Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez and President Bush have not seen eye to eye for quite some time now. The Feb. 12th, 2005 Washington Times reports that Venezuela is ordering 1,000 AK-47 assault rifles, as well as helicopters from Russia, which the U.S. has stated, would be given to Marxist rebels in the region, most likely, in Colombia. The U.S. has filed a formal complaint against Russia for the sales of the weapons. Colombia is also looking to upgrade their air force from American made F-16s to Russian MiG 29s. For more information, read the article here.

Russia's take on U.S. criticism?



Senator Charles Rangel of New York seems to echo this sentiment as well:




Questions for debate.

1.)To what extent is th administration's cricitism of Venezuela a product of resetnment over lost military contracts as opposed to potential aiding of Marxist rebels in the region?


2.)What course should we take in dealing with Venezuela? Other than "impertinence" and criticism of Venezuela, where do we go from here?

Not sure. I mean, I'm sure there's some of that, but I don't know how likely it is for Venezuela to turn around and sell the newly purchased hardware to the rebels.


What course should we take? What course can we take? They are a sovereign nation, in a worldwide free trade market. They have the right to buy military hardware from whomever they can get the best deal from.

Now, if they do sell that hardware to people intent on subverting free democratic peoples in the region, we can certainly apply economic sanctions on them. But, really, what else can we do at this point?

The argument could be made that we really need to take him out. He is the fifth largest producer of oil for us, so he can affect our economy to a certain extent. As an aspiring socialist who mingles with North Korea and Cuba openly, he is a threat to the region because he could help any Marxist movement in the region set up operations in his country. We could offer powerful generals backing through money and weapons support if they lead a coup. We could hire disgruntled Venezuelan itnelligence officials to have him killed. We could fund commando squads to blow up bridges, oil pipelines, and to generally create chaos within Venezuelan society and their economy. A more benign effort would be to funnel money to pro-democracy groups and news sources that don't like him. Yes, there are laws that might be broken, but who in all honesty honors them?

1.)To what extent is th administration's cricitism of Venezuela a product of resetnment over lost military contracts as opposed to potential aiding of Marxist rebels in the region?

There is a lot more to this than military contracts. Please take time to view this link to view the escalation of state department rhetoric. Venezuela & USA: Has the lion awakened? http://www.vcrisis.com/index.php?content=l...rs/200502120431

2.)What course should we take in dealing with Venezuela? Other than "impertinence" and criticism of Venezuela, where do we go from here?

Well, I mentioned on another topic the other day that I had seen large numbers of ship pack Cobra attack helicopters in a discrete hangar here in PR. I took a closer look at the hangar and it has a sign Dyne Corp. the manufacture of the helicopters and my guess they are on their way to Columbia. See link: Regarding Fuerza Aerea Colombiana http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/printer_169.shtml There is going to be a face down with Chavez and Castro. Recently in the news Chavez has been allowing squatters to take over private company lands. There is an election around the corner and now he is taking over the press: “The Year's Most Serious Attack Against Press Freedom” http://www.narconews.com/Issue30/article808.html and, “Castro warns of Chavez death plot” http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/12/...ain673686.shtml

This is not about military sales it is about the future of the entire South America.

edited to repair links

1.)To what extent is the administration's cricitism of Venezuela a product of resetnment over lost military contracts as opposed to potential aiding of Marxist rebels in the region?
Does the admin itself make these arms sales and reap their profits? If this was America's motive then wouldn't the US gov. be more in favor for the lifting of the arms embargo on China seeing the Europeans were taking the initiative?


2.)What course should we take in dealing with Venezuela? Other than "impertinence" and criticism of Venezuela, where do we go from here?
Isn't the US accused of involvement in the coup in Venezuela? I have no idea if that is true or not..just rumours I have read. Yet perhaps the US is trying other methods than just vocal criticisms.

By no means am I stating that we should take Chavez out, quite the contrary. Just playing devil's advocate and stating what could be done, rather than what should be done. Our country has a long history in trying to undo occurances in other nations. In the early 1960s, our government contemplated provoking a war with Cuba by sinking a boat of refugees, killing civilians, and blaming the episode on the Cuban government in order to gain public sympathy in starting such a conflict. What is very amusing is that when Chavez was ousted for a day or two, the U.S. media played the anti-democratic coup as a bold move for democracy. I don't believe that Chavez is a bad leader. He has taken oil profit proceeds to fund medical and educational programs in the countryside of his nation. If anything, his actions are what is in the best interests of his people. The U.s. should negotiate with him and in light of our manuevers to oust him, publicly apologize and fire administration officials who may have secretly bargained for the coup.

I disagree..and I think he has high ideals about what his government should do but I think they stay on that piece of paper he carries everywhere with him. Venezuela is a very socially divided country..as is much of S. America. I don't think Chavez seeks to dissolve the class structure in his country I think he seeks to exploit it for political gain. He is not a socialist he is a populist.
He has been in power what now..6 yrs? And according to the UN poverty in Venezuela has remained unchanged. And the medical programs involve importing Cuban doctors and flying patients to Cuba for operations..Venezuela's own medical health care system is still pitiful. Does he intend to build the needed institutions for true social progress..or are these "missions" the extent of it? Seems more like their intention is for political advancement than for social advancement


Chávez's mission to get out the vote

1.)To what extent is th administration's cricitism of Venezuela a product of resetnment over lost military contracts as opposed to potential aiding of Marxist rebels in the region? I'd say the criticism from 'lost military contracts' is absolute zero. I'd be very surprised if we've sold them much of anything since Chavez was elected. If anything, it's a drop of spit in the ocean.


2.)What course should we take in dealing with Venezuela? Other than "impertinence" and criticism of Venezuela, where do we go from here? I don't think we should intervene much at all, if possible. Chavez is not popular...so unpopular that Venezuela was actually importing its oil just a couple of years ago due to strikes from workers attempting to oust him. The next election is in 2007.

Edited to add: Here is a list of our arms sales to Venezuela in the past 13 years. Around 35 million total sales in over a decade. I obtained the figures from this arms notification site.

I'm venezuelan. I must first say that I don't like Chavez. Never had. I can't like a person who tried to make a coup to our democracy in 92 and due to incompetency of our political system, which let him get out of jail before he paid for his crime, allowed him to candidate himself for the presidency using the means he was supposed to be so outraged of, in the first place.

He is as bad a leader as it can be. He involved politics into one of the most efficient companies we had: PDVSA (State petroleum company), in order to use the money it produces to pursue his own interests. The poor people in Venezuela are not better off with him, instead his 6 years in government has made things difficult for the middle class in venezuela to exist (one of the most developed middle classes in Latin America), making more poor people in the process.

As Bucket said, Chavez is a populist. He helps poor people only when it is convenient for him (elections time, etc.). There is not a consistent plan to solve social problems in Venezuela. He seems to have more of a consistent plan to interfere in other south america countries such as Bolivia, Argentina, Colombia and Chile, supporting anti-government groups as the guerrillas in Colombia, the "piqueteros" in Argentina or Evo Morales in Bolivia.

Moreover, he is able to spend a lot of money lobbying in the USA and finding support for his "government".

How can the USA handle Venezuela? I would better ask: How should the USA handle Chavez?


I'd say that the USA should not try directly to handle Chavez (it would be easy for him to continue with his superficial anti-US rethorical blah-blah-blah) .....It should use the OAS (Organization of american States) to make more pressure on him. Last august referendum (electronically made) results were too rapidly accepted by the international community, including the group led by ex-president Carter, even though it could have been possible to count manually the votes ending the controversy arose due to the inconsistencies between pre-estimations and post-referendum results.....180 degrees difference. OAS should have made pressure to make the count immediately. It didn't happen. paper votes were found dumped in solitaire places and even near military installations (the military took care of the ballots), which meant that even if count was done late, it would not reflect the original results.. After the referendum results, we (the people who has been protesting for a year and half on the streets) got kind of tired and depressed (What can you do when you are not sure if you were tricked or not and the whole continent was backing the dubious referendum results?) and let Chavez win the regional elections (for mayors and governors).


Chavez is a problem. He is a problem because he wants to become a world leader and has the money to try (and most likely fail wasting Venezuela's assets in the process): he wants to export his so-called "revolution". On the other side, since Chavez is seen as a leftist, uninformed and sometimes not so uninformed socialist organizations and groups around the globe supports his government, thinking it is serving their agendas while in truth it is only Chavez's agenda they are supporting.

The sooner the problem is dealt with the better.

P.S: It seems very hard for me to write in correct english (german is active in my head and kind of interfere with my english grammar). That you all write for the most part so well, doesn't help my shyness to write in the Forum.

So I apologize for any horrible grammar mistakes I may have commited.

giftzahn

Hoi giftzahn

I was hoping you would comment on this thread because I read in another post that you are originally from Venezuela. Has Venezuela experienced a lot of negative migration since Chavez came into power?

I read a very interesting article on Chavez and it basically said that Bolivarian-ism (is this a word?) ..which is what I have read he follows..is flawed and is bad government and does not seek to "liberate" even Bolivar acknowledged this when he said...
"It would be better for South America to adopt the Koran than the form of government of the United States, even though it be the best in the world"
Here is the article I read..
All change in Venezuela’s revolution?

I also wanted to ask you...do you feel the great social divide that exists in Venezuela allowed for this to happen? And do you think the people of Venezuela can overcome this divide?

PS I understood everything you wrote.

Hi Bucket:

Has Venezuela experienced a lot of negative migration since Chavez came into power?

Yes, We have experienced more than normal negative migration, due to the fact that since six years ago many people have felt the necessity to escape from an abrasive environment where everything seems to be political motivated: Jobs were taken away because you didn't agree with Chavez's government; Private property was being invaded without the government clear disapproval (It could be argued, given some cases, that the government was encouraging such an unacceptable behavior) and in general because the economical situation has been getting worse and worse since Chavez took power. For example, During Chavez's government we had the situation, for the first time in our democratic history, that in spite of very high oil prices, the economical situation got actually worse.

Besides the economical aspect, Chavez succeeded in making the gap between social classes bigger than it never was, playing with the latent unsatisfaction of the people in order to increment his power; You could say that nowadays there is a hate from the poor classes toward the other classes that was not there before (imho).


We were never before been very prone to emigrate.....so the current situation speaks a lot about the problems we are facing.

do you feel the great social divide that exists in Venezuela allowed for this to happen? And do you think the people of Venezuela can overcome this divide?

What allowed for this to happen was the weakness of our political parties, the corruption and the lack of trust in our institutions, which is, by the way, something that is currently happening in all latin american democracies. Chavez came on a time where everybody needed a change from a system that needed, without doubts, many improvements. He promised to do that: improve the system, stop the corruption, eliminate poverty. The people chose him. Nothing has been done but many don't want to lose their hopes....not yet. How many people do still support Chavez? That is something that since the last Referendum is a secret for me. I believed something near 40%.....Now we are suppose to believe it is near 60%.


We will eventually overcome this divide that in my opinion was artificially fabricated, in the first place. We tend to be friendly and simple people, with generally no time to be hating each other (not long ago, Venezuela had the happiest people in the world, last survey we ranked third )...... so generate the conditions: work, stable institutions and responsible government and we have everything in the country what is needed to succeed: people and country's riches.


PS I understood everything you wrote.

Thank you!