracy, or to collapse a country that has been resisting US hegemony for the past two decades?

A: What the United States expects Guaidó is to lead Venezuela to the point where the interests of the big corporations that govern the West are met. What the international coalition that supports Guaidó expects has nothing to do with democracy, but with the acceptance of certain values and rules and the alignment with the commercial, military, political and geopolitical interests established by the big Western corporations.

Q: The footprint of the US can be seen in many major crises in oil-rich countries such as Iran (1953) and Iraq (2003). Do you think “Venezuela (2019)” is on the same list?

A: In a way, it explains the behavior and the voracity of the United States for seizing or controlling the points that it believes are vital for its commercial, military and political spirit. Indeed, the coups it has supported, organized, orchestrated and committed throughout history, are part of a strategy to use democracy or internal politics as a perfect makeup to control the masses and in some way satisfy this guideline: it is necessary for the Stars and Stripes to be waved on the flagpole of this or that country. By imposing a government and controlling it, they can control the natural resources or geographical ports that empower their production and their transit around the world.

Venezuela Coup Attempt Another Defeat for US Empire

Maduro calls Empire’s bluff with help from axis of independence

Kevin Barrett

On January 5, 2019, a little-known Venezuelan politician, Juan Guaidh, proclaimed himself president. Like the proverbial madman who thinks he is Napoleon, Guaidh was suffering from delusions of grandeur. But compared to most madmen, Guaidh was in an enviable position: his delusions drew support from the world’s biggest, albeit dying, empire.

Donald Trump’s rabid Secretary of State Mike Pompeo began howling that Guaidh was the real president, and that duly elected President Nicolas Maduro was the imposter. The US Empire’s lapdogs around the world barked dutifully in agreement.

The sinister farce was staged by the usual murderous gang of coup choreographers in and around Washington. As if to emphasize the point, on January 25 Trump appointed death squad specialist Elliot Abrams as Special Representative to Venezuela. That’s a bit like appointing Charles Manson as Special Representative to Hollywood.

But despite the best efforts of Pompeo, Abrams, and their rascally regiment of reactionary regime-change ruffians, the atrocious attempt to install a megalomaniacal nobody as puppet dictator of Venezuela has (as of this writing) bogged down in tar sands (tar sands is the Venezuelan translation of the important Vietnamese word quagmire).

First, Guaidh’s call for support from the Venezuelan military fell on deaf ears. Then his call for support from the American military merely cemented his reputation as a traitor. Aside from a small minority of rich people who hate the Bolivarian Revolution and want to return Venezuela to its previous status as an unofficial US colony, few Venezuelans are eager to see their nation invaded and its fabulous oil resources looted. And even the US Empire’s lapdogs around the world unanimously yapped out pathetic little yelps of opposition to any American invasion.

Throughout February the increasingly desperate Americans and their stooges tried to orchestrate public relations stunts involving humanitarian aid convoys. Just as they had tried to cast Syrian President Bashar al-Asad as anti-humanitarian by staging false-flag chemical weapons attacks, the same regime-change specialists tried to paint Venezuelan president Maduro as a viciously callous cad who doesn’t care about the material suffering of his people.

But following in the failed footsteps of al-Ghouta’s Syria false flag of August 2013, the attempt to blame Maduro for the February 23, 2019 burning of a humanitarian aid truck in Cúcuta, Colombia fell flat. Viral videos showed that anti-Maduro hooligans, not Venezuelan soldiers, threw the Molotov cocktail that set the aid truck on fire. What the whole world saw on February 23, the New York Times “revealed” two-and-one-half weeks later.

In a March 10 story headlined “Footage Contradicts US Claim That Nicolas Maduro Burned Aid Convoy,” the Times all but admitted that the event was a false flag operation designed to push the Maduro-is-a-monster meme, “Many of Mr. Maduro’s critics claim that he ordered medication set on fire during the border standoff — even though many of his people have died of medicine shortages in hospitals. Yet the claim about a shipment of medicine, too, appears to be unsubstantiated, according to videos and interviews.” In other words, the whole thing was a lying PR scam from the get-go.

On March 7, 2019 the Empire upped the ante, unleashing a wave of sabotage that crippled Venezuela’s electricity grid. Pompeo’s propagandists blamed Maduro’s alleged incompetence. But WikiLeaks revealed the truth, tweeting a reference to the 2012 leaked Stratfor emails, “US-backed regime change consultancy CANVAS analyzed how to topple Chavez, including by exploiting electricity outages, ‘This would likely have the impact of galvanizing public unrest in a way that no opposition group could ever hope to generate.’”

Imperial propaganda painted a preposterous picture of public panic and pandemonium. But the actual situation on the ground in Caracas and across the country was mostly calm. By mid-March the lights were going back on, sending regime-change cockroaches scurrying for cover.

Democracy is the delivery vehicle to entrench special interests and to perpetually impoverish the oppressed.

The constitutional government of Venezuela has survived (thus far) not only due to popular support, but also thanks to encouragement from the world’s leading independent nations including Russia, China, Turkey, and Iran — the key nodes in an emerging “axis of independence” that is challenging Washington’s world takeover bid. Russia is supporting Maduro in part because the legitimate government of Venezuela owes Moscow plenty of oil and money. But there are also important principles involved: “We view the attempt to usurp power in Venezuela as something that contradicts and violates the foundations and principles of international law,” Russian spokesman Dmitry Peskov explained in January.

Iran, too, is standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Venezuela as a matter of principle. Iran’s Islamic Revolution, like Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution, is steeped in anti-imperialism and the global struggle for economic and social justice.

The other major Middle Eastern Muslim-majority power, Turkey, also supports Maduro. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s spokesman Ibrahim Kalin summarized that policy, “My brother Maduro! Stand tall, we stand by you. Under the leadership of President Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey will maintain its principled stance against all coup attempts #WeAreMADURO.”

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that Turkey is not just offering verbal support, but also is refining and processing Venezuelan gold — and that US officials suspect Erdogan of helping that gold find its way to Iran “in violation of sanctions on the Islamic Republic.”

China, too, has economic reasons for standing by Maduro. China has invested heavily in Venezuela, and will likely lose out if the US overthrows the constitutional government and installs a puppet regime.

Will Venezuela’s legitimate government once again successfully stymie a US coup attempt, as it did in 2002? Might the Americans lash out with an invasion? As Pompeo keeps saying, “all options are on the table.” But increasingly it seems that whatever military options the US has are staying on the table; the all-out-invasion card has not been played since Bush’s catastrophic 2003 attack on Iraq. Even so, the Americans keep warning Iran that all cards are on the table. They keep warning Syria that all cards are on the table. They keep warning North Korea that all cards are on the table. But at the end of the day the US is failing to get anywhere with its thuggish threats. The world is calling its bluff.

The difficulty the US is experiencing trying to have its way with Venezuela is a symptom of imperial decline. The American empire has lost its war in Afghanistan. It has lost its war in Iraq. It has lost its war in Syria. It has surrendered to permanently nuclearized North Korea. It promised to overthrow the Islamic Republic of Iran before its 40th anniversary, and failed miserably.

Surrendering the middle of Brzezinski’s “grand chessboard” to Russia, China, Turkey, and Iran, the US has retreated to its own backyard and tried to reinvent the Monroe Doctrine, according to which the imperialist yanquis own everything in the Western hemisphere. And though they have successfully installed neoliberal-fascist dictatorships in several previously free and independent Latin American countries, the eternal gringo war on Uncle Sam’s southern neighbors seems to have run out of gas on the road to Caracas.

 

Kevin Barrett

Venezuela fights on!

Venezuela, despite being unjustly subjected to the most crippling sanctions by the roguish US administration of Donald Trump, because of the independent nature of the government in Caracas, seems determined to weather the storm, as it has done over the past decades.

However, there has been a distortion of the realities in that country by the American media.

We present you parts of an interview given to the International Strategy Center by Jeanette Charles of the international solidarity liaison with Venezuela about the recent economic measures in Venezuela, migration, and other matters.

In May 2018, she organized a delegation with Venezuela Analysis and The Intrepid News Fund to observe the presidential elections in Caracas. During their trip, journalists, activists, lawyers and other participants met with representatives from community-based organizations, revolutionary collectives and Bolivarian government officials as well as interacting with people on the street from taxi drivers, street vendors and students.

In order to provide a more balanced and deeper understanding of Venezuela’s reality that corporate mainstream media fails to cover, MintPress interviewed her to hear her thoughts and observations from Venezuela’s migration, currency revaluation, the assassination attempt, and the presidential election.

Question: Recently, the international media and consequently the Korean media (even its progressive elements such as JTBC news) have reported on migration from Venezuela as resulting from a humanitarian crisis. Who is leaving? Who is staying? What is the cause? How should we understand it?

Jeanette: Internationally, the world is bombarded with the narrative of a Venezuelan “refugee crisis” fiercely promoted by the United States and right-wing governments in the region (e.g. Colombia, Ecuador Peru). In recent weeks, Ecuador called for a summit to address this “migratory chaos” and the US confirmed plans to send a navy ship, ostensibly to deliver medical supplies to Colombia for “Venezuelan refugees.” US actions have been condemned in Venezuela by government authorities as “another aggression on our country and Latin America.” This misleading media portrayal must be understood in its full political and social complexity rather than as sensationalized headlines that feed the dangerous and racist discourse preluding US intervention. Corporate media and international political powers have invested in painting Venezuela as an ungovernable and backwards country, absent of political leadership where droves flee political persecution, ultimately, to justify intervention and dissuade other countries from pursuing alternatives to capitalism.

The discourse on Venezuelan migration, especially since 2014, warrants serious study on media representations, their motivations and questioning the accuracy of their reporting. Furthermore, the increase in xenophobic attacks against Venezuelans abroad is under-examined and similarly evokes racist and misogynistic sentiments. Sures, a Venezuelan independent human rights organization, explains the heterogeneous reality of Venezuelan migration: Absent from the sensationalist headlines is a more grounded and nuanced examination that acknowledges the many migrants that are dual nationality citizens or descendants from other countries in the region and are returning home or at other times are leaving, saving money, and coming back to Venezuela. These fluctuating migration patterns are reflected in the widely varying estimates of Venezuelan migrants from 1.6 million (5%) by the Organization for Migration to over 650 thousand (2%) by the United Nations in a nation of nearly 32 million people — this is hardly the “migratory crisis” international media depicts. Challenging the notion of a Venezuelan refugee crisis does not deny the daily challenges of an economic war and some families’ response to migrate. Fundamentally, the international media debate regarding Venezuelan migratory tendencies does not capture Venezuela’s historical, economic or political contexts.

Janette continued: More importantly, the international corporate media and even progressive forces completely ignore and wholeheartedly dismiss the tens of millions of Venezuelans who stay. Many are determined to defend and push their revolutionary process forward. I’ve met them in the streets, communes, and organizations. They know their historical potential, especially at the grassroots level, and constantly seek ways to reach their greatest heights alongside initiatives by the Bolivarian government to overcome present-day obstacles.

While the situation is complex, the international corporate media does not provide accurate nor historically grounded reporting. Venezuela’s revolutionary process is very much alive. As Venezuelans strive to achieve 21st Century Socialism, we, committed to solidarity, must sharpen our analysis and ground ourselves in that Venezuela still remains at the forefront of a global vision for justice, liberation and building another world.

Question: At times, the media faults he Maduro Administration’s recent economic measures for worsening the economy. Though it may be too early to determine the efficacy of such policy, what was its rationale and what would it take for it to succeed?

Janette: On August 20th, the government launched a series of economic measures to resolve inflation and speculation including a new currency, the Sovereign Bolívar, tied to the Petro Moneda, a cryptocurrency rooted in Venezuelan oil production and mineral reserves. The government has increased salaries nearly 30 fold for public sector workers and is subsidizing private sector workers’ salaries for the next few months as private companies transition to the new levels. In addition, Venezuelans will receive economic bonuses to their electronic accounts [the Carnet de la Patria (homeland card). These bonuses allocate financial resources for Venezuelans across the socio-economic spectrum from families in accordance to their size to youth as well as expectant parents. The state also negotiated with the private sector to re-adjust prices for 25 basic food items to tackle price speculation across the country. These new measures rely on the government and civil society to fight the illegal dollar exchange market and price gouging. We will be able to evaluate whether these measures succeed based on economic improvements over time and whether the re-established currency will earn people’s trust. The new Sovereign Bolivar not only revalues the national currency, but also challenges the highly speculative and destructive illegal dollar exchange markets. In an effort to relinquish the US dollar of its power over the Bolivar, the Venezuelan government will authorize open currency exchange houses effectively allowing a controlled rate for the dollar. Everyday additional facets of these economic measures are announced in Venezuela. As Venezuela makes this economic transition, other countries peer into the possibility of a world independent of the US dollar where a nation of people and their resources determine the own economic conditions.

Janette continued: While Maduro is establishing sustainable conditions for Venezuela to viably transition into a 21st Century Socialist economy, he is also engaging the private sector since Venezuela lacks the infrastructure to respond to basic material needs on a national scale. Thus, to a certain extent, the government must cooperate with the private sector to import and sell necessities such as pharmaceutical medicines and food. Even with these promising measures, it’s important to note that grassroots movements which support Maduro still demand greater institutional support for local and regional initiatives centered on the communes as well as in domestic agricultural and industrial production.

In twenty or fifty years, today and tomorrow’s decisions will hopefully bring Venezuela closer to the socialist society that leaders like Comandante Chávez and the comunerxs (communards) envision. However, much of the nation’s success is contingent on its ability (and of those in solidarity) to fight against US efforts to destabilize Venezuela as well as the region politically and economically. US sanctions play a critical role in Venezuela’s economy and have a direct impact on conditions. US sanctions prevent Venezuela from refinancing its debt and block key imports. They also intentionally affect the lives of Venezuelans by limiting their access to material goods which naturally provoke visceral psychological and emotional distress meant to destabilize people’s commitment to the Bolivarian Process. An emergent international anti-sanctions campaign in Canada and the United States comprised of anti-war activists, labor unions and human rights organizations among others is dedicated to countering and reversing these illegal economic policies and denouncing these foreign government actions as a prelude to warfare.