1---There
was very limited coverage of Hugo Chavez's death in the United
States. Can you briefly describe the reaction of the Venezuelan people?
Eva
Golinger--Chavez’s death was devastating for Venezuelans. Despite
knowing about his illness, most Venezuelans thought he would win the
battle against cancer like so many other battles he won before. The
reaction was a collective cry of deep despair and sadness, but also of
love, profound love for this person, this man who gave every last breath
he had to making his country a better place for all. Ten days of
mourning were officially declared in the country and Chavez’s casket was
placed for millions to pay respects to before the final funeral
occurred. People spent up to 36 hours waiting in line to say goodbye to
Chavez at the Military Academy where his political consciousness came to
life, and where his casket was placed temporarily after his shocking
death. Then, on the tenth day, a mass parade of people accompanied
Chavez’s funeral procession to the hilltop “Cuartel de la Montaña”
(Barracks of the Mountain) across from the presidential palace
Miraflores in Caracas, where he was laid to rest in a strikingly
beautiful tomb called “The Four Elements”. The Cuartel de la Montaña is
where Chavez launched his political career in February 1992 during an
attempted military rebellion against a corrupt and murderous neo-liberal
president. He failed at that attempt and went to prison, but his
message and charisma reached millions, who joined his movement that
later led to his election as president in 1998. Chavez’s tomb site,
“The Four Elements”, includes his casket resting on top of a beautifully
sculpted lilypad on fresh water and clean earth. It sits in the open
air with a burning eternal flame. Still to this day hundreds of
Venezuelans visit the site, hoping for a chance to be close to their
beloved president.
2---Chavez
was an inspirational and charismatic leader who was able to push
through progressive policies that benefited the majority of
people. Will the Bolivarian Revolution continue under current
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro or has there been a shift in
direction?
Eva Golinger--The
Bolivarian Revolution is continuing with President Maduro, there has
been no shift in direction. Despite winning the presidential election in
April with a narrow margin, Maduro has not altered Chavez’s policies in
any significant way, in fact, he is trying to consolidate them further.
He did change many cabinet members, but this was viewed as a positive
move, especially because he brought in a lot of younger, unorthodox
people instead of sticking with those who had been shuffled around
Chavez’s administration for years. He did keep many of Chavez’s people,
because of course Maduro is one of them, but he brought in fresh blood
to show he was willing to make some necessary changes. For example, he
named a frequent critic of Chavez’s community-based policies, Reinaldo
Iturriza, as Minister of Communes, which is a ministry dedicated to
helping organized communities with resource management and project
development. Iturriza himself was a grassroots organizer and he replaced
a bureaucrat. Maduro has so far kept the economic policies of Chavez’s
government, though he changed the cabinet members in charge of them. He
has cracked down harder on government corruption and crime. Dozens of
public officials have already been arrested for corruption and he
militarized high crime areas in order to get violence and insecurity
under control. So I would say he picked up where Chavez left off and
accelerated.
3---Could you sum up some of Chavez's most important achievements as President?
Eva Golinger--Chavez’s
achievements as President are vast and numerous. He transformed
Venezuela from a dependent, cowardly nation with no national identity,
mass poverty and stark apathy to a sovereign, independent and dignified
country, full of national pride, cherishing its rich cultural diversity.
He also reduced poverty by well over 50%, implemented successful,
quality free universal healthcare and education programs and diversified
the economy with the creation of new industries in the nation and
thousands of new small business owners and cooperatives. One of his
greatest achievements has been the collective awakening of consciousness
in the country. Venezuela was so apathetic before Chavez became
President, worse than the United States. Today it is a place where
elections draw over 80% voluntary participation. Everyone talks about
politics and issues of importance to the nation. Youth want to
participate in the construction of their country, their future. Over the
past few years the youngest members of Congress (National Assembly)
have been elected in history, with legislators as young as 25 years old.
Half of the members of Maduro’s new executive cabinet are under 45.
There are new youth movements, student movements – both opposition and
chavista – that are active and participating in political life. And
there is no question that Chavez’s social policies and over 60%
investment of the national budget annually in social programs made a
massive difference in everyday Venezuelans’ lives. Today there is more
consumer power, Venezuelans enjoy better nutrition, have more dignified
homes and Chavez also propelled worker-friendly laws that guarantee a
living wage (the highest minimum wage in Latin America) and strong
workers’ benefits. There are many things he was unable to complete, but
what he did achieve is extraordinary for a bit more than a decade in
power, considering he also had to transform corrupt, inefficient and
broken state institutions and face a US-backed opposition with immense
economic power.
4---You
have written extensively about US intelligence agencies and NGO covert
activities in Venezuela. Do you see any sign that the meddling has
decreased since Chavez died?
Eva Golinger--No.
US intervention in Venezuela has progressively increased each year
since Chavez was first elected in 1998. During the April 2002 coup
d’etat against him, which was defeated by the people and loyal armed
forces, the US was backing the opposition, but with moderate aid
considering what they are doing today. Each year, funding for
anti-Chavez groups has increased by millions, coming through USAID, the
National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the State Department, and other
US-funded agencies, such as Freedom House, International Republican
Institute (IRI) and National Democratic Institute for International
Affairs (NDI). In fact, Obama not only increased the funding to
anti-Chavez groups, he made it even more official by openly including
such funding in the annual Foreign Operations Budget. There is a special
paragraph dedicated to funding for Venezuelan opposition groups, or as
they call it, “democracy promotion”. I have extensively proven in my
investigations that this funding has gone to finance destabilization and
very undemocratic organizations and activities in Venezuela. We know
from documents released by Wikileaks and more recently by Edward
Snowden, that US espionage in Venezuela increased exponentially this
year, as Chavez’s health worsened. The US threw a massive amount of
economic and political power behind losing presidential candidate
Henrique Capriles, and has been the only nation to refuse to officially
recognize President Nicolas Maduro’s electoral victory in April.
Washington will continue to back the opposition in hopes that Maduro’s
term can be recalled in a referendum in three years, when he’s reached
the halfway point of his six-year term and constitutionally can be held
accountable in a recall referendum. The US is banking on achieving his
ouster then, if not before through other undemocratic means. Several
leading opposition members have been caught recently in plots to attempt
a coup against Maduro, as well as plan his assassination. All of them
frequently travel to Washington for “meetings”. The Venezuelan
government also recently ended a dialogue established with Washington
that began in January after offensive statements made by incoming US
Ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power. Maduro’s
administration, like Chavez’s, longs to have a respectful relationship
with the US government. But they will not stand for aggression,
meddling, or otherwise interventionist behavior. The US seems unable to
engage in a mature, respectful relationship with Venezuela.
5---Here's
something that Barack Obama said in an interview with Univision when
Chavez was on his deathbed. He said, "The most important thing is to
remember that the future of Venezuela should be in the hands of the
Venezuelan people. We've seen from Chávez in the past authoritarian
policies, suppression of dissent."
Was there a reaction to Obama's comment in Venezuela?
Eva Golinger--Definitely
there was a very strong reaction. First of all, the comments were
viewed as completely disrespectful to the nation and government at a
time when Chavez’s health was deteriorating. They clearly indicated
that the Obama administration is ignorant about Venezuela and has no
concern for the massive, collective emotional difficulties millions in
the country were experiencing due to Chavez’s failing health. President
Chavez’s number one objective – which he achieved to a great extent –
was transferring power to the people. Obama’s hypocrisy in such a
statement overshadows his own failure to comprehend Venezuela’s reality.
More people in Venezuela participate in political life than ever
before, and many more than in the US (percentage-wise). In an era of
mass espionage, selective assassinations, drones, secret prisons, grave
human rights violations and other repressive policies led by the US,
Obama should think twice about characterizing another nation’s
government that he only knows about from talking points uninformed
analysts provide him with. In sum, Venezuelans were outraged as Obama’s
insensitive and disrespectful remarks, but they were not surprised.
Those comments are typical of Washington’s hostile position towards
Venezuela throughout the Chavez administration.
6---Why did Washington hate Chavez?
Eva Golinger--I
suppose Washington hated Chavez for many reasons. Of course the oil is a
primary source of Washington’s aggressive attitude towards Chavez.
Venezuela has the largest oil reserves on the planet and before Hugo
Chavez was elected, governments were subservient to US interests. In
fact, Venezuela was on the verge of privatizing its oil industry, along
with everything else in the country, right when Chavez was elected. So
the fact that a head of state sitting on the world’s largest oil
reserves – which the US needs to maintain its excessive consumer model
in the long term – would not be subordinate to US agenda was maddening
for Washington. Chavez not only reclaimed and transformed the oil
industry to redistribute the wealth and ensure foreign corporations
abided by the laws (paying taxes and royalties, for example), but he
also nationalized other strategic resources in the country that the US
had its hands in, such as gold, electricity and telecommunications.
Clearly Chavez was a major thorn in Washington’s economic interests in
the region. Once Chavez spearheaded the creation of Latin American
integration and cooperation, that converged into organizations such as
the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), the Bolivarian Alliance
for the Peoples of Our Americas (ALBA), the Community of Latin American
and Caribbean States (CELAC), as well as PetroCaribe, Telesur (the
region’s first television network) and many more initiatives, Washington
quickly began to lose influence in the region. This also led to more
hostility towards Chavez, since he was the major leader and driving
force behind Latin American independence and sovereignty in the XXI
century. Washington, and the Venezuelan elite, also couldn’t stand
Chavez’s mannerisms and direct way of telling things like they are. He
was afraid of nothing and no one and never stood down, he always
remained firm and said what he believed, even if it wasn’t the
diplomatically correct thing to say. And Washington hated him for
bringing back the evil concept of socialism to today’s world.
They tried to hard to rid the planet of anything remotely like communism
in the XX century, so Chavez’s “Socialism of the XXI Century” was a
slap in the face for old school Washington, which still holds the reigns
in the US.
7---Would you like to add your personal thoughts about Chavez's passing?
Eva Golinger--Chavez’s
death is impossible to accept. He was such a vibrant, motivating force,
full of love and genuine affection for people and life. He had an
extraordinary capacity of communication and could connect with anyone in
a sincere embrace of humanity. He was a brilliant visionary and a maker
of dreams. He helped people see the potential within themselves and
realize our capabilities. He adored his country, its rich culture,
music, diversity, and he truly gave every piece of himself to building a
dignified, strong and beautiful Venezuela. I was one of the fortunate
ones to be his close friend and share many exceptional moments with him.
He had weaknesses and imperfections, like we all do, but his capacity
to love and care about all people led him to overcome many difficult –
almost impossible – obstacles. He really believed he would defeat
cancer, and of course we all hoped he would. His passing leaves a deep
emptiness and profound sadness for millions. His energy was so infinite,
it’s hard to not feel it everywhere still, around us, leading and
guiding the revolution he helped build. That’s why it’s so difficult to
accept his leaving, because he is still so present in our lives, and of
course in every inch of Venezuela. Chavez became Venezuela, la patria querida, and his legacy will continue to grow and flourish as Venezuela blossoms into its full potential.
Eva
Golinger, winner of the International Award for Journalism in Mexico
(2009), named “La Novia de Venezuela” by President Hugo Chávez, is an
Attorney and Writer from New York, living in Caracas, Venezuela since
2005 and author of the best-selling books, “The Chávez Code: Cracking US
Intervention in Venezuela” (2006 Olive Branch Press), “Bush vs. Chávez:
Washington’s War on Venezuela” (2007, Monthly Review Press), “The
Empire’s Web: Encyclopedia of Interventionism and Subversion”, “La
Mirada del Imperio sobre el 4F: Los Documentos Desclasificados de
Washington sobre la rebelión militar del 4 de febrero de 1992” and "La
Agresión Permanente: USAID, NED y CIA". Since 2003, Eva, a graduate of
Sarah Lawrence College and CUNY Law School in New York, has been
investigating, analyzing and writing about US intervention in Venezuela
using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to obtain information about
US Government efforts to undermine progressive movements in Latin
America. Her first book, The Chávez Code, has been translated and
published in 8 languages (English, Spanish, French, German, Italian,
Russian, Farsi & Turkish) and is presently being made into a feature
film.
Cindy Sheehan's book about Hugo Chavez and the
Bolivarian Constitution
Click Image for Ordering Info
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please limit your comments to the content of the posts---not your self-perceived, self-righteous, personal opinions of the authors/activists who post at this blog. Personal attacks, or threats of violence will not be posted....moderator.