<a href=www.vheadline.com>Venezuela's Electronic News Posted: Thursday, May 22, 2003 By: Elio Cequea

Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 18:02:49 -0500 From: Elio Cequea Feico57@aol.com To: Editor@VHeadline.com Subject: Reality

Dear Editor: Democracy in Venezuela needs a strong and serious opposition, different to the one we have now...

I have been a harsh critic of the forces that since 1998 play the opposition in Venezuela. They have not lived up to their important and critical role.

A healthy democracy needs of the renewing transfusion of blood that only a strong opposition can provide ... an opposition that is strong not only in ideas, but also with a serious social and political agenda gives a democracy the stability to move a country in the right direction.

The political opposition in Venezuela not only lacks ideas but it has never presented any social and/or political agenda to the nation. They seem to have lost touch with the political reality of our country and have taken their fight to levels of complete irrationality.

The only purpose of the leaders of the opposition is to get the political power back ... they totally lost it in 1998 and want it back. Period!

That is in summary their proposal and agenda.

Before 1998, Presidential candidates won elections only by criticizing the government ... that obviously does not work anymore. Now Venezuelans expect proposals, plans and new ideas to combat our problems and improve our lives.

"Chavez must go" is practically the one and only opposition slogan ... as a motto, agenda, plan, proposal, program or offer, it is far from being a serious one to combat or improve anything.

But, then again, it fully comprises the political platform of the opposition ... if Chavez is out, they will get back the power because they are our sole political alternative.

That is all they care for, and that is all they are fighting for ... even among themselves.

Perhaps we should call a referendum to revoke the opposition instead.

Elio Cequea Feico57@aol.com

<a href=www.vheadline.com>venezuela's Electronic news Posted: Thursday, May 22, 2003 By: David Coleman

Venezuelan National Guard (GN) anti-narcotics agents estimate some 150 metric tonnes of Colombian produced cocaine pass through Venezuelan transshipment points each year ... 25% of the neighboring nation's total production and considered to be the largest world producer of illegal drug.

The news comes as 6th Control judge Hector Medina ordered the incarceration of four narco traffickers caught with 460 packages of cocaine powder totaling 600 kilos (1,323 pounds).  The detained suspects are named as Eduardo Junior Silva Barreto (33) alleged to be the ringleader, Jhonathan Alexander Gonzalez Perez (21), Georsi Barreto Betancourt (26) and Miriam del Carmen Santeliz Gonzalez.

23rd State Attorney Alis Boscan de Baptista says investigators now have 30 days in which to bring charges against the four and says he expects more arrests to be made shortly as interrogation proceeds.  Zulia Regional Criminal Investigations Department (DIP) officials are said to be hunting two other suspects linked to the drugs gang busted in the Los Pinos neighborhood of Maracaibo in the early hours of Tuesday morning.

Citizen Security & Defense official Jose Sanchez says he has informed the Official Ombudsman's Office on all arrest procedures, including a newly-issued capture warrant for the missing duo, who remain unnamed.

DIP officials say the capture and seizure of the gang and the drugs haul has struck a severe blow to a powerful drugs cartel operating across the border from Colombia.  The drugs cache had been concealed in an underground cavity in waterproof packaging indicating that it was due to be shipped out by sea, most probably to Europe and North America.

GN raid commander Colonel Alcides Manuel Garcia Mavarez says the operation was the result of weeks of intelligence work.  The raid was approved just before midnight on Monday and the suspects' dwelling surrounded by armed officers in a well-orchestrated policing operation.  While police documents estimate the value of the cocaine at more than a billion Venezuelan bolivares, its value at street level in Europe is likely to be many multiples more.

Meanwhile a Venezuelan drug mule hospitalized in Cancun (Mexico) after she swallowed 44 capsules containing 536 grams of heroin, has been named as Miriam Gonzalez de Gonzalez (39) ... she is in ICU and her condition is described as extremely grave.

By MICHAEL E. KANELL The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

With Nestor Kirchner scheduled to be inaugurated Sunday as the new president of Argentina, U.S. policy-makers now face left-of-center leaders in a trio of key Latin American nations.

Kirchner, a member of the party created by Juan and Eva Perón, joins Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, the former labor leader who is now Brazil's president, and Hugo Chavez of oil-rich Venezuela as potential thorns in the southern side of the United States.

A few decades back, that notion would be enough to give then-U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger a cow -- if not a coup.

In 1973, Kissinger was instrumental in a U.S.-supported military revolt that overthrew the elected government of Salvador Allende in Chile and set off years of bloody oppression. It was thousands of lives and almost two decades later before free elections were held again.

Is the stage now again set for conflict -- whether it be diplomatic tension, trade penalties or even something more forceful?

Even if relations sour, President Bush probably cannot take action that overtly contradicts years of U.S. policy, said Vicki Gass, senior associate for economic issues at the Washington Office on Latin America. "The U.S. has been pushing democracy building. They can't go in there and do what they did with Allende."

Since the Monroe Doctrine, Latin America has been treated by the United States as a key zone of interest. Washington dispatched troops to Argentina to protect U.S. interests as far back as the 1830s. During the Cold War, Latin America was viewed as a battleground in the struggle against the Soviet Union -- a "back yard" requiring tending, covert action and support of proxy forces such as the Contras in Nicaragua pitted against governments backed by the former Soviet Union such as Fidel Castro in Cuba and the Sandinista regime of Nicaragua.

But since the fall of the Soviet Union, Latin America has mostly been out of the U.S. spotlight. Certainly, the Bush administration's foreign policy has been more focused on terrorism and Iraq.

Latin America is one of the few issues on which Bush has not aggressively pursued policies far from those of the Clinton administration, which hammered away at free trade, Gass said. "As far as the administration has any policy toward Latin America, it is about trade."

And that is where to find the most likely point of contention, said Robert B. Ahdieh at Emory Law School, a specialist in emerging markets and international trade. The leftward drift of regional leaders will up the ante on the Free Trade Area of the Americas, U.S.-sponsored negotiations aimed at a hemispheric trade pact.

"This administration -- like Clinton's -- [has] made the FTAA something of a priority," Ahdieh said.

Atlanta officials have been lobbying to have the trade organization's headquarters located here. The city faces a tough challenge: Miami is regarded as the front-runner in the United States, while Panama City, Panama, and Port of Spain in Trinidad and Tobago are also keen to host the secretariat.

Analysts have likened the economic spinoff for the successful city as somewhat akin to the billions of dollars a year pumped into the Brussels economy as a result of the Belgian capital's hosting the headquarters of the European Union.

The trade talks offer a chance for Kirchner to partner with Silva and Chavez, hoping for more leverage than any would have solo, Ahdieh said. For the United States, having tougher bargainers on the other side of the table is not a deal breaker, but it may slow down an agreement and will probably mean modifications to the U.S. vision.

"It may derail some elements," he said. "It may be narrower than the original."

Rhetoric mellows

The new wave of leaders may also be more interested in alliances with their neighbors than with the superpower to the north. That may not please the United States, but the challenge is far less radical than that of Allende, or even of the Sandinistas in Nicaragua during the 1980s.

None of the three recently elected presidents now calls for radical reshaping of their economies. Moreover, both Kirchner and Silva have softened their reputations by choosing mainstream advisers and economic managers.

"They are left of center, but they are committed democrats -- and they are both very realistic about the economic constraints they face," said Carol Graham, vice president and director of government studies at the Washington-based Brookings Institution.

Kirchner hasn't yet shown how he intends to wield power, but his hints so far echo the performance of Silva -- a good sign for hemispheric relations, she said. "The nuts and bolts of Lula [Silva] -- it's Washington consensus policies."

Pragmatism dictates moderation -- and most leaders get the message, said David Bruce, professor of international business at Georgia State University. "Both Lula [Silva] and Kirchner have emitted a lot of continuity vibrations. My guess is, there is not all that much excitement about them in Washington."

Oil production rebuilt

But Chavez is different.

He has expressed support for Fidel Castro and other villains in the American pantheon. He has used virulent anti-U.S. rhetoric, and his fiscal policies have infuriated Venezuela's business community.

That mix puts him in a different category, Bruce said. "He is annoying on the international stage, and he controls a big source of oil."

Yet even Chavez's radicalism has been more rhetorical than real rebellion -- at least when it comes to the crucial components of trade and finance that connect Venezuela to the global economy. Most critical to his relations with the United States, he has managed to rebuild much of the nation's oil production despite a bitter strike. Chavez's realism is a matter of survival -- a realism shared by the other two, say experts.

Like Argentina and Brazil, Venezuela depends on assistance from funding agencies such as the International Monetary Fund, Inter-American Development Bank or the World Bank, but also on the huge private institutions that shift billions of dollars around the planet each day in search of lucrative returns.

"As those institutions play a stronger role, that puts countries in an economic straitjacket," Gass said.

A year ago, the Bush administration seemingly welcomed a coup in Venezuela, only to be embarrassed when it fizzled. There has been no evidence that Washington actually backed the plotters.

"But there is a perception -- whether accurate or not -- that Bush is using more stick relative to carrot," said Ahdieh.

A potential showdown?

More recently, the United States said it would delay signing a free trade agreement with Chile -- apparently because that nation, a member of the U.N. Security Council, did not support the war against Iraq. "The message is that we are big enough to do without you. Are you big enough to do without us? And unfortunately for them, the answer is no," said Ahdieh.

The most likely spot for a high-stakes showdown is Venezuela -- and then, only if Chavez cancels or ignores a referendum on his rule slated for August.

Kissinger once said the United States would not stand by while a nation foolishly chooses a socialist path -- however democratically. And certainly all three of these leaders came to office via the ballot box. But there's a potential complication.

What happens if Chavez this summer defies the democratic rules? Would the United States move against him?

Most experts think retaliation in Venezuela would be low-key.

"I don't think it's merely rhetoric -- we would prefer democracy," Ahdieh said. "But I don't think the United States feels it's in our vital strategic interests that there be democracy in Venezuela. Whether the oil is flowing -- that is a serious concern."

<a href=www.vheadline.com>venezuela's Electronic news Posted: Thursday, May 22, 2003 By: Jose Gabriel Angarita

VenAmCham's Jose Gabriel Angarita (economist) writes: The Organization of Oil Exporting Countries (OPEC) agreed to increase quotas and reduce production in an attempt to put an end to an estimated 2 million bpd glut on the world oil market. The cartel may be trying to keep the markets supplies, given the seasonal impact on oil demand ... but idle capacity among its member countries is estimated at about 1.2 million bpd, meaning that not much in the way of price variation can be anticipated, in the short run at least.

The expectations generated at the beginning of the year due to the impending military conflict have not materialized, since oil prices have remained high and are not in question. The cause may be the slow return of Iraqi production (output for domestic consumption is estimated at 143,000 bpd), terrorist attacks in the Middle East (the region that supplies about a third of world oil exports), and fears of new terrorist attacks in the United States.

For Venezuela, according to statistics published by Banco Mercantil, April saw a recovery of production to an average of 2.6 million bpd, though the average for the first four months of the year was 1.7 million barrels per day. The price of Venezuela's oil export basket has averaged US$27.14 per barrel so far in 2003, but it has sunk to about $21 per barrel since the end of the Iraq war.

Oil prices will continue to be influenced by the fluctuations of world supply and demand and by the slow recovery of Iraqi production, the recovery of the Venezuelan oil industry, and the Nigerian elections, as well as declines of international inventory levels.

The best thing for Venezuela right now is the maintenance of a certain stability in the world, since lower oil prices would worsen the country's fiscal crisis by reducing revenue from oil exports.

Reuters, 05.22.03, 4:32 PM ET By Alistair Scrutton

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina (Reuters) - Latin America's political shift to the left after a decade embracing U.S.-promoted market reform may be more strident reaction than a serious policy move, analysts say, highlighting the lack of viable alternatives.

The rise to power of another left-leaning government in South America, with Argentina's President-elect Nestor Kirchner promising to be more independent of Washington when he takes over on Sunday, appears to confirm a voter backlash against U.S. influence in the region after years of economic woes.

Center-left Kirchner joins Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Venezuela's populist President Hugo Chavez as leaders openly critical of U.S. policies such as free trade, market reforms, the Cuba embargo or the Iraq war.

Suffering from economic downturn, many of Latin America's 500 million people are tired of the "Washington consensus" of market reforms, unfettered investments and diplomatic closeness in the 1990s -- when Argentina sent troops to the Gulf War.

But the rhetoric seems to be louder than the action, especially over the economy where budget austerity and free trade are still at the forefront of policies -- if only for want of an alternative.

"In Latin America, the issue is not security or geo-political strategy but economic, and on economic policy little has changed," a Western diplomat said.

Ricardo Israel, head of the Political Sciences Institute of the University of Chile, said: "Leaders may blame globalization but they have very little alternatives to offer."

Latin Americans feel poorer as economies have struggled, highlighted by riots in Peru and Paraguay and financial crises in Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay over the last year.

Argentina's crisis gave rise to the IMF moniker International "Misery" Fund and Lula was hailed as a victory for the excluded in the region's biggest economy.

Washington has struggled to win Latin American support to condemn Cuban human rights violations. Chavez, a close ally of Cuban President Fidel Castro, is one of the most vocal leaders against what he calls U.S. "imperialism." Even Mexico and Chile, traditional allies, did not back the invasion of Iraq.

LET'S NOT PICK A FIGHT

"There's a degree of resentment against the U.S. not seen for a while due to its unilateralism. On the other hand there's a very heavy dose of pragmatism -- not wanting to pick a fight," said Peter Hakim of Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington think-tank.

Kirchner criticizes IMF austerity plans and wants an alliance with Brazil before agreeing to a U.S.-promoted Free Trade Area of the Americas, a contrast to the 1990s when Argentina was a key U.S. ally that pegged its currency to the dollar.

But with a weak mandate at home, Kirchner needs foreign support, especially the IMF, to win back investor confidence. "U.S. relations will be just a little more formal, they won't be so openly friendly " said political analyst Manuel Mora y Araujo.

Brazil is key for progress on the free trade agreement by 2005, the world's largest free trade zone covering the Western Hemisphere. Lula calls the free trade agreement a U.S. attempt to "annex" Latin America, "There's been a more confrontational stance on free trade," said Joao Teixeira, of the Prospectiva consultancy in Brazil. "But Brazil does not have many instruments to put rhetoric into action," he added.

"Rather than a move to the left, it's more a move toward caution," said Nicolas Shumway, head of Latin American studies at the University of Texas in Austin.