Before the presidential elections of October 7,
Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez had spoken of a “perfect victory”, setting
himself a target of 10 million votes from an electoral register of about 19
million and promising a knockout blow to the Opposition. He fell almost two
million votes short of his own target. His victory percentage this time was a
little over 11% — not bad after 14 years in office — but his lowest ever. This
could not have been the perfect victory that he wanted or was it, by the law of
unintended consequences, just that?
REPEAT MISTAKE
A year later, Chavez narrowly lost a referendum on
constitutional reforms and the Opposition was handed the opportunity to
regroup. In 2008, the Chavistas lost the more populated states like Miranda,
Zulia and Carabobo, Venezuela’s electoral corridor. Two of their governors
would later switch to the Opposition. In 2010, the Chavez and Opposition votes
in the parliamentary elections were roughly equal though the Chavistas achieved
a large majority in the national Assembly.
This time, the Chavistas have regained some ground from
the Opposition in many of the states they had lost four yeas ago and are
predicted to take some of them back in the December state governor elections.
The challenger to Chavez, Henrique Capriles, even lost in his own state of
Miranda. It was left to the veteran Opposition leader, Ramos Allup, to point
out that the Chavista votes had increased among the middle and upper classes by
4% while the Opposition votes in the popular sectors had fallen by 7%.
[In red, Chavez votes, in blue
Opposition votes, in green the margin Source:
Left
Futures]
The depression in the Opposition ranks, and the enormity
of Chavez’s victory, extends beyond mere numbers. They threw everything into
the campaign: more unity than ever more, financial resources to make the U.S.
presidential candidates envious and saturation coverage by the private media
and a million phone calls on the two days before the elections when campaigning
was prohibited. It will be difficult for them to manufacture another candidate
with trajectory who can take on Chavez six years on if he runs for office. They
find that neither armed adventures nor ballot boxes will get rid of the
President overnight. Victory will be a slow slog; perhaps this man cannot be
beaten in his lifetime. There is little appetite among Opposition supporters
for street violence as a means of toppling Chavez. The private media remains
the Opposition’s last bastion but the alternative popular media has more
presence these days: it is harder to get away with barefaced lies.
This year’s Opposition campaign bore the hallmark of State
Department planning. A young, energetic and telegenic challenger against the
old beast; a united Opposition with trusted gatekeepers to hand out television
time and funds for those who fell in line and a new party, Primero Justicia
(Justice First), unafraid of street fights, to take the place of the fractious
dinosaurs of the old Opposition: that was how Chavez was to be felled. In the
end, Primero Justicia was not even the highest vote-getter among the Opposition
groupings and the old guard has come storming back. It’s back to the design
board in Washington.
Layers of the Opposition have begun to peel away. About a
tenth of the Opposition bench in the National Assembly has broken off from the
leaky umbrella of the MUD (Democratic Unity Roundtable). Perhaps this marks the
emergence of a moderate Right in Venezuela, something that interests Chavez for
the strategic reason that if the Bolivarians ever lose power, it is better to
do so to a moderate nationalist Opposition than to the rabid Right, something
from which it will be easier for them to recover.
PROTEST VOTE
Chavez’s vote share decreased in this election in percentage terms but his actual votes increased compared to 2006. This was down to the increase in the election register, with 96% of Venezuelans inscribed in it. Chavez argues that his physical condition contributed to the relatively poor harvest of votes. His last round of radiotherapy ended just two days before the start of the campaign and his participation this time was limited. What is more certain is that there was a fairly large protest vote. This is borne out by two post-electoral opinion polls in which two-thirds of Venezuelans said that the country would prosper under Chavez and 59% of them said theirs was a protest vote for the Opposition. Most of these were in states and municipalities where the local Chavista leadership was out of touch. A quarter of the social classes at the bottom of pile, who have benefited enormously from the revolution and who live in barrios where there was no Opposition campaign, voted against the President. The editor of Venezuela’s largest-selling newspaper, Ultimas Noticias, put this down to the penetration of the Right-wing radio stations. A record number of Venezuelans voted this time but even with the turnout of more than 80% a fairly large number of Chavez supporters abstained, either as a protest or out of triumphalism. Should Chavez be able to deliver more efficient governance in the new cycle, many of those who voted for the Opposition could migrate back to the Bolivarian camp.
Chavez himself says it is still too early to measure the
impact of the victory but believes that the Bolivarian revolution is now safe
for the rest of the century. The margin of victory perfectly suits him in two
ways. It destroys the narrative of stolen elections. The international Right
had to concede that Venezuela did have democratic elections. The internal
Opposition too conceded that the elections were transparent and clean. It
robbed the United States of the excuse to delegitimise and isolate Chavez
internationally and plan for a military intervention. The modest but by no
means a narrow victory margin also gives him the mandate to purge his own ranks
and a decent interval of six years to set things right. Within days of the
victory, Chavez came out with three major planks of his new presidential
period. Popular power would be strengthened. The community councils would be
woven into communes with extensive powers and the ideas and values of socialism
reasserted. The people would have to be convinced; there would be no
imposition. What defined the Bolivarian revolution was its democratic character,
he said in a live telecast of the first meeting of his new Cabinet.
Second, tactics and strategies for the Bolivarian media
are being rethought to counter the private media’s permanently hostile
campaign. Chavez acknowledged the inefficiencies of the national, regional and
municipal governments and promised that he would come down on inefficiency and
bureaucracy with an iron fist and that this would be his best period of
governance. He has asked the Bolivarians to subject themselves to
self-criticism. The electoral result
gives him the legitimacy and the impetus to push through for a revolution
within the revolution, long overdue and with popular clamour behind it.
No comments:
Post a Comment