By Luis Manuel Aguana
The confirmation that an attack did
indeed take place last Saturday, August 4, against the illegitimate President
of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, was given by the well-known journalist
Jaime Bayly when he indicated on his program last Monday that his sources in
Washington had informed him that the event would take place in the way it did
(see in Spanish Jaime Bayly regrets that Maduro is still standing August 6,
2018, at https://youtu.be/RbkllolxAQE min 10:51).
Without commenting on whether or not
this was an unhappy indiscretion, not of Bayly, who is ultimately a journalist,
but of those who planned it, who, without measuring the consequences of a
possible release of this information into the public eye, gave the regime
confirmation from an independent source and served as a perfect excuse to
victimize themselves internationally and attack those of us who are in the
country, whether or not we agree with the methods used to provoke their
displacement. I can't imagine Chapita Trujillo calling a journalist to inform
him of the attack he made on Rómulo Betancourt in Los Próceres.
Until before that moment no one
believed the regime that a real attack had occurred against Maduro, and
although the criminals who misgoverned in Venezuela do not need excuses to
imprison someone, they did it with Deputy Juan Requesens and any opposition
they want to foist the action.
Holding Jaime Bayly responsible for
that would be inappropriate. Once a journalist has information that he or she
considers newsworthy, they will use it at the right time according to their
criteria, and that's what Bayly did. In my previous note I did not speculate
whether what happened on Avenida Bolívar was an attack or not (see Maduro, scapegoat,
at http://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/p/blog-page_40.html), I limited myself to analyzing one side of the
problem that I considered more important, taking as a premise who could take
advantage of the disappearance of Maduro. However now, in light of this new
information, I think it is necessary to complement my previous note.
If some Venezuelans here or abroad
consider that the expeditious way to put an end to tyranny in Venezuela is
that, I am not the most appropriate to judge it. But I think it is important to
analyze if in this way the entire regime would fall, because it is based on the
premise - to prove - that once the "leader" disappeared, the rest of
the government would fall equally, taking over the country the "democratic
forces", with the purpose of returning to democracy and freedom.
If this were so, a successful attack
would only be the last link to take over the government by those supposed
forces that would only be waiting for that action to move. Is that what we have
here? does it take those democratic forces that are supposedly waiting, to
eliminate Maduro to act? I don't think so. If such forces existed, Maduro would
be the least of the hindrances. At the slightest movement of such forces, he
would be the first to run.
So, what makes those Venezuelans
think that if Maduro falls, others will fall? Do you think that would be the
trigger for a general uprising of the country or the Armed Forces in
particular? If they do not have that certainty, they would be doing a
disservice to the Venezuelans, because that movement without enough force to
expel the whole communist system, which would be the passage of command from
one side to another within the same criminal gang , very likely to another much
worse. In fact, we Venezuelans thought that there could not be a worse one than
Chavez... but Maduro arrived.
Make no mistake about it. I am not a
naive person who forgets that violence is the midwife of history, as the old
adage goes. But that assumption, which was the same as that made by Commissioner
Oscar Perez, when he believed that if one of them took the lead, the others
would follow him, ended the life of a group of exceptional Venezuelans who
believed that offering their lives in that way would make a difference.
Unfortunately, those forces that had been waiting did not appear anywhere,
dying massacred by the regime. I believe that if you decide to go into the
field of violence, you must have a proven force greater than your opponent's,
in concrete and measured terms - not assumed - to obtain effective results.
There can be no rehearsals or assumptions because lives are at stake.
So clear was El Libertador about
this that he did not hesitate to seek help outside the country to fight our War
of Independence. The extraordinary recent review by journalist Gustavo Azocar
explains it in detail (see in Spanish, Bolívar: ¿Traidor a la patria por pedir
ayuda extranjera?, en https://www.lapatilla.com/2018/07/23/bolivar-traidor-a-la-patria-por-pedir-ayuda-extranjera-por-gustavo-azocar-alcala/). In fact, Bolívar presents the original of the
Angostura Speech to British Colonel James Hamilton, who had lived in Angostura
since the middle of 1818, fighting for our freedom, so that he could translate
it into English, taking it to London to spread it in Europe, from where he was
rescued from Colonel Hamilton's family in 1975 by the distinguished master Don
Pedro Grases (see in Spanish Manuscrito Original, Parte I, El Resguardo,
en https://historiaesc.wordpress.com/2016/01/21/manuscrito/. To that extent, foreign aid was involved in
Venezuela, in the confidence that El Libertador had in giving a foreign
collaborator one of the greatest pieces of our nationality.
Any strategy that Venezuelans apply to the
rescue of freedom must be very carefully weighed against the consequences it
generates and evaluate whether, instead of contributing to our liberation, it
helps the regime to perpetuate itself. In a force solution, especially if one
relies on the internal force, these results are not clearly visible, because if
it has not yet manifested itself after all that has happened in recent years,
it is unlikely to do so, even if the visible face of the regime disappears.
Some of us Venezuelans are confident in the
criteria that El Libertador had in seeking external help for the liberation of
the Republic. However, this can only be coordinated by whoever represents us in
a legitimate way, as in his time represented the General in Chief of the
Independence Armies, Simon Bolivar. To this end, we encourage the Supreme Court
of Justice to appoint a National Emergency Government to operate in exile. This
route may seem to many to be leguleya and ineffective, but in reality it is
not. Slowly and inexorably, all steps have been taken outside the country to
achieve this transcendental decision, a decision that will be accompanied by
all the countries that support Venezuela against the dictatorship that usurps
power in our country.
Once this constitutional government has been
appointed, it would be the legitimate and sole representative and interlocutor
in exile of the Venezuelan people, not only to do whatever it takes to achieve
that force capable of legitimately subduing the regime in a democratic manner,
either to force it to count itself in a genuine and transparent manner or to
force a peaceful solution to this situation from outside with the help of the
international community.
Personally, I would
rather see Nicolás Maduro Moros sitting there listening to the charges against
him by a court in Venezuela, to answer for the crimes perpetrated by his
regime, than see him flying through the air as a result of a bomb. I assure you
that we would enjoy that justice more, apart from being the most satisfactory
to the interests of all Venezuelans.
Caracas, August 10,
2018
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario