José Vicente Rangel believes that opposition groups have lost the chance to hold a revoking vote, and that all they have left is to "get ready for the next elections for governors, mayors, deputies and president in 2006"

He denied that the administration is afraid of a vote to terminate the mandate of President Hugo Chávez

ALFREDO ROJAS EL UNIVERSAL

Even though he has occupied three positions in the current administration of President Hugo Chávez, Venezuelan Vice President, José Vicente Rangel, prefers to talk about the groups opposed to the government. As if he was a mentor of dissidents, he even dares to give Chávez' foes some advices, "which I should not disclose, because if they take these suggestions into account this may be harmful for the government. But I do believe that it is fundamental to have a democratic opposition in a democratic government."

Question: Is the government more comfortable now with the country's internal situation?

Answer: I do believe that we all should be more comfortable, specially our foes. Our opponents are the ones who need democratic and institutional normalcy the most. They have to accept that they are not going to overthrow Chávez. During this conspiracy, opposition groups have won nothing but the strengthening of Chávez.

Q: Don't you believe that accusing Chávez' foes of plotting to conduct a coup d'etat is a little overrated?

A: As long as there are plans to conduct coups and people who do not believe in a recall referendum -as some leaders in the so-called Democratic Block have said, and as some retired military officers have admitted- this is a valid allegation. We talk about coup-mongers because we have detected coup-plotting activities. Let us think for a moment what would have happened if the opposition sectors were democratically wiser and used the vast resources they have at hand, such as our Bolivarian Constitution. I am sure that they would be in a completely different situation.

Q: In what position would the government be then?

A: The administration's situation would be harder perhaps. The government would be under siege, because nothing is more harassing than a democratic opposition -this generally puts any government between the devil and the deep blue sea. Coup plotting does not.

Q: A revoking referendum may put the government under siege?

A: Not necessarily. That is another thing. Opposition groups currently operating in Venezuela have not laid the grounds for a recall referendum adequately. They have wasted time. They are lost in senseless disputes. At first, they have a 38 percent support -this was a fast track for them-, but since they lack the will to serve, such a force could not be channeled through a democratic way, and instead it was focused on coup-plotting -with the help of television networks.

Q: Do you believe that Chávez' foes could have forced early elections?

A: I cannot say what they could have achieved, but in any case they could be in a better position for holding a recall referendum.

Q: And what would be the administration's situation?

A: Perhaps the government would be in a precarious position. It is hard to forecast the future when confrontation is really democratic, when citizens decide what is their best choice.

Q: How is the government facing a likely recall referendum?

A: Very calmly, with no fears. But what are Chávez opponents going to do if they do not gather the number of signatures necessary to hold this vote?

Q: There will be a revoking referendum or not?

A: I have serious doubts on the opposition's capabilities to collect the necessary signatures. This is a valid doubt, because if they do not gather signatures, there is no recall vote. I know that many people in the ranks of the opposition have this doubt. That is the reason why they have taken the way of coup-plotting and accusing Chávez of fraud.

Q: The government plans to regulate the right to demonstration, the freedom of speech and the freedom of press, why?

A: In Venezuela, people now exert their rights to demonstrate and their freedom of speech as never before. We have a hyper democracy in our country. The problem is not the exercise of the citizen's rights, but the fact that some sectors refuse to respect the Constitution, and they use the right to demonstrate or the freedom of speech with coup-plotting intentions. But we have guarantees for the political, social, business, and unionist sector to work.

We intend a regulation in the framework of the development of constitutional rights, because our Constitution establishes the regulation of general rules. We do not want to eliminate the right to demonstrate, but we do want to put an end to demonstrations having a purpose other than the exercise of a civic right. Some steps will have to be taken. If a demonstration jeopardizes lives and properties, a regulation must be adopted, either in Venezuela or in the United States.

<a href=www.novinite.com>The Bulgarian News.com For the record: 16 June 2003, Monday. Yahoo News

Emerging-market bonds have performed very well this year, buoyed by unprecedented cash inflows as increasing numbers of investors have found this high-yielding asset class a relative haven from the volatile equity markets of the developed countries.

Indeed, according to the Financial Research Corp., emerging-market debt funds received $712.2 million in new money through the end of April, after having taken in $534.9 million in all of calendar year 2002. [By comparison, the sector suffered an outflow of $553.1 million the prior calendar year.] But in spite of the renewed investor interest, emerging-market bond funds remain overlooked and small -- the entire category comprises only about $5.475 billion in assets.

Still, if the funds continue to perform anything like Kristin Ceva's $95.3 million Payden Emerging Markets Bond Fund, they may pop up on more investors' radar screens. Ceva, who has managed the fund since its inception in December, 1998, emphasizes regional diversification in her portfolio and typically stays away from distressed-credit countries. For the three-year period ended Apr. 30, the fund gained 13.4% [on an annualized basis], vs. an 8.8% rise by the average global bond fund.

And while the fund's performance has outstripped that of its peers, its expenses haven't. Though the fund's annual expense ratio was increased from 0.80% to 0.90%, it remains below the peer group's average of 1.38%. Palash Ghosh of S&P's Fund Advisor recently spoke with Ceva about the fund's strategy. Edited excerpts from their conversation follow:

Q: What has driven this recent inflow of new cash into emerging-market bonds? A: At both the retail and institutional levels, investors are reducing their equity holdings and increasing their exposure to fixed-income securities. Moreover, with this low interest rate environment, high-yield bonds and emerging-market debt instruments have become more attractive. As the equity markets in the developed countries remain quite volatile, an increasing number of investors are uncomfortable with stocks and seeking safe havens.

Q: What kind of bonds do you look for? A: We invest in both sovereign and corporate bonds of emerging-market countries that are exhibiting improving macroeconomic and political trends. We like to emphasize geographic diversification across Latin America, Eastern Europe, and Asia.

Q: What are some of the fund's other significant data? A: Its average duration is about 6.2 years, and the average maturity is 13 years. However, we can invest without regard to duration or maturity. Q: What about credit quality? A: The fund's average credit quality is BB+. One cannot think of emerging-markets debt as being below-investment-grade anymore. That's a thing of the past. A number of emerging-market nations [including Malaysia, Mexico, South Korea, Chile, South Africa, and Poland] have had their sovereign debt upgraded in recent years to investment-grade status. For example, Mexico, which is the largest country [by allocation] in virtually all emerging-market bond indices, has a relatively high rating of BBB.

Our fund's average credit quality is typically higher than that of most emerging-market indexes because we seek to avoid distressed-credit or nonrated countries like Nigeria and the Ivory Coast.

Q: What are the fund's top country allocations? A: As of Mar. 31: Russia, 19%; Mexico, 17%; Malaysia, 8%; Peru, 7%; Brazil, 7%; Bulgaria, 6%; Colombia, 6%; Philippines, 5%; Panama, 5%; Romania, 5%; Ukraine, 4%; and South Africa, 4%.

As a risk-control measure, we typically will not permit any one country to account for more than 20% of the fund's assets.

Q: What is the fund's sector breakdown? A: As of Mar. 31: corporate was 10%, and sovereign, 87%. We limit our exposure to corporate debt in the emerging markets to about 15% because the corporates in these countries often lack liquidity.

We purchase corporate debt in countries where we have confidence in their sovereign risk. Our corporates tend to reside in upper-tier, well-managed companies like Televisa in Mexico.

Q: What benchmark do you use? A: While most emerging-market bond funds use the J.P. Morgan EMBI Plus Index, we feel that index is too heavily concentrated in just three countries: Mexico, Brazil, and Russia [which together represent 65% of the index].

Our portfolio is closer in structure to the JP Morgan EMBI Global Diversified Index, which reflects our focus on regional diversification. As of Apr. 30, this index had 46.5% allocated in Latin America [including 12.3% in Mexico and 9.2% in Brazil], 23.4% in Europe, and 20.4% in Asia. Q: How have you performed against that index? A: Year-to-date through Apr. 30, the fund has gained 9.9% [gross of fees] while the index rose 10.3%. In calendar 2002, the fund jumped 10.6% [gross of fees], while the index went up 13.7%.

For the three years ended Apr. 30, the fund gained 14.3% [on an annualized basis, gross of fees], while the index rose 14.5%.

Q: Why have you been underperforming that index recently? A: Primarily because certain defaulted or CCC-rated countries like Argentina and Ecuador have delivered significant outperformance -- and we're not focused on such markets. In fact, Ecuador's debt markets have rocketed 54.69% this year, while Argentina gained 23.72%. Our focus on higher credit quality precludes investing in such risky countries.

Q: What's the premise for investing in Russia, which is currently your largest allocation? A: From a macroeconomic perspective, if you're a bond investor, you're looking at a country's ability to pay back its debt. Russia has done an excellent job in reducing its debt-to-GDP ratio to less than 40% [in fact, it has a better debt-to-GDP level than such European nations as Poland or Hungary].

There are no concerns about default risks for the foreseeable future, and Russia has current-account and fiscal surpluses. Moreover, it offers political stability, pretty good economic growth [partially supported by high oil prices], and progress on structural and economic reforms. We're comfortable with the overall economic and political fundamentals in Russia.

However, on a microeconomic level, there are some concerns about corporate governance. Russia has represented an overweight position in the fund as long as I have worked on it. The country has been the top-performing emerging market over that period.

Q: What about Mexico? A: We continue to have a favorable view of Mexico's debt markets -- it's considered a "safe haven" in Latin America. Because Mexico appears in the Lehman Aggregate Index, it attracts many "crossover" high investment-grade investors. As such, Mexico has a very broad base of investors.

Q: There appears to be some optimism about Brazil's economy now after years of turmoil. A: We currently have a neutral weighting in Brazil, reflecting our cautiously optimistic stance on the country. Brazil's newly elected President, Luis Inacio Lula da Silva, apparently seems committed to reforms in social security, tax, and pension. He's saying all the right things, but we are awaiting implementation of his stated programs.

Brazilian politics are extremely fractious. Some members of Lula's own party who oppose his reforms.

Q: You mentioned you have no exposure in Argentina, but aren't things improving there, given that the Argentine peso recently reached a 12-month high, and the Central Bank has intervened to stabilize the currency and is seeking to resolve the country's defaulted debt? A: Argentina is certainly on our radar screen, but they still have to go through a lot of restructuring of their defaulted debt. We don't have a good enough idea of how the new President-elect Nestor Kirchner will treat this process. There are simply too many variables and political risks in Argentina now.

Q: What other emerging markets are you strictly avoiding now? A: Turkey and Venezuela are very high-risk markets now. The situation in Venezuela could be particularly explosive, given the social tensions, high unemployment, oil strikes, and turmoil surrounding President Hugo Chavez. Turkey has very difficult debt dynamics -- eventually the money received from the IMF and the U.S. will run out.

Q: In Europe you have positions in Romania and Bulgaria but not in the more prominent countries like Poland, Hungary, or the Czech Republic, which are joining the European Union. A: We see more value in the long-term convergence stories of Romania and Bulgaria -- these nations are likely to join the EU by 2007. The spread valuations in Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic are extremely tight -- we just don't see much value nor upside in these countries.

Q: Which emerging markets have you been moving out of recently, and where have you been adding? A: In the fourth quarter of 2002, we began shifting out of Eastern Europe [as they had enjoyed a nice run-up], and we moved into Latin America, particularly Colombia, Peru, and Brazil, where security prices had gotten quite cheap.

Q: Isn't Colombia a high-risk area politically? A: President Alvaro Uribe of Colombia is vastly different from Chavez of Venezuela. Uribe's government is highly respected and seems committed to enacting fiscal and structural reforms to improve the country's debt-to-GDP ratio. They also seem genuinely committed to fighting the nation's guerrilla presence. Moreover, Colombia is the third-largest recipient of aid from the U.S., so they have a lot of financial help.

MONDAY, JUNE 16, 2003 New Museum of Contemporary Art

NEW YORK CITY, (<a href=news.amn.org>amnnews.com) — The New Museum of Contemporary Art is pleased to present "José Antonio Hernández-Diez", the first major museum exhibition in the United States of works by this acclaimed Venezuelan artist. Organized by the New Museum and curated by Senior Curator Dan Cameron and Adjunct Curator Gerardo Mosquera, the exhibition will be on view from July 11-September 21, 2003. This presentation concludes a national tour that included the Palm Beach Institute of Contemporary Art and SITE Santa Fe. One of the most important South American artists to have emerged in the last decade, Hernández-Diez creates candid, poetic, and at times disturbing and irreverent multi-media installations inspired by the vernacular culture and traditions of his home country. Hernández-Diez is part of a new generation of Venezuelan artists who emerged in the late 1980s –at nearly the same time that Venezuelans began a public process of searching for a solution to the economic and social crises in their country—to challenge the aesthetic traditions that had dominated Venezuelan art since the 1950s. Using unusual materials culled from urban life—such as skateboards, sneakers, pool tables, fake nails, and pork skin—Hernández-Diez elevates street and domestic culture, while commenting on the harsh economic and political realities of South American life.The New Museum exhibition will include fourteen works created by Hernández-Diez between 1991 and 2000, chosen to convey several overlapping themes that inform his work: technology and the body; marginality and vernacular culture; myth making; and an intimate, spontaneous, and enigmatic use of communication and industrial technologies. Examples of works dealing with each theme are outlined below. TECHNOLOGY AND THE BODY A guiding principal of Hernández-Diez’s early work is the discomfort of the human species caught between its animal state and something more exalted. In a 1991 installation titled "San Guinefort [Saint Guinefort]", the cadaver of a dog is locked inside a septic glass container. The viewer is able to reach his arms inside the glass case through rubber protusions in order to touch the dog’s body. San Guinefort evokes South American Catholic faith and superstition—the proof of touch is considered a remedy for religious doubt—while introducing Hernández-Diez’s interest in issues of mortality, which he subsequently explores in such works as "Vas p’al cielo y vas Ilorando [You Go To Heaven and You Go Crying"] and "La Hermandad [The Brotherhood]". MARGINALITY AND VERNACULAR CULTURE One of Hernández-Diez’s most visceral installations, "La Hermandad [The Brotherhood]", 1994, comments upon the uselessness of a common urban pastime such as skateboarding in a country as troubled as Venezuela. "La Hermandad" consists of a room in which the dominant sculptural element is a large metal drying rack. Attached to the rack are dozens of makeshift skateboards created by attaching four wheels to a slab of fried pork. The skateboards are in various stages of decomposition, some dripping fat into troughs beneath. On three small tables are monitors showing the three stages of the skateboards’ existence: birth (in a frying pan), life (careening through the street), and death (chewed apart by dogs). To learn that fried pork skin is a favorite snack among the disenfranchised classes in Venezuela only adds to the intimations of waste and uselessness. MYTH MAKING "S & M (Ella Perdió un Dedo) [S & M (She Lost A Nail)]" is the title for a series of current sculptural pieces. The works are gigantic women’s fingernails, installed in different ways, sometimes together with large pieces of sandpaper. They establish a minimalist inclination in Hernández-Diez’s art that nonetheless carries a wide spectrum of meanings. The title alludes to a famous Spanish B-movie actress of the 1960s and relates, both nostalgically and ironically, to stereotypes of mass media icons in South American culture. INTIMATE, SPONTANEOUS AND ENIGMATIC USE OF COMMUNICATION AND INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES One of the defining factors of Hernández-Diez’s work is humor. At times, his humor is biting and sarcastic; other times, it is the playful and idiosyncratic humor of a child. For example, "Que te Rinda el Dia [Have a Prodcutive Day]" (1995) is an installation of several sets of unpainted pegboard furniture bearing what appear to be bite marks from a gigantic human mouth. To achieve this effect, Hernández-Diez employed a mechanical press adapted to actually bite the furniture. While his previous works were based mostly on video installation and often juxtaposed medical technology with religious subject matter, a mechanistic performative quality appears in this unexpected and playful example of Hernández-Diez’s art. ABOUT THE ARTIST José Antonio Hernández-Diez was born in Caracas, Venezuela, in 1964. Currently, he lives and works in Barcelona, Spain. He has had solo exhibitions in New York, Madrid, Sao Paulo, and Caracas, and is increasingly represented in international exhibitions and biennials. Over the last twelve years, José Antonio Hernández-Diez has created a remarkably diverse yet conceptually consistent body of work. Vernacular culture and social issues inspire Hernández-Diez’s work but his work also represents a reaction against stereotypical views of South American identity. He works from within his culture, breaking expectations to address popular culture and society in a poetic, indirect manner. Many of the works in the exhibition at the New Museum have never been seen before in the United States. FUNDING José Antonio Hernández-Diez is made possible by generous grants from the National Endowment for the Arts, the Elizabeth Firestone Graham Foundation, Colección Patricia Phelps de Cisneros, Caracas, and from Rosa and Carlos de la Cruz. ABOUT THE NEW MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART The New Museum of Contemporary Art, founded in 1977 and located in the heart of Soho, is the premier destination for contemporary art in New York City. With an annual schedule of dynamic exhibitions, the Museum presents the most innovative and experimental work from around the world. Debate and discussion about contemporary culture are encouraged through a broad range of educational programs, publications, performances, and new media initiatives. The New Museum recently announced plans to build a new, 60,000 square foot facility at 235 Bowery. Visit www.newmuseum.org for more about the New Museum.