French view

[Dan Scanlan <dscanlan@xxxxxxx>]

Too bad Americans can't generate a 94.6 percent voter turnout. The
only presidential candidate actually working to expand the vote in
this country is Ralph Nader and "progressive" voters hate his guts.
Bummer. They must secretly love the CIA, Skull and Bones and the
corporatistas. Or is it just too much TV?

Dan Scanlan

---------------------
\
"The Stakes in the Election Were Not Chavez Himself":
  3 Questions for Maurice Lemoine
  By Laura Martel
  Le Nouvel Observateur

  Monday 16 August 2004

  Maurice Lemoine is Assistant Editor-in-Chief at "Le Monde
Diplomatique", a Latin American specialist, and author of "Central
America, the Esquipulas Castaways" (2002, L'Atalante).

   Under what conditions did the recall referendum vote take place?
How do you explain the very high level of participation?

  - According to the two outside observers on the ground, the Carter
Center and the Organization of American States (OAS), the democratic
process was respected. The balloting even took place under conditions
of rather exceptional calm, given the context of political crisis
that has been running through Venezuela the last three years.

  The only anomaly in comparison to a traditional election was the
extension of time for polling places to be open, but this was done in
an altogether legal way since such an extension is allowed for by the
National Electoral Council to permit all voters who wish to vote to
do so.

  The level of participation was so high because this referendum
constitutes a sort of climax in the acute political crisis that has
polarized Venezuelan society since November 2001.

  Consequently, mobilization was maximized by both sides for this
crucial event. This participation illustrates Venezuelans' desire to
express themselves through the ballot box, which is a good thing
given the opposition's anti-democratic maneuvers in recent years.
After the 2002 attempted coup and economic destabilization in 2003,
democracy recovers its rights.

  Moreover, it is all to the honor of the government to have allowed
such a referendum to take place under such good conditions. The
principle of the recall referendum, which gives all power to the
people, only exists in three countries.

  How do you analyze the results and Chavez' popular victory. Does he
owe his success to his record?

  - I am not surprised by this victory. Unlike some others, I have
always supposed that Chavez enjoyed solid popular support.

  Well before the rise in oil prices, Hugo Chavez had implemented all
sorts of reforms (agrarian reform, literacy programs, introduction of
doctors to poor regions) that allowed the popular masses ignored by
the IVth Republic to get their heads above water.

  You have to know that 70% of the population lives below the poverty
line. That's why the stakes of the election were not Chavez himself,
but the reforms he had initiated. The opposition had in effect
announced that it would go back on these reforms if they won. Now, if
agrarian reform seems an archaic issue to us, it's a concrete reality
for Venezuelans. The Chavez government, by giving property title to
peasants who illegally occupied those lands, also gave them access to
citizenship. These actions may remain invisible at a macro-economic
level, but they count for a great deal among the population.
Beyond his rather "rough" persona, Chavez' overall positive record
explains the support he's received. First of all, President Chavez
has always respected democratic process. He has, by the way, been
confirmed in his functions by democratic processes eight times, a
record no other American leader (including Bush) can boast.

  Even if he has failed in some areas such as the fight against
corruption, reduction of unemployment, and insecurity, he has
restored dignity to the neglected popular masses in spite of
opposition attacks which have absorbed a good 60% of his government's
energy.

   Will the opposition refusal to validate the results lead to
trouble? What consequences could this result have at the national and
international level?

  - As far as I know, the declarations of the two National Election
Council members close to the opposition are not a challenge to the
results, but an objection to the publication of preliminary results.
One segment of the opposition is truly Pinochettist, however. It was
responsible for the 2002 coup and the lock-out of the economy that
finished by bankrupting the country in 2003 (9% reduction in Gross
National Product): we may therefore expect that it will not accept
the results. If the opposition accepts the democratic process, it
could prepare for the 2006 elections, find the unity, the leader, and
the program that it currently lacks. If it refuses, we may fear the
worst.

  For the moment, its only objective is to oust Chavez, whom it
accuses of implementing a Castro-Communist regime. Now, although
Chavez does not hide his friendship for Castro, there's nothing
Communist about him! Cuba has established a single party state and
state control of the media and the economy. Venezuela counts 40
political parties, the media - in the opposition's pay - is not
censored or punished, and the President, who has not nationalized
anything, calls for foreign capital to invest in the country.
Certainly Chavez supplies low price oil to Cuba, but he does the same
for the Caribbean and Central America.

  At the international level, this eighth consultation may finally
convince other countries - especially in Europe which has conducted a
media campaign against him - of Hugo Chavez' legitimacy. As for the
United States, it finds itself in a very difficult position.
Washington detests Chavez, to the point of having participated in the
2002 coup d'Etat and financed the opposition through the National
Endowment for Democracy, which is close to the International
Republican Institute. Venezuela, however, is one of the USA's
principle oil suppliers.

  Confronted with instability in the Middle East, Washington can't
take the risk of destabilizing Venezuela by pushing Chavez out. He
personifies stability and his re-legitimation by the referendum
creates a fear of popular revolt should the opposition take power by
force. The United States has no other solution, therefore, than to
deal with him.

Translation: t r u t h o u t French language correspondent Leslie Thatcher.