Suscribete a TICs & Derechos Humanos

Venezuela: It's time to stop the game

By Luis Manuel Aguana

During the ANCO Conversation Forum in Maturín, I compared the situation of the official opposition with that of a domino player who, raising a hand of 7 whites, preferred to let the game run until the end, running the risk of being won without being blocked, hoping that the count would help him. And I asked them, and who doesn't lock a hand like that? Why negotiate if you can take everything with you, if you know that the opponent's hand is lost because you have the whites To be able to clean up what is left of our country after this tragedy, you have to win the game by taking them out of power, not claim half or what the regime wants to give you after a negotiation.

That is why I have always believed that since they are not "blocking the game" having the certainty of winning, it is because they are sold to the regime. Let's see: Who do the majority of Venezuelans favor in order to get out of Maduro? The regime or the opposition? Who do more than fifty countries back, who are willing to support what the Government in Charge of Juan Guaidó decides? But we still find ourselves "negotiating" with the regime. And I ask myself, negotiating what? What was it that we Venezuelans missed that we couldn't understand if we whites didn't calm down the game?

Forgive the colloquiality of the comparison, but I still can't reach the people to explain what we consider obvious. How is it that personalities of the intellectual world write letters indicating that we mistreated Guaidó in social networks? That is not Guaidó, for God's sake! It is the path chosen by the opposition to get out of the usurpation! With that what they do is hide the bottom saying that we are against who appears publicly as the responsible.

For my Guaidó he can stay as long as he wants -in fact he is in campaign-. Moreover, I want him to head the Transitional Government, over those who want to see their heads roll, skipping that transition by using an election with the regime. But please don't sell to Venezuelans that we are against Juan Guaidó, using a ploy to cover up an indefensible electoral arrangement.

Why are those anchors of the official opposition intellectuals who criticize the fact that we are messing with the saint, hiding that the regime and the opposition they defend are taking alms through the back door with elections? Why don't they say that we are against elections? Why do they insist that we are against Guaidó? That's what people have to ask themselves. While more than 90% of the country wants them to leave, the opposition is looking for an electoral compromise with the regime to keep them. Who understands that stupidity?

So this is where I want to emphasize our plebiscite proposal. This proposal goes against the electoral proposal of the regime and its official opposition. Why is the Plebiscite an equally electoral proposal not openly debated? Why don't the communicational anchors of the opposition discuss it in the same way as the elections in their programs by social networks or radio programs? Why?

I have a theory that would answer that. The official opposition does not want to leave the regime out and uses all its communicational influence to avoid it. Thousands of reasons, starting with the most obvious, corruption. With a Plebiscite that openly declares to the International Community the unanimous rejection of the population to continue in Miraflores the delinquents that ungovern us, the whole "establishment" castro-chavista-madurista would have to disappear to give way to a Transitional Government "without enclaves of the regime," as Henry Ramos Allup's theory maintains. That is, do not block the game of dominoes even if all the whites have been lifted. And that in this case is criminal because it prolongs the suffering of the people, because it produces more deaths of Venezuelans due to medicines, diseases and hunger, because it deepens the bloodshed of our youth in that massive exodus.

And a plebiscite gives us the certainty of winning and collecting. You will say and why are you so sure that they would leave with a Plebiscite? Because the manifestation of the people would be so overwhelming and forceful that it would be practically impossible for the International Community to materially refuse to mobilize in favor of the Venezuelan people. That the UN Security Council would look green to oppose a humanitarian intervention when requested by the population itself. It would be unprecedented! The structure of the questions we have proposed indicates this:

1) Do you demand the immediate cessation of the usurpation of presidential powers exercised by Nicolás Maduro Moros?
2) Do you demand that the citizen Juan Guaidó Márquez fully exercise his powers as President in Charge of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, and in that condition, constitute a Transitional Government and call free, fair and transparent elections?
3) Do you request the International Community to take immediate and effective measures, with the objective of protecting and helping the people, carrying out the necessary actions to stop the very serious and continuous violations of Human Rights in Venezuela?

(See Comunicado ANCO: Un Plebiscito para que el Pueblo Soberano Decida, en

With the first question the people would decide the Cessation of the Usurpation of Nicolás Maduro Moros, without mistake: WE DO NOT WANT IT. It would not be Juan Guaidó, nor would it be the official opposition. WE VENEZOLANS fired him (Donald Trump will like that: You're fired!).

With the second question, Venezuelans would be giving full popular support to citizen Juan Guaidó Márquez as the President of the Transition to call an electoral process that guarantees free, fair and transparent elections; and to exercise the Transitional Government with all the powers conferred by the Constitution to the President of the Republic.

So far Guaidó is a president held in pins. This plebiscite legitimizes him and gives him the political floor to act above all political parties and would silence the mouths of all countries that still doubt his legitimacy. No more the excuse of not appointing a Cabinet to govern. After the Plebiscite there would no longer be the expression "the self-proclaimed" President Juan Guaidó. In the small letters of the questions (see in detail ANCO's communiqué with the complete proposal) it is established how those elections would be carried out to guarantee the completion of the Transition those free, fair and transparent elections. NOBODY can say that this is an "anti-Guaidó" proposal, ALL THE CONTRARY is to Juan Guaidó the one that best suits him because it would imply the support of the Venezuelan people to act.

But the third question is fundamental. It is the Venezuelan people who are asking for the intervention of the International Community to protect and help the Venezuelan people against a regime that exercises power and is responsible for crimes against humanity in our territory. Once again, it is the Venezuelan people who launch an SOS to the world. Do you believe that with this permission the countries that have recognized Guaidó will slip through the cracks? They would have no alternative but to intervene and hand over power to Juan Guaidó because that is what the Venezuelans decided in this Plebiscite.

Now, it is clear that this plebiscite consultation CANNOT BE CARRIED OUT WITH THE CORROMPT POWER OF REGIME and that we must use civil society and international organizations, such as the OAS, the EU, the Lima Group, the IDEA Group, etc., to count the votes of Venezuelans in that Plebiscite because the regime's NEC cannot be used.

How long should we repeat and explain that this Plebiscite cannot take place without the international pressure of friendly countries and without the internal pressure of Venezuelans? That the regime WILL NOT ALLOW this process if they don't put a gun to his temple. And that gun represents the power of the most important nations in the world interested in an electoral and democratic solution for Venezuela. And the most paradoxical thing about this whole issue is that those who would benefit politically would be the G4 parties themselves because they are the ones who manage the National Assembly and the constitutional heirs of power, and in no case do we propose this solution.

It is time for the horses to stand in front of the cart. It is time to stop this game. Venezuelans already have a serious differential proposal to discuss in the face of Chimbas elections with the regime. Now they are the ones who have the floor...

Caracas, July 26, 2019


No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario