Chavez

 In a characteristically bold move, Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez called for the formation of a “Fifth International” in November last year. The Latin American leftist leader made the call at the World Meeting of Left Parties, a conference held in the Venezuelan capital, Caracas.

 For those not immersed in socialist lingo, an International is a forum for working-class organisations; a solid base for coordination and debate. The tradition began in 1864 with the International Workingmen’s Association, of which Karl Marx was a founding member. Uniting workers across borders, the International Workingmen’s Association admitted a range of leftists from the anarchist, socialist and trade union movements. This organisation lasted over a decade and provided a strong, diverse base for working-class organisation. However, due to a conflict between Karl Marx and anarchist Mikhael Bakunin, the First International dissolved in 1876.

 While not officially forming a Fifth International, guests at the World Meeting of Left Parties signed a document intended to kick the process off – the “Caracas Commitment.” This is available in English, on the PSUV website: www.psuv.org.ve/files/tcdocumentos/commitment.caracas.pdf

 The Caracas Commitment has a decidedly anti-imperialist bent, with a 6-point course of action summarised below:

1. Mobilisation and condemnation of US military bases.
2. Installation and development of a platform of joint action by left wing parties of the world.
3. Organisation of a world movement of militants for a culture of peace.
4. Artillery of international communication to emancipate revolutionary consciousness. [This refers to left-wing media.]
5. Mobilize all popular organisations in unrestricted support for the people of Honduras.
6. Solidarity with the peoples of the world.

 In large part, these 6 points form a response to the recent right-wing military coup in Honduras. Opposition to US military bases has particular pertinence for the Latin American left, where successive administrations have increased US military presence under the pretext of an ineffectual “War on Drugs”, and troops trained on US military bases have taken power from democratically elected left-wing governments. By November last year, democracy was officially restored in Honduras, but the coup had a chilling affect; former President Manuel Zelaya had been denied his presidency and his proposal to establish a constituent assembly to draw up a new constitution – a measure which could have brought profound democratic and revolutionary advances to Honduras – has been defeated.

The Caracas Commitment also declares solidarity with the peoples of Zimbabwe and Iran. While socialists may not endorse the repressive policies seen under Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe and the theocratic Iranian regime, it is necessary to oppose all attacks on national sovereignty by the US empire.

The insurgent Maoist movements of South Asia and the Philippines were notably absent from proceedings. This reflects the character of the conference, which largely involved ruling parties, such as the Chinese Communist Party and the Mexican PRI. After the speech by Chavez, interested parties formed a Working Group aiming to achieve the formation of a Fifth International.

The proposal that a Fifth International be formed is an interesting and potentially significant development. Any measure which genuinely brings the left together internationally, in a way that meaningfully benefits its members and the cause of human liberation, is to be welcomed.

Whether this proposal leads to such a development or not is not yet clear.

It would also be unlikely that such a development would benefit from the membership of every small Western Marxist party. To be of value, an International needs to be a genuine movement of serious, significant revolutionary forces. Whether or not this proposal will lead to such a body remains to be seen.

On January 25 Bolivians voted by a large majority to approve a new constitution designed to give greater control over the country’s natural resources to the indigenous majority of the Andean nation.

The constitution, which was championed by Bolivian President Evo Morales (a former Aymara peasant activist and leader of the left nationalist Movimiento al Socialismo/MAS), was the culmination of nearly two decades of struggle by the indigenous majority to wrest back control of their lands from the blanco elites and their friends the foreign multinationals. During the 1990s Bolivia saw a succession of governments embark on an unprecedented campaign of privatisation including the full or partial sale of the state-owned oil, gas, electricity and telecommunications industries. In 2000 the then-President (and former military dictator) Hugo Banzer signed a contract with a consortium led by US company Bechtel to give it exclusive rights over the supply of water and sanitation services in the city of Cochabamba, with local residents forbidden from collecting their own water through rainwater tanks or other natural methods.

Popular victory and legislative compromise

Under the new constitution approved on January 25 however state ownership of natural resources is guaranteed along with the right of all people to be involved in decisions about their use. This law is designed as a protection not just against moves to privatisation but also to ensure that the profits from the exploitation of resources such as oil and gas is shared equitably by all Bolivians – instead of being monopolised by the (comparatively) wealthy, eastern provinces of the country where most of the white minority lives.

Nevertheless, the conservative opposition (which controls the four eastern provinces of the media luna- Pando, Beni, Santa Cruz and Tarija) have not given up the fight and through their majority in the Senate managed to make a number of compromising amendments to the draft of the new constitution before it was presented to the voters.

Key among these compromises was the decision that the proposal to limit private individual land holdings to no more 5 000 hectares should not be applied retrospectively – ensuring that the interests of the existing big landowners are unaffected. This was a clear act of sabotage against the popular will, given that over 80% voted for the inclusion of the 5 000 hectare limit (as opposed to the alternative of a 10 000 hectare limit).

Under the new constitution, private corporations are also permitted to continue their involvement in industries such as hydrocarbon extraction as “partners” with the Bolivian state. This partnership model has been used by Morales and his administration to placate international investors alarmed by his gradual re-nationalisation over the past few years of the key oil and gas industries.

Parallels with Venezuela

In many ways the contradiction between popular victory and legislative compromise that characterises the new Bolivian constitution resembles the situation unfolding currently in Venezuela, where this February self-proclaimed “Bolivarian socialist” President Hugo Chávez won a referendum allowing him to stand for a third term in office by over 1 million votes yet is still forced to deal with a right-wing opposition which controls a number of key states and routinely uses armed police to attack trade unionists and community organisers.

In Bolivia President Morales has recently ordered the arrest of the former prefect of Pando province Leopoldo Fernández for ordering the massacre of 16 peasants during a protest last September against his authoritarian policies. Like Chávez, Morales is strongly supported by the leaders of the indigenous and urban social movements as well as the campesino unions. However the main Bolivian trade union federation, the COB (Central Obrera Boliviana) – despite calling for a ‘YES’ vote in the recent referendum – has often opposed him for not going far enough – in July 2008 calling a general strike over Morales’ failure to meet their demand for universal pensions.

Morales and Chávez have both won landslide victories in recall referendums initiated by opposition supporters – in August 2008 Morales and his vice-president Álvaro Garcia Linera won the backing of 67% of voters while opposition prefects in two key states had their mandates recalled. Still, both leaders face major challenges with corrupt pro-capitalist elements within their own administrations. On February 11 the president of the Bolivian state oil company YPFB Santos Ramírez (like Morales a former peasant activist) was arrested for taking bribes in return for the granting of lucrative government contracts (the scandal only came to light after one prospective ‘donor’ was murdered by Ramírez’ own brothers-in-law).

Whether these contradictions – like those in the new Bolivian constitution – can be overcome will depend ultimately on the level of militancy and self-confidence among the Bolivian peasants and workers themselves. While the government of Evo Morales has delivered many positive reforms, whether or not these reforms will actually be implemented – and by whom – is still to be determined.

Peter arrived in Auckland straight from Venezuela where he has spent the past three weeks.

Below are notes taken from the meeting.

He was there for the elections which were won by the revolutionary United Socialist Party by a large majority.

This election had the biggest turnout ever, 65%, whereas the record previously was just 50% (voting is voluntary in Venezuela). The polls don’t close until there are no more voters and there were people lining up to vote until 11.30pm.
The United Socialist Party (PSUV) won 17 out of 27 governors, and combined with its allies won 6 million votes to the right-wing opposition’s four million votes. It was a resounding vote of confidence in the revolution. The opposition won a couple of key states which gave a boost to the right wing reaction, but the overall vote was conclusively in favour of the revolution.

Battalions of volunteers ran the election campaign. Each battalion was made up of 30 to 100 people and each person had 10 people to contact about the election. They’d fill up a book of these names and details then start on a new book. But it didn’t stop at polling day. Immediately after the election they got together to discuss the results and plan ahead.

Peter Boyle made it clear that he had no intention of overstating the development of the movement; he painted a frank and detailed picture of a society undergoing transformation in fits and starts.

He spoke of the changes taking place in education where nearly the whole population has gone back to school – from children up to 80 year olds. He met a 73 year old woman who had left school at primary level who was now completing her law degree. She will use her education to serve the people she says. There are around 100 Bolivarian universities set up that give the poor their first opportunity at tertiary education. In contrast the established universities are still bastions of the elite.

Health care has been transformed for the poor, and greatly assisted by Cuban doctors – who at one time numbered 30,000. Currently there are around 15,000 Cuban doctors who provide free health care 24 hours a day in small local clinics where they live. There are also bigger medical centres that provide diagnostic services (mostly run by Venezuelan doctors), and dentists – also from Cuba, who give dental care to masses for the first time ever.

Clean running water, good sewage systems and affordable housing are key advances being made. There is building going on everywhere and Chavez has joked that he doesn’t know why the West accuse him of being anti-private property when he has created more private home owners than ever before. Now people in poor working class districts can get low interest loans to buy their homes.

As well as these mass campaigns, there are around six communes which are pilot projects. These are aggregations of communal councils of which there are 1500 operating. These organisations are developing popular participatory democracy. These are the seeds of new democracy from below. One of the challenges is to get the youth to become activists. At the moment it is mostly middle aged women who are leading the charge. These people were never political before, have now become real agents of change.

There are security committees that replace the corrupt police who have been driven out of the barrios, and these new committees solve the problem of crime.

The question of how to organise the people living in slums – which comprise the biggest populations in the megacities today – is pivotal in Venezuela. The problem of criminal gangs is rife, and the way forward has been found to organise the mothers. Even the hardened gang members will listen to their mammas!

Every revolution has its enemies within and the wealthy are opposed to the transformations of the Bolivarian revolution. There are all sorts of ways they are trying to stymie the revolution, says Peter.

The army is being revolutionised and politicised, which is a very interesting experiment. There are also 1.5 million militias, although only 200,000 to 300,000 have received training.

For all the progress there is still a long way to go. But people are rising to the challenge.

The revolution in its tenth year now has been a combination of mass mobilisation on the ground and alliances and compromises in the parliamentary arena. More and more a mass revolutionary base is being developed.

Photo: ABN/Prensa Miraflores. View video footage here

President Chávez meets with his people at Miraflores

By Heison Moreno for ABN/YVKE Mundial

Translated by Tim Bowron for The Spark

The head of state celebrated this April 13 together with hundreds of Venezuelans who were out on the streets of Caracas since the early morning. The President told Venezuelans in the opening phrases of his speech that “Venezuela will never be anyone’s colony” and announced the launch of the “Misión 13 de Abril”.

Caracas, Sunday afternoon

The citizens are gathering on Urdaneta Avenue in Caracas to commemorate the civil-military struggle that enabled President Hugo Chávez to return to power six years ago, as a kind of celebration of the recovery of national dignity.

Points such as the corner of Santa Capillas and the environs of the office of the Vice-president of the Republic are again marked by the presence of the people, the same people who in 2002 went out into the streets in order to demand the return of the head of state and the constitution.

Urdaneta Avenue was packed in the early morning with Venezuelan men and women who gathered just like on that previous April 13, to take back their country’s freedom and to sweep away tyranny. The guardians of freedom, members of the misiónes and the general populace gather today to the accompaniment of music by Ali Primera which can be heard even as far away as the Laguno bridge.

The Caracas metro is providing free underground transport so that everyone can mobilise.

At the same time, as part of the national program of the Week of the Brave People the diplomatic representatives of Venezuela posted in different parts of the continent are coming to participate in a series of activities including forums, talks and exhibitions to raise awareness about the events of 11, 12 and 13 April 2002 in which the rights of the Venezuelan people and the legitimacy of a democratically elected government were violated by sections of the Venezuelan far-right.

“Misión 13 de Abril” is launched

They await, as the final finale, the launch of a new misión by the cabinet, which will be named after April 13 and will be aimed at the strengthening of popular power.

The initiative, announced in the middle of March by Chávez, is concerned with supporting the creation and strengthening of the socialist communes, as part of a project in which the ministries of Planning and Social Participation have been working on for several months.

An essential element in this policy is the fact that the communities will have a greater presence in the administration of government, with direct influence over the solution of the problems of each region.

To be precise, the strengthening of popular power highlights the major importance of the constitutional reform project which was the subject of the referendum last December and defeated by a narrow margin.

“Our destiny is to be always victorious”

“It is necessary to strengthen our institutions, sharpen our politics (…) because our destiny is to be always victorious”, declared Chávez. From outside the Miraflores Palace, in Caracas, during the commemoration of the day on which national dignity was restored, the head of state maintained that the battle of April 11 2002 still has not finished.

“They are desperate to come back, but we are here everyday to tell them that they may never return”, the national command said of the opposition groups and oligarchs who carried out the coup d’état of April 11 2002.

“I will never betray the fatherland of Simon Bolívar”

Chávez emphasised that he would never be a traitor, and that he would live the rest of his days “at the service of the heroic people of Bolívar and at the service of the Venezuelan fatherland.”

“All that keeps me breathing, every breath, every sigh, will be dedicated – each minute and each second – to the battle in defence of the Bolivarian socialist revolution. I exhort the Venezuelan people to dedicate themselves more everyday to this cause, to engage with the popular and progressive movements of Latin America and the Caribbean”, he stressed.

The head of state commented that if the 4^th of February [an allusion to Chávez´s first unsuccessful attempt to take power in 1992] had not occurred, the historical process would not have been triggered “that brought us here, to the point where we can see there is a direct line between that day and December 1998 [the date of Chávez´s election as president]“.

“During these six years, the majority of Venezuelans decided that this soldier of the people would take the Presidency of the Republic. And despite the international interests subordinated to Washington, who have deployed a media operation to try to turn me into an ally of imperialism, of the oligarchy, they have never succeeded and never will”, said Chávez.

“It is for this reason that we are here and acknowledge ourselves to be children of Bolívar, a truly human people, beautiful, combative and revolutionary, on the road towards the construction of socialism. In relation to the events of April 11, 12 and 13 2002, the national commander emphasised that those who took over the streets of Caracas and the Palace of Miraflores for 47 hours, “forming that tyrannical, murdering, bourgeois, lackey, despotic government subordinated to the Whitehouse, represent the same historic and traitorous current, of the same stock as those who in 1828 expelled Simon Bolívar from Caracas and condemned to death Marshal Antonio José Sucre”.

Replenish your conscience in order to carry the revolution to victory

Chávez also called on all men and women of the country to replenish and strengthen their consciences, stressing that it was a necessary act in order to take up the challenge of carrying the revolution to final victory, and in time, the consolidation of the progressive currents in Latin America.

The letter from Castro read by the President stated that: “the fall of Venezuela would drag down the hope of the people of Latin America. I daresay that if Venezuela is lost, the USA would take over the Latin American hemisphere. Instead your triumph instead altered the course of history”.

Chávez exhorted all Venezuelans, during a speech given on Sunday before a multitude gathered in the area around the Miraflores Palace, to be conscientious of what the triumph of the process of changes underway in this country would mean for the rest of Latin America.

“This is a gigantic challenge. It is important that in the light of observations such as this one (that of Castro) we strengthen our consciences. It is necessary for us to replenish our conscience, our will, the quality of our administration, that we struggle each day without rest for these small everyday victories, of every minute which pave the way for victory, because this is our only road: victory”, he said.

He called also for everyone to assimilate the importance of what took place on April 13 2002: “We have still not yet weighed in its full magnitude the significance of that which occurred here on a day just like today 6 years ago and, above all, the consequences, the impact of what happened here”.

(see original report in Spanish here)

Translated by Tim Bowron for The Spark

9/4/08

MERIDA, Venezuela. Steel workers and the trade union Sutiss have won their fight for the nationalisation of the steel industry firm Ternium-Sidor after months of strikes, confrontations and repression by the National Guard. This morning, at 1.22am, vice-president Ramón Carrizales, the envoy of the National Executive, finally opened a way forward to a solution in the conflict between the trade union alliance and the trans-national corporation’s management. During this conflict the workers had denounced before the Minister of Labour the multiple contractual irregularities and the prevailing conditions of capitalist exploitation, but in spite of all this they were not listened to by the Minister.

Carrizales spoke in the name of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to communicate the decision already reached by the head of state Hugo Chávez Frás to renationalise Ternium Sidor, the largest steel producer in the country, controlled by the Italian-Argentine consortium Techint. The unprecedented character of the labour conflict in Sidor remained confirmed last night with the announcement of the Venezuelan government to retake majority shareholding in the firm, which was privatised in 1997. Following the petition of the United Union of Steel and Allied Workers (Sutiss) to resume talks with the company in the framework of the contractual negotiations, the Executive organised last Monday a meeting between the parties, which was marked from the outset by the determination of the vice-president to resolve this conflict once and for all. The Minister of Labour was not invited to this meeting.

The fact is that it was the forward pressure by the workers which triggered the approval of the nationalisation. Meanwhile management resisted agreement on the transfer to the payroll of more than 600 ancillary workers and the establishment of a pension for the retired workers at the level of the minimum national salary.

Triumph of the workers

At midnight the atmosphere was already tense in the meeting room of the Macagua hydroelectric complex. At this time the workers of Sutiss put forward an offer but without finding any response from company management.

Meanwhile, the threat of nationalisation hung over the room, gaining in likelihood each moment. Abruptly and almost surprising those present, the vice-president asked to put in the minutes the unwillingness of the representatives of the trans-national to put forward a counter offer, by so doing communicating the decision that no further formalities remained: Sidor would be nationalised.

On March 17 Nelson Davila, Venezuela’s charge d’Affaires for Australia and the Pacific, spoke at a student forum at the University of Canterbury. Organised at short notice the meeting was attended by a small but highly interested group of people.

A day earlier Davila had also spoken at a public meeting in the inner city which some 20-25 socialist and trade union activists attended. Following on from that meeting a decision was made to establish a Venezuela solidarity group in Christchurch.

At the UC student forum Davila spoke of the revolutionary process currently unfolding in the Latin American country, where modes of participatory democracy such as community councils and worker run factories are being developed. He also talked of the “Missions” that the government of Hugo Chávez is carrying out; social programs financed by revenue from Venezuela’s nationalised oil industry that have drastically improved the situation for people in the country’s poor barrios, alleviating poverty and improving literacy rates. Venezuela has made education free, from kindergarten though university, and is also building a free health care system with help from Cuba which has supplied many trained doctors. Davila stated that Venezuela was “not paradise” but they were working to build a human alternative to neoliberal capitalism.

When asked what activists in New Zealand could do to support the revolution in Venezuela, Davila said that Venezuela what needs most is political support; activists should publish information on the situation there, and show the many documentary films that have been made about Venezuela. This is important to counter the misinformation coming from the US administration and repeated in most corporate media. He also encouraged us to visit Venezuela ourselves, something which several Australian activists have already done recently.

The Workers Party will be showing a documentary about the recent Venezuelan election, at the University of Canterbury on April 2. Email byroncclark(at)gmail.com for more information.

(first published on Socialist Democracy blog)

Having suffered a narrow defeat in the constitutional referendum held last December, Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez has signalled that plans to accelerate his Bolivarian socialist project will have to be placed temporarily on hold.

On January 6 he announced during his weekly television show “Alo Presidente”:

I’m obliged to slow down the pace of the march. I’ve been imposing on it a speed that’s beyond the collective capabilities or possibilities; I accept that, that has been one of my mistakes… Vanguards can’t lose their contact with the masses. They must stay with the masses! I will stay with you, and therefore I have to decrease my speed…

However, despite the referendum defeat, the right-wing opposition forces have not gained significantly in terms of their actual support. In the December poll the “No” vote increased by only some 300,000 over the vote total of the opposition candidate in the previous year’s presidential elections.

What was decisive, though, was the abstention of some 3 million Chávez supporters, who this time simply stayed home and did not vote.

These voters, concentrated in the poor barrios where joblessness and inadequate housing are still widespread, clearly felt that the priority of the socialist revolution should be economic transformation and not constitutional window-dressing.

As the leaders of Marea Clasista y Socialista, a Marxist current inside Chávez´s newly formed party, the United Socialist Party (PSUV), wrote in an analysis of the referendum defeat:

The government talks of the project of socialism and equality, but it does not always resolve key social problems like insecurity, housing, the wages of big sectors of the population, whereas other wealthy sectors still dispose of big companies and maintain their economic and political power. We all know that there are very positive social gains and that the reform brought others, but revolutions have unavoidable laws: to advance; it is necessary to take clear measures which weaken capitalist economic power and orient according to social needs.

There are signs that Chávez has at least partially assimilated this essential lesson. In his speech to the opening congress of the PSUV on January 12 he warned of the dangers of the new party being infiltrated by bourgeois or middle-class elements, only out to enrich themselves and betray the revolution.

This should be kept in mind when analysing Chávez’s other recent statement (widely reported in the capitalist press) that the revolution “must seek out an alliance with the middle classes, even the national bourgeoisie”. This remark was made in a separate speech on January 2, which also included an announcement of a government amnesty for the supporters of the failed 2002 CIA-backed coup against Chávez.

But although it may be necessary for Chávez to outwardly conciliate with pro-business forces and “play to the gallery” of foreign diplomats, he is clearly still aware where his true support base lies and also of the need to build the PSUV as a combative party of the workers, peasants and urban poor.

As Chávez summed it up in his speech to the delegates at the PSUV congress, at the end of the day the revolution “cannot depend on one man or an elite, rather it must be built by the people”.