Venezuela Problem – Best on Tuesday

www.nationnews.com Tuesday 14, January-2003 by Robert Best

WITH THE OPPOSITION strike in Venezuela now more than six weeks old certain contrasts are revealing themselves among those who are demanding that President Hugo Chavez either resigns or calls early elections, and his supporters, The “Chavistas” who want him to stay.

For a start, the international news media, while making it difficult to accuse them of being partial towards the anti-Chavez protesters, have certainly been focusing more on these than on any elements that are supporting Chavez. This is most interesting since this trend comes in the wake of accusations within Venezuela itself, even before the anti-Chavez marchers had hit the road, that the Venezuelan media were anti-Chavez in much of their news coverage.

It has reached the point where a number of TV and radio stations have been attacked with the blame being placed on those who support the Venezuelan president. But it is not difficult to read between the lines with all that has been going on in the country.

For example, even when the international media carry pictures of the protesters, it is marked how better off those in the anti-Chavez ranks look compared with those who are rallying for the Chavez cause. We are seeing people in proper looking threads (clothes), some even wearing their jewellery as they march against Chavez compared with those who are shouting on his behalf, leaving no doubt by their appearance that they are among the country’s poor.

It comes over strongly in these pictures that while the anti-Chavez elements have been accusing him of dividing the country, with its more than 21 million people, the real “divider” is poverty.

Those who have been following developments in Venezuela will recall that reports from international agencies have noted that it is a country in which some 80 per cent of the population live below the poverty line. This is in a country that boasts of being the third largest oil producer in the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries.

It is not difficult to understand why the 20 per cent who are better off see their way of life being threatened by signals sent by Chavez that he intended to do more to improve the living conditions of the poor, most of whom, it should be noted, are of native Indian origin.

A close look at the pictures coming out of Venezuela of those who have been queuing up outside the banks as the crisis there deepens, with the country’s bolivar currency taking a beating because of the long strike, leaves no doubt who really have money in the banks. This also accounts for the ability of so many of the middle class to keep up the strike pressure on Chavez, since they have been able to use their bank accounts like a “strike fund.” Now that the currency has began to slide it will be interesting to see how these protesters will react. Many of them will find themselves moving closer to that 80 per cent who are said to be below the “poverty line” if the strike drags on much longer.

It is still true that where a man’s treasure is, there will his heart be also, and we must now wait and see if the anti-Chavez protesters will have the heart to keep going for that much longer now that their protest to bring down Chavez is hitting them where “their way of life” is concerned.

Next door in Brazil, where socialist convert Lula da Silva has recently taken over as president with a strong promise, like Chavez, to improve the lot of his country’s poor, tentative steps have begun towards that end. But how what has been going on in Venezuela will affect Silva’s approach to the problem we can only guess.

Brazil is a country where it is reported that an estimated 54 million out of a population of 175 million live below the poverty line. This is a smaller percentage than Venezuela’s 80 per cent. It is not far-fetched to anticipate that should Silva make certain moves on behalf of the poor in his country, he could run into similar problems as Chavez has.

Silva was reported to have visited a number of poverty-stricken areas last week promising residents government programmes to end hunger and provide clean water; basics which have been lacking. He however told them that he cannot promise all their problems “will be solved from one day to the other.” He has given them, nonetheless, some hope. That is what Chavez has also given millions of poor in Venezuela. The problem ahead is that having held out that hope to the poor, it will not be easy, now there is some momentum, for those replacing him or ousting him, to put back the clock. It will be more of a challenge for those who are privileged, to continue in their comfort zone.

Hopes dashed deepen discontent and discontent courts strife. This is the path that beckons Venezuela if all involved are not careful. Chavez has really not been able to do much so far to help the poor. Yet that 80 per cent poor will be determined that more of that oil wealth trickles down.