By
Luis Manuel Aguana
One of the most striking
scenes of the extraordinary film "Darkest Hour" starring Gary Oldman
in the role of Sir Winston Churchill, who tells the story of a crucial period
in Britain during World War II, and the transcendental decisions that the Prime
Minister had to make as the main leader of the war, is when he decides to
declare that his country will not surrender, after an encounter with a group of
civilians in the Underground who convince him that the United Kingdom must face
fascism, and that they will fight until the end for their country. Ordinary
people erased Churchill's doubts about whether or not to negotiate an armistice
with the enemy, provoking his historic speech in the House of Commons.
Recognizing historical differences,
this is the same situation that Venezuelan politicians of the official
opposition face with the appointment of a Transitional Government by the
National Assembly, only that these, unlike Churchill, are ignoring the people
who shout to them that there can be no possible negotiation with the criminals
who rule this country. That meeting in the Underground of the British leader
with his people, hearing “live and direct” what the people thought gave him the
fundamental support he needed to put his soul (restearse) before his party and declare that only the dead would give
up the island. That is the size of the commitment of a political leadership
that understands the gravity of its situation.
Contrary to the advice
that says "don't clarify it because you’re making it darker", I will
try to explain a Twitter message that sparked a controversy on the net, after
Dr. Blanca Rosa Mármol de León published in her twitter account that "There
is talk of an agreement with the regime negotiated by Deputies of AD and UNT
guaranteeing AN control presided over by Guaidó so that NM is recognized by the
AN, and in August, general elections would be held. In the first two months of
the year the CNE would be named; The ANC and TSJ remain intact". (see
in Spanish https://twitter.com/BMarmoldeLeon/status/1075553048758501377).
Note that Dr. Mármol was
not making a statement that requires her to give any explanation or "make
excuses" as some have indicated. In my opinion, she was giving a warning
by saying "there is talk going on", because this was already on
social networks with explicit indication of the characters and location in the
country where the negotiation had taken place. The politicians jumped immediately
to deny it, to the point that at their request Dr. Mármol de León published the
following message: "I received a call from Guaidó, for which I
thank him, in which he assures me that in the exercise of his presidency in the
National Assembly, Maduro will not be recognized as president of Venezuela. He
also assures me that the agreement to which I referred in the previous tweet is
false". (see https://twitter.com/BMarmoldeLeon/status/1075813817836298246).
I replied to this last
message from Dr. Mármol de León with the following twit: "They
have said that they will not recognize Maduro. THAT'S NOT THE PROBLEM.
The problem is that they tolerate him in exchange for elections and do not
immediately fill the Power Void as is their constitutional obligation. Is
Guaidó willing to fulfill the mandate of the 16J? That's the problem!” (see https://twitter.com/laguana/status/1075826016558481413).
That response of mine generated
around 70,000 messages on Twitter, with positions for and against the reality
or falsehood of that negotiation. Personally, I do believe that they have
negotiated even if they deny it. We have plenty of history of them saying
something and then we prove the contrary. But that's the least of it. What
is important is whether or not they are going to comply with their
Constitutional obligation to fill that Power Vacuum that has already been sentenced
as a direct consequence of the conviction of Nicolás Maduro Moros for
Corruption and Legitimation of Capitals. This was an obligation of the
National Assembly from that very moment, whether with its current Directive
presiding or with its next Directive after January 5. There is no need to wait
until January 10, which has been set as a sublime date for something that they
could well have done and should have done months ago, specifically since
October 29, 2018, the date of the publication of Maduro's sentence.
If the Directive that hands
over on January 5, 2019 did not comply with this obligation, the following
question is: will this new Directive submit this consideration to the Deputies?
Omar Barboza refused to do so, which is why Venezuelans think they -OB and his
own- have negotiated with the regime. That is a very valid presumption by those
of us who voted in the 16Jul-2017 Referendum for a change of public powers resulting
from the January 2017 Agreement Declaring Nicolás Maduro's Abandonment of Office.
Now it is MANDATORY, not only because on January 1 a new presidential term must
begin with a validly elected president, but because the current one should be
locked up for being corrupt.
Now, I’ve been advised
by twitter:"Does Guaidó have an army at its disposal, real capacity or command
to instruct the National Armed Forces, such that "the mandate of the 16J
is followed"? Won't that be the problem: to continue wishing
and asking for what is not possible?". And this is really the
perception of many Venezuelans: that deputies "can't do anything”. And
that is not true. The TSJ-L Magistrates who fled the country after being
validly appointed by the National Assembly did do something; they acted on an
accusation trying Maduro and convicted him, and also sentenced a makeover of the
electoral system in Venezuela. The fact that these sentences have not yet
materialized is not a reason for not having formulated them. A
government designated legitimately and constitutionally, even if it is not holding
office and dispatching from Miraflores, can do a great deal to remove these
criminals from power.
As
I wrote in a Twit replying to that: "Nobody is asking the deputies to take
up arms to evict the dictator. But it is up to them to appoint a government.
When our Independence was declared in 1811, it was not only to sign the Act but
to make it effective. But you had to have the courage to sign the Act..." (see https://twitter.com/laguana/status/1075943385284968449).
And that last sentence
is actually the bottom line of this whole problem. Going back to the example of
Independence, if the deputies of the 1811 Congress had said, "if we sign
that Act there will be a war that we cannot endure and there will be deaths,
many of whom are here", and it would have been true. But their overriding
determination was the sense of what had to be done in favor of a new country
and the formation of a new Republic. They did what they had to do. They could
have left it at that, but they didn't. And that sense of history, no matter how
hard I try to see it, I don't see it reflected in the current deputies. What you can see is
negotiation and politicking.
It was up to the 1811
deputies to do what they did, and they did it. The war was fought by those who
had to do it. They did it and won it, with the cost in lives of half the
population. It’s not a hard situation, it’s a very hard situation, and
when those responsible assume their historical commitment, the Nation
progresses. That is the sense and the dimension of the oath they take when they
assume the responsibility: "May God and the Fatherland reward you, and if
not, may they demand it"....
And that's what I'm
modestly doing here, demanding it. If between now and January 10, 2019, with or
without a new Directive, the Deputies do not assume their commitment to the
country, we will deduce that they negotiated the permanence of the regime. At
that moment, other Venezuelans, invested with the authority of the Supreme
Court of Justice - Legitimate, according to Art. 333 of the Constitution, will
have that responsibility accordingly. It will be to them that God and the
Fatherland will reward.
Caracas,
December 22, 2018
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario