<a href=www.vheadline.com>Venezuela's Electronic News Posted: Thursday, May 15, 2003 By: Patrick J. O'Donoghue

The lawyer of a group of homeless people in Paraguay has asked the Venezuelan Embassy in Paraguay for political asylum. Argentinean Marilina Marichal (37)  represents some 6,000 squatters in San Lorenzo, 20 kilometers outside the capital Asuncion.

The Paraguayan Attorney General's Office has charged her withdisturbing public order, incitation to violence, defending illegal actions and conspiring against the State. Marichal's husband, Raul Marin says the family has received serious death threats, leaving them with little choice but to seek asylum. 

"When the Venezuelan government takes note, I'm sure it will understand our situation." 

Marin himself and three squatter leaders face arrest and have been waiting for a ruling from the Supreme Court of Justice (CSJ) on their status as human rights defenders. Marichal is currently inside the Venezuelan Embassy in Asuncion with her 8-year old daughter. 

Paraguayan Attorney General Carlos Calcena argues that Marichal's situation does not merit political asylum ... "she has broken the country's laws."

<a href=www.vheadline.com>Venezuela's Electronic News Posted: Thursday, May 15, 2003 By: Oscar Heck

Attempt by a self-confessed Chavez-hater to discredit Chavez and the government

VHeadline commentarist Oscar Heck writes: Gustavo Coronel's  <a href=www.vheadline.com>“An open letter about PDVSA to President Hugo Chavez Frias” is another attempt by a self-confessed Chavez-hater to discredit Chavez and the present Venezuelan government. It is also another desperate and futile attempt to vindicate the anti-Chavez and pro-opposition people from their without-conscience, illegal, unethical, immoral and criminal actions … actions which they have obviously (and publicly) shoved down the throats of all Venezuelans … and by “all Venezuelans” I mean all Venezuelans.

Coronel states that “Chavez” fired 18,000 PDVSA employees in an undignified fashion.

What crock!

I was in Venezuela while most of this happened:

First, Chavez himself was not the one who fired the employees ... he read a list on TV of the employees that were being fired!

Second, if they were to be fired (as they were) how else would these employees know that they were to be fired if they were not showing up to work as they should have been?

By mail? No, the mail service was shut down by Coronel's so-beloved pro-opposition people.

By phone? Probably not, most of the ex-PDVSA saboteurs were probably partying in Aruba or Miami!

Third, they deserved to be fired.

Fourth, they deserved to be “undignified”, as Coronel calls it...

Why? Because they assisted first-hand in destroying the Venezuelan economy … which cost several billions of dollars (not to emphasize the long-term effects of their malicious and pre-meditated actions that caused untold prolonged damage onto the vast majority of “humble” Venezuelans -ú as Coronel's so-beloved pro-opposition people often likes to call “them.”)

Coronel goes on to say that these ex (and I stress ex)-PDVSA employees will go back to work for PDVSA. No way Gustavo. Would you re-hire an employee of your hotel/resort on Margarita if that person sabotaged your installations, stole your keys and went to the media to discredit you? I don’t think so.

What will happen “as sure as the sun goes up every morning”, is that these PDVSA saboteurs and criminals will never work at PDVSA again.

Hopefully, they will never work at any other petroleum company again … they deserve to be “selling cakes in the streets”, as you so derogatorily state! (What is wrong with selling cakes on the streets, Gustavo?)

Now, I have worked for over 20 years as a professional recruiter: corporate executives, upper and mid-level managers, scientists and technical people. I have interviewed and evaluated over 12,000 people in a vast number of fields of activity in several countries. I have helped to mount some of what are today the biggest manufacturing firms in the world in their field. I have also done extensive fraud/criminal/corruption investigation work at high levels.

Coronel considers the PDVSA saboteurs as “real PDVSA professional managers and technicians.” That is also a bunch of crock. True professionals would not have sabotaged PDVSA, especially knowing that the results could be so devastating!

Coronel says that “these values had been accepted by the nation as the guiding principles for the Institution.” This cannot be true ... by implication, most Venezuelans are not saboteurs. Most pro-opposition people are.

Anyone who supports the kind of “values” that the opposition-supporters and the ex-PDVSA saboteurs support, has no “human” values. They have been heartless and without-conscience, thinking only of themselves … as Coronel mentions “…putting everything on the line: jobs, financial stability, family and career.”

Furthermore Gustavo, it is not because someone has “knowledge and experience” in the petroleum industry that it makes them “valuable” for PDVSA. Knowledge and experience are “acquired,” they are not “innate.” There are other factors that play more important roles in the selection of “valuable” employees: human values and inborn character traits, capacities and talents. The fact that a person has a university degree does not make someone more “intelligent” or more “able” or more “persistent” or more “creative” or more “reliable” or more “honest” or more “human” than someone who doesn’t have a degree.

It applies as well to someone who has “experience and knowledge.” Some of the best “crooks” in the world are also some of the most “intelligent” and “creative” people in the world. What one does with his/her talents, traits and capacities depends on the “human values” to which one subscribes.

Example: Who do you think collects priceless “illegal” antiquities and artwork?

Coronel is dreaming (or having some serious nightmares).  He is accusing Chavez (and by implication, the present Venezuelan government) of trying to destroy PDVSA.

Where has he been for the last year or so?

Who “stopped” PDVSA?

Chavez? The present government?

No, PDVSA was stopped by those 18,000+ ex-PDVSA employees that so willingly supported the mafia-incited-stoppage … whether duped into it or not!

Coronel addresses Chavez suggesting that he should reflect on his own ethical posture. Maybe Coronel should ask the PDVSA saboteurs and anti-Chavez supporters that participated in the destruction of the Venezuelan economy!

Does he really believe that it is ethical to create a “stoppage”, block streets, sabotage PDVSA, try to close banks and schools?

Does he think that it is ethical to call for the murder of someone in public?

Does he think that it is ethical for employers to intentionally shut down operations (threats included), leaving thousands of average Venezuelans jobless and wageless (!) … simply because the employers are part of the Fedecamaras/CTV/Media/USA backed “stoppage?

(Three of my brothers-in-law lost their jobs -ú due to being locked out in December 2002 -- and still haven’t been paid!)

Coronel says that the ex-PDVSA people were trained in “meritocracy, apoliticism and professional management.”

First, according to the dictionary, “meritocracy” is: a system in which such an elite (an intellectual elite, based on academic achievement) achieves special status, as in positions of leadership. If you believe that “intellectual academic achievement” is “good” criteria for managing/operating a company, then you are simply confirming that the ex-PDVSA employees should not be re-hired. Company leaders selected based on their “intellectual academic achievement” do not guarantee good or great management. “Intellectual elites” are better suited for university and institutions of the like.

Second, if meritocracy is the ex-PDVSA system, then it is very difficult to imagine that “professional management” was one of the backbones of the ex-PDVSA.

Third, you say “apoliticism”. The evidence is abundantly to the contrary! This “meritocracia” brought down PDVSA for political reasons (and probably also to detract from the excesses in personal privileges).  It appears to me that Coronel, as well as many pro-opposition supporters really believe that “meritocracy” is a valid contender in today’s world.

Sorry to tell you Gustavo Coronel ... times are changing ... the “intellectual academic elites” are losing ground in Venezuela and worldwide … and for obvious reasons.

Oscar Heck oscar@vheadline.com

<a href=ogj.pennnet.com>Oil & Gas JournalMaureen Lorenzetti Washington Editor

WASHINGTON, DC, May 15 -- US House congressional leaders Wednesday sharply criticized the United Nations' management of oil revenues under its Iraq oil-for-aid program and called for strong US involvement in controlling future oil receipts.

"I see no need to continue the United Nations' Oil-For-Food Program and to allow the UN to control oil revenues that rightly belong to the Iraqi people, when the UN lacked the will to enforce its own sanctions against a tyrant and thereby liberate the Iraqi people from unspeakable atrocities," said House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Billy Tauzin (R-La) at a subcommittee hearing on the subject. "Continuing the Oil-for-Food Program will only guarantee to again enslave the Iraqi people by denying them the only means they have to preserve the freedom they now have."

House Subcommittee Energy and Air Quality Chairman Joe Barton (R-Tex.) said he will send a letter to the UN asking that Congress receives a "full accounting" of the current oil aid program. He acknowledged that Congress does not have the authority to subpoena the UN's records, "but I encourage the UN to fully explain this program that has not been externally audited." Barton has been a frequent critic of the UN program since it was established in the late 1990s as a way to avert the humanitarian crisis that developed in the wake of Gulf War I and subsequent international sanctions.

The US is proposing that the UN begin phasing out the oil-for-aid program over a 4-month period before the current program expires June 3. It also is seeking a detailed resolution that lifts sanctions and protects the interim government from oil revenue claims so oil can start flowing.

US officials say the resolution "will abolish outdated provisions relating to the sale of oil and other goods and facilitate Iraq's ability to trade freely in the international market," according to a Department of State fact sheet.

A "reconstituted" Iraqi State Oil and Marketing Organization (SOMO) will conduct oil sales consistent with international market practices, DOS said. "These transactions will be audited by independent public accountants, who will report their findings to an international advisory board that will include representatives from the UN, World Bank, and IMF (International Monetary Fund). To ensure that the Iraqi people are not penalized because of (deposed ruler) Saddam (Hussein) and can receive the benefits of their national patrimony, oil sales will be immunized against attachment by international creditors or others with claims against the former regime."

US officials are calling for a vote next week, but there is resistance from France and Russia, whose officials say taking such a sweeping action would be premature, given that it is unclear how an Iraqi government will pay existing debt. Some US lawmakers are calling on Iraq's creditors to forgive much of that outstanding debt.

Experts testify Oil experts representing government, academia, and the private sector also testified before the subcommittee.

Robert Ebel, director of the energy program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC, said a number of interested observers make the interpretation that, under the Geneva Convention, the occupying power has the right to sell the oil and to use the income for the restoration of order and the benefit of the Iraqi people. He also noted that this is not a universally held position. "Not all would agree. Nonetheless, is the United States today an occupying power, having shifted from that of a liberating power? Apparently so, and that means the Geneva Convention can apply."

Ebel added that accepting the role of an occupying power raises an associated question: What is the status of those oil contracts that have been signed with Russia and China? Will they be honored?

"Under international law, it would seem that these rights should be protected in that contract sanctity is maintained in the event of a change in government."

Jim Barnes, research fellow at the James Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University, said that oversight of oil revenue is best handled by multinational agencies such as the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. "The fund will presumably be involved in such critical matters as rescheduling Iraqi debt in any case; the bank will no doubt be called upon to play an important role in Iraqi reconstruction."

The Bush administration proposals call for the UN and the IMF to be part of an advisory board that would have auditing authority over a fund that would serve as a repository for Iraq's oil revenues.

Barnes noted that significant funds remain in escrow accounts under the current UN aid program. "These funds need to be disbursed to pay for emergency aid to Iraq. It might be best to permit the UN to continue managing these funds, on an expedited and transparent basis, until the balance is liquidated." The US proposal before the UN suggests something along those lines.

Testifying on Iraq's role in international oil markets, Guy Caruso, administrator of the Energy Information Administration, said the country is "crucial" to long-term world oil supplies but, in the short term, the market has adjusted to its absence. Despite several disruptions in supply since last November (Venezuela, Nigeria, and Iraq), and low inventories, the prospects for improvements in short-term world oil supply are good over the next several quarters.

He said that analysts assume that as disrupted sources move back toward normal production (now particularly Iraq), the increased production from those areas will be accommodated by reductions in supply from other OPEC producers. "Thus the development of excess supplies that might sharply pressure prices in the downward direction is not expected over the next several quarters," he said.

Thu May 15, 2003 01:55 PM ET CARACAS, Venezuela (<a href=reuters.com>Reuters) - Venezuela's government on Thursday sharply criticized U.S. Ambassador to Caracas Charles Shapiro for hosting an event at his official residence during which a female impersonator used a puppet to ridicule President Hugo Chavez.

"What we have here is an irresponsible U.S. ambassador," Venezuelan Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel told a news conference.

The incident could be interpreted as a provocation, he said.

Shapiro hosted an event on Tuesday marking International Press Freedom Day during which he criticized what he called a deterioration of press freedom in Venezuela.

The event, broadcast on local television, ended with the appearance of a male comedian dressed as a Venezuelan female media broadcaster and carrying a large puppet wearing a red beret representing the Venezuelan president.

The personal attack against Shapiro threatened to again irritate relations between the Bush administration and the government of left-winger Chavez, who has fiercely criticized U.S. policies such as the invasion of Iraq.

Venezuela, the world's No. 5 oil exporter, is a leading supplier of oil to the United States.

Rangel said Venezuela considered Shapiro's behavior an act of personal irresponsibility and did not want the incident to damage relations with Washington.

"In spite of Mr. Shapiro, we want excellent relations with the United States, with its government and its people," Rangel said.

The ambassador and U.S. Embassy officials were not immediately available for comment.