Is any negotiation with the regime of Nicolás Maduro Moros possible after July 28? The question comes to mind because possible “solutions” to the Venezuelan political crisis are being cooked abroad, which include the figure of “sharing” the government of the country with a tyranny that stole the elections on July 28. And hence the question: is a negotiation such as the one proposed two years ago by Luis Almagro, Secretary General of the Organization of American States, OAS, still possible? Indeed, in July 2022, Almagro directly proposed a Collegiate Government with the narco-tyranny of Nicolás Maduro Moros, based on the alleged impossibility of removing it in a negotiation:
“The objective of Maduro's exit transformed every negotiation into a zero-sum game that ended up being impossible: neither Maduro's exit in a negotiation nor an election that could mean his exit. As that objective still seems to be unrealistic for some, then a negotiation in that context obviously cannot be how to get Maduro out, but how to continue. This implies cohabitation. Cohabitation is an exercise for which I have seen practically nobody prepared in Venezuela. But that makes it even more necessary, in the sense that it implies an exercise of real political dialogue, of shared institutionality, of shared powers of the State.” (see in Spanish, Luis Almagro, El infierno del sendero que jamás se bifurca, en https://www.cronicas.com.uy/contratapa/el-infierno-del-sendero-que-jamas-se-bifurca/) (emphasis added).
I published two notes in reaction to this proposal (see The 4 stages of Almagro's article, in https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/p/the-4-stages-of-almagro-article.html, and From Peñalver to Almagro, we are not yet Swiss, https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/p/from-penalver-to-almagro-we-are-not-yet.html) suggesting the cultural unfeasibility of such a course of action. I still feel exactly the same way and even more so, after the drastic change in the Venezuelan political context since 2022.
If at that moment
when the OAS Secretary General was proposing that solution, at least this could
be debatable AT THAT TIME because it had not been possible to reach any
solution with the regime due to the fact that, as Almagro himself indicated in
his article, “It is very difficult to go
to a dubious electoral process that simply assures the continuity of what we have
now with non-existent or doubtful legitimacy (but which obviously expects to
count on the complacency of many -sugar bites teeth-)”.
But WE ENDED UP
GOING TO THAT DIFFICULT ELECTORAL PROCESS mentioned above, but in the terms of
the regime, without any guarantee on July 28, 2024, and the opposition was
victorious with an overwhelming majority, as has been amply demonstrated,
leaving far behind the commonplace that was recited as a mantra abroad that we
were polarized. We have already demonstrated that there is no such polarization
and all of Venezuela rejects the nefarious regime of Nicolás Maduro Moros. And yet
he remains in power by force.
However, once again, this proposal of cohabitation with a Collegiate Government was recently taken out of the trunk by Gonzalo Koncke, Chief of Staff of Luis Almagro at the Organization of American States, OAS, according to statements made by Koncke to the Director of Infobae America, Laureano Pérez Izquierdo:
“And on the other hand, we have insisted on the Collegiate Government, as the only form of democratic transition government in Venezuela. The all or nothing game is equivalent to nothing for the people. When one perceives that everyone wants 100% in Venezuela one realizes where the political problem lies. Of course this requires work and it is not spontaneous. Fundamentally because nobody is willing to share anything.” (see in Spanish Infobae, Gonzalo Koncke: Asking that in Venezuela they stop torture, murders and disappearances without asking for justice is a contradiction in terms, in https://www.infobae.com/venezuela/2024/10/07/gonzalo-koncke-pedir-que-en-venezuela-se-detengan-la-tortura-los-asesinatos-y-las-desapariciones-sin-pedir-justicia-es-un-contrasentido/).
At this point, we must emphasize that the solution of “cohabitation” with a Collegiate Government proposed by Luis Almagro in the political context of 2022, should not and cannot be the same if it is carried out after a coup d'état to the Popular Sovereignty perpetrated by the narco-regime of Nicolás Maduro Moros and rejected by a large part of the International Community. Koncke was left with Almagro's proposal of 2022 without considering the serious events that took place in Venezuela in the early morning of July 29, 2024, widely recorded by the observation of the UN and the Carter Center. And if it cannot and should not be the same, what is behind all that?
The answer comes from Colombia. Gustavo Petro evaded the proposal of his country's Congress to recognize Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia as the undisputed winner of the Venezuelan elections of July 28, stating “...The Colombian Congress, by constitutional order, cannot demand positions on international policy from the president. The proposal is a request and I will study it within the decisions I have to make always consulting, before anything else, the general interest of the Colombian society.” (see post of @petrogustavo on September 25 on X (Twitter), in https://x.com/petrogustavo/status/1838926295603855448).
And what is for Petro “the general interest of Colombian society” for Venezuela? You guessed it, cohabitation with Nicolás Maduro Moros. Petro refuses to recognize the popular will of Venezuelans and presents his own cohabitation proposal to save Maduro's neck - and to some extent his own neck - in the following terms:
“The central idea of the Colombian government is for the ruling party and the opposition in Venezuela to reach a power-sharing agreement. Inspired by the experience of the National Front in Colombia, President Petro has indicated that this model could be a transitory solution for Venezuela. As proposed, the cohabitation agreement would last six years, with periods of three years for each faction, under the supervision of international organizations and the commitment to hold transparent elections. This plan contemplates the progressive lifting of international sanctions imposed on Venezuela, in exchange for political and governance guarantees that benefit both Chavismo and the opposition.”
“To ensure the viability of the proposal, the Colombian government is seeking the backing of key international actors. Among those involved in the efforts are the United Nations Security Council and countries such as Cuba, China and Russia, which play a relevant role in Venezuelan politics. Also expected to participate is the Organization of American States (OAS), whose Secretary General, Luis Almagro, has expressed a growing interest in the idea of a shared government in Venezuela, despite his previous critical stance towards the Maduro regime. Cohabitation, as suggested by Almagro, is not a simple exercise, but it is fundamental to establish a real dialogue and a shared institutionality that benefits all political actors” (see El Venezolano- Colombia, Petro's Plan for a Democratic Transition in Venezuela, in https://elvenezolanocolombia.com/2024/10/el-plan-de-petro-para-una-transicion-democratica-en-venezuela/) (emphasis added).
Is it possible to “share power” with those who were swept away by the Venezuelan people in an election and staged a coup to stay there? Only in the cornered mind of the Colombian President, who requires Maduro to sustain a state of affairs in the region. And that state of affairs cannot be other than the guerrilla, drug trafficking and the economic prostration of Venezuelans, all of them natural allies of President Petro. I do not believe that in the interest of the Colombian people, as an argument of his post of September 25, is the deepening of Venezuelan migration to the borders of Colombia and the very presence of Petro in power.
Note that Petro seeks support for this proposal in China and Russia (those countries are back again!), permanent members of the Security Council and Luis Almagro in the OAS, who already made a statement in 2022 in relation to it, and apparently also now through his chief of staff, Gonzalo Koncke, who made that statement for the OAS. Perhaps Brazil and Mexico will join Petro's proposal, who still insist that Maduro must show some minutes that would only prove that he lost the elections and that he must hand over power.
We are then in the midst of international cohabitators who still persist in ignoring an evident reality, seeking to extend Maduro's presence in power, at the expense and against what Venezuelans decided on July 28, 2024. If the opposition leadership in the hands of María Corina Machado is consistent with the promise to respect the result of July 28, we will not have to worry about what Petro proposes or fails to propose.
But if for some reason we get one millimeter out of that in a negotiation, in the style of the former negotiators of the Unitary Platform, who surrendered everything to the regime, starting by recognizing it, we will step on that mango shell, because the world will turn towards it due to the fact that “that is what Venezuelans want” in the general mood of the International Community to “end the conflict” in Venezuela. Beware of that! This sad proposal by Petro reminds us that it is high time for a radical change of the negotiating faces of the new July 28 opposition....
Caracas, October 10, 2024
Blog:
TIC’s & Derechos Humanos, https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario