[ad_1]
Things are going from bad to worse for Nicolás Maduro’s adversaries. To the disagreements that had already been made public, last week, between the majority opposition and the most radical wing, given the impossibility of uniting criteria regarding the route to carry out the change of government, was added, this week, the appearance on the scene of former governor Henrique Capriles, with a third path that bets on dialogue and the electoral route.
(You may be interested: ‘Capriles is with the Maduro regime’: María Corina Machado)
The return of Capriles, the ‘skinny’, who faced Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro in presidential elections, and on both occasions he was close to winning, It was even more controversial than the discussion on Twitter between the leader of the most extreme sector of the opposition, María Corina Machado, and the president in charge, Juan Guaidó.
It was first rumored, and then confirmed, that Capriles had worked in silence to obtain the pardon granted Monday to 110 persecuted and political prisoners, and that for this he had even spoken with the Foreign Minister of Turkey, Mevlut Cavusoglu, a key ally in international support for the regime.
The nets once again served as a platform, this time for the confrontation between the Guaidó, who accused Capriles of carrying out “unconsulted negotiations” and “in a personal capacity”, and the former governor, who stated that he was satisfied with the not minuscule achievement that he had achieved with his “personal efforts” for the pardon.
(You might be interested: What do they play in Caracas. Editorial EL TIEMPO)
Juan Guaido (c.), President of the National Assembly of Venezuela and president in charge of Venezuela, with members of the European Parliament.
Machado did not remain silent: “Capriles is with the Maduro regime,” he told EL TIEMPO.
Thus, it does not seem unreasonable that the political scientist Benigno Alarcón considers that this could be “the worst schism of the Venezuelan opposition in the last 20 years”, and that Maduro’s adversaries, as a group, are going through what could be one of their “worst moments”.
“(The fragmentation) came from previous disagreements, but is accentuated by the imminence of the electoral act and a series of conditions that, in some way, some consider as the opportunity for the resurgence of some leaderships,” Alarcón said.
And it is no coincidence that it happens three months after the controversial parliamentary elections are held, which the Machado and Guaidó sides announced they would boycott.
This could be the worst schism of the Venezuelan opposition in the last 20 years (…) Maduro’s adversaries, as a group, are going through what could be one of their worst moments
Military intervention?
Machado has proposed, instead, a controversial “Peace and Stabilization Operation”, with foreign support, something that is interpreted as a military intervention in which what the Vente Venezuela leader called the “allies” would be involved, including, of course, the United States, a bet that has already been discarded by the Lima Group and that does not seem to take into account the proximity of the elections in the northern country and the possibility of Trump being defeated, which would mean a tumble in relations between Washington and the region and, of course, a very possible change of the third on the Venezuelan issue.
Guaidó’s proposal is still under discussion, but it could include mobilizations and the holding of a plebiscite to consult the public on how to leave the regime.
(You may be interested: Taking advantage of the covid-19, Maduro unleashes repression against opponents)
But the Capriles thing goes further. His idea, according to a report by the Bloomberg agency, is to lead the regime to accept the postponement of the elections so that they are not held on December 6, but in 2021, and thus give time to a serious electoral mission to take charge of observing the elections at least six months in advance.
For Machado, those who propose to participate in the elections “play the game of tyranny” and are the ones who are doing “the greatest damage to Guaidó”
Miguel Gutierrez. EFE
Maduro needs the international community to legitimize those elections, and in that sense it has already yielded in the international observation and invited the European Union and the UN. But it is difficult to give in on the date.
At the moment, Bloomberg reports, the talks are stalled, according to five sources consulted in Caracas, Because Maduro believes that doing them next year would violate the Constitution, but deep down it is known that an observation mission is not improvised in three months and that it would question many of the previous movements of the regime, like the conformation of the electoral referee and the intervention in the directives of the opposition parties.
That third way that Capriles proposes seems, in principle, to have the support of the EU, which, although it does not recognize Maduro and supports the sanctions, has promoted the route of dialogue, different from that of the Lima Group and Washington, which have left because of the ‘diplomatic siege’ and isolation.
The EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Josep Borrell, said this week that the release of the prisoners was a step towards “free, inclusive and transparent elections.” which was interpreted in Caracas as a tacit endorsement of Capriles, which for some confirms that in Brussels they see Guaidó’s route exhausted or, at least, bogged down:
The release of the prisoners was a step towards free, inclusive and transparent elections.
“The European Union and Capriles believe that the strategy of Guaidó and the US for a sudden change of government has not worked,” confirmed Venezuelan analyst Mariano de Alba, based in Washington.
Without a postponement, EU observers would not have the minimum six months they need to prepare for the event. For this reason, the opposition negotiators want to do everything possible to involve the EU in order to ensure that the vote is fair.
In particular the group led by Capriles is approaching the EU member states to ask if they would monitor the vote separately, the sources told Bloomberg.
And while the opposition falters and exhibits its fractures, the regime takes firm steps towards elections for which, first, according to analyst Félix Seijas, “it assured that the election was going to win.” with the interventions of the parties, and now, that he knows that it is “a won game”, he begins to “give in under conditions” to gain recognition from the international community.
(You may be interested: I am happy to have regained my freedom; interview with Congressman Gílber Caro)
Nicolás Maduro is taking advantage of the opposition’s fracture.
Specialists and opponents consulted by this newspaper consider that the regime may continue to give in on some of the opposition’s demands, as well as electoral guarantees, in order to achieve the desired recognition.
His are practices that, according to Alarcón, are common in the repertoire of electoral autocracies, such as the electoral competitive clientelism, which consists of generating incentives for actors other than the government party to end up competing for spaces to continue challenging the government.
“What these mechanisms do, as Chávez did in his early years, is to keep the opposition very divided,” Alarcón insisted, who said that those who will play the role of opposition in this election, after the majority opposition refuses to participate, will be minority parties that will not go under a unitary formula, with which they will compete against each other.
“It allows the Government to guarantee electoral success (…) because in any circuit there will be 5 or 10 candidates (opponents) competing for a seat, while the Government will be taking only one,” said the Venezuelan specialist.
(It could be of your interest: They use political prisoners as a token of extortion and exchange: one of the opponents pardoned by Maduro speaks)
What these mechanisms do, as Chávez did in his early years, is to keep the opposition very divided.
60 percent abstention?
Following the joint announcement that the majority opposition would not participate in these elections, the Delphos firm estimated that abstention on December 6 would be in the order of 60 percent.
For Alarcón, the movement of figures like Capriles could reduce this abstention by a maximum of four points.
Seijas explained to this newspaper that, indeed, it could increase participation, but that it will depend on the guarantees that can be rescued, of the communication plan that is made to promote participation and of the alternative route announced by the Guaidó side.
“Depending on how much impact this proposal has, it would also affect the counterpart, which is participation in elections. Because they are not compatible. As one weakens, the other becomes stronger. There is going to be a struggle, “said Seijas, who stressed that, however, it is still speculation.
In any case, however, the ruling party is expected to win Parliament. Organizations like Súmate foresee, in different scenarios, that the regime will obtain two thirds of the seats, with which it would have a qualified majority. In this way, the regime will regain control over all powers, and it would do so, possibly, with the recognition of the international community.
With this, according to his plan, he would not only eliminate Guaidó and his interim government, which, according to the interpretation of a constitutional article, depends on his position as president of Parliament.
A crossroads that makes it clear that Venezuela is, today, very far from a process of democratic transition.
Andreina Itriago
EL TIEMPO correspondent
Caracas
