[ad_1]
When he declared himself the “president in charge” of Venezuela in January 2019, Juan Guaidó managed to unite the heterogeneous Venezuelan opposition. However, over the months and given that his strategy to get Nicolas Maduro power has not worked, unrest grew among those who supported him.
In this way, in recent months the voices have multiplied that have questioned the strategy of the US sanctions and claim that the electoral approach should go beyond the refusal to participate in the December parliamentary elections. In fact, a few days ago, the opposition leader Maria Corina Machado He withdrew his support for Guaidó, and this has only confirmed the breakdown of the unity with which the Venezuelan opposition forces once confronted Chavismo.
The new schism facing the opposition is over whether boycott elections -which has been the measure proposed by Guaidó- or participate in them, an option to which the former presidential candidate called on Wednesday Henrique Capriles, openly challenging the strategy of the president of the National Assembly.
For Luis Vicente Leon, president of the Venezuelan pollster Datanalisis, the lack of unity is a problem for both leaders, and not just one of them. “I insist that to vote or not to vote in this biased election, without unity or strategy to defend citizen rights, is a false dilemma that leads to the same vacuum. For its part, stating that the only solution to the problem is foreign intervention, in addition to belittling the responsibility of work and internal struggle, concludes that the problem is unsolvable “, dice.
The tensions between the two were also exposed on Tuesday, after the release of dozens of dissidents, which Guaidó considered was due to “political maneuvers”, ratifying his position “not to go to the electoral fraud of December 6.”
The head of Parliament believes that the elections will not have the minimum guarantees to ensure elections without fraud, and that the Maduro government will try to give them the greatest possible appearance of legitimacy to convince the opposition to participate.
Although the abstention had been agreed with the main parts of the opposition, including the faction led by Capriles, the former presidential candidate – who is disqualified from holding public office– He announced his intention to do the opposite. “We are fighting so that the elections are free and democratic, that is our fight, so that the Venezuelan people can express themselves and that their vote is respected and counted”added.
“Capriles considers that the option that Guaidó is proposing has no future, that it goes head-on against a wall, and he is seeing the opportunity to rethink his own leadership, proposing something that he considers could be more successful. What he is doing is moving the waters “, raises Felix Seijas, director of the Delphos pollster.
Because the detailed proposals are not yet known, analysts agree that it is difficult to determine which strategy could be more successful. “How effective your move is going to be will depend a lot on the support you have from the population and also on whether this strategy is part of a longer-term or medium-term approach. What could happen is that both crashed or only one crashed. That it goes well for both seems difficult, because so far they have not been considered as complementary strategies between which there may be synergy, which would be optimal, ”says Seijas to Third.
“That if you go to the process, you do not legitimize Maduro, it is a falsehood. If the dictatorship leaves a little gap, we have to put our hand in and then put our foot in “Capriles argued, adding that “no one knows what may happen, but I am sure that nothing will happen calling to do nothing or calling to continue in the current situation.”
For León, it is not surprising that the opposition fractures after months without achieving its goal of change. “It is absurd to take the debate to a simplistic plane of good and bad in the opposition. There are simply divergent positions in a country that fails to produce the desired change for 80% of the population. Their sin is not having common rules to decide together. But it is a shared sin ”, he concludes.
[ad_2]
