www.forbes.com Reuters, 01.29.03, 8:50 PM ET

CARACAS, Venezuela, Jan 29 (Reuters) - Venezuela's opposition on Wednesday extended into its 60th day a strike aimed at forcing leftist President Hugo Chavez to resign or call elections in the world's No. 5 oil exporter.

The opposition strike, started on Dec. 2, has crippled the nation's vital crude oil output and exports, rattled global energy markets and shunted the OPEC member nation deeper into economic recession.

"Now, more than ever, (we say) not one step backwards," strike leader Carlos Fernandez, who heads the anti-Chavez Fedecamaras private business association, said. Striking employees of state oil giant Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) say they will stay out until Chavez resigns, stages a vote and reinstates fired oil workers.

But outside the oil sector, support for the shutdown has been fraying. Venezuela's private banks said Wednesday they would resume normal daily working hours Monday. They had operated limited hours since December to back the strike.

Chavez, a former paratrooper who was elected in 1998 and survived a coup in April, has refused to step down and sacked more than 5,000 PDVSA managers to counter the strike. The government plans to introduce a fixed exchange rate and capital restrictions to offset economic damage from the strike.

Deploying troops and replacement workers, Chavez says he is defeating the stoppage he calls an illegal attempt to oust him. While strikers dismiss his claims, oil production has crept up to about 30 percent of pre-strike levels.

Blue-collar oil workers have started to return to work, but backing for the strike remains strong among key PDVSA managers and skilled workers at oil fields, refineries and ports.

ipsnews.net

Humberto Márquez The nearly two-month general strike against Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez began to wane Wednesday with banks returning to their usual schedules and other sectors beginning to normalise activity as well, while the opposition tries to avoid the appearance of defeat.

The association representing the country's 30 private banks, which handle 90 percent of all financial activity, ''decided by a two-thirds majority to renew normal hours of operation as of Monday, Feb. 3,'' announced the group's president, Ignacio Salvatierra.

CARACAS, Jan 29 (IPS) - The nearly two-month general strike against Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez began to wane Wednesday with banks returning to their usual schedules and other sectors beginning to normalise activity as well, while the opposition tries to avoid the appearance of defeat.

The association representing the country's 30 private banks, which handle 90 percent of all financial activity, ''decided by a two-thirds majority to renew normal hours of operation as of Monday, Feb. 3,'' announced the group's president, Ignacio Salvatierra.

Since the strike began Dec. 2, the banks have only been open to the public for half their normal hours -- in the mornings --, leading to long queues of clients and prompting difficulties in other sectors of the economy.

The political opposition declared the nationwide work stoppage to demand a non-binding referendum in which voters would indicate whether or not the populist Chávez should immediately resign.

But on Jan. 22, the Supreme Court indefinitely postponed its debate on the constitutionality of the referendum.

Another aim of the strike, according to the business, labour and oil industry leaders who are heading it, is to show the world the magnitude of the Venezuelan people's opposition to Chávez.

The strike was further designed to pressure the government and opposition negotiators, engaged in talks brokered by Organisation of American States (OAS) Secretary-General César Gaviria, to quickly come up with an ''electoral solution'' to the crisis.

Education Minister Aristóbulo Istúriz said 90 percent of the country's public schools are functioning again, while private schools have been holding assemblies to discuss opening their doors next week.

''We have a timetable for dismantling the strike without it being interpreted as a defeat,'' a Christian Democratic leader who has been one of the main organisers of the opposition protests told IPS on condition of anonymity.

''The logical thing is to start with the most sensitive areas, like the food industry and education,'' he said.

Since December, activity has been paralysed in shopping malls, department stores and the main manufacturing industries, although for some sectors the beginning of the strike coincided with the traditional December-January vacation period.

A large part of the country's small and medium industries continued to operate normally, including neighbourhood shops and bakeries. Mass transit was not involved in the strike, and many factories and other businesses had already begun to return to normal operating schedules.

Over the past week, central areas of Caracas and other large cities have experienced the habitual noise and traffic congestion seen after every annual vacation period, even though long lines of vehicles continued outside the service stations, as the Venezuelan oil industry is only beginning to restore production after it fell to a relative trickle.

On Sunday, the shopping centres will open their doors to opposition activists collecting signatures in support of various initiatives aimed at pushing Chávez out of power.

Petition drives will also be carried out in front of the hundreds of schools that generally serve as voting stations.

There are numerous initiatives for which signatures are being collected, including a constitutional amendment to cut short Chávez's 2000-2006 term, a referendum that would revoke his mandate, and a call for the creation of a constituent assembly to rewrite the constitution.

A few days later, according to the opposition source, the malls and the franchises in Venezuela of international corporations will open their doors on restricted schedules, ''to maintain the climate of civic protest, the point towards which the current strike will ultimately evolve.''

The reduced hours will allow shopkeepers to readjust the prices of their products once foreign exchange controls go into effect on Feb. 5. The government announced the new controls after suspending foreign exchange trading by the Central Bank on Jan. 22.

Car-makers are negotiating agreements with their workers to put them on leave with partial payment of their wages while they sell off accumulated inventories.

General Motors, the leading automobile manufacturer in Venezuela -- the company sold 25,945 of the 74,560 vehicles assembled in the country in 2002 -- asked its 1,800 employees to remain on leave and to take a 25-percent pay cut until some 6,000 vehicles are sold on the local market or exported to Chile, Colombia and Ecuador, said the company's director of legal affairs, Luis Kolster.

Similar accords are being negotiated by Ford and Chrysler, while they await the reopening of their showrooms and sales lots. Much depends on the government's decision on foreign exchange, because around half of the components that go into each car are imported.

The strike's flagship industries -- those in which the two- month stoppage had most support -- include bottlers (of beer and soft drinks), flour, and food processing plants, which are to gradually reinstate operations throughout February.

The privately-held communications media, which halted broadcasts of advertising and changed their normal programming to focus on covering and promoting the anti-Chávez conflict, "will be the last to return to normal operations, though perhaps by Feb. 10," said the opposition source.

The oil industry, normally Venezuela's economic engine, has been the core of the power struggle here. The managers and several thousands of employees of the giant state-run Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) stopped working, halting operations at oil wells and refineries and on tankers.

Petroleum represents a quarter of the gross domestic product (GDP), half of fiscal revenues and 80 percent of cash inflows.

The country's normal output of 2.8 million barrels of crude per day fell to just 150,000 with the onset of the strike in December. Venezuela, an oil exporter for the last 90 years, had to import gasoline for the first time in three generations.

The government responded with an emergency plan backed by the armed forces, and has achieved a partial recuperation of production. Chávez says daily output now stands at 1.32 million barrels of oil. The opposition PDVSA managers' union, Gente del Petróleo, however, puts the figure at 1.05 million.

This was achieved "by overexploiting the fields of light crude, where are easier, while the heavy crude will be hurt because they are more difficult to reactivate, meaning the output levels from prior to the strike will not be achieved in the short term," a protest leader told IPS.

On another front at PDVSA, the government began rapid reforms "to streamline its structure and eliminate extra personnel," company president Alí Rodríguez said as he reported the layoff of 5,111 employees.

The anti-Chávez coalition is demanding amnesty for all oil employees who participated in the strike, "but the problem is that the government refuses to address the point in the negotiations," said Américo Martín, one of the six negotiators representing the opposition.

Officials say that some of the oil industry's installations were sabotaged. Administrative proceedings have begun against the leaders of the strike in the petroleum sector.

"For the saboteurs, there will be neither pardon nor amnesty," said Vice-President José Vicente Rangel, leader of the government's negotiating team. (END)

www.zenit.org

Code: ZE03012907 Date: 2003-01-29

CARACAS, Venezuela, JAN. 29, 2003 (Zenit.org).- The president of the Venezuelan bishops' conference appealed to citizens and the government to come to an agreement and put an end to the 2-month-old general strike.

The episcopate made this appeal at the start of its ordinary assembly, fearful that the country could degenerate into "anarchy or greater misgovernment," which would only lead to "greater violence and undesirable situations."

At the opening of the assembly, Archbishop Baltazar Porras Cardozo, conference president, emphasized the need for social reconciliation and rejected confrontation as a way to solve the crisis.

"A solution to the crisis through political exclusion is non-viable," he said. "The country must be reconstructed by all, materially and spiritually, ethically and institutionally. It is a task of giants, but not impossible."

The archbishop also lamented the systematic attack on the Church "as an institution and, in particular, its hierarchy" in Venezuela, in addition to the "indiscriminate use of Catholic religious symbols." The latter is a common practice of President Hugo Chávez.

www.khilafah.com uploaded 29 Jan 2003 ÈÓã Çááå ÇáÑÍãä ÇáÑÍíã How to Stop the War Decisively

Following the launch of our campaign ‘Don’t Stop the War – except through Islamic Politics’, many who support the ‘Stop the War Coalition’ campaign have presented arguments to try to justify their position. As yet these arguments have not addressed the daleel (evidence) used nor presented even a shubhat daleel (semblance of evidence) regarding their position. What we have received, however, are arguments that are built upon the mind. The main argument used is ‘how can we stop the war except by lobbying the British government?’

We have felt it necessary to address this question in some detail, such that those who support the ‘Stop the War’ campaign and still intend to march on the 15th of February can reconsider their position.

Any political campaign waged by Muslims should be characterised by two things – firstly it must conform to the Shari’ah, and secondly the actions conducted should be consistent with the political aim. Therefore, lobbying the British Government, British Parliament, the US Administration or the United Nations is both incompatible with the Shari’ah and the aim of achieving the objective of stopping the war.

The contradiction with the Shari’ah is because through lobbying these entities, sovereignty is conceded to the taghoot. Allah (Subhanahu Wa Ta’aala) says,

Ãóáóãú ÊóÑó Åöáóì Çáøó®¢öíäó íóÒúÚõãõæäó Ãóäøóåõãú ÂãóäõæÇ ÈöãóÇ ÃõäúÒöáó Åöáóíúßó æóãóÇ ÃõäúÒöáó ãöäú ®!=óÈúáößó íõÑöíÏõæäó Ãóäú íóÊóÍóÇßóãõæÇ Åöáóì ÇáØøóÇÛõæÊö æó®!=óÏú ÃõãöÑõæÇ Ãóäú íóßú†õÑõæÇ Èöåö æóíõÑöíÏõ ÇáÔøóíúØóÇäõ Ãóäú íõÖöáøóåõãú ÖóáóÇá©£Ç ÈóÚöíÏ©£Ç

“Have you seen those who claim to believe in the revelation revealed to you and the revelation revealed earlier. They seek the ruling of taghoot (non-Islam) although they have been ordered to disbelieve in it” [TMQ An-Nisa: 60].

This ayah of the Qur’an decisively forbids referring to solutions that come from Kufr sources, institutions or ideologies.

Additionally, the action is also inconsistent with the aim of stopping the war as these nations are colonialist in their outlook and therefore decide actions based on the interests of the capitalists and not the interests of the common man. This is clear when we read the history of Britain and America in their dealings with the Islamic world.

Consequently challenging and accounting the Muslim rulers is the action that both conforms to the Shari’ah and is consistent with the aim of ensuring a war against Iraq does not happen. There are a number of myths in this debate advocated by many in the ‘Stop the War’ movement – these are that America is the only cause of the bloodshed in Iraq, that Bush has the final say on this war, that the Muslim countries are impotent and that it is futile to challenge the Muslim rulers as they are helpless.

The myth that the Muslim countries are mere spectators in this dispute completely contradicts the reality. It is clear that there is a systematic and unambiguous blood trail that exists from the capitals of the Muslim countries to the deaths of Muslims in Iraq. It is also clear that rather than being in a weak position, the Muslim countries will have an effective veto on this war. This can be illustrated using clear evidences from the political reality.

It is clear that since the US and the UK do not share a physical land border with Iraq, they rely extensively on the assistance and help of countries from the region. This assistance constitutes unparalleled support for America and without it any war on Iraq would become a fanciful philosophy. What follows is an illustration of the main components of this unparalleled support:

1. The US military, as well as the wider US society, relies on importing 50% of its oil needs every day – this constitutes almost 10 million barrels of oil per day. Its allies such as Japan and Europe are also heavily reliant on imported energy resources. According to a report issued a couple of years ago by Dick Cheney, the US will need to import at least 60% more energy resources than it does now by 2020. America and its allies are heavily reliant on oil from Muslim lands to the extent that America even imports oil from Iraq currently (500,000 barrels of oil per day), while at the same time she is prepared to attack the very same nation. The consequences of an oil boycott by the Muslim countries would have devastating impact on America, her allies and the world economy and would make any war more problematic. However instead of making moves to a boycott, Saudi Arabia in the last OPEC meeting announced an increase in oil production to further smooth the worldwide energy situation. This was a missed opportunity as the price of oil has been rising on the back of war jitters in addition to the production problems being currently faced by Venezuela.

2. The US Navy has been assembling its armada and war fleet so as to be in a position to launch an attack against Iraq. Many people are in awe of the US Navy with its armada of aircraft carriers, destroyers and cruisers. However what is less well known is that for these ships to get from the Mediterranean to the Red Sea they must pass through the Egyptian controlled Suez Canal. On just one day, last week, nine US and allied ships sailed through the Suez Canal as part of the war build-up. If the Egyptian Government were to close the Suez Canal for military warships operated by the allies this would create significant problems for America in getting her navy into position. Many cite the huge dependence of Egypt on Suez Canal shipping fees (about $2 billion in 2002), however any war will undoubtedly impact normal merchant shipping anyway and the Canal authorities have already factored in a 10% loss in income yields.

3. In addition the US Navy’s 5th Fleet is actually housed by the Bahraini Government, thus providing it with invaluable logistical and political support. If the Bahraini Government refused to act as a host nation for the 5th fleet, where could this US armada realistically go? This is the same 5th fleet that will be firing hundreds of cruise missiles at Iraq.

4. In the last Gulf War the US military build up took five months to conduct. However since 1991 the US has been busy developing many roots in the Gulf States, building a formidable array of bases crammed with ‘pre-positioned’ equipment. In Kuwait the US training base of Camp Doha, built in 1991 as a temporary facility, has become permanent home to about 10,000 US troops; a second permanent facility is being built at Camp Arifjan. Tens of thousands more allied troops are also on their way to Kuwait, so providing a perfect platform for America and Britain to attack Iraq from the south.

5. In Qatar the US has use of one of the longest runways in the region at about 5,000 yards at the al-Udeid airbase, recently upgraded to American specifications. The airbase was built at a cost of $1 billion and is used exclusively by the American airforce, with no Qatari planes in sight. The kingdom also houses the largest stockpile of US military equipment abroad and will house General Tommy Franks and the CENTCOM central planning unit from where the war will be conducted and orchestrated. US commanders also launched a dry run of their ability to oversee the command and control of a conflict from Qatar, the first time such a war game has taken place outside the US. Such an exercise will prove invaluable experience for American forces in any upcoming desert war.

6. In Turkey, nearly 2,000 US Airforce personnel fly daily missions to patrol the no-fly zones from the bases at Incirlik and Diyabakir. America has also sought to house thousands of army troops in Turkey so as to assist in any land attack against northern Iraq. Turkey also provides valuable assistance as a member of NATO to America by ensuring that America’s military responsibilities in other theatres are addressed while she is free to attack Iraq.

7. In Saudi Arabia the US still maintains 10,000 troops and the prestigious operational centre at the Prince Sultan airbase. This airbase is considered a state of the art facility and was used in the Gulf war and during the war against Afghanistan. Saudi officials despite their public statements have assured America that the facility will be used to lead the air campaign against Iraq.

8. The provision of these military bases, use of air space, logistical help, access of waterways and air bases combined with other US bases present in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Uzbekistan provide invaluable launch pads from where America can engage in its attack. It is a complete distortion of the reality to say that America could effectively prosecute this war against Iraq without such help.

9. Though America has numerous aircraft carriers in their arsenal, these as mentioned before can only operate within the region due to the acquiescence of the Muslim rulers. In addition these carriers are unable to house the heavy bombers that will be needed to effectively do the job in Iraq. Only missions from land airfields can carry the heavier weapons needed to open deep bunkers or carpet-bomb bigger targets. In addition a land invasion from Kuwait, Saudi Arabia or Turkey is eminently easier than one attempted from the sea. A US Professor of National Security at the Joint Forces Staff College, Ehsan Ahrari, admitted the reliance on help from the region when he said, “We are not 100% dependent on availability of those facilities, even though it would make military operations imminently more doable”.

10. However the above series of points simply illustrate the huge damage that could be done to the war plans of the Western countries from Muslim countries that simply desist from assisting the Western forces. The above realities clearly demonstrate that America and Britain could not possibly initiate this war without the assistance of the Muslim rulers, yet what would happen if Muslim countries actually engaged in military operations to support Iraq?

11. For example Iran, Syria and Jordan have all declared neutrality in any upcoming war – however this is a dishonourable position. These nations should stand shoulder to shoulder with the Muslims of Iraq, and if they did this would completely destroy any American plan to colonise Iraq. This, allied to the denial of bases, waterways and a refusal by Turkey to house thousands of troops, would mean America would not be able to fight this war.

12. In addition if Muslim countries such as Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia stopped co-operating with America in its ‘war on terror’, America would have to divide her resources. If these nations made unilateral attacks on America’s interests in South/Central Asia and South East Asia, America would find it very difficult to fight on so many fronts. This can be seen clearly from America’s inability despite Pentagon protestations to simultaneously defeat both North Korea and Iraq at the same time.

13. The Central Asian states such as Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan, in response to a war on Iraq, could also decide to close down their pipelines and oil/gas production. This would jeopardise the world economy at the same time that America was seeking to fight Iraq. Economic damage could also be done to the Western economies if the Arab countries that have billions of dollars invested abroad decided to divest their monetary and other financial assets from America and Europe.

Conclusion

We find today that the very groups who are calling to support the ‘Stop the War Coalition’ are in fact the same groups who avoid discussing the rulers in the Muslim world – the ones who can decisively stop this war. Their silence on this is deafening and if it continues they will end up joining these rulers in their crime. They are funded by these corrupt states for the work of ‘Da’wah’. We find it ironic that Yusuf al-Qaradhawi, the Sheikh of Qatar, host of American troops, comes to the UK to endorse the ‘Stop the War’ march. Yet he keeps silent about the crime of the Qatari Government and the US troops garrisoned there, ready to strike at our brothers. Indeed he is promoted by them as the official authority of Islam, such that he comes to Britain to promote Muslims to lobby the Western governments.

It is therefore clear that without the political, economic and military assistance provided by the Muslim countries, that America and Britain cannot possibly fight this war in any successful fashion. Effectively the Muslim lands and their rulers have the real right of veto and the destiny of the Muslims of Iraq lies in their hands. The Muslim leaders appear to the masses as being lukewarm to this war – however this is not driven by their love for the Muslims of Iraq but rather their fear for their own survival due to the deep hatred the Muslims of the region have for them. They are all in vulnerable political positions, which is why they are forced to promise America and Britain everything in private. By Muslims engaging in a concerted and powerful political campaign in Britain and all around the world, we can assist this global struggle in putting substantial pressure on these regimes to be replaced, so that they do not further any assistance to the 21st century US and UK crusaders.

We ask you to stop the war only through the Islamic political work. This is the correct Da’wah we call you to. May Allah (Subhanahu Wa Ta’aala) be a witness to this.

æó®!=õáö ÇÚúãóáõæÇ †óÓóíóÑóì Çááøóåõ Úóãóáóßõãú æóÑóÓõæáõåõ æóÇáúãõÄúãöäõæäó æóÓóÊõÑóÏøõæäó Åöáóì ÚóÇáöãö ÇáúÛóíúÈö æóÇáÔøóåóÇÏóÉö †óíõäóÈøöÆõßõãú ÈöãóÇ ßõäúÊõãú ÊóÚúãóáõæäó “And say: work (righteousness) soon will Allah observe your work and His Messenger, and the believers” [TMQ At-Taubah: 105].

Hizb ut-Tahrir – Britain 29th January 2003 / 26 Dhul Qadah 1423 Hijri

www.vheadline.com Posted: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 5:35:44 PM By: Oscar Heck

Opposition's desperate attempt to not lose "self-serving privileges"

VHeadline commentarist Oscar Heck writes: The Coordinadora Democratica (opposition coordinators) is inciting people, through the private media, to attend "La Firmaza" (the "signing") ... a campaign planned for February 2, 2003.  This "signing" effort is intended to somehow replace the non-binding referendum, which was  allegedly to take place on that same date but was cancelled by the CNE (National Electoral College).

The official binding referendum is planned for August, 2003.

As at today, the television ads read:

"La Firmaza"...... "Obligante, constitucional, legal...."

"The Signing"..."Obligatory, constitutional, legal..."

The "signing" will apparently be carried out by thousands of volunteers, members of the diminishing opposition.  This "Firmaza" may perhaps be  the opposition's last collective attempt to deliberately deviate and sabotage attention from the legal, democratic and constitutional elections/referendum process.

The Coordinadora Democratica ... comprised mostly of middle-to-upper class Venezuelans ...  has been unsuccessful in trying to oust Chavez from power by declaring a national work stoppage that began on December 2, 2003. Since early December, the opposition has also ... through vicious and manipulated news broadcasts ... tried to discredit Chavez and incite panic amongst the Venezuelan people.

The opposition backed private television stations, avid participants in the effort to oust Chavez, are:

• Globovision, which many people now call, "Golpevision", meaning ,"coup-vision",
• Venevision, which many people now call, "Venenovision", meaning ,"poison-vision",
• TeleVen, which many people now call, "Televeneno", meaning, "tele-poison", and
• RCTV (Radio Caracas Television), which people have not yet found a new name for.

The "Coordinadora Democratica" itself is now being called by many, the "Coordinadora Demoniaca" (Demonical Coordinator).

The above-mentioned television stations, as well as most of the privately-owned Venezuelan newspapers, have been -- and still are -- co-conspirators of the  Coordinadora Democratica in reporting untruths, manipulating and distorting facts and in creating outright lies.

The Coordinadora Democratica has been responsible for misleading the outside world by calling the stoppage a "strike", when in effect it was not a strike as strikes are conventionally known. Except for few cases, the stoppage was put into effect by the business owners and not by the employees, thousands of whom now find themselves without work or pay.

The Coordinadora Democratica, which continue to call itself "civilized" and "democratic," have also been responsible for attempting to mislead  the outside world into believing that the stoppage was nationwide.

This is a complete lie.

The actual "stoppage" occurred mostly in Caracas, Valencia, Barquisimeto and Maracaibo ... the four major industrial cities ... outside these cities, the country was almost "business as usual," except for the unavailability of beer, soda, bottled water, gasoline, cooking gas and Harina Pan (corn flour) -- a Venezuelan staple.

• The Coordinadora Democratica was also responsible for illegal bank and school stoppages.
• The Coordinadora Democratica has been responsible for extensive sabotage (criminal in nature) of the petroleum industry in Venezuela, PDVSA (a government-run industry and main provider of operating revenue for the Venezuelan government).

Let us see how much further the Coordinadora Democratica will go in their desperate attempt to not lose their "self-serving privileges" which have kept up to 80% of the population poor for the last 40+ years.

Oscar Heck oscarheck111@hotmail.com