By Gustavo Coronel
The Council on Hemispheric Affairs continues its undistinguished work on Venezuela. The current effort: “A Decade in Power: An Assessment of Hugo Chavez's Bolivarian Revolution”, by Ashley Wagner, is afflicted with the same shortcomings of their previous work: insufficient research, pro-Chavez bias and, even, just plain ignorance of the reality of the country.
In the opening lines the author speaks of the 10-year celebration decreed by Chavez but fails to comment on how this decree was done. Hours before the day arrived, Chavez felt it would be a good idea to celebrate it and ordered all business closed down. Most Venezuelans went to work, not knowing about the caudillo's decision. Shops were opened, private hospitals and clinics started to work, bakeries offered their daily bread. In rage, Chavez ordered the army on the streets, forcing merchants to close down. Only then the “spontaneous” celebration could proceed. This grotesque event should have merited the comment of any serious analyst, but not Ms. Wagner's.
Her review of the Social reforms sounds suspiciously like the paper by Mark Weisbrot et al on the same subject, one that I have taken apart in my blog (“Memo to Weisbrot et Al”) www.lasarmasdecoronel.blogspot.com . She says: “After the recuperation of the control of the national petroleum company…the resulting vast increase in government revenue…” Wagner makes this sound like if taking control of the company resulted in greater revenues. Nothing of the sort! What Weisbrot et al and now Wagner call “control” was the takeover of the company by his followers, led by Rafael Ramirez, which has led to the company losing about 800,000 barrels per day in production capacity, as well as much corruption and deterioration in all aspects. Increased revenues were the result of oil prices jumping from $30 per barrel to $120 per barrel. Even a failing company could make more money with those prices. Today, the company cannot even pay its contractors on time and is failing clients because of lack of production.
The author mentions a “Mision Vuelta al Campo” as one building healthcare facilities nationwide and providing surgery for cataracts. Obviously she is mixing up several things. Mision Barrio Adentro is the one providing free medical care (of low quality) while “Vuelta al Campo” is an imitation of the Chinese policy of encouraging the urban poor to return to the countryside. How is Chavez doing this? By allowing the urban poor to invade productive private land in the countryside, taking over the cattle and trying to run the operation, until the whole thing predictably collapses. Hundreds of private farms have been invaded, with the protection of the Chavez regime, only to start these farms on a one-way trip to ruin.
The author continues the eulogy: “ By 2005, illiteracy was essentially eradicated in the country. State sponsored literacy and educational programs also resulted in substantial gains in middle and higher education enrollment. Enrollment rates nearly doubled from 1999 to 2008, the period of time spanning Chavez's term”. The eradication of the illiteracy is a lie. UNESCO has had to deny several times that this is so. The illiteracy rate in Venezuela remains at some 7 percent; the same rate Chavez found when he took over in 1998. Why these so-called analysts are unable to check the UNESCO report is beyond my understanding. List of countries by literacy rate. In this list Venezuela has a 93 percent literacy rate and is number 72 in the ranking. So much for this lie.
The author claims that shortening the workweek from 44 to 36 hours was done to prevent exploitation! The normal international workweek in the office is 40 hours and in the factories 44 hours. Shortening the workweek only helps to increase costs and to condemn many industries to bankruptcy. At this moment they are considering to cut it again, to 30 hours, “in order to increase employment”!
Again the author relies on the Weisbrot et al whitewash when she says that the GDP “has doubled” and that nationalizations were “wildly popular and appreciated”. This is far from the case. These takeovers of productive businesses such as the Electricidad de Caracas, the cement companies, the steel company SIDOR and the telephone company CANTV are ruining these companies and driving foreign investment out of the country (is now negative).
The author adds this sugary statement: “his revolution showed a generosity of spirit which was almost unparalleled in terms of the often significant financial contributions and sharing of the country's petroleum revenues for educational and medical services, in addition to a wide roster of foreign aid and acts of goodwill”. This is a truly repugnant statement to any Venezuelan who loves his/her country. Chavez has been financing Castro's Cuba since 2004, at some $2 billion per year, money that belongs to us. He has been giving money and free oil to his ideological friends, Morales, Correa, Ortega and Kirchner. He has been squandering Venezuela's resources in order to consolidate a personal political project. And this ignorant lady says that this shows Chavez's generosity of spirit! Chavez is giving money to Hollywood actors like Danny Glover ($20 million) to make films to enhance his image. He is giving Joseph Kennedy's organization “subsidized” fuel oil to give to the U.S. “poor”, who have an income ten times higher than the Venezuelan poor. The ignorant lady fails to see that Chavez is not generous but prodigal with our money. The $800,000 moneybag intended for Cristina Kirchner in Argentina was only one of several deliveries of our money to finance Kirchner's presidential campaign. Is this generosity of spirit?
The author is definitely just a soldier in Weisbrots's pro-Chavez army. She quotes” statistical data from the CEPR, showing that social spending in Venezuela per person has more than tripled from 1998-2006”. In fact what has tripled is the spending on pension funds (social security) a very corrupt and inefficient social service that has never worked. When this effect is removed, says Economist Francisco Rodriguez (“The Empty Revolution”, Foreign Affairs, May-June 2008) the social expenditure that remains is not greater, even somewhat lower than that of pre-Chavez's governments. This “analysis” by Wagner is just an echo of Weisbrot's “academic” work.
The author repeats the ignorant version of the “U.S. led coup of April 2002”. The lady was not there. I was. What happened was that 700,000 Venezuelans marched on the presidential headquarters, Chavez got panicky, asked the army to repress the marchers, the army refused and asked for his resignation instead. This resignation was announced in the early hours of April 12, 2002, over national TV. Ms. Wagner/Weisbrot was not there. I was. General Baduel (now also opposed to Chavez) put him back in power in a palace countercoup. The lady calls RCTV actions “chicanery”. RCTV was broadcasting what was taking place, in spite of Chavez's frantic orders to suppress the information. I was there. I saw it all. Ms. Wagner is ignorant of the facts and has embraced non-critically the “CIA coup version”. Chavez has spent millions of dollars selling that version and has made some inroads but the truth is stubbornly coming through.
The rest of the paper, where the author shows a pronounced pro-Chavez bias is so pitiful that I will not even comment on it. She even suggests that the prevailing lower oil prices will not affect Chavez. This shows her extreme ignorance of our reality.
Chavez's little army in Washington DC, led by Commander Weisbrot, marches on.
Gustavo Coronel is a 28 years oil industry veteran, a member of the first board of directors (1975-1979) of Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), author of several books. At the present Coronel is Petroleumworld associate editor and advisor on the opinion and editorial content of the site. Petroleumworld does not necessarily share these views. Petroleumworld not necessarily share these views.
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, by using this link, you agree to allow PW to publish your comments on our site.
Petroleumworld
welcomes your feedback and comments: editor@petroleumworld.com.
Petroleumworld
News 03/07/ 09
Copyright© 2008 respective author or news
agency. All rights reserved.
We welcome the use of Petroleumworld™ stories
by anyone provided it mentions Petroleumworld.com as the
source. Other
stories you have to get authorization by its authors.
