Canada embarrasses itself by rejecting dominant Chavista victory in Venezuela elections
Photo Credit: (Toronto Star/Google Images)
Written by: Tyler Shipley
On Sunday, Venezuela held a round of parliamentary elections, featuring dozens of opposition parties of the left and right, which had a 31 per cent turnout rate. For comparison, 35 per cent of the US population (around 120M out of a population of 331M) voted in its comparable 2018 midterm elections. The outcome was a strong, victory for the governing PSUV, winning 71 per cent of national assembly seats. Predictably, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo rejected the results before they were even announced and claimed that Venezuelan President Maduro was a dictator. Maduro responded but noting that Pompeo - whose President is currently claiming he is the victim of a coup in Washington - is in no position to lecture Venezuelans about democracy.
Champagne for the Masses
Like his US counterpart, Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister, François-Philippe Champagne, rejected the election before its results had even been announced. This was premised on the fact that the increasingly embarrassing US-educated Juan Guaidó - an opposition leader who declared himself the “true President” of Venezuela and was granted official recognition by the US and Canadian governments - called for a boycott of the election. Few actually rallied to his call.
Guaidó was always viewed by most Venezuelans as a puppet of Washington, and a May 2020 poll showed that 88 per cent of the country considered him unfit to govern and his approval rating fell consistently below 10 per cent. He has never been elected to the Presidency, though Canada and the US continue to call him the President.
The west has been trying to overthrow the Venezuelan government since it first took a turn towards socialism in the late 1990s after the election of Hugo Chávez. The ramped up efforts over the past few years have left Venezuelans ravaged by economic sanctions and hardship, but have failed to convince them to abandon the socialist project they overwhelmingly support.
2020 was an especially embarrassing year for the “regime change” boosters in Ottawa and Washington. Donald Trump was mocked by his Democratic Party opposition for his failure to overthrow the duly elected Nicolás Maduro and, to make matters worse, their overthrow of Evo Morales also ended in failure. Like Maduro, Morales was labelled an unpopular dictator, but last month Bolivians overwhelmingly voted his party back into power, putting the lie to such claims.
This has also been a real blow to Canada, and especially the figure of Chrystia Freeland, who had fully backed the coup against Morales and who played a central role in assembling the Lima Group, a coalition of the most right-wing regimes in the Americas, to overthrow Maduro.
Backdrop to Regime Change
Let’s backtrack. When this story is told in mainstream North American media, it often assumes that Chávez and Maduro were/are “brutal dictators” who are responsible for a human rights disaster and that Venezuelans want to be rid of them. This is not even close to accurate.
A short article like this can’t capture the complexity of modern Venezuela, but we need to keep a few things clear. For one, Chávez didn’t create the revolution, the revolution created him. The masses rose up in the context of poverty, corruption and injustice, and built local power within their own barrios.
When Chávez was elected, he had to work with these local councils, which exercised considerable authority in their neighbourhoods. Thus emerged a new model of democracy in Venezuela which sought to balance between the national leadership and these local councils.
Between Chávez and local councils, life improved dramatically for poor Venezuelans. Poverty reduced by around 50 per cent, wages introduced for domestic labour, reduced costs of living, free health care and significantly better representation of women and lgbtq people.
But Canada and the US worked tirelessly to undermine and defeat the revolution. In 2002, they collaborated with Venezuela’s right-wing opposition (who were allowed to operate freely and controlled 92 per cent of the media) to overthrow Chávez. The coup failed due to massive popular demonstrations, but it illustrated the lengths the west would go to defeat the revolution.
Canada in the Coup
Canada directly supported the attempted coup. It funded at least three of the organizations involved, including one headed by Maria Corina Machado, brought to Ottawa to speak to ministers in 2005. In 2006, Canada refused to acknowledge Chávez’s electoral victory, despite its being overseen by international organizations.
Chávez defeated several recalls and won four elections (deemed “the best in the world” by the Carter Center) often by a wide margin. Yet Canada consistently claimed he was a dictator. In 2010, Canadian minister Peter Kent went to Venezuela but refused to meet with government officials, speaking only to the opposition.
Ironically, Peter Kent noted that Chávez had suspended 6 radio stations, and called this “evidence of shrinking democratic space,” though these stations had regularly violated broadcast laws. The irony is that Kent was speaking from a visit to Honduras, where an actual dictatorship had taken power with Canadian support, and where journalists were routinely murdered.
Canada’s cynicism was transparent. It was angry that the Venezuelan government had made it more difficult to exploit Venezuelan resources and labour. Canadian mining companies (like Vanessa Ventures and Crystallex) sued Venezuela repeatedly, demanding tax-free access to resources, especially around the Las Cristinas gold mine.
The Canadian government casually noted in 2007 that “Chávez failure would be a positive sign for Canadian interests,” transparently acknowledging that what was best for Canadian capital was to undermine the democratic will of Venezuelans. The lawsuits and pressure continued.
The cynicism of the Canadian elite was barely concealed. For instance, Peter Munk, the ghoulish figure at the heart of Canadian mining interests, penned an unhinged op-ed in the Financial Times comparing Chávez to Hitler. Lo and behold, on the board of Munk’s company (Barrick Gold) sat Venezuela’s richest man, and vocal Chávez opponent, Gustavo Cisneros.
A Better, Brighter Future
When Chávez died in 2013, PM Stephen Harper could not contain his glee, celebrating the dawn of a “better, brighter future” for Venezuela. He was heavily criticized by Venezuelans who were mourning a flawed but beloved figure who had done much to improve conditions and empower the poorest Venezuelans.
The west believed its own propaganda about Venezuela, and assumed the revolution would crumble without its “dictator.” But Venezuela was no dictatorship; power was shared with 50,000 local councils. The next national election was won by former bus driver Nicolás Maduro, who promised to stay the course.
Canada joined the US in the absurd claim that the election was tainted. No other countries would back this, given the wide international recognition of Venezuela’s strong electoral process. But the North Americans used it to justify imposing a strangling set of economic sanctions on the country.
The effect of the sanctions was horrific, exacerbated by the crash in oil prices that had sustained much of Venezuela’s economy. The UN repeatedly called the sanctions a form of “collective punishment” that was directly causing hunger and death. Canada was unmoved by the suffering of Venezuela’s poor.
Instead, Canada used that suffering as evidence that Maduro should be overthrown. But no matter how much Obama, Harper, Trump and Trudeau punished poor people in Venezuela, they just would not do what the gringos wanted. Maduro remained popular.
The Floundering Lima Group
Which brings us back to 2019, and the Lima Group set up to oversee the demise of Venezuelan democracy. The Lima Group brought together the most right-wing governments in the Americas, including the fascist Jair Bolsonaro government in Brazil, and Canadian-backed dictatorships in Colombia and Honduras.
But the rogue’s gallery Chrystia Freeland assembled at Lima looks more foolish every day. For all his fascist bluster, Brazil’s Bolsonaro has lost an ally in Donald Trump, has seen a series of electoral defeats in 2020, and has bungled Brazil’s COVID response and seen his approval rating drop to barely 30 per cent. The right wing governments of Chile, Peru, Guatemala and Honduras have all seen massive popular insurgencies against their rule, and the Bolivian coup leaders who joined Lima late have since been swept out of power.
And yet, Canada has spent at least $55 million in its efforts to have Juan Guaidó installed as president in a country that has not elected him. Granting official recognition to a rich guy no one likes was clumsy and misguided, as was the foolish attempt at a paramilitary invasion this past May.
These failed because Venezuelans support the socialist project that they have been building for two decades. The dynamic between the masses and the presidency is complicated, it was under Chávez and it is with Maduro. There are criticisms from the left and the right within the Bolivarian movement.
But ultimately this was and is a revolution that seeks to put more power in the hands of the poorest people, so that communities can protect themselves against gang violence, provide clean and accessible water, ensure that everyone eats, and build institutions of care and support. This is why no one flocks to Guaidó.
A Transparent Canadian Myth
Canadians cling to the mythology of our nice, neighbourly approach to world affairs, but the rest of the world sees through this pantomime. Canada’s cynicism in invoking human rights in Venezuela is laid bare by its support for neighbouring Colombia, where millions of people have been killed and displaced over the past two decades. Canada says not a word, because Canadian mining companies directly benefit from the violence: much of it takes place around conflicts over land that Canadian companies want to mime.
And Canada’s claim to respect democracy and the rule of law is nonsensical given the key role it has played in coups d’état in Haiti (2004), Honduras (2009), Brazil (2016), Bolivia (2019) and countless others.
So why does Canada care so much about Venezuela? Canada’s position reflects its founding principles. It serves its ruling class interests in destroying and/or demoralizing any alternative to unfettered capitalist exploitation. And it stays true to its colonial roots in insisting that Canada knows better than Venezuelans what Venezuela needs. This pattern is consistent in Canada’s behaviour in the world, as documented in detail in Canada in the World.
More Articles
