By Luis Manuel Aguana
Faced with the perceived loss of course of the opposition ship and the
stagnation-worsening of the situation of Venezuelans, the political leadership
that has no way to influence the decisions that are being made in the official
opposition heart of the National Assembly that was formed from 23E, has
published some suggestions to the President in Charge of the Republic, Juan
Guaidó through the oldest known method, public letters.
And I say expressly "perception of loss of direction" because
some still believe that this misdirection of the opposition leadership is not
deliberate, but is due to a different way of approaching the struggle against
the regime, and that alternative ways can still be suggested to accelerate its
exit. And that, in my view, is a serious mistake. Those who are running this
ship know where they are taking it, and it is not exactly for a place where we
all agree.
Because it would be natural for recommendations for a change of course
to be made if those who lead are willing to listen to them. If the person in
charge (which seems to be in doubt) continues to make mistakes, then the least
that can be done from the outside is to suggest options to correct what needs
to be corrected.
However, the options are few if we effectively believe that the
deviation from the course is of such magnitude that it is difficult to hear
suggestions because what is really happening is that there are no errors in the
course but a deliberate route to a different destination that does not admit
corrections.
It is as if we all believe that we are heading from point A, to an
agreed point B, and those of us on board see in the middle that they are taking
us to an unknown point C. It is as if we all believe that we are heading from
point A, to an agreed point B, and those of us on board see in the middle that
they are taking us to an unknown point C. And when we tell the driver that he's
lost and that he's changing course, we do it in the belief that he's doing it
because he doesn't know he's lost it, when he's actually aware that he's
deliberately taking us to point C, without our authorization, due to a change
of strategy that was forged without our consent. I think that's what's going on here.
The letters that have been addressed to President Encargado Juan Guaidó
make that sense. For example, the letter addressed by the honorable citizen
Enrique Aristeguieta Gramcko (see full text in http://venezuelagana.org/2019/06/04/aristeguieta-gramcko-pide-un-cambio-de-rumbo-a-guaido/) requests Guaidó
to assume the power conferred on him by Article 233 of the Constitution, with
all his constitutional powers, removing himself from party discipline, and to
proceed to condemn emphatically and publicly the dialogue and pacts with the
regime. But is that what the driver or drivers want? Obviously not because the
route to point C leads us precisely to that, to negotiate with the regime
-that's the idea!
The letter addressed by our friends of the so-called radical and hard
opposition against the regime, María Corina Machado, Diego Arria and Antonio
Ledezma (see full text in the Twitter message of the Soy Venezuela Alliance,
in https://twitter.com/SoyVenezuela/status/1139186136289599493) repeats the same mistake but establishing a logical reasoning: if we
support the mantra of the famous trilogy then there is no possible negotiation.
We must therefore close the negotiation, leaving only one option: force. And
this force is not in a position to emerge from Venezuela, but from our allies,
with the firm support of the Venezuelan people, who reject outright a
cohabitation government.
This letter reaffirms the strategy that the people initially decided on,
that is, the route from A to B that they proposed to us, in a call to the
drivers to comply with what was agreed. And this is reasonable, but as we indicated,
it is not their intention to "correct" the course, but the definition
of a new one behind the backs of the Venezuelan people, and that is where I
want to focus this discussion. Whose boat is it? The Captain and his officers,
or whose officers are we on it? The answer seems easy.
We all agreed on 23E that the Captain was Guaidó and approved a
navigation chart translated into a mantra that everyone believes in. If they
threw the mantra overboard (ver The death of a mantra, in http://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/p/the-death-of-mantra.html) redefining a new destination, with a new route
(or the same one changing the order of the factors that alter the product),
then the least that should happen is that that destination and its route should
be decided by all of us again, because the destination of Venezuela does not
belong to them but to all of us on board.
That's where this discussion with the drivers needs to be centered. If
any request has to be made to Guaidó, it is not that he corrects the course to
retake the logical route that we had already decided, but that in the light of
everything that has happened up to now it is the Venezuelans who decide what to
do, counting on the help of those who have helped us up to now from outside.
¿Y porque hacer
eso ahora? Precisamente porque perdimos el rumbo y el destino. Algunos me han
indicado que eso ya lo hicimos el 16 de julio de 2017. ¡Falso! Lo que hicimos
ese día fue darle un mandato expreso a una Asamblea Nacional, que no lo cumplió
porque negoció con el régimen a nuestras espaldas engavetar el resultado a
cambio de elecciones de Gobernadores al final de ese año. En esta oportunidad
el cumplimiento del mandato del pueblo sería previamente concertado fuera del
país con quienes si estarían dispuestos a hacerlo cumplir a la fuerza si es
preciso.
But people would ask themselves, "How can we get the people to
express themselves in the midst of tyranny? That part would be the consequence
of an open discussion of exit terms with the regime, not of a negotiation to
keep it and share with the official opposition a cohabitation that is what they
are doing now. And how is that achieved? That the International Community
assumes it and imposes it as an alternative solution to the problem because it
would be the definitive expression of the Venezuelan people. If we all want
Maduro and his delinquents to leave, then let them help us express it, imposing
it as a solution to the regime and to the opposition, in favor of the
Venezuelan people, forcing the regime to fulfill the mandate of the Sovereign
from outside. The letter to Guaidó then is for a Plebiscite, and we've already
sent it to him.... (https://ancoficial.blogspot.com/2019/06/comunicado-anco-carta-publica-juan.html).
Caracas,
June 15, 2019
Email:
luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario