By Sean Hannley, Alliance for Global Justice

03-06-2009

 

               

                     On February 24^th, Marc Weisbrot from the Center for Economic and Policy Research and H. E. Diego Arria, the former Venezuelan ambassador to the United Nations who was firmly against Chavez, were asked to sit on a panel to discuss issues relating to Hugo Chavez and the Bolivarian Revolution, with a special emphasis on the implications of the referendum that removed term limits for elected officials in Venezuela and where Venezuela seems to be heading.

                Dr. Weisbrot claimed he was “not an expert on revolutions” but an economist. He said that there has been “quite a campaign against Chavez and Venezuela” in the US media, and the “press often uses words like “dictatorship”” to describe the democratically elected government of Venezuela. He said that there was too much emphasis on Chavez and not enough on the whole government and economy. He said that the most important changes in the last 10 years involved bringing PDVSA, a state-owned oil company, under the control of the government. PDVSA, which was nationalized in 1976, had been controlled by the country’s elites for their own enrichment. These same elites attempted to overthrow the democratically elected government of Venezuela in 2002 and paralyzed the company in 2002-2003.

                Since PDVSA was brought under the control of Chavez’ government, GDP and real income have doubled. Some of this is a recovery from the oil strike, but most of the growth is in the non-oil sector and the private sector is growing faster than the public sector. Dr. Weisbrot pointed out that that there is less state control of the economy than in France. Under Chavez, the poverty rate has been cut in half and extreme poverty has been reduced by 72%, there has been a significant redistribution in income, the gross enrollment rate in education has doubled and unemployment has fallen by half.

                Dr. Weisbrot did point to some challenges facing the Chavez administration. The rate of inflation is as high as it was before Chavez took office, over 10%, however, it is still lower than Venezuela’s historical annual inflation, above 20%. A major fall in oil prices would be a major challenge for Venezuela, however, Venezuela has amassed huge reserves, around 25% of GDP. Oil prices are very low right now, however, the futures market sees it going back up by the end of the year and even if they don’t, there won’t be a balance of payments problem. Dr. Weisbrot said that Venezuela needed to diversify away from oil. Manufacturing has doubled in the last ten years, however the country should focus on increasing this further. Venezuela has an over-valued exchange rate, a problem which will need to be solved and it needs to refocus on law and order as the crime rate has gone up substantially.

Dr. Weisbrot claimed that US news outlets have created a fiction about “control” of the media by Chavez. RCTV has the largest television audience in the country, is privately owned and is certainly not pro-Chavez. Many of the radio stations and newspapers are against Chavez, and are more extreme and anti-government than FOX News in the US. Dr. Weisbrot accused US media of intentionally ignoring the progress in Venezuela: There are 12 times as many primary care physicians in Venezuela under Chavez, giving millions more access to health care. He pointed out the US government has “singled out [Venezuela] as an enemy state” and the press reflects this in their reporting.

                Ambassador Arrias began by comparing the Bolivarian revolution to the French Revolution. He called the Venezuelan government a “Piñata”, a “barrel of oil” and a “military regime.” He said that Chavez attempted to overthrow the Venezuelan government and was then elected president, which demonstrates that Venezuela “used to be an open society,” where anyone could come to power. He claimed that the government of Venezuela was very weak before Chavez and it didn’t take care of the population and that other nations in the region have benefitted hugely from subsidized financing of oil which has taken place under ALBA.

He claimed that Chavez has made “enemies” of his political opponents, and described the Venezuelan system as one where the way to benefit one’s self is to “wear a red shirt, march, get benefits.” Arrias said that “poverty is on the front burner of the Venezuelan government” and that Chavez sensed that it was the most important issue in the country and has developed an emotional connection to the people. However, he claimed that handouts have damaged the population because the poor have become dependent on the state and on hand-outs and that the poor are divided for and against Chavez.

 Law and order has become an issue in Venezuela and Arrias pointed out that “Caracas has double the homicides of Bogotá.” He said that Chavez has a very effective communication system to the public and compared Chavez to those who gave orders by radio to the Hutus in the Rwandan genocide. He claimed that Chavez has incited hatred and resentment in the population. He claimed that those who ran PDVSA before Chavez took over were the “best people in the country” and that mismanagement at PDVSA since the takeover has meant production of one million fewer barrels of oil per year. He concluded by saying that the students in Venezuela are against Chavez, Chavez wants to “steal their future,” and that the students educated under Chavez are the most brilliant that the country has ever seen.

This entry was posted on Friday, March 6th, 2009 at 7:25 pm and is filed under Home Page. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.