Quo vadis, Venezuela?

[Translated from Spanish, by UrbanGypsy] This is an opinion piece, not written by me.

BY Oscar Espinosa Chepe

The parliamentary elections in Venezuela, scheduled for September 26, could mark a radical departure in its turbulent recent political history, becoming the beginning of the end of Chavez. This time 165 seats of deputies will be in play and, for the first time in several years, the fragmented opposition will present some degree of unity, which suggests that, for the first time, as a result of the disruption caused by the administration of the controversial Hugo Chávez, the Venezuelan people might be compelled this time to establish a limit to the abuse and mismanagement of a populist regime that threatens to turn one of the world's richest nations into a new Cuba, with its totalitarian model and all its dysfunctions.

Explaining the last 11 years is difficult due to the inconsistencies and absurdities. When Chavez came to power in 1999, aided by a significant political movement of change, with massive support from a population frustrated by the bad management of successive governments, the price of a barrel of oil was 10.40 U.S. dollars on the international market. Since then it has grown to a peak in July 2008 of 144 U.S. dollars, down at the end of that year to about $40, and then increasing, currently maintained at more than $70 - or 7 times the price of when Chavez came to power.

The substantial rise in the price of fuel should mean a great influx of financial income and should have resulted in the strengthening of the Venezuelan economy, but economic data shows the opposite. In 2009, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) decreased by 3.3%, while in 2010 the fall is projected to be at 3.0% by ECLAC (Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean), and its projected rebound in 2011 of only 2.5% makes it the poorest in South America. Meanwhile, inflation rates have been stubbornly high around 30.0% in recent years, which has influenced the collapse of the real value of wages. At the same time, under the 11 year Chavez administration, Venezuela's currency has lost 90.0% of its value. Even the extraction of oil has fallen dramatically; if in 1998 was 3.5 million barrels a day, it currently extracts only 2.8 million, according to Venezuelan consulting firms.

Ironically, PDVSA, the entity responsible for managing oil, increased its workforce from 37,900 workers to the current 100,000, a story that parallels the decline in efficiency of the once-famous Cuban sugar industry after its nationalization by its Communist regime. In a global Competitiveness List for 2010, published recently by the World Economic Forum, Venezuela ranked 122nd; the lowest position in Latin America.

This data points to a very serious increase of shortages of commodities, something incredible given the considerable reserves of foreign currency that the nation should have. There have also been repeated incidents of power cuts, droughts that have affected the energy production, and evidence of the poor condition of power plants, which have not worked well in the absence of a proactive investment policy and lack of maintenance of the adequate facilities that are available.

In social terms, Venezuela has seen a great increase in corruption and violence. If in 1998 there were 19 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants, in 2009 it reached 75, according to the Venezuelan Observatory of Violence, which indicates that Venezuela has become the most dangerous country in Latin America. It ranks 122nd globally in levels of violence after South Africa, according to the 2010 Global Peace Index that ranks 144 countries.

There has also been a continued deterioration in the political arena. The persecution against the opposition has increased and a significant number of television and radio have been silenced or forced to reduce criticism of the government through different methods. If there are still areas of freedom, they are the result of the Venezuelan people’s determination to uphold and fight for democracy, which has so far prevented the implementation of a Cuban-style totalitarian system.

Chavismo, by the delusions of grandeur of the leader, has been characterized by continued interference in neighboring nations. Interference which has ranged from sending suitcases of money to influence elections in other countries, to supporting sustained narco-groups, of which there is abundant evidence, as is in the case of Colombia. It has resulted in insane policy choices that have caused serious friction with Venezuela’s neighbors, including the danger of military confrontation with Colombia.

Chavez has tried to tackle the growing economic disaster, political and social, with the use of chauvinistic and demagogic rhetoric, full of insults and abuse, lacking credible arguments. He has also used as a political tool the import of tens of thousands of Cuban technicians, primarily in health and education to benefit the poor in slums. This has served as strong propaganda to tout Chavez's alleged accomplishments without mentioning the cost it represents for the country. For years, in exchange for cooperation, Venezuela has delivered about 100,000 barrels of oil a day to Cuba, with special prices and financing conditions, in addition to granting important loans. Venezuela has become the main economic and trading partner of the island, and has been busy taking the place, with its oil wealth, the old position that the USSR had until 1989 of providing the island’s lifeline. If Cuba, at this time of great difficulty, lacked the Venezuelan cooperation it depends on, the economic consequences would be devastating.

Of the many hopes and dreams aroused by Chavez, the Venezuelan people have lost many of them. Much of the original must trusted allies and companions of the leader have gradually removed themselves from his ranks, and many have become his staunchest opponents. From General Baduel, who participated with him in the 1992 coup attempt and aided his return to power in 2002 after a momentary loss, to until last February, the separation of the popular governor of the state of Lara, Henry Falcon, the number of disaffected is steadily increasing. Even allies still at his side, like the Communist Party of Venezuela, have refused to join the new Unified Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) and have repeatedly made criticisms of his management.

Polls show the decline in its popularity due to his continued mistakes, arrogance, as well as vulgar and aggressive rhetoric. President Chavez reached only 45.0% of support in Venezuela in 2009, 20.0% less than in 2006, while 81.0% of respondents indicated that private property is essential for economic development, according to a survey Latinobarómetro, a prestigious nonprofit organization based in Santiago de Chile, which since 1995 carries out opinion surveys on economic, social and political issues in Latin America. The survey also showed that the image of Chavez in Latin America has deteriorated significantly, with only a 40.0% approval, a level equal to that Fidel Castro. The leader with the most popularity was Barack Obama with a 70.0% approval, followed by Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva with 64.0%, Michel Bachelet close to 60.0%, and Felipe Calderón and Álvaro Uribe with about 55.0%, all showing growth in relation to previous surveys. The levels of acceptance of Chavez and Fidel Castro were the only ones with significant decreases in acceptance in Latin America.

From the above it follows that if the elections for deputies of the Venezuelan National Assembly are clean and fair, the chances of losing control of the National Assembly by Chavez are highly probable, which could have disastrous results for the fragile and dependent Cuban economy, especially if it has not foreseen this potential scenario.