I was expelled from Venezuela several years ago as a result of my political activism against the abusive rule of the Chavez government. Therefore, in the primary elections that took place on Sunday February 12, I was not allowed to register as a voter like a regular Venezuelan citizen living abroad. What happened to me reflects one among many aspects of Chavez’s despotic regime.
However, my personal story of exclusion does not prevent me from seeing that something important has just occurred in Venezuela. I believe that the primaries reflect a general rejection of 13 years of Chavista authoritarian, corrupt and polarizing rule. At the same time, the results of the primaries seem to reflect an inclination towards the center, a desire for both, political peace and social inclusion. This election appears to represent an evolution, a tendency to move not only beyond Chavez but also beyond the traditional political order, which was dominated by two major elitist parties (AD and COPEI), which Chavez abolished.
There are reasons to be cautiously optimistic with the primaries. Prior to the elections, opposition pundits had forecast a turnout of a million and a half, or two million at the most in the opposition primaries, while pro-government pundits had forecast that merely 900.000 people might show up to vote. But instead, 3,059.024 valid votes were cast to elect the opposition candidates for the presidency, governorships and mayoral offices. This means that 17% of the total registered voters cast their vote. This is a very good figure taking into account the environment of fear and intimidation the country has experienced in the last decade. By the same token, the number of people who participated was higher than those who did so in the primaries of Chavez’ party, the Venezuelan Socialist United Party (PSUV). In the 2008 PSUV primaries no more than 2.373.458 people voted. Likewise, in the PSUV primaries held in 2010 to elect the candidates to the National Assembly, 2,575.484 votes were cast. Furthermore, the turnout in the opposition primaries was even more amazing if we take into consideration that people faced the prospect of losing jobs, contracts or entitlements if the government identified them as belonging to the opposition.
It is also important to look at the profile of the candidates who obtained the bulk of the vote. Two of them have been very active governors. The winner Henrique Capriles Radonski, 39, is the Governor of the State of Miranda, and he obtained 64% of the vote. Capriles advocated “Lulism”, a desire to replicate Jose Inazio “Lula “ Da Silva’s policies of promoting capitalist enterprise and foreign investment as well as policies of social inclusion. The second most voted candidate was Pablo Perez, 42, who is the governor of the State of Zulia with 30.3% of the votes. Both are young politicians with a commendable executive experience and good records as governors. Both also define themselves as center-left of the political spectrum. Capriles received the full support of non-traditional political parties like Primero Justicia, Voluntad Popular and of leftist parties such as CAUSA R as well as two parties formerly allied with Hugo Chavez (PODEMOS and PPT). Unlike Capriles, Perez’s party, Un Nuevo Tiempo, is made up of politicians coming from the old traditional parties and his candidacy was endorsed by AD, COPEI, Convergencia and the leftist Party Bandera Roja.
Interestingly enough, the candidate who reached a very distant third place with 3.7% of the votes was Maria Corina Machado, an independent politician with no formal party platform. Machado is a charismatic, intelligent and attractive woman, who led the electoral-watch NGO “Sumate”. She has also been a vocal and courageous opposition member of the 2011-2016 Venezuelan National Assembly. Despite all this, her direct, assertive and critical communication style was considered to be well to the right, too confrontational and therefore polarizing.
In other words, many Venezuelans have grown tired of polarization. Likewise, they do not want to return to the pre-1998 years of two-party rule. Less so they want to maintain Hugo Chavez in power, who is held responsible for the severe deterioration of the quality of life, high inflation, constant shortage of basic food supplies, high crime rates, undemocratic practices and flagrant corruption.
The relevance of Capriles landslide victory is a display of maturity by the Venezuelan opposition that now understands that the road to win the minds and hearts of Venezuelans is to disregard and refuses to play the endless confrontations, the Chavez government has encouraged throughout the years.
Such acrimony has helped Chavez radicalize his regime and burn the bridges of political communication between social groups and political forces.
Capriles Radonski’s bid was further bolstered by a show of unity among candidates from the opposition, which for years suffered from internal disputes that ultimately benefited Chavez. These divisions have further allowed Chavez to accelerate the process of dismantling democratic institutions while assuming full control of the legislative, judicial and electoral branches of government. This process has deepened the destruction of the capitalist-liberal state while replacing it with the failed “Socialism of the 21st century”.
In spite of the high expectations that may be arising from the impressive result of the recent Venezuelan primary, Capriles must face the hard fact that Chavez is still riding high in the polls. To be sure, he will be running against an incumbent that not just continues to be popular among many in the poorest sectors, but who controls at his will the hemisphere largest oil reserves as well as a formidable state-run media and patronage apparatus. This means that Chavez also has the means to spend massively on welfare projects for purely electoral purposes.
Although Capriles and the opposition will need to go beyond his vague promises, and his “Lulismo”, they must also be prepared to quickly respond to the provocations and vicious attacks that will definitely come from the Chavista side. This means that they will have to avoid falling into the mendacious and scandalous provocations, character assassination and flagrant defamatory attacks against the elected unitary candidate. In fact, these attacks have begun already.
We have already witnessed the hysterical response of Chavez and his allies to the impressive outcome of Venezuela’s first ever-presidential primary: the orchestrated anti-Semitic attacks against Capriles for his Jewish ancestry (although he is Catholic, his family came to Venezuela escaping from the Holocaust during WW II) and the unfounded attacks against him regarding his sexual orientation. Worse, the Chavez government has already initiated its first assault against democratic practices by having the Supreme Court make an unusually “emergency decision”, ordering all voting material turned over to the government. The opposition organized around the MUD (Unified Democratic Platform) has refused to comply arguing that the voting records (ballots and rosters) were burned as agreed, within the next 48 hours after the February 12 opposition primary in order to avoid placing registered voters in Chavez’ black list. The conflict continues to unfold, having already caused the death of a university student who was hit by a police tow truck when he was protesting in defense of destroying the list of registered voters in the State of Aragua.
It is worth remembering that after the failed 2004 recall referendum against Chavez, a voter list of those who have petitioned for the recall was leaked and widely circulated. As a result of this leak, the infamous “Tascon List” (named after Luis Tascon, the Chavista member of the National Assembly promoting the use of this list) emerged and was overtly used against hundreds of people. These people were fired from government jobs or prevented from working for the government or from participating in state bids. Given the October national election as well as his health situation, Chavez has also begun to armor his inner circle to secure the continuity of his regime. He appointed hard-line military figures in key positions such as Diosdado Cabello, who was appointed President of the National Assembly, and the controversial narco-General Henry Rangel Silva, who was designated Minister of Defense.
Thus, it is likely that the opposition will face an uphill battle in trying to convince voters in Venezuela’s rural backwaters and urban slums to vote for anyone other than Chavez. Chavez will continue increasing public spending before the October 2012 general election. Likewise, in case of victory by the opposition, Chavez will offer resistance. Should that happen, we might face the possibility of violence.
It is no accident that the MUD had chosen February 12 to hold the opposition primaries. In that date Venezuelans celebrate a national holiday called “Day of the Youth”. After the impressive turnover and unity showed by the opposition that day, maybe we have already witnessed the spark of a “Venezuelan spring”.
It could well be that an open clash between a legitimized and reasserted opposition and a military-shielded regime could be inevitable and violent.
Vilma Petrash is a Venezuelan exile, an International Affairs analyst, and a TV producer for AmericaTeve- Miami.
Source: TheAmericasReport.com
Artículos Relacionados: