31-1-2003
The
Colours Of Venezuela
A Statement by the Maryknoll Lay Missioners in Venezuela
We are a group of nine Maryknoll lay missioners who have worked
in
Venezuela for between five and fifteen years, accompanying the
poor of the
urban barrios and rural towns in the state of Lara. At this
moment,
Venezuela finds itself in the throes of a very tense and bitter
political
conflict which is causing considerable damage to the lives of
the average
Venezuelan and to the well-being of the nation, and which appears
to have
the very real potential for becoming a much more violent conflict.
We are
currently on Day 53 of a national strike and our reality is
one of
twenty-hour gasoline lines, two-day lines for cooking fuel,
scarcity and
speculation of food staples, and the loss of billions of dollars
from oil
revenues that pay such items as teachers' salaries and hospital
supplies.
Perhaps most critical, once-peaceful marches are becoming increasingly
confrontational and violent. As missioners who have walked alongside
the
Venezuelan people and experienced their tremendous warmth and
generosity
for many years, we feel pain and sadness as we witness the divisions
and
hardships that are taking place in front of our eyes, and we
feel a sense
of alarm that we may be at the doorstep of a much more serious
and violent
situation.
While the world has its eyes focused on the possibility of war
in Iraq,
here in Venezuela we find that the underlying cause of this
conflict is
similar one: oil and the desire for control of Venezuela's huge
reserves of
oil. Likewise, we worry that the consequences of this conflict
may spill
over this nations borders and have negative effects in the
rest of the
region. If unconstitutional or violent means are used to overthrow
a
democratically elected government here in Venezuela, this may
set an
undesirable precedent for other countries in Latin America.
We feel especially compelled to write at this moment because
we sense that
in spite of much media attention to this situation, there are
voices in
this explosive conflict that are not being heard: those in the
urban
barrios and rural towns such as those where we live and work.
As the April
events showed us, if attention is not given to the opinions
of this rather
large block of people in the search for a solution (i.e. the
poor, who
comprise over 50% of the population), the results may well be
surprising,
and this time lamentable. Likewise, if the underlying cause
of this
conflict is not acknowledged, a solution will not be long lasting.
Though the poor are routinely ignored by much of the press throughout
the
world, in Venezuela this situation is compounded by an unusual,
and very
disconcerting, situation. At a time in Venezuela in which political
parties
have lost the respect of the majority of the population, the
leadership of
the political opposition has been taken up by a very unlikely
and very
powerful source: the media. The power of the major television
stations and
newspapers is such that they appear to be directing the entire
script of
the opposition, using the very powerful tool that is in their
hands. Some
of what we see here seems almost impossible to believe when
we express it
on paper, even though we have taped dozens of hours of television
programs
for reference. For fifty three days, since the December 2nd
initiation of
the strike, the four major Venezuelan television stations have
not shown
one single commercial ad. They do, however, show approximately
twelve
commercials per hour, or around one hundred a day). Each and
every one of
the commercials is an anti-Chavez ad. They are strikingly slick,
smooth,
moving, and obviously very professional and expensive. We can
only wonder
where the funding for this is originating.
When we try to imagine a similar situation in the U.S., we realise
how
truly disconcerting this is. Imagine that ABC, CBS, NBC and
CNN showed not
a single commercial ad for fifty three days, but instead showed
one hundred
ads a day directed at removing President Bush from power, comparing
him to
Hitler and Satan. Imagine as well, that every day the channels
invited the
public to anti-Bush marches, showing, over ten times a day,
the hour,
location and title of each daily march. This situation is of
course of
grave concern to us, not only because it results in an unbalanced
and
inaccurate portrayal of the crisis in Venezuela, but also because
the use
of the press to incite violence rather than to inform is very
disturbing.
The press presents this conflict as arising from a one very
clear and
simple problem: the presidency of Hugo Chavez. He is portrayed
as a
dictator under disguise as a democrat, and his removal ANY means
available
is procured. Certainly Chavez, with his flamboyant personality
provides a
striking, and often delightful, focal point for the opposition.
However,
for those of us who live in Venezuela, and especially for those
of us who
have lived under several other Venezuelan presidents, it is
hard to find
the facts to back this image of Chavez as a dictator, much less
to find any
justification to resorting to unconstitutional or violent measures
to
overthrow him. We do recognize and criticize the fact that often
Chavez has
used inflammatory and divisive language, and that at times his
followers
have resorted to violent tactics. We also recognize that the
use of
violence is not limited to one side of this conflict, and we
unconditionally condemn any use of violence in this conflict.
Chavez was elected by the largest majority of any recent election
and
during his government there have been a total of four other,
highly
transparent elections. The new and very progressive constitution
places a
strong emphasis on human rights and the process that ushered
it in was one
of unprecedented participation. Our own low-income communities
give
testimony to the fact that this government has indeed given
priority to the
poor. Public schools and health care are now totally free and
exempt of the
"collaboration fees", a euphemism for privatization that was
taking place
under former governments. Increased percentages of the national
budget have
been given to health, education and housing, and for the first
time we have
spacious and attractive schools, hospitals, community centers
and sports
complexes in our own very poor communities. While the opposition
frequently
makes reference to the repression and violence imposed by this
government,
our experience is that this has been a government that, while
certainly not
error-free, has been much more guarded in its use of repressive
measures.
We dont have to take our memories too far back to recall many
instances of
repression under other recent presidents, most notably the terrible
Caracazo massacre of 1989 under President Carlos Andres Perez.
Why then, is there such blind hatred and determination on the
part of many
to remove this man?
It seems to us that the overriding motivation of the average
participant in
the opposition is an irrational fear, sometimes cultivated and
certainly
stroked by the media, that exists within upper-income sectors
of society.
It is a fear that Chavez will somehow cause the poor majority
to come
streaming down from the hillside barrios and take over their
lives and
world as they have known it. The truth is, the poor do feel
invited down,
not to destroy or take over, but to take part in their country,
for the
very first time. And this is precisely what is behind their
often blind
love of this man: their very existence as human beings has been
recognized
and embraced, and the value of their participation has been
affirmed. This
has mobilized them to take part in the public life of their
country to the
degree that, whatever happens to Chavez at this moment, they
will remain a
significant force to deal with. Perhaps this is why the walls
of the
barrios are often painted with the phrase "Chavez somos todos".
We do, however, think that there is a much deeper issue present
here which
has turned an otherwise manageable political conflict into one
that could
spin out of control and spill beyond the countrys borders:
Venezuelas
oil. PDVSA, the state oil company, provides the government with
nearly half
of its $20 billion budget and provides the United States with
about 15% of
its oil imports. Although the industry was nominally nationalized
in 1976,
it has been following the global tendency towards privatization
and in
recent years gives only 20% of its earnings to national coffers
compared to
80% at the time of nationalization. In 2001 a law was passed
under the new
Venezuelan constitution that guarantees that the state own at
least 51% of
any energy venture in Venezuela. Many feel that the passage
of this law is
what brought outside interests to the Venezuelan conflict and
plentiful
funding for the opposition, and motivated the United States
to be among a
lonely group of countries to recognize the interim government
that replaced
Chavez in a short-lived military coup in April. Certainly, the
involvement
of the oil industry in the national strike is what has produced
the most
damage and hardships to the country.
In summary, we share with you some specific positions of the
nine Maryknoll
lay missioners currently working in Venezuela:
* We reject the use of any violence on the part of any side
in the conflict.
* We call for an end to the national strike that has already
caused serious
damage to the country.
* We are concerned that the Venezuelan media is being used to
incite
violence rather than to inform.
* We think that it is important to acknowledge that the root
of this
conflict is control of Venezuelan oil.
* We think that all voices should be heard in the shaping of
a solution,
not just those with greater access to funds and to media sources.
* W are concerned about the role of the U.S. in the Venezuelan
conflict,
particularly because of their recognition of the April coup
leader, and are
cautious about any role that they may have in a shaping a solution.
* We believe that this conflict must be resolved within the
legal framework
of the Venezuelan constitution.
We are grateful for your attention and your support and appreciate
your
prayers for the Venezuelan people.
In peace, Martha Benson, Phil Brady, Mary Jo Commerford, Maggie
Han, Glenn
Rabut, Peter Ree, David Rodriguez, Sami Scott, Lisa Sullivan,
Maryknoll lay
missioners in Venezuela
|