Attack or foreign aid

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

Twitter:@laguana