Chávez: From hero to tyrant

The divisive policies of "El Presidente" are turning friends into enemies. Some claim his strident r

In the corner of a toyshop in downtown Caracas lay a dusty pile of battery-operated talking Hugo Chávez dolls. El Presidente was dressed in full military regalia and, at the touch of a button, would deliver a speech on the Bolivarian revolution. "Sale: half-price," said a notice propped up on top. The sales assistant gave them a disparaging glance. "I wish I could buy them all," she said conspiratorially, "so I could burn them."

One thing you can say with certainty about Venezuela's president is that he provokes strong emotions. People in Caracas offer their political opinions almost before introducing themselves. On my first foray into the city's streets, I asked a bookseller where I could buy a map, and he gripped my arm fervently before replying: "There is only one thing you need to know about Caracas, and that is that we are revolutionaries." The whole population has been politicised; it has also been polarised into two ferociously hostile camps, Chavistas and the derogatorily named opposition of "esqualidos" ("squalid people"). The tone of debate is so angry that the situation is often described as a "cold civil war".

With a power-crazed Chávez at the helm, the fear is that it may not remain cold.

Like many cities in Latin America, Caracas is characterised by the sharp contrast between its spacious and tranquil affluent areas and the poor, gang-ridden barrios that sprawl up the surrounding hills. Since the attempted right-wing coup that briefly deposed Chávez in 2002, a dangerous face-off between the two has been evolving. Carlos Caridad Montero, a Caracas-based film-maker, took me to see one of the city's front lines: the motorway that runs between Petare, the largest barrio, and the middle-class area of Terrazas del Ávila. On one side of the road, the brick shacks of Petare are stacked on top of each other like brightly coloured Lego. On the other stands a set of grim, if slightly better-heeled, tower blocks.

"Everyone in these blocks is armed in case the gangs from Petare try to invade the area," Carlos told me. "And on the other side, you have the gangs, who are also heavily armed. In Petare, they call the people who live on this side gringos, as if they were American rather than Venezuelan."

William Ury, a conflict resolution expert at Harvard, identifies three typical symptoms of a country on the brink of civil war. The first is that the population begins to arm itself; the second is that each side begins to dehumanise and impute evil intentions to the other; and the third is the politicisation of the media. Contemporary Venezuela has each of these conditions in abundance. Ury suggests that the key to defusing the threat is to strengthen the "third side": those organisations or people who empathise with both sides of the conflict and will encourage others to resolve their differences non-violently.

The Chávez regime is making it increasingly difficult for anyone to remain on the "third side". Carlos has good left-wing credentials (he trained in Cuba). He is broadly sympathetic to Chávez, but is also concerned about the effects of political polarisation. However, working for Villa del Cine, the year-old government-backed cinema organisation, he will be expected to produce what the minister of culture has termed "cinema with an ideological tendency". Films perceived to be critical of the government or to cast Venezuela in a bad light will not be welcomed. "I co-operate because I believe there is important work to be done that does not involve criticising Chávez," he said. "The problem is that as soon as I tell people who I am working for they assume my work is 'propaganda'. You are forced on to one side or the other."

Another prominent film director, Alejandro Bellame, told me that "it is true we still have nominal freedom of speech. But now what you say has consequences. If you dare to criticise, more and more doors will be closed to you. This system rewards loyalty above talent or hard work."

Despite the divisive revolutionary rhetoric, many middle-class professionals support Chávez's determination to integrate poorer communities into Venezuelan politics. Yanay Arrocha, a publicist working for the recently closed anti-Chávez television station Radio Caracas Televisión (RCTV), told me: "The achievement of this government has been that the great majority of people now discuss politics and are interested in the nation. Poor people understand that they have rights, and rich people understand that they have a responsibility, and that there are problems to resolve." But the price has been a painful erosion of common values, she said. "The attitude that is transmitted from the top is that if you think differently from me, you are my enemy."

The social breakdown in Venezuela makes its presence felt in many ways, not least the 80 per cent increase since 2000 in the number of Venezuelans - mainly the educated professionals any developing country desperately needs - living in the United States. Street crime and delinquency have also grown alarmingly: according to the United Nations, Venezuela recently overtook Brazil in having the highest rate of gun- related violence in the world among nations not at war.

In Caracas, homicide has become the most common cause of death for men between 15 and 25. Much of the violence is contained in the poorer barrios, although "express" kidnappings and carjackings are a significant preoccupation across the city. "We have been subjected to a political rhetoric which in some way justifies the use of violence as a response to poverty," said Bellame. "What Chávez has not grasped is that you can't create solidarity by decree."

Chaos and unrest

Until lately, opposition to Chávez was characterised as "right-wing" or, in the terminology used by the president and his supporters, "imperialist". Since May, when the government shut down RCTV, the country's most popular channel, this has been changing fast. The charges against it were of anti-government bias, in particular its refusal to air news of the pro-Chávez protests that brought him back to power after the 2002 coup. However, RCTV was predominantly an entertainment channel, and showed some of the nation's favourite soap operas, or "novelas". In a young country, its 53-year broadcasting history gave it national heritage status; one acquaintance described it as "part of our collective consciousness". Polls showed that 70 per cent of Venezuelans disagreed with the decision to take it off the air.

RCTV has been replaced by TVes (pronounced té vès, or "you see yourself"), a government channel that has the apparently laudable aim of moving away from a western, consumerist agenda and reflecting the "real" Venezuela. But when I tuned in at prime time on a Saturday evening, it was broadcasting an hour-long programme about the armed forces, encouraging conscription to the reserves. An army general was explaining, over footage of Iraqi insurgents waving guns, that ordinary Venezuelans had to be trained in tactics of "asymmetrical resistance".

"What the country needs now is union, complete union between the population and the armed forces," he said. The journalist conducting the interview smiled and nodded.

"Chávez is, above all, a military man," explained Ivo Her nández, a professor of political science, when I went to see him at the Simón Bolívar public university on the outskirts of Caracas. "Politics for him is a battle: there are no greys - just black and white. The idea of doing things consensually doesn't enter his head. In no sense does this situation benefit Venezuelans from any social group. He has caused too much chaos and unrest for the country to develop." The university itself is buzzing with dissent, with "freedom of speech" graffiti daubed on walls and cars throughout the leafy complex. Students in yellow T-shirts run around putting up posters advertising rallies and protest marches.

The RCTV shutdown has been the catalyst for an important new wave of opposition, spearheaded by a national student movement. Almost daily, students have been marching through the streets of the capital, protesting against curbs on freedom of speech and, crucially, on the independence of universities (Chávez has announced plans to replace independent student unions with government-friendly "Popular Student Power" councils). The protesters - who are from public and private universities alike, and therefore from diverse social backgrounds - do not use the emotive anti-Chávez rhetoric employed by the right-wing opposition. Instead, they promote the idea of "national reconciliation", which they symbolise by painting their hands white.

I attended a student rally at a baseball stadium in central Caracas. Thousands of young people from around the country were packed in, waving Venezuelan flags and chanting, "We are students, not coup-plotters." Sindy ópez, a fresh-faced 19-year-old from Simón Bolívar University, was there with her friend Maria González.

"When they closed RCTV, we really got desperate, and furious about the lack of freedom of expression and diversity of thought," she said. "We realised we could not let it carry on. It is not like the president says - I'm not from the elite; my family doesn't even own a house. I just can't see this happen to my country."

Chávez has responded to the protests by claiming that those involved are "representatives of the international bourgeoisie" who are being manipulated by the right. He called on those living in the barrios to "defend our revolution from this fascist aggression" - a comment that was interpreted by many RCTV supporters as an incitement to attack.

"We have been trying to make our voices heard non- violently," said one protester. "The problem is that the president wants violence." So far, the marches have been peaceful.

The students have been dubbed the "2007 generation" by the Venezuelan media, and have become a focus for protest from other pockets of opposition, including journalists. Their agenda centres on inclusive politics; having grown up under Chávez, they are well aware that they will not succeed without the support of poor communities. They are attempting to create a dialogue, with students who live in the barrios being encouraged to set up discussions and consultations that feed back into the movement.

"Every one of us needs to bring the debate to their work, their family, their barrio," said one of the student leaders, Stalin González. "We don't want to impose any idea or ideology on anyone. All we want is for every Venezuelan to have a say in how we construct this country."

Chávez will have to listen to their message - and soon.

Hugo's friends and foes

WARM

Ken Livingstone Chávez's visit to London in 2006 to see the mayor concluded with a deal like no other. In return for $32m worth of diesel oil, to be used to subsidise London bus travel, the Greater London Authority would provide expertise and advice to the Venezuelan government on projects from transport and cleaning up rivers to tourism. Livingstone himself is head of the Venezuela Information Centre.

Alexander Lukashenko When Chávez visited Belarus in June, the Belarusian president (known as Europe's last dictator) praised him as "a man of extensive knowledge". Lukashenko pledged co-operation; Chávez stated his desire to "form a team". There is speculation that his recent visits to both Belarus and Russia have been to arrange major weapons purchases. Vladimir Putin has sold Venezuela $3.5bn of weapons in the past several years.

Fidel Castro Chávez regards Castro as a father figure and Cuba as a model for his Bolivarian dream, and Castro has committed himself to helping him achieve it. Chávez has provided Cuba with oil and poured capital into its economy in return for educators and medical professionals. Castro has complimented him for being "a champion of the cause"; Chávez has stated Venezuela should head "toward the same sea as the Cuban people . . . a sea of happiness, true social justice and peace".

Evo Morales In April 2006, the Bolivian leader signed up to Chávez's "Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas", a managed trade agreement and anti-American alliance that also involves Cuba. Venezuelan aid has poured in. Deals were concluded in May 2006 including partnerships between the state-owned oil companies and joint mining and fertiliser ventures. In March, Venezuela paid the legal bills for Bolivia's controversial gas nationalisation. Morales's opponents fear that he is leading Bolivia down the path to a presidential monopoly of power.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad The Iranian president had good reason to welcome Chávez to Tehran again this month, as his government faces another round of sanctions by the UN Security Council. Chávez is defending Iran's nuclear programme and promising to unite the Persian Gulf and the Caribbean. "I thank God that Iran and Venezuela are standing together for ever," he said.

COOLING

Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva The ethanol deal that Brazil signed with the US in March blunted Chávez's dream of an anti-US alliance in the south. In May, he described Brazil's national congress as a "parrot" of the US. Lula coldly replied: "Chávez has to look after Venezuela, I have to look after Brazil."

ICY

George W Bush In September, Chávez called Bush the "devil" at the UN General Assembly. Last month, a US military psychological profile described Chávez as insecure, malignantly narcissistic and driven by a need for adulation. The Bush administration tacitly backed a coup that briefly ousted Chávez in 2002, and has made no secret of its distaste for a leader who has thrown an economic lifeline to Castro's Cuba.

Research by Marika Mathieu and Zain Sardar

Related article: Chávez: the defence

187 comments

PonyJony's picture

Chavez is progresive? That's the most ridiculous statement I've ever heard. The dude is an homophobic, racist, nationalist, ultra military, and a proud confessed wife beater (with far more girlfriends than Udai Hussein) , not to mention anti semite (because that, again, seem like something progresive to be in contemporary Europe) and to some brits he comes off as progresive. That's how insane the world we live in is. In Britain he would be hanged. A man who said he doesn't trust an animal that bleeds for four days and doesn't die, refering to women. A man who tried to put the director of Secuestro Express in jail because he included a Gay soldier in his movie (I respect homosexuals, he said, but to suggest there's homosexuals in the armed forces is treason).

It doesn't seize to amaze me how nobody of the Chavez defenders in this blog can anwser the real question: What's the benefit of having trippled the crime rate in less than a decade. The 14 thousand Venezuelans who died last year demand your answer. If you can't answer that question, stop disrespecting their memory. Or is it that letting the poor kill each other is also some progresive technique to reduce poverty?

And like I said, Calvin Tucker is not a tarifado. He uses arguments from three years ago, and the Tarifados are updated weekly.

Calvin Tucker's picture

Who do you think you are kidding, CoCoLoco?

Only in the mind of an opposition fanatic could the website he linked to be described as "the website of the poor of the barrios". It is, as CoCoLoco knows full well, an anti-Chavez disinformation website that is as representative of the Venezuelan poor as the Count Dracula is of vegetarians.

The US Government is spending millions of dollars on disinformation of this sort - this money is channeled through NED and USAID and given to what they call "civil society" groups, which is a by-word for the upper and middle class opposition.

The facts are that 80% - 90% of the working class and poor of the barrios consistently vote for Chavez. Chavez's national approval rating according to the latest DATOS poll is over 70%, and Chavez won the last election with 63% of the vote.

*******************************************************

mat_ador84 is equally misinformed. The idea that Chavez is "not actually an integral part of this movement" rivals CoCoLoco's post for the prize for the silliest comment of the week.

The problem in Venezuela is precisely the opposite. It is Chavez alone who can put millions of people on the streets, and it is Chavez to whom the majority of Venezuelans look to for leadership.

The whole point of the new 6 million strong united socialist party (PSUV), is to create a political infrastructure that is self sustaining, participatory, and can strong enough to withstand an assassination or unexpected exit of Chavez from the presidency. Likewise the development of the communal councils will decentralise decision making to the grass roots, and involve millions of ordinary Venezuelans.

ALL of these developments in popular democracy have been spearheaded by Hugo Chavez, who has spoken frequently about the over-reliance of the Revolution on his personality.

mat_ador84 also appears to know next to nothing about the extent of US attempts to undermine and destroy Venezuelan democracy. In 2002 they gave the green light to the military coup, and then immediately recognised the short lived dictatorship. The Venezuelan opposition is funded by the US Government. There is also a corporate media disinformation campaign against Venezuela, which portrays Chavez as a dictator and an enemy of free speech (to their shame, the New Statesman appears to have joined in).

The idea that the very real threat posed by the US to Venezuela is in some way comparable with the Bush's largely fictitious 'War on Terror' is so superficial is hardy merits a response. Bush represents a corporate elite of billionaires, whereas Chavez represents the working class, the poor and the disenfranchised. mat_ador84 might not be able to see the difference, but Venezuelans can.

mat_ador84 suggests that Chavez should be "focusing on helping them [Venezuelans] to improve their neighbourhoods, schools and hospitals."

If mat had bothered to learn even the most basic facts about the Chavez era, he would know that that is precisely what Chavez is doing. A free health service has been rolled out across the country, illiteracy has been wiped out, a million more kids attend school, government backed supermarkets selling half price food have opened in every barrio, the minimum wage has risen enormously, unemployment is down, and even the opposition survey firms admit that real income for the poorest 60% of Venezuelans have more than doubled under Chavez.

That's why Chavez has a 70% approval rating, and why he has won every election and referendum since 1998 with massive majorities. It ain't rocket science.

CocoLoco's picture

Calvin Tucker, why dont you say it straight out: You love Cuba and want Venezuela going the same way. That the people of the country (all of them ! not just one group) are the loosers is of no concern to you .... contrary to me, people come first not ideologies, and what you are doing is nothing than repeating state propaganda without even thinking. What is anybody gaining if the salaries raise is lower than the inflation ?

WillB's picture

Without debating the validity of the visibly contentious arguments put forward by Alice O’Keeffe in her article, the hastily commissioned repost by Colin Burgon in last weeks NS has highlighted what I consider to be a serious failing on behalf of the editor John Kampfner.

A journalist writing for a current affairs magazine such as the NS should, on publication of their piece, be able to rely on the total support of their editor regardless of public opinion. Let us not forget that Mr Kampfner gave his editorial go-ahead for the inclusion of the piece just as it appeared. We must presume that he was as aware as Ms O’Keeffe must have been in the writing of it that it would ruffle the feathers of a significant section of the NS’s readership.

The ensuing furore has I’m sure exceeded both O’Keeffe’s and Kampfner’s worst fears but this should not cloud the inexcusable actions of the latter in commissioning and publishing not simply a counter-argument but instead a very personal and vindictive attack on Ms O’Keeffe herself.

Given the scale of impassioned opinion in this case one can see the justification for the exposure of another viewpoint in the magazine but not under any circumstances should the editor (whose first allegiance must be to his staff) commission such a piece and allow it to become so spiteful a personal attack. Regardless of anyone’s thoughts on Ms O’Keeffe’s point of view we must agree that in doing so Kampfner has portrayed himself as both disloyal to his staff and as a man unwilling to shoulder the responsibility for his own editorial decisions.

Calvin Tucker's picture

He also eats babies, usually with a dollop of ketchup.

"In Britain he would be hanged," you tell us.

Britain abolished the death penalty in 1965, so Hugo will be quite safe from the hangman's noose next time he pays us a visit.

"how insane the world we live in is"

I didn't know you did irony.

Calvin Tucker's picture

CocoLoco

Salaries for the poorest 60% have doubled in REAL terms, i.e. after inflation has been deducted. That's what I said in my post. That's what the INE statistical institute says. That's what the even the opposition-owned survery firms say.

The people of your country have spoken in ten elections and referenda, and they have rejected everything that you and the opposition stand for.

Chavez is not being judged on empty promises. He has been in power for 8 years, so he is being judged on his track record.

Two thirds of the population you ludicrously claim to speak for, like his track record on income growth, health, housing and education.

That's why they keep voting for him.

Why can't you respect that?

aadamb3's picture

PonyJony, the flow of the argument puts in hostile tone and an arrogant one. You are wealthy man with an education. Still your claims have no backing nor do you provide for negative evidence. Your simply making claims. Then demanding you be answered. You position lack a depth and a pou sto: a historical position from which you stand.

PonyJony's picture

It's easy to laugh at Venezuelans from the safety of your London home, Calvin Tucker.

Calvin Tucker's picture

Insanity knows no borders, PonyJony. And I reckon the two thirds of Venezuelans who voted for Chavez would be laughing along with me.

CocoLoco's picture

Calvin Tucker, voting in a democracy is secret, so no problem to vote for an opposition candidate or in a referendum to be for the recall vote , in Venezuela you end up on a list (Tascon list p.ex. ) and you loose your job, you can not find a new one as all companies working in any way for the government have to prove that they have nobody on those lists on their pay roll.
The country has 24 Million people , about 50% of the population is under 18 years old (figures from OAS, UN ) ... but on the election list are 18.5 Million people. If that would be the case in your country, would you believe the elections are regular ?
By the way, I am not from Venezuela, just a neighbour

Latest tweets