Recent
elections in Argentina and Venezuela have yielded major changes that
could ultimately open the door to greater interference by corporate
interests and the U.S.
by
Ramona Wadi
The recent
right-wing triumphs in Argentina and Venezuela are being touted as a
pivotal moment in South American politics, with the longstanding
balance of power shifting away from the left and toward the right.
In the
1970s, when a socialist fever was spreading across South America,
especially after Salvador Allende’s triumph in Chile, the United
States was concentrating on devious paths to destabilize the change
that had been achieved through democratic elections. The neoliberal
experiment that commenced in Chile on Sept. 11, 1973 later expanded
in the region via Plan Condór, through which the U.S. sought to prop
up dictatorships in the Southern Cone.
The Macri
family business, the Macri Society or Socma, expanded its wealth
during Argentina’s dictatorship era. According to a TeleSUR report,
the family business grew significantly throughout the late 1970s and
1980s by providing services to the regime, including waste management
and postal services.
And last
month, a narrow victory went to Mauricio Macri, a right-wing
presidential contender. With the backing of his party, he was part of
the minority opposition to a bill proposed by former President
Cristina Fernandez earlier this year that sought to investigate
dictatorship crimes and those complicit in them.
After
election results were announced, Jackie Fox, a psychological
counselor, who was quoted in The Guardian, stated: “This is the
end of corruption. We have someone who doesn’t need to become
richer than he already is.” Yet a Nov. 23 analysis from TeleSUR
warned:
“The
election of Mauricio Macri in Argentina’s presidential race comes
as a welcome victory to the country’s business elite and right-wing
parties across Latin America, but the president-elect has some
dubious ties that could signal a lasting legacy in the new head of
state of darker times in Argentina.”
Indeed,
recent elections in Venezuela have demonstrated a similarly chilled
socialist fever which once gripped the region — a fever which
democratic elections had kept in power until just recently. And,
alarmingly, it’s opening the door wider to U.S. and corporate
interference.
Does
Macri mark Argentina’s return to a neoliberal agenda?
Despite
earlier indications that left-wing candidate and former Vice
President Daniel Scioli would likely emerge victorious, right-wing
contender Mauricio Macri was propelled to a 3-point victory in
November, spelling the end of the leftist era ushered in by Néstor
Kirchner in 2003 and continued through his wife, Cristina Fernández.
Argentina’s
former Minister of Economy Domingo Cavallo, whose policies some claim
were responsible for the country’s financial collapse in 2001 and
its ensuing default, clearly spelled out the terms upon which Macri’s
political success would hinge, stating that his rule “might also
help to put a definite end to the ‘Bolivarian Alliance for the
Peoples of our America’ that has caused such a great damage to the
peoples that adhered to it.”
Following
the election, Macri declared his intentions to align the country’s
foreign policy with that of the U.S., while shunning Venezuela and
Iran, saying, “We need to be in the world.”
However, as
Jonathan Watt sand Uki Goñi noted in The Guardian last month,
Macri’s “small margin of victory could hamper his ability to
push through political changes, particularly because Macri does not
have a majority in either house of congress,” particularly as
the former president continues to enjoy popularity among populist
“Peronists, union members and supporters in congress.”
Despite any
perceived hurdles he may have to jump in his return to a neoliberal
agenda that is likely to dominate his presidency, Macri has already
declared his intention to expand the role of corporate media by
scrapping the Media Law put into place under the Fernandez
administration. Macri argues that it inhibits free-market
competition, but, according to TeleSUR, critics maintain that an end
to the Media Law “and its limitations on the size of media
conglomerates is a direct assault on a democratic commitment to a
diversity of voices in the media and will be a death sentence for
alternative opinions in the media.”
In his first
comments following the announcement of election results, Macri stated
that building relations with other countries in Latin America was a
priority, adding that he would raise the issue of Venezuela’s
alleged human rights abuses at Mercosur, the regional free trade
association. During the final presidential debate, Macri had, in
fact, threatened to seek to expel Venezuela from the trading bloc.
Once the
right-wing victory in Venezuela was ascertained, though, Macri did
not feel compelled to pursue Venezuela’s expulsion any further.
Indeed, given the close electoral triumphs and Macri’s apparent
intentions to boost Argentina-U.S. relations, the shift of power away
from Venezuela’s socialist bloc is none other than an added victory
for Macri, who is being hailed as the commencement of change in the
continent.
For his
part, Scioli had warned that “Macri wants to leave us to the
luck of the market,” and accused him of making “a pact
with the IMF and vulture funds.”
Although the
rhetoric can be perceived as part of the pre-election diatribe, the
accusation is reminiscent of right-wing tactics in Venezuela, where
prominent individuals have discussed the concept of foreign
intervention through the International Monetary Fund as part of the
plans to oust Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.
Maduro: ‘A
counterrevolution has won’
In
Venezuela, the Democratic Unity Roundtable, the coalition opposition
group, made significant gains in this month’s legislative
elections. It won 99 out of 167 seats in the National Assembly
elections, shifting the balance of power away from the country’s
socialist base for the first time in nearly two decades.
In the wake
of election results, President Nicolas Maduro reiterated that the
destabilization tactics of the U.S.-backed right wing had managed to
influence public opinion enough to sway votes away from the socialist
principles of the Bolivarian Revolution, the socialist movement of
his predecessor and mentor, Hugo Chavez.
In the
aftermath of the defeat, Maduro’s rhetoric shifted from acceptance
of the outcome of the election — though he continued to reiterate
that economic sabotage such as deprivation of basic household
staples, played a crucial role in the result — to calls for
strengthening the grassroots movement in the country.
After
calling upon Venezuelans to “recognize in peace these results
and re-evaluate many political aspects of the revolution,”
Maduro embarked upon an offensive, vowing to protect workers’
rights and announcing “the creation of a new law to protect
workers’ stability for the next three years.”
The
announcement was made as the Venezuelan opposition had already
started threatening an overhaul of existing legislation that protects
workers’ rights — namely, the Organic Labor Law — in favor of
ushering in a capitalist agenda. The 2012 Organic Labor Law sought to
protect workers’ rights by proclaiming the need to “protect
work as a social deed” and “recognizing workers as
creators of socially produced wealth and as protagonists in education
and work processes.” Cipriana Ramos, a leading opposition
lawmaker and the head of one of the country’s largest business
organizations, argued that the law “can’t exist to benefit
workers.” With an overwhelming majority, the opposition can now
begin work to repeal existing legislation that has safeguarded
workers’ rights and shift power back to the Venezuelan oligarchy.
The
opposition also declared that, should it win two-thirds of the
National Assembly seats, it would seek to oust Maduro. Other threats
voiced by the opposition are in direct retaliation against the
Bolivarian Revolution, including threats to repeal the Law on Fair
Costs and Prices, a price-setting law which ensures affordable and
accessible commodities for the entire Venezuelan population.
In the wake
of election results, Maduro insisted: “The opposition hasn’t
won — a counterrevolution has won.”
TeleSUR has
not been averse to criticizing government weaknesses in the aftermath
of the elections. While acknowledging the role played by intentional
disinformation, particularly through international media and social
media, Maduro’s inability to deal resiliently with the economic
sabotage affecting the working class has been cited as another factor
contributing to the defeat.
While the
opposition revels in its newfound grasp on power, it will also face
an uphill battle as it attempts to convince its voters of an
independent strategy away from the U.S. After violent incitement
backed by the U.S., as well as the support garnered from European
countries which attempted to portray Maduro’s government as
infringing upon human rights — in February 2014 the European
Parliament passed a resolution urging Maduro to resign — the
right-wing agenda in Venezuela is a clear return of the oligarchy
with the intent of destroying the socialist structure.
The methods
used to sabotage Venezuela today may differ slightly from those of
the past, notably Chile and the ensuing Plan Condor. However, it is
clear that the U.S. has, through various means, attempted to destroy
Venezuela, in particular by targeting its strongest structures, such
as the accessibility of goods and services to accommodate basic needs
and, on a higher level, Venezuela’s oil.
According to
U.S. State Department spokesman John Kirby, the election results
“reinforce for us the importance of continuing to have dialogue
with Venezuela, and to continue to try to get this relationship on a
better path.”
Dialogue
with the U.S. is a mere euphemism for collaborative interference. In
November, TeleSUR and the Intercept revealed that since 2010, the
U.S. National Security Agency spied on Petroleos de Venezuela, a
state-owned oil and natural gas company, obtaining data which would
in turn provide an opening through which to spy on the company’s
officials. U.S. President Barack Obama authorized the operation in
2010, and it was carried out by the CIA and NSA, operating directly
from the premises of the U.S. Embassy in Caracas.
This
revelation should not be viewed as an isolated incident but within
the context of coups against Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution
since 2002, when Chavez was briefly ousted and the designated U.S.
and IMF-backed Pedro Carmona took over for two days.
After
Chavez’s death, destabilization and coup attempts intensified —
with the latest in February 2015 — following a series of oppressive
international measures such as U.S. sanctions on Venezuelan leaders
for alleged human rights violations.
Source:
Comments
Post a Comment