By Roger D. Harris, Task Force board member

Ed. Note: Roger Harris was an election observer in Venezuela for both of Maduro’s elections, most recently on a Venezuela Analysis/Intrepid News Fund delegation.

The hall went silent at the National Electoral Council (CNE) on the evening of May 20^th as the five poker-faced officials filed in. Over 300 of us election observers from over 30 countries were seated in anticipation. The CNE president announced the results of this high-stakes election: the Venezuelan people had reelected Nicolás Maduro.

A US-backed political tide of reaction that had swept away other previously left-leaning Latin American governments (often by extra-parliamentary means) in Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, and Honduras had been bucked.

The US and the rightwing opposition in Venezuela had demanded an election boycott and Maduro’s resignation. Defying them, the popular classes voted as a form of resistance in what they proudly told us was a “celebration of democracy.” Hugo Chávez’s Bolivarian Revolution was again affirmed as was Chávez’s successor, Nicolás Maduro.

Maduro’s Inheritance

Hugo Chávez had spearheaded a movement that turned Venezuela from an epigone of Washington to an independent force opposing US global hegemony, placing a renewed focus on the socialist project. The Bolivarian Revolution reclaimed Venezuela’s history and forged a new national identity. Venezuelan society became more inclusive for the poor, especially women, people of color, and youth.

Maduro inherited all this and more: a dysfunctional currency system, deeply engrained corruption, an entrenched criminal element, and a petro-economy dependent on the international market. He also inherited the eternal enmity of Washington, bent on nothing short of regime change.

When Chávez died in office in 2013, many Venezuelans grieved deeply. Maduro won a snap election in a nation still reeling from Chávez’s passing just five weeks previously.

Chávez was bigger than life when he was alive. In death Chávez emerged even larger. Even for a 6’ 3” former bus driver and union leader, these were very big shoes for Maduro to fill. In working class neighborhoods, the slogan of the 2013 election was Yo soy Chávez (I am Chávez). Maduro had been Chávez’s then vice president and designated successor. But talking to Venezuelans back then, Maduro was an unknown quantity. They had, as many expressed, lost a father. They did not know the son, as Maduro himself characterized his relationship to his mentor.

The death of Chávez was a traumatic moment for the Venezuelan people, and an opportunity not to be missed by the US Empire and its acolytes to roll back the Bolivarian Revolution. Feet held to the fire, Maduro never had a grace period. Nor did Maduro ever waver or show fear.

The losing opposition candidate in 2013, Henrique Capriles, declared the election a fraud and called upon the Venezuelan people to “express their rage.” What ensued was the opposition- incited violence (guarimbas) of 2013, 2014, and 2017. Mainly confined to middle class opposition neighborhoods, over one hundred people have perished along with billions of dollars of public property destroyed. Capriles’ sore loser reaction was entirely predictable. Every politically engaged Venezuelan that we met in 2013 knew that this election would be declared fraudulent by the opposition and the US if Maduro won. The game plan for the US and its funded opposition is: declare elections that are lost but close as fraudulent, boycott elections that they don’t have a chance of winning, and initiate street violence.

Big business in Venezuela has created selective shortages in consumer goods as part of what has become known as the economic war. While liquor stores are fully stocked, according to a young woman from the state of Táchira bordering Colombia, items such as feminine hygiene products and diapers are scarce, targeting the grassroots chavista leadership, which is mainly female.

The US declared Venezuela an “extraordinary national security threat” in 2015 and has since piled on ever increasing economic sanctions.  And since Maduro’s accession to the Venezuelan presidency, international petroleum prices plummeted, adding another body blow to the country’s economy. Revenues from petroleum sales fund the vast social programs of the Bolivarian Revolution.

Under normal conditions, Maduro’s prospects for reelection would have looked dismal with hyper-inflation, negative GDP growth, and critical shortages. The US and its allies were trying to invoke the charter of the Organization of American States (OAS) to justify military intervention based on a “humanitarian crisis.”

While hardship today in Venezuela is undeniable, it does not rise to a level of humanitarian crisis. That’s the fake news. We could see well-stocked stores and lively commerce.

The real news is that even though Venezuela has the funds to buy vital medicines and food stuffs, such efforts are being blocked by illegal sanctions. The enemies of Venezuela are trying to make fake news true by hypocritically condemning the very conditions they are exacerbating.

The rightwing opposition, despite assistance from the US, has won only two of 24 major elections since 1998, which is its basis for calling a “dictatorship” what former US President Carter called the best electoral system in the world.

Meanwhile the Maduro government has proven resilient in responding to the challenges, while still maintaining and even extending core social programs such as building two million housing units for the poor. Measures taken include creating a crypto-currency, revaluing the regular currency, distributing food through the CLAP program, diplomatically forging closer relations with China and Russia, and most of all relying on the strength of the chavista base.

The US and the main opposition coalition, MUD, demanded Maduro call off elections and resign. The MUD further discredited itself, calling for yet more punishing US sanctions on their own people. Echoing the US, they even spoke of a coup, all in the name of “restoring democracy.”

Henri Falcón broke ranks with the MUD and ran. His main program was to replace the Venezuelan currency with the US dollar, which would prevent the government from using fiscal means to manage the national economy. He also advocated taking massive loans from the IMF. The chavistas characterized his program as selling out Venezuela to foreigners.

Only 46% of the eligible voters cast ballots on May 20. Nevertheless, Maduro received a larger percentage of the eligible vote in Venezuela than did Obama in 2012 or Trump in 2016 in US presidential elections.

Besides the opposition boycott, people sympathetic to the Bolivarian Revolution, such as a Caracas taxi driver we spoke with, were not motivated to vote in an election that they saw as not tightly contested.

Sweeping the contest with 68% of the vote, Maduro emerged as his own person from under the shadow of Chávez. Maduro had now forged deep personal ties with his supporters, who triumphantly chanted “vamos Nico” (“go Nico,” with Nico being the nickname for Nicolás).

Maduro won on a playing field tilted against him.  But will his movement succeed in righting the economy as he promised on a playing field tilted even more precipitously against his government? Already Trump has imposed new illegal sanctions designed to prevent recovery, further punishing the Venezuelan people for voting the wrong way.

The young chavista mayor of the coastal city of Vargas is optimistic. Pointing to the ramshackle shanties of the poor on the hill above us, he told us “I am from there and we are the Venezuelan people.”

Source: Task Force on the Americas, May 29, 2018