Everyone has interpreted in their own way the proposal for a change in the Venezuelan political leadership made by María Corina Machado. Unfortunately, since in Venezuela we do not examine the proposals but the proponents and the possible intentions that the critics think they have, it is very difficult to reach a good conclusion, leaving in limbo what could be a serious and positive approach for Venezuelans. It is clear that any political leader has an intention behind what he says or does, but that does not mean that it is necessarily bad. As lawyers say, good faith is presumed, bad faith must be proven.
And as I always believe in good faith, with obvious exceptions, I defended this proposal at the time it was made, making the corresponding observations. (see Towards a new opposition representation, in https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/p/towards-new-opposition-representation.html).
However, as it always happens in a political climate as turbid and polarized as ours, the proposal went the other way focusing on the fact that this meant a shot in the foot of the opposition to the regime because it rejected the continuity of the Presidency-in-Charge of Juan Guaidó and the National Assembly, whose renewal was agreed earlier this year with the new approved version of the Statute for the Transition.
Although the above proposal certainly indicates that there are those of us who do not agree with a renewal of those who have not distinguished themselves precisely for their successes in the struggle against the regime, and have betrayed the banners of those who have died in the streets for it, that is precisely why the political leadership must be changed. Here the discussion is not whether we need some oxen to plow, but that we demand better oxen to do it. Where we get them from and how we do it is another matter for another discussion.
I am not satisfied with the popular expression "those are the oxen we have and those are the ones we have to plow with". It is not acceptable. To say that we cannot demand a better political leadership because those who lead now are bad and corrupt, responsible for the fact that the regime has advanced to intolerable levels of physical and moral destruction of the country, does not seem to me an admissible excuse for those who have died in Venezuela in this unequal struggle against the regime.
Venezuelans must remember that it is not this opposition political representation that renewed itself through an unconstitutional Statute to whom the countries have given their support, it is the people of Venezuela. The countries recognized the 1999 Constitution which in its Article 233 pointed out Juan Guaidó as President in Charge in 2019. But we are already in 2022! And although he continues to hold himself as President-in-Charge in the middle of a debatable legal diatribe, it is no less true for everyone that his political support is not enough to be able to bring together the necessary factors to achieve the change of the regime as required by Venezuelans, being necessary a new President with the indispensable backing of the popular sovereignty. This is what is being demanded when asking for an urgent renewal of the political leadership.
However, political immaturity wrongly points to the fact that the variable is being attacked and not the content. (see Main variable, in https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/p/main-variable.html). And it is not the institution of the Presidency-in-Charge, constitutionally recognized inside and outside, to which this proposal for a change of leadership is being addressed, it is its content. Many may say that in this case the variable and its content are the same thing, but they are not. And that is precisely the problem. Juan Guaidó is now the President in Charge by the approval of a Statute that is internationally recognized BECAUSE WE THE VENEZOLANS gave the deputies of the 2015 National Assembly a power of political representation. But that power can and should be revoked at any time, like any power. And in this case the principal of that power is the Venezuelan people.
The depth of the approach that has been made for the renewal of the political leadership goes through revoking that power we gave to those defeated Deputies, establishing a different representation. And there are two ways to do it: a) through a popular call as we did in 2017 and 2020, deciding by popular mandate a new political representation that embodies the true current sentiment of the national opposition (which is in essence the approach of María Corina Machado); or b) through a constituent call.
The two options have profound differences, but an indisputable common premise: they must be recognized by the International Community, since the support that this new leadership will have to achieve the objective of removing the usurpers from power derives from it. A proposal that summons the country for a simple renewal of its political representation would be a significant advance to what we have now and should include a proposal for the formation of a Government Board that collegially and with Venezuelans of recognized moral solvency take the reins and the legitimate representation of Venezuelans for one and only objective: the end of the usurpation of Nicolás Maduro Moros.
But the call for a constituent assembly has a different meaning and in no way excludes the first alternative (if presented in two successive phases) although it is a proposal that basically includes it. This call has as a fundamental requirement the support of the International Community, led by the US, that this is the most suitable path for reconciliation and peace in the country, as well as the consensus of all Venezuelans, including those who usurp power. This may seem utopian but I wish to believe that it is possible through a true process of political negotiation that forces the usurpers to rely on the neutral arbitration of international organizations.
Some may see this second alternative as impossible, but it is the one that, even being the most difficult to implement, is the one that would most guarantee social peace in the future for all Venezuelans. Both alternatives point to the renewal of the political leadership with a great difference: a constituent process would purify the entire political world in its full extent and depth, and would define new bases of action for the political actors. And that terrifies the opposition political parties, which have not known what an internal election is for decades. They prefer to leave things as they are, with the same useless oxen, even if that means the current institutional destruction of Venezuela.
At this point it is good for Venezuelans to start thinking which would be the best alternative to apply politically because every day that passes is crucial. The parties have already decided on elections for 2024, and they chose to use the same political platform based on a Statute that has been failing for three years, one after the other in an incredible display of the Einsteinian paradox of doing the same thing expecting different results, without considering that every day that passes without solving this crisis leads the people to the cemetery. We are already two weeks away from 2022. Let's not wait for the last one to continue counting the dead.
Caracas, January 9, 2022
Blog: https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
Instagram: @laguana01
Telegram: https://t.me/TICsDDHH
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario