By Luis Manuel Aguana
You always end up finding out about things in Venezuela. Since those
meetings began in Oslo, no one has clearly told us that there has been a
dialogue there (even if they say they are not doing so) until Father Ugalde
informed us (remember his closeness to MUD-FA) in his last delivery: "In the Norwegian predialogue (there
has been no dialogue) something very important happened, Guaidó's
representatives expressed clearly and firmly that Maduro's departure is an
indispensable condition for negotiations to begin, since his usurping
permanence means more death and violation of human rights. I imagine that on
the regime's side, the permanence of Maduro in power until 2025 was defended as
indispensable” (see in Spanish Ni quiere ni puede, in http://www.el-nacional.com/noticias/columnista/quiere-puede_286728). Ugalde's expression
"I imagine" is his way of indicating that it was what the regime said
without exposing itself directly (beware if he was there when they said it).
It is clear that the use of the semantics that as "they did not see
each other" (according to them), then "there has been no
dialogue" is nothing more than a foolish euphemism to deceive assholes.
What is this about a "predialogue"? That exists as much as a
"pre-pregnancy. Either she is pregnant or she is not pregnant. Ask any
serious diplomat what are the methods of conducting dialogues, meetings and
negotiations between two conflicting parties and you will find that what they
did in Norway is one of many methods of dialogue.
The regime told them clearly in Oslo that Maduro stays until 2025. What
part of that NO did the official opposition not understand? As a result,
Ugalde-MUD-FA now intends to sell us that we should press for "Maduro's negotiated exit"
with a "transitional government with
clear and defined lines for the immediate change of the suicidal social
economic model and the immediate preparation of the conditions for free and
fair elections”. And what will be for Father Ugalde "Maduro's
negotiated solution"? Maduro
said he would not leave, period.
So that way out can in no way be negotiated but forced by factors that
are outside the sphere of control of the official opposition. Because "a
negotiated solution" implies that Maduro would agree to leave if certain
conditions established in a negotiation between the parties, such as, for example,
a transitional government with enclaves of the regime, are met. But that did
not happen in Oslo. That is a type of negotiation, let's call it Type A
negotiation. The other negotiation, let's call it Type B, is when Maduro has no
alternative but to leave because the force for his exit is so forceful that
what would remain is to ask for his life (like what happened to Chávez in
2002). The Type B negotiation should be the negotiation sought by the official
opposition and Venezuelans in general. Which of the two types of negotiation
are we talking about here?
By running to Oslo with the regime, the official opposition showed a
clear disadvantage. The April 30 attempt had failed, so it was logical to
expect from the regime that position of forceful refusal to yield one
millimeter to some losers. So what did they go there to do? The obvious answer
is that they went to negotiate in Type A, which was not achieved on April 30
with Padrino and Moreno, but with such a disadvantage that the regime told them
to fuck off (excuse my bad English but there is no other expression).
For Ugalde to say "a negotiated solution for Maduro" must
ignite all the alarms because what the MUD-FA is telling us through one of its
most authorized spokespersons is that as the regime won in that first round of
negotiations in Oslo, we must generate enough "pressure for Maduro's
negotiated solution" in a Type A negotiation with criminals, because there
are some "..." politicians” so
naive that they believe that Trump is going to send his marines to save us or
that the UN is going to send its Human Rights Commissioner to stand up to
Maduro, call him a usurper and a criminal and demand his immediate resignation.
Unfortunately, there are those who seem to bet on this impossible and label the
president in charge Guaidó as sold if he doesn't play that game”. Impossible greater manipulation.
And how will that pressure be? More young people killed on the streets?
More calls to the military for an impossible breakdown of the Armed Forces? It
seems that the deaths and tortures of the serious military who, unable to do
anything for their country because they took an oath they cannot fulfill, are
immolating themselves by conspiring against a regime whose system pays to
plunder and kill them, are not enough. Look at only the last case, Lieutenant
Commander Rafael Acosta Arevalo. After that no one can call cowards those who
like him have given their lives to fulfill their oath. There is no way to
conspire in Venezuela because there is a potential toad at every level of the
Armed Forces who charges hard in dollars for sapping. That's eminently Cuban.
The solution then is on top. What part of that don't they understand
Ugalde-MUD-FA?
And when a group of Venezuelans insist that the solution is not within
the country because the real conditions are not given for it, then the MUD-FA
sends us the epithet of "naïve" betting "this impossible"
to request the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) to Venezuelans who have the
nations of the planet because the regime is massacring us. I would like
Venezuelans to evaluate who the "naive ones" really are, whether
those who have led the opposition with mistakes that have cost lives, or those
of us who have persistently maintained that it is that opposition that, with
its mistakes, collaborationism and negotiations, has maintained it to this day.
You have to negotiate, yes, but in a Type B negotiation situation. And
for that there is no Norway or Sweden. And the way to do it has already been
explained and is called Plebiscite (see Plebiscite versus Elections, in https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/p/blog-page_76.html). The solution is
that it is the people who decide...
Caracas, June 30,
2019
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario