<a href=www.vheadline.com>Venezuela's Electronic News Posted: Thursday, April 17, 2003 By: Patrick J. O'Donoghue

A bomb exploded destroying part of the Tachira State Ranchers Association (Asogata) HQ in San Cristobal. No one was hurt in the blast since it took place before 1.00 a.m. and according to police sources, there were no witnesses and little damage done. 

Asogata president, Genaro Mendez blames left-wing elements ... "they left pamphlets and fliers with slogans, such as 'Land for everyone' and 'The Revolution is the only way to success!'" 

Tachira State Governor Captain (ret.) Ronald Blanco La Cruz has condemned the attack warning that it's the wrong way to do politics.

Comparing the Asogata bomb to the more powerful semtex C4 that ripped the entrance of the Caracas Teleport building, Blanco La Cruz says an negotiated agreement has been signed with the government and if people don't like it, there are other means to express their disapproval.

Forums

Referendum 2003 discuss the pros and cons of a revocatory referendum

President Hugo Chavez Frias express your opinions on the Presidency of Hugo Chavez Frias and his Bolivarian Revolution

Bolivarian Circles Are Bolivarian Circles a Venezuelan form of Neighborhood Watch Committees or violent hordes of pro-Chavez thugs?

Venezuela's Opposition What is it? Is a force to be reckoned with or in complete disarray?

Our editorial statement reads: VHeadline.com Venezuela is a wholly independent e-publication promoting democracy in its fullest expression and the inalienable  right of all Venezuelans to self-determination and the pursuit of sovereign independence without interference. We seek to shed light on nefarious practices and the corruption which for decades has strangled this South American nation's development and progress. Our declared editorial bias is pro-democracy and pro-Venezuela ... which some may wrongly interpret as anti-American. --  Roy S. Carson, Editor/Publisher  Editor@VHeadline.com

Apr 17th 2003 | CARACAS From <a href=www.economist.com>The Economist print edition EPA
Read complete story in spanish

A year after Venezuela's failed coup, its president rules in triumph over a shattered and still-divided country

ON APRIL 13th, the broad Avenida Bolívar in the heart of Venezuela's capital was a sea of flags in the national colours of red, yellow and blue, spattered with the scarlet berets of the political movement led by President Hugo Chávez. Behind the president, on his podium raised high above the crowd, was a vast billboard celebrating the “civilian-military unity” that, in official mythology at least, restored Mr Chávez and his populist “Bolivarian revolution” to power after he was briefly ousted in a coup a year ago.

Twelve months on, the balance of power in Venezuela has shifted dramatically. Mr Chávez celebrated the anniversary with an international “solidarity forum” paid for out of public funds. Those attending included Carlos Lage, Cuba's vice-president.

Venezuela The Organisation of American States explains the referendum under discussion in Venezuela.

In contrast, Mr Chávez's opponents failed even to unite in commemoration of last year's events, in which 19 of their supporters were killed. Some of their rallies were cancelled for lack of support. The opposition is battered and leaderless. It is licking its wounds after the failure in January of its second all-out bid to topple the president, this one through a two-month general strike that strangled the oil industry. The government claims that oil production is now back to normal, despite the sacking of nearly half the state oil company's workforce.

But Mr Chávez is presiding over a country dramatically impoverished by 18 months of bitter political conflict. The strike alone cost Venezuela 7.6% of its GDP, according to the National Assembly's economic advisory office. Many private firms have closed down. Since December, in one household in three a family member has lost his job, according to DatosIR, a market-research firm. Datanalisis, another survey firm, predicts a 30% drop in purchasing power this year, in a country where half the population is barely managing to subsist. Crime is soaring.

The government has imposed exchange controls, and is itself close to broke. When Mr Chávez said last month that Venezuela would have to restructure its foreign debt, finance officials quickly contradicted him. But the government faces a fiscal deficit this year of close to 7% of GDP, according to LatinSource, an economic consultancy. It is likely to press the Central Bank to print money, so inflation (31% during last year) is set to continue rising. Vegetable gardens for the poor

The president brands the opposition as fascist coup-mongers. The opposition, for its part, accuses Mr Chávez of being an elected dictator. It is unclear, however, whom the hard-pressed Venezuelans will blame for their plight. Polls showed a slight increase in support for Mr Chávez during and after the strike. But that may not last. Officials fear that hunger could erode support for Mr Chávez among the poor. Beside the Avenida Bolívar, the government is sponsoring vegetable gardens.

The next test for both sides is likely to be a mid-term referendum on Mr Chávez's presidency. Under the constitution, this could be held from August onwards. Government and opposition negotiators said last week that they had reached a “pre-agreement” to hold such a vote, after talks mediated by the Organisation of American States. But there are many obstacles. The government has not even said whether it will sign the “pre-agreement”. Although the opposition in February gathered the 2.4m signatures needed to call a referendum, it will almost certainly have to repeat the exercise. There is no electoral authority in place. The National Electoral Council's term lapsed a year ago. A new council has yet to be appointed, because of wrangling not just between the two sides but within the opposition.

All this means that the government has many ways in which to stall a referendum. If cornered, Mr Chávez could simply precipitate an election. Since he is far more popular than any single opposition leader, he might win this—unless the opposition were to unite. There are no signs of that yet. The opposition is still shell-shocked after the strike. “Everyone is depressed and dispirited,” admits an opposition source. It lacks a clear strategy as well as a leader. But the campaign for the referendum could quickly galvanise it again.

For now, the heat has gone out of Venezuela's political conflict. But neither side is interested in a lasting accommodation. The threat of violence still lurks. As the Chavistas geared up for their celebration, a bomb damaged the building in which the talks between the government and the opposition were held. Similar bombs went off at the Colombian consulate and the Spanish embassy in February. If Venezuela is indeed enjoying a truce, it is an uneasy one which shows no sign of lasting.
Read complete story in spanish

<a href=washingtontimes.com<Washington Times- EDITORIAL • April 16, 2003

     The death toll of Americans fighting terror and narco-trafficking in Colombia has reached five since February 13, after a State Department coca-duster flown by an American was shot down last week. About 150 U.S. troops are still combing Colombia, looking for three Americans kidnapped in February by the most brutal terrorist group in the Western Hemisphere, the FARC.

     Colombia's narcotics and terrorism cabals are spreading violence beyond Columbia. They have been given sanctuary in Venezuela, are involved in coca cultivation in Peru, are behind some drug-related violence in Brazil and launch forays into Ecuador. This regional aspect of the Colombian problem has developed a dangerous dynamic. Eyewitnesses claim the Venezuelan military has selected which narco-terror group they are backing, and are bombing their adversaries in Colombia. Thus far, the Colombian response has been subdued. But, if such bombing continues, the situation could erupt in conflict.

     Washington has taken some key steps toward meeting the challenge. Since July 2000, the United States has given Colombia almost $2 billion to combat drug trafficking and terrorism. Last year Washington approved a trade pact for Colombia and its neighbors. But, the region also needs the United States to help coordinate a regional approach to mitigate the transnational threat.

     Colombia and its neighbors must do a better job of policing their borders to contain the narco-terrorist danger. Since resources in these countries are limited, cooperation is essential. And here, Brazil, which has warm ties with Venezuela, must intervene to convince the government of President Hugo Chavez to stop harboring terrorists.

     The United States should share its extensive customs, interdiction and border patrol expertise by holding joint training sessions with authorities from Colombia and surrounding nations. The donor countries helping Colombia must also provide the funds and know-how to bolster the country's rural development. Colombian authorities only control about 60 percent of the country. Therefore, much of the nation is a kind of no-man's land that provides the ideal habitat for terrorists.

     Before the violence in Colombia claims more American lives and causes greater regional instability, the administration should become more active in seeking solutions. Colombia's problems can't be eradicated overnight. But, with U.S. help, they can be steadily reduced.

April 16, 2003, 12:38PM By DAVID IVANOVICH Copyright 2003 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- OPEC will consider slashing its crude production next week, fearing the quick war in Iraq could send crude prices nose-diving.

Oil prices edged closer to $30 a barrel Tuesday after oil ministers finally agreed to meet April 24 in Vienna.

The goal of this meeting is to rethink the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries' production strategy for the coming months.

"All options" will be on the table, OPEC Secretary-General Alvaro Silva said.

Some OPEC watchers say the cartel could agree to cut production by nearly 2 million barrels a day, or about 7 percent, from current levels.

So far this month, the 10 OPEC countries whose output is controlled by production ceilings have been pumping 26.4 million barrels a day, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

That's 1.9 million barrels a day more than their output quotas would allow.

The OPEC producers have been pumping a great deal of extra crude in recent weeks to offset the loss of nearly 2.5 million barrels a day of Iraqi crude production, which has been off line since the war started.

The OPEC countries had pledged to make up for any supply disruptions as a way to dissuade the United States and other industrialized nations from tapping their strategic petroleum reserves.

But the speedy U.S.-led victory in Iraq and the relatively minor damage inflicted on Iraq's oil fields have wiped out most of those war jitters.

And now OPEC members are asking whether the group's output is about to glut the market.

"I think they'll go back to their quota," noted John Lichtblau, chairman of the New York-based Petroleum Industry Research Foundation.

Michael Rothman, senior energy market specialist for Merrill Lynch in New York, argued that OPEC's current ceiling is too low, considering that petroleum inventory levels remain well below normal.

"I don't think the meeting is designed to implement a new policy but to signal to the oil market that they are not going to implode," Rothman said.

Seven of the OPEC members are currently pumping more than their quotas would allow. But Saudi Arabia, the cartel's largest producer and de facto leader, accounted for the bulk of that extra production.

Saudi Arabia, which had been producing only 8.1 million barrels a day in December, is currently cranking about 9.6 million barrels a day, its highest rate in 13 years and about 21 percent above its production limit.

It has ignored its quota because world inventories had dropped dangerously low with the lost production from Venezuela because of labor strife, plus the potential for lost Iraq production when war started.

Days before the fighting began, Kuwaiti officials had announced plans to shut in crude production near the Iraqi border to guard against attack. But fears that Iraq would lash out at Kuwait quickly dissipated. Kuwait is pumping full-out, producing an average of 2.45 million barrels a day this month, 25 percent above its ceiling.

The OPEC producers are concerned about overproduction because the second quarter is traditionally the weakest of the year for oil demand.

Winter is over, while the busy summer travel season has yet to begin. U.S. refineries usually use this period to build inventories, and stocks in the United States are extremely low.

Oil demand was already hampered by a slowdown in the world economy, while the war and the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome or SARS epidemic have taken their toll on world travel.

Since the start of the war, crude prices have dropped substantially, as oil traders realized their worst fears -- many oil fields in flames -- were unwarranted.

But the much-feared price crash has not occurred, as it did after the last Gulf War. On Monday, the OPEC basket of crudes fetched an average price of $25.35 a barrel, smack in the middle of the group's desired $22 to $28 price band.

But price hawks like Iran are fearful the United States intends to use Iraq's crude production to hobble the OPEC cartel. Even if other members do not subscribe to such fears, they realize OPEC must make room for the resumption of Iraqi exports.

Vice President Dick Cheney said last week White House officials hope to get Iraqi production back up to 2.5 million to 3 million barrels a day by the end of the year.

Many industry experts believe the new government could be exporting 1 million to 2 million barrels a day by the end of June, Lichtblau said.

But to do that, they'll have to get permission from the United Nations to market the oil.

"The legal issue at the moment is overriding any kind of physical problems," Lichtblau said. "They could start exporting oil, not immediately, but very soon.

During the years of economic sanctions, the U.N. Security Council has controlled Iraq's oil sales through its oil-for-food program.

The United States and Great Britain are poised to ask the United Nations to allow a new government in Iraq to use the proceeds to rebuild the country.

What is unclear is how or when the council will respond.

<a href=www.canada.com>Canadian Press Tuesday, April 15, 2003

CARACAS (AP) - A senior Venezuelan army general said the government of the South American country has proof the United States was involved in a short-lived coup against President Hugo Chavez last year.

Army Gen. Melvin Lopez, secretary of Venezuela's National Defence Council, said Tuesday "proof exists" the U.S. administration was involved in the mid-April putsch. He declined to give further details. "We have the evidence," Lopez said during an interview broadcast by Venezuela's state-run television channel.

Lopez said three U.S. military helicopters were on Venezuelan territory during the coup.

A spokesmen from the Pentagon declined comment on the allegation Tuesday night.

Dissident generals rose up against Chavez on April 11, 2002, several hours after 19 Venezuelans died and over 100 were wounded by gunfire as opposition marchers clashed with government supporters in downtown Caracas.

Loyalists in the military returned Chavez to power two days later.

Following his return, Chavez said "worrying details" had emerged suggesting a foreign country might have been involved in his temporary overthrow.

Chavez said a coastal radar installation had tracked a foreign military ship and helicopter operating over Venezuelan waters a day after his ouster. Chavez did not say which country had sent the ship and helicopter but governing party legislators have accused the United States of helping execute the coup.

The U.S. administration has repeatedly denied it was involved in the coup but acknowledged having held conversations with Venezuelan opposition leaders and military officers prior to the rebellion against Chavez.

A month after Chavez returned, the U.S. Embassy denied allegations U.S. military vessels were in Venezuelan territory.

The only U.S. vessels to approach Venezuelan waters during the coup attempt were two U.S. coast guard ships on a joint anti-narcotics mission with The Netherlands, the embassy said in a news release.

The embassy also rejected allegations by governing party legislators that two U.S. military officials who visited the Fuerte Tiuna military base in Caracas the day before Chavez's ouster were helping coup leaders.

The two officers spent two hours at the base April 11 to investigate information about troop movements, the embassy said. They left hours before Chavez was deposed. Two officers returned to the base April 13 for another evaluation of the situation.

Officials in Washington said they told opponents of Chavez they would not support any unconstitutional activity aimed at removing the leftist leader from power.

Chavez, who has irritated Washington by forging ties with Cuban President Fidel Castro, has criticized the United States for being too slow in condemning the coup when it occurred.

In contrast to most Latin American governments, the United States was sluggish to condemn the coup, initially blaming Chavez for his own overthrow. It later joined members of the Organization of American States in condemning the coup as unconstitutional.

Last week, Chavez commemorated the one-year anniversary of his dramatic return to power by inviting anti-globalization activists to a series of forums in Caracas.

Opposition leaders condemned the celebration, saying it was an insult to relatives of the victims who died in the violence that occurred prior to the military uprising.