By Marco Teruggi on January 20, 2020
Photo: Carlos Herrera
Venezuela’s opposition is in the middle of a fundamental dispute. This is not a mere fight about the National Assembly but there is something that goes way beyond that. It lies in the decision to follow the path traced by the United States or creating a national alternative. Legislative elections are in the works and are expected to be held this year though without a confirmed date yet.
Venezuela’s politics is a scenario in motion, amidst disputes and assaults in preparation. The events that occurred in the National Assembly early this year, in which Juan Guaido lost his chairmanship, are only an emerging part of what is at stake.
The current scenario began develop in the middle of 2019 especially over a main aspect: the opposition’s lack of capacity to overthrow President Nicolas Maduro. Estimations made by strategists and funders of the parallel government headed by Guaido did not yield the expected results.
Such a defeat of the coup monger math not only resulted in Maduro staying in power but also on disagreements that led to splitting the opposition. An essential issue is expressed in this division too about the way the Venezuela’s conflict could be solved; either through violence and foreign aid or domestically through elections.
The Disagreements within Venezuela’s opposition began to be public by the end of 2019, when the loss of strength and credibility on the road map set by the United States through Guaido could no longer be hidden. This division appeared through an element that tends to define politics: money.
“There is an internal dispute among them as a result of a struggle to control revenues,” Deputy to the National Constituent Assembly, Maria Alejandra Diaz, told Sputnik.
The matter of dispute dealt with foreign funding, “estimated by the USAID to be $630 million during the last four years,” Diaz commented.
The hoarding of such resources combined with other elements, such as the lack of internal democracy among parties, differences concerning their strategy, and personal ambition.
“There is a rebellion on behalf of opposition parties that have been set aside in their regions and which have been demanding a space during the last year,” the Deputy noted. Together with mutual finger-pointing of corruption and bribery, this dispute resulted in a group of opponents—headed by Luis Parra—presenting their own list to chair the National Assembly on January 5. Therefore, the division was expressed in struggling for the opposition’s public display space, where Guaido was displaced.
Parra’s bloc “is not asking for an invasion but they said they want to make the National Assembly into an institution to be respected again,” Diaz explained. His stance is different to Guaido’s, who she described as “the U.S. main piece” in Venezuela.
Parra’s position strengthens a political stance expressed in the National Negotiating Table, a space created between Chavism and opposition groups by the end of 2019. Opponents in the Negotiating Table “openly expressed to be against the blockade and against any sort of invasion. It’s a sector opposing the Government but seems to be defending the country,” Diaz said.
The opposition that was publicly united around the road map established by the U.S. since the beginning of 2019 now has two different blocs; Guaido and Parra, who is now chairing the National Assembly, together with the National Negotiating Table.
“I think that if the opposition group sitting on the Table joins Parra’s dissident group within the legislative branch, there could be an opposition strong enough to face those extremists who have been damaging the country.”
Next Elections
Now the debate is focused on legislative elections this year. The opposition’s division has already been clear: taking part or sabotaging it.
The electoral issue is marked by the renewal of the National Electoral Council. “There was not an agreement in the National Assembly because Guaido refused it, while Parra’s group is willing to resume such negotiations. This is interesting because the opposition taking part on the Negotiating Table and Parra could reach an agreement with the Government to elect new members or the entire leadership (of the Electoral Council). We don’t know what’s going to happen and that would be a political decision,” Diaz explained.
The idea is that the electoral body is renewed by the National Assembly recognized by the other public powers; this is to say, the legislative body headed by Parra. Thus, the new Electoral Council and next elections would be backed by a greater amount of political factors.
Amidst a scenario of instability, Diaz commented that there is a possibility of reaching such agreement not through the National Assembly but through the National Negotiating Table. Thus, “in order to guarantee the Negotiating Table’s decisions, the new electoral Council rectors should be appointed by the National Constituent Assembly.”
This is the scenario backed by Chavism: a political agreement with a broad group of national opposition groups who condemn the U.S. blockade and international intervention, so as to have the required legitimacy and then hold legislative elections.
Guaido has already announced that he will not recognize a change on the National Electoral Council, neither the call to elections, nor the subsequent elections. “They are going to sabotage it because they are not interested on resuming the country’s institutionalism. And, as they do not longer control the National Assembly, their legitimacy in the country has decreased even more,” Diaz said.
Guaido’s stance reflects the United States’ strategy. The U.S. Administration and its allies, such as Colombia or the European Union, announced they are going to recognize only the National Assembly headed by Guaido and defended the need of setting a transition government to hold elections.
“In this dispute for power, the U.S. is not going to give up. They are going to put even more pressure on until any of the sectors surrenders,” the Deputy commented. This includes strengthening the economic blockade, attempted covert armed operations, and pressure through personal attacks on the Chavista leadership, as well as to opponents who separated from Guaido and the U.S. strategy.
Missing Pieces
The opposition’s reconfiguration map has not been completed yet. Their actions now are focused on an internal dispute among parties to define which sector will hold their leadership.
As a matter of fact, the leadership for Primero Justicia ( Justice First) is under dispute. On the one hand there is Parra’s group; on the other, leaders such as Julio Borges—who is actually living abroad. Such disputes will be solved by the Supreme Court of Justice. If Parra wins, Primero Justicia and a group of its leaders will surely take part in the upcoming legislative elections.
This internal instability is linked to other political groups by Deputy Maria Alejandra Diaz. “This is why Guaido resigned from Voluntad Popular. He’s no longer is controlling that party,” she explained regarding Guaido’s anticipated decision of splitting from the party through which he assumed the parliament’s presidency.
In this scenario, a majority of the opposition would take part in the upcoming elections, while the pro-U.S. group could remain isolated. It’s still too early to foresee if that is going to be the result in a context where permanent actions of sabotage are sure to be planted along this road map.
According to Diaz this set of political variables show that the Maduro Administration could win a majority in parliament. However, she said, economics will be determining, “People tend to vote with their heart or their stomach. There shall be a sensitive improvement of the situation through measures that must be taken to protect the weakest sector in this equation; the Venezuelan population.”
Source: Sputnik News, translation Resumen Latinoamericano, North America bureau
Photo: Carlos Herrera