Lagniappe
Jackson
Diehl
: Chávez's
U.N. Moment
Why Do Latin Democrats Support Him?
It's election day for Hugo Chávez -- not in Venezuela
but at the United Nations General Assembly. Today a vote is due on his
government's bid for a nonpermanent seat on the Security Council. Chávez
has spent most of this year campaigning for the job, traveling the world
and promising tens of millions of dollars in aid to poor countries in
Asia and Africa whose votes he's counting on. His ambition is a big
one: to become the leader of global opposition to the United States,
or, as he puts it, to "radically oppose the violent pressure that
the empire exercises."
There's
a fair chance he'll lose. Most vote counters at the United Nations think
Venezuela will fall short of the 122 General Assembly votes it needs
on the first ballot, as will its opponent for the seat, Guatemala. One
of the two might win on subsequent ballots, but Latin American governments
are already anticipating that a third candidate from the region -- such
as Uruguay or the Dominican Republic -- will end up getting the job.
If so it will be a wounding rebuff for Chávez following his Bush-as-devil
tirade before the assembly last month, and one that could hurt him in
another vote, if it is free and fair: his bid for reelection as president
in December. His opponent in that race has been hammering home the point
that Chávez is squandering the country's oil revenue on foolish
foreign adventures.
A Chávez defeat would save the Bush administration from embarrassment
and spare the Security Council a nuisance factor. Still, there won't
be much to celebrate. The fact that a clownish populist who has eagerly
embraced the presidents of Iran, Belarus, Zimbabwe and Libya could even
come close to getting two-thirds of the votes of the 192 U.N. members
is testimony to how low U.S. prestige has sunk around the world. More
specifically, it's a measure of how twisted U.S. relations with Latin
America have become -- and also, how fragile the appeal of democratic
values is in that region.
How twisted? Let's look at Chile, a country that has
been convulsed by debate the past two months over whether to vote for
or against Chávez. Chile's democratic president, Michelle Bachelet,
is a moderate leftist; her government has a free-trade agreement with
the United States and just took delivery of new F-16s for its air force.
Some in her party were sheltered during the Pinochet dictatorship by
Venezuela's then-liberal democratic government. Chávez has not
only dismantled that democracy but has vociferously supported Bolivia's
claim to a piece of Chile's coastline. Under a military pact he signed
with Bolivia's leftist government, Venezuela is committed to building
new military bases on Bolivia's border with Chile.
All this, and yet Bachelet was unable to decide on her
government's vote by yesterday. Only strong opposition from the centrist
Christian Democratic Party, a member of her coalition, prevented her
from backing Chávez. Why? A vote for Guatemala, she told Christian
Democratic congressmen earlier this month, "would be a signal of
little independence from the United States," which has been pressing
hard for Guatemala's candidacy, according to an account of the meeting
by the newspaper El Mercurio.
In other words, as Chile's president sees it, it's better
to support a budding autocrat who promises to defend Iran's nuclear
program on the Security Council, and may threaten her own country's
security, than to be seen as close to Chile's largest trading partner
and strategic arms supplier at a time when it is trying to use the Security
Council to stop Iran (and North Korea) from acquiring nuclear weapons.
This certainly says something about Chile, and neighbors
Brazil and Argentina, which are also supporting Chávez: that
they value Venezuela's investment in their economies more than preventing
nuclear proliferation (Chávez is buying debt from Argentina and
aircraft from Brazil); that solidarity with a neighbor matters more
than solidarity with other democracies (probably the only votes for
Venezuela in the free world will come from Latin America and the Caribbean);
that their governments prefer a weaker United States to a chastened
Hugo Chávez.
But this affair also underlines the continuing fecklessness
of the Bush administration's approach to Latin America. There is its
overreliance on faithful but small allies in Central America and its
inability to come to terms with the region's giant, Brazil. There is
its heavy-handed lobbying, which prompted Guatemala's foreign minister
to say that he wished Washington "would not promote our cause so
much." Most disturbing, there is the inability to win support from
a nominally close ally such as Chile, even against an autocratic demagogue.
Chávez may lose the U.N. vote, but in the contest for Latin America,
the United States isn't winning.
Jackson Diehl is
an Op-Ed writer for the Washington Post. Petroleumworld not necessarily
share these views.
Editor's
Note: This commentary was originally published by The Washington Post,
on Oct. 16, 2006. Petroleumworld reprint this article in the interest
of our readers.
All comments posted and published do not reflect either for or against
the opinion expressed in the comment as an endorsement of Petroleumworld.
All comments expressed are private comments and do not necessary reflect
the view of this website. All comments are posted and published without
liability to Petroleumworld.
Fair use Notice: This site contains copyrighted material
the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the
copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts
to advance understanding of issues of environmental and humanitarian
significance. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. For more information go
to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
All works published by Petroleumworld are in accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes. Petroleumworld
has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor
is Petroleumworld endorsed or sponsored by the originator. Petroleumworld
encourages persons to reproduce, reprint, or broadcast Petroleumworld
articles provided that any such reproduction identify the original source,
http://www.petroleumworld.com or else and it is done within the fair
use as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish
to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own
that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner.
Internet web links to http://www.petroleumworld.com
are appreciated.
Petroleumworld
News 10/17/06
Copyright©2006
The Washington Post. All rights reserved.