Chavismo explains defeat

(This is a re-post of my piece for the WOLA blog Venezuelan Politics and Human Rights)

Government and pro-government forces have been reacting to Sunday’s adverse elections results. Comments have ranged from the self-critical to the blaming of an “economic war” waged by the opposition.

The first reaction came from President Maduro himself. Right after the electoral authority’s announcement that the opposition had secured at least 99 elected deputies, Maduro appeared on television from the Miraflores palace recognizing defeat. He refrained however from directly congratulating the winners and instead accused his opponents of stepping up the “economic war” against the country in the weeks before the election. He also called for a “rebirth” of the Revolution and told his followers they needed to “go from the current state of difficulties caused by the economic war, to a renovation of hope.”

On Monday, the president met with his cabinet and said that the government was declaring itself in a state of “permanent dialogue with the people, with criticism and self-criticism and constructive action.” But he also suggested that the Revolution should go into a defensive/offensive phase. The defense should be for the safeguarding the social accomplishments of the Revolution against the attacks form the right. He explained, “they feel they have power and are already showing their fangs and threatening to persecute the people. The bourgeoisie is coming to impose a neo-liberal restoration.”  The offensive phase, on the other hand, should aim at the final defeat of the “economic war promoted by rightist sectors seeking to generate chaos and destabilization.”

In his televised address on Tuesday night, Maduro said he would block any amnesty law for political prisoners coming from the new parliament. He also asked for the resignation of all his cabinet ministers, as he announced the government will be going into a deep “restructuring.”  

Other government officials also reacted to the results. The PSUV governor of Falcón State, Stella Lugo, declared on Monday that “the government is going into a full state of revision.” She said however, that the revision should focus not in the government itself, but on how it had failed to clearly explain the effects of the economic war and who was behind it: “The opposition won those spaces because of the economic crisis. But we failed to explain to our people that the crisis had been planned by the right-wing. The people yesterday drained in the ballots their discontent as a result of the economic crisis.”

The head of the PSUV’s electoral campaign, Jorge Rodríguez, also accepted defeat in a press conference on Monday. He asked for an internal revision of the government, but also blamed the defeat on what he called an “atypical campaign.” “While we were in the street with ideas and proposals, the opposition side didn’t even put any candidates in the field. Instead they waged an economic and psychological war. As president Maduro said yesterday, the right-wing didn’t win; the economic and psychological war and all aggressions suffered by the Venezuelan people won the elections.” Rodríguez also turned to the accusation made in the past by the opposition againstChavismo and told the “right” not to take this electoral win as a blank check. “If the opposition uses this electoral result as an instrument to attack the institution, well, it will have to face us,” he warned.

The international campaign coordinator of the pro-government coalition, Roy Chaderton, said in a press conference in Caracas that the defeat could be explained because “a part of our people, seriously disgruntled by the sufferings progressively caused by the economic war waged by rightist sectors, succumbed to the promises of a false change, which is really a step backwards.”

One of the reelected Chavista deputies, Earle Herrera, said that the results were “an incentive to consolidate and defend the achievements of the first 17 years of the Bolivarian Revolution.” He also said that his reelection had not been an essay task because “the Venezuelan people have been the victims of sabotages of the oil industry, guarimbas, economic war, kidnaping attempts, and many more destabilization plots, which we have been fighting against alongside the people.”

The current president of the National Assembly and PSUV leader Diosdado Cabello said that the results were only a slight misstep for the revolution. But he also sent a message to thoseChavistas who had switch political loyalties and voted for the opposition: “if you claim to be aChavista, but you voted for the opposition, the facts will prove you wrong.” On Tuesday Cabello declared that the current AN will speed through the appointment of 12 judges of the Supreme Justice Tribunal, before the new opposition dominated assembly takes over in January 2016.

Independent Chavismo also quickly reacted to the elections results. The popular web forumAporrea.org, carried many articles which backed the government’s line of blaming the economic war for the defeat (read examples here and here). Some also blamed a lack of patriotism and loyalty by the people, asking the Lord to forgive the traitors, or claiming that the “the bonds of servitude are still stronger that those of patriotism.”

Many more pieces however expressed doubts about the government’s explanations of an economic war as the main culprit for the defeat and instead squarely blamed corruption and incompetence within the government (read examples here and here.)

The need for self-criticism and doubts about the conspiratorial explanations given by the government were the main points of several reactions from the independent left. Franklin González, a well-known social sciences professor of the Universidad Central de Venezuela and former ambassador to Poland, Uruguay, and Greece during the Chávez administration, wrote in a piece for Aporrea that the government needed to learn from the defeat and deal with the everyday problems of the people instead of blaming everything on a conspiracy. “If a person phones a government bank and spends an infinite time on hold, without ever reaching anyone to answer, this has little to do with imperialism and the CIA.”

Nicmer Evans, leader of the independent Chavista party Marea Socialista, said that the government should fully face its responsibility for the results. “I have heard some government officials blaming the people; instead I think the government has no one to blame but itself. To say that the economic war is completely responsible for this is quite frankly to be totally disconnected from reality.”

Elections day conspiracy theories

A perfect day for conspiracy theorizing.

If, as most polls predict, the day ends with a National Assembly controlled by the opposition, will the government accept defeat? 

Here is a story of a secret meeting of high government officials in the Fuerte Tiuna military compound on December 4 to discuss the issue. Different versions of this story have been circulating since yesterday in opposition web sites and social media. Note the presence of a “Cuban general” in the meeting, and the touching Latin-American hope in the military finally standing up against the regime:

¡BOMBAZO! PADRINO LOPEZ SE REVELO CONTRA MADURO Y DIOSDADO En una Reunion en FUERTE TIUNA

DICIEMBRE 6, 2015

REUNIÓN EN FUERTE TIUNA

Presentes todos los integrantes del Alto Mando Militar, el Comandante de la Redi Central, un general cubano, el jefe del Sebin, el jefe de la Dgcim, el ministro González López, Jorge Rodríguez, el ministro Motta Dominguez, el jefe de Cantv, el jefe de Conatel. Presidieron Maduro y Diosdado.

Las voces mas activas de la reunión fueron las del presidente Maduro, Diosdado y el ministro de la defensa. Todas las encuestas de cierre referidas y comentadas parcialmente por el presidente eran demoledoras en los números contra el régimen. Incluyendo dos de cierre al martes 2 de diciembre ejecutadas por el Sebin y la Dgcim.

La encuesta en la que más énfasis y preocupación puso el presidente (esa la leyó el ministro Padrino) fue la interna dentro de la FAN con la misma tendencia nacional y la misma diferencia de casi 35 puntos a favor de la oposición. El general en jefe le insistió al presidente que teniendo esa tendencia en la FAN era peligroso hacer retoques en los resultados electorales definitivos a nivel nacional en virtud a que generalmente los resultados se conocen al detalle desde la mesa electoral por todos los integrantes del Plan República.

El tema del control del orden interno lo garantizó con los planes previstos en las Redi y Zodi. En general el Alto Mando Militar se vió nucleado y unido en la reunión, salvo el Almirante Franklin Montplaisier (Comandante General de la Armada) y el MG Reverol (Comandante General de la GN) quienes se presentaron dispuestos a todo con tal de que la victoria para la revolución se garantizara “como sea” como lo dijeron en varias oportunidades. Hubo un momento de tensión durante la reunión, lo fue cuando Diosdado Cabello expuso que “lo que estaba en juego el domingo era el futuro de la revolución y la cabeza de todos los presentes” y el ministro Padrino en una intervención de cierre señalaba que él tenía el compromiso de salvar la responsabilidad institucional de la FAN con “la correcta ejecución primero del Plan República y luego, en caso de una grave alteración del orden publico, la restitución del mismo a través de la ejecución de los planes correspondientes.”

Vladimir Padrino señaló que lo que estaba en juego era la democracia y el cumplimiento de la constitución y que el Comandante eterno Chávez ya había dado un ejemplo en una situación similar el 2 de diciembre de 2007 durante la derrota electoral del referendo aprobatorio de la reforma constitucional. Ni al presidente Maduro, ni a Diosdado le gustó cuando el ministro Padrino señalo que las responsabilidades eran individuales, que él iba a asumir las suyas. Posteriormente quedaron como temas generales y tocados muy superficialmente, las posibilidades del apagón parcial, el tema de las operadoras de telefonia digital y el internet y la posibilidad de que algunos factores de la MUD hicieran anuncios de los resultados electorales antes de la intervención del CNE.

Parece que la cosa no esta tan buena para Maduro y Diosdado, El tono se pone serio cuando el mismo Padrino Lopez es quien pide garantizar los resultados.

Así que mañana todos a estar pilas en las mesas. NO VAMOS A PERMITIR NINGUNA ESTAFA.

EL Gobierno puede que tenga algunos militares, PERO NO A TODOS, todavía hay Venezolanos que quieren una mejor institucionalizad y aun aman a este país tanto como tu y yo.

Public Opinion Research on Conspiracy Theories in Venezuela

Despite the importance conspiracy claims have acquired in Venezuela’s political discourse, both for the opposition and government but especially as the official rhetoric of the latter, public opinion experts have paid little attention to the study of the use of conspiracy theories in Venezuelan politics.

Several pollsters have included in their surveys questions indirectly related to the beliefs in an “economic war,” sabotages, or alleged plots to kill government officials. DATANALISIS for example found earlier this year that only 9.3% their respondents blamed the private sector for food scarcities while 50% blamed the government. But late last year IVAD, found that an impressive 19.9% of respondents believed it was true that the opposition was planning to assassinate President Maduro. And one of Venezuela’s most important public opinion agencies, HINTERLACES, has fully embraced the government’s conspiratorial rhetoric as part of their explanations (see my most recent posts on this issue here, here, and here.)

John M. Carey, Brenda Nyhan, and Thomas Zeitzoff are, to my knowledge, the first to commission a survey directly asking questions about conspiracy beliefs in Venezuela. Carey has published some of the results of that survey in The Washington Post.

One of the most interesting bits:

We found that belief in conspiracy theories in Venezuela is widespread. Most notably, while key demographic characteristics track only loosely with politics, conspiracy theory beliefs are tightly bound up with Venezuelans’ preferences between the governing chavistas and the opposition. Moreover, the conspiracy beliefs the government has promoted are far less frequently endorsed than one promoted by the opposition — an indicator that the PSUV’s attempts to avert electoral disaster are failing.

What percentage of the population supports government conspiracy theories, or their opposition inspired versions, seems to roughly correlate with general government and opposition support according to recent polls. If the authors are right and “belief in conspiracy theories in Venezuela is widespread,” did people in the last couple of years simply switch the conspiracy theories they believe in line with their political allegiances? 

Jorge Arreaza: The government is protecting the opposition from itself

The Vice-president Jorge Arreaza yesterday addressed a group of foreign diplomats accredited in Venezuela and, according to the Agencia Venezolana de Noticias, “alerted over the media manipulation of the national political scenario that is promoted by the right-wing ahead of the December 6 elections, as part of their plan to sabotage them.”

Arreaza said: “The media attacks against Venezuela every time there are elections are terrible. There is a pattern here, a planned and well-rehearsed script.

Arreaza also repeated the government version according to which the leader of opposition Party Luis Manuel Díaz was killed as part of a settling of scores between organized gangs fighting for the control of Guárico State’s criminal activities. Arreaza said that Díaz had belonged to the gang of “Los Plateados.”

The Vice-president added that the Venezuelan government has information that the “ultra-right” is planning to commit “political crimes with the aim of generating confusion and of blaming the government for such crimes.” 

According to him these rightists groups are paying between 30,000 and 60,000 dollars to sicarios for the assassination of Lilian Tintori, wife of jailed opposition leader Leopoldo López, as well as other opposition figures. President Nicolas Maduro had previously also declared that “the right” is paying people “up to $50,000 to generate violence in Venezuela.”

Fortunately, declared Arreaza, “the government is offering protection to Tintori and to other opposition leaders that are showing up in intelligence lists as targets.”

The Venezuelan government backed news channel Telesur is also running a series of pieces claiming that the opposition is falsely accusing PSUV militants of electoral violence and that the recent attacks on opposition electoral meetings is all part of a plot that includes paid sicarios dressed as PSUV supporters. In this article, “The false attacks against the MUD in Venezuela,” Telesur explains that it suspects that the immediate complaints by the MUD of alleged attacks were planned in cahoots with the Secretary General of the Organization of American States, Luis Almagro, the European Parliament, and the United States Embassy in Caracas.

In a not very subtle attempt to criminalize the opposition parties umbrella organization Mesa de la Unidad (MUD), Telesur is running via twitter (@teleSURtv), under the hashtag #MUDmafiososYasesinos, this information about the “Criminal network of the Venezuelan ultra-right” already published in August.

Electoral coup according to Telesur

Here is an interesting “infographic” by Telesur. It shows the “five stages of the electoral coup in Venezuela,” which would be staged by the opposition for the December 6 legislative elections.

“Why are United States officials so sure that there will be a complex scenario in Venezuela? Because there is a five stage plan to stage an electoral coup,” informs Telesur.

The first stage is a media strategy using “mass psychology.” This media strategy aims at producing “manipulated tendencies [showing] an opposition victory.” Recent polls that show a 35 points lead for the opposition can surly be dismissed as part of the conspiracy. Also part of this stage is the “magnifying” of issues such as insecurity, scarcity, and the violation of human rights. These are issues are most obviously not a real problem in Venezuela and are part of a media construction.

The second stage of the plot is to denounce an electoral fraud. In order to do this the opposition is asking for “intervention of international observers and the United Nationals System.”

The “consolidation” of International support for the opposition is part of the third stage. The usual conspirators such as Alvaro Uribe and Felipe González are mentioned, but also organizations such as the Konrad Adenauer, and the Friederich Ebert foundations and FreedonHouse.

Opposition street mobilization is the fourth stage, “especially in the State of Táchira and other frontier states.” According to the document the opposition has been hording t-shirts “with the symbols of the PSUV”. Opposition militants would dress as pro-government supporters and attack electoral centers and State media facilities. The document directly accuses an opposition candidate for the State of Barinas, Freddy Superlano, a person “with close links to Tintori,” as the “strong man” for this part of the plot.

The fifth and last stage will “achieve that medical centers are not in condition to open during the days before and after the elections to take care of the wounded.” How the opposition could effectively close government controlled public health facilities, is not explained in the document.

The main evidence of this conspiracy is, for Telesur, are recent declarations by John Kelly, current chief of the United States Southern Command, and by Thomas Shanon, Counselor of the United States Department of State, that the “White House is closely following the Venezuelan electoral process,” and a recent visit to Caracas of a “parliamentary rights-wing European group,” which met the local opposition.

The source used by Telesur for this document is also interesting: Hugo Moldiz Mercado, a Bolivian politician who was briefly Minister of Government in his country in 2015.

(Thanks to @brolidolli)