| Date:23/12/2004 http://www.thehindu.com/2004/12/23/stories/2004122313861100.htm Opinion - News Analysis By Siddharth Varadarajan
NEW DELHI, DEC. 22. Given the close interest it has taken in the Best Bakery case, the Supreme Court is bound to view with grave concern the videotaped "claim" by the BJP MLA Madhu Srivastava about how he used "money and intimidation" to procure Zahira Sheikh's silence in the Vadodara fast-track court last May. Assuming that Mr. Srivastava's claim is true, the obvious question that requires urgent investigation by an impartial and empowered investigative agency is why Zahira turned hostile once again, refusing to identify the accused at the Mumbai special court on December 21. If Tehelka's allegation — that Mr. Srivastava fixed the case last year with Rs. 18 lakhs and the threat of violence — is correct, it is only reasonable to surmise that a similar "package" was put together this time around. What was in this package? And who put it together? Money, threat
The Tehelka tape shows Mr. Srivastava and his cousin, Chandrakant Batthoo Srivastava, admitting that they had paid Zahira Sheikh Rs. 18 lakhs. It is also evident from their choice of words — and the videotaped remarks of their close associates — that the threat of violence was a factor which ensured that the key witness in the Best Bakery case kept her end of this "bargain". Why Zahira subsequently resiled from this "bargain" and found the courage to charge Mr. Srivastava and his cousin with intimidation is not known. Nor, of course, do we know what it is which led her to turn "hostile" for a second time. Mr. Batthoo Srivastava and Nisar Bapu, an associate of the BJP MLA, attack her for being "greedy" and speculate that the Gujarat Government might have paid her as much as Rs. 35 lakhs this time around. Of course, such hearsay clearly has no legal validity. Sloppy prosecution
When the Supreme Court in April 2004 ordered a retrial in the Best Bakery case and also directed that it be held outside Gujarat, it did so because it was more than evident that the State Government had deliberately allowed the prosecution case to be sabotaged. Zahira turning hostile was an important — but small — part in the officially sanctioned sloppiness that marked the conduct of the prosecution. Moreover, the fate of the Best Bakery case closely mirrored what was happening in virtually all riot cases across the State. At the same time, the Bench also knew that Zahira had not undergone a sudden change of heart in the courtroom and that mala fide factors had played a role. Her affidavit spoke of the threats she had received, but not, of course, about any money that might have changed hands. Perhaps, the money was promised but not delivered; perhaps the intermediaries took a substantial cut, leaving Zahira with much less than the agreed sum. Again, these are questions for the CBI to probe. As the nation ponders over the latest twist, it is important to remember that the Best Bakery case is not about Zahira Sheikh but about those who killed 14 innocent persons. It is also about those "modern day Neros" — to borrow from the Supreme Court's own words — who allowed the killings to take place and have busied themselves ever since in trying to find ways to shield the guilty. Zahira may or may not have taken money but she and her family will always remain the principal victims in the case. Each time she turns hostile, she enacts another chapter in the tragedy that is Gujarat. Apart from the obvious issue of witness protection, the Supreme Court needs to take a hard look at the question of financial compensation for the riot victims. The pittance that the Modi Government has offered as compensation for the lives lost or homes and businesses destroyed often forces victims who have lost everything to forsake the elusive chimera of justice for the immediate relief of a pay-off. The worst that can be said about Zahira Sheikh is that having lost everything while the rulers of Gujarat sat back and enjoyed the show, she is trying to get the best she can out of a politico-legal system that rarely delivers justice to the poor. But if "greed" is the vice which has afflicted her, it pales into insignificance before the greater immorality of those who are so determined to ensure that the perpetrators of the communal carnage in Gujarat are never brought to book.
© Copyright 2000 - 2005 The Hindu |
23 December 2004
The latest act in the tragedy that is Zahira
17 December 2004
Inside Venezuela IV: Ties with India to centre around oil
17 December 2004
The Hindu
Inside Venezuela IV
Venezuela-India ties to centre around oil
By Siddharth Varadarajan
Caracas: With the Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez, due to visit New Delhi in February, the stage is set for the establishment of a fruitful bilateral relationship between the two countries, centred around oil, of course, but not necessarily limited to it.
Four years ago, ONGC Videsh Ltd. and the Venezuelan oil company, PDVSA, nearly clinched a deal involving the Indian public sector unit operating at least six promising or proven oil blocks. When the memorandum of understanding was signed in 2000, it marked the first time Venezuela had offered oil concessions to a foreign company outside the international tendering procedure. For ONGC, which has been looking at diverse oil extraction opportunities around the world, the $50 million Venezuelan deal made good sense. Despite the distance involved, ONGC could have either sold the crude in a swap deal or even shipped the oil to India at a reasonable cost since many West Asia-based tankers return empty after discharging their cargo at ports on the Atlantic seaboard. Indeed, Reliance today finds it worthwhile to source crude for its Jamnagar refinery from both Venezuela and Brazil, say Indian officials.
Negotiations with PDVSA reached the stage where ONGC was sent a confidentiality agreement — usually the penultimate stage before the facilities are actually handed over — but the Venezuelans suddenly changed their mind. Ali Rodriguez, who was then head of PDVSA, told the Indian side that new OPEC restrictions on output meant Venezuela was not in a position to boost production.
* * *
Though the scrapping of the deal was a setback, the failure of India and Venezuela to agree to a set of dates for the visit of Mr. Chavez has been another source of irritation since 2001.
On the basis of bilateral consultations, the Venezuelan President was due to visit New Delhi in the summer of 2001. However, due to some misunderstanding, Mr. Chavez was informed only about a week before his departure that the trip could not take place. The Vajpayee Government subsequently sent the late Murasoli Maran, then Commerce Minister, all the way to Caracas to mollify Mr. Chavez and invite him to be chief guest at the January 2002 Republic Day function. But even this was not to be. Barely a week before January 26, the Venezuelans sent word that their leader would be unable to come, sending New Delhi scrambling to find a replacement.
After much confabulation, the two foreign offices have finally settled on February 2005 but the dates still have to be cleared by the PMO. In the run-up to the visit, New Delhi has reminded Caracas of its old commitment to ONGC. According to Venezuelan officials, the President has asked Mr. Rodriguez, who is now the Foreign Minister, and Rafael Ramirez, Oil Minister and PDVSA head, to examine the prospects of a fresh deal. Of course, if the dates for Mr. Chavez's trip are not cleared, or if the trip is cancelled again, India and Venezuela can pretty much forget about doing business with each other for the time being. Which would be a great pity considering both countries have an interest in South-South cooperation and the creation of a world order that is not unipolar.
* * *
For India, a strong economic partnership with Venezuela would complement its other proposals in South America. Apart from the Indian-Brazil-South Africa (IBSA) initiative, New Delhi has been pursuing framework agreements for free trade with the Mercosur countries (Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay), as well as Chile.
But progress has been painfully slow. Though India's trade with the Latin American region has increased by 87 per cent during the last five years and stands at $2.6 billion, its share in the region's total trade is a mere 0.48 per cent. India exported $1.5 billion to Latin America in 2003-04 — a mere drop in the ocean considering that the region's import bill for the same period was $330 billion. In contrast, China's trade with the region stands at $29 billion.
(Concluded)
© Copyright 2000 - 2005 The Hindu
The Hindu
Inside Venezuela IV
Venezuela-India ties to centre around oil
By Siddharth Varadarajan
Caracas: With the Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez, due to visit New Delhi in February, the stage is set for the establishment of a fruitful bilateral relationship between the two countries, centred around oil, of course, but not necessarily limited to it.
Four years ago, ONGC Videsh Ltd. and the Venezuelan oil company, PDVSA, nearly clinched a deal involving the Indian public sector unit operating at least six promising or proven oil blocks. When the memorandum of understanding was signed in 2000, it marked the first time Venezuela had offered oil concessions to a foreign company outside the international tendering procedure. For ONGC, which has been looking at diverse oil extraction opportunities around the world, the $50 million Venezuelan deal made good sense. Despite the distance involved, ONGC could have either sold the crude in a swap deal or even shipped the oil to India at a reasonable cost since many West Asia-based tankers return empty after discharging their cargo at ports on the Atlantic seaboard. Indeed, Reliance today finds it worthwhile to source crude for its Jamnagar refinery from both Venezuela and Brazil, say Indian officials.
Negotiations with PDVSA reached the stage where ONGC was sent a confidentiality agreement — usually the penultimate stage before the facilities are actually handed over — but the Venezuelans suddenly changed their mind. Ali Rodriguez, who was then head of PDVSA, told the Indian side that new OPEC restrictions on output meant Venezuela was not in a position to boost production.
* * *
Though the scrapping of the deal was a setback, the failure of India and Venezuela to agree to a set of dates for the visit of Mr. Chavez has been another source of irritation since 2001.
On the basis of bilateral consultations, the Venezuelan President was due to visit New Delhi in the summer of 2001. However, due to some misunderstanding, Mr. Chavez was informed only about a week before his departure that the trip could not take place. The Vajpayee Government subsequently sent the late Murasoli Maran, then Commerce Minister, all the way to Caracas to mollify Mr. Chavez and invite him to be chief guest at the January 2002 Republic Day function. But even this was not to be. Barely a week before January 26, the Venezuelans sent word that their leader would be unable to come, sending New Delhi scrambling to find a replacement.
After much confabulation, the two foreign offices have finally settled on February 2005 but the dates still have to be cleared by the PMO. In the run-up to the visit, New Delhi has reminded Caracas of its old commitment to ONGC. According to Venezuelan officials, the President has asked Mr. Rodriguez, who is now the Foreign Minister, and Rafael Ramirez, Oil Minister and PDVSA head, to examine the prospects of a fresh deal. Of course, if the dates for Mr. Chavez's trip are not cleared, or if the trip is cancelled again, India and Venezuela can pretty much forget about doing business with each other for the time being. Which would be a great pity considering both countries have an interest in South-South cooperation and the creation of a world order that is not unipolar.
* * *
For India, a strong economic partnership with Venezuela would complement its other proposals in South America. Apart from the Indian-Brazil-South Africa (IBSA) initiative, New Delhi has been pursuing framework agreements for free trade with the Mercosur countries (Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay), as well as Chile.
But progress has been painfully slow. Though India's trade with the Latin American region has increased by 87 per cent during the last five years and stands at $2.6 billion, its share in the region's total trade is a mere 0.48 per cent. India exported $1.5 billion to Latin America in 2003-04 — a mere drop in the ocean considering that the region's import bill for the same period was $330 billion. In contrast, China's trade with the region stands at $29 billion.
(Concluded)
© Copyright 2000 - 2005 The Hindu
16 December 2004
Inside Venezuela III: Using oil as a lever against U.S.
16 December 2004
The Hindu
Inside Venezuela-III
Using oil as a lever against U.S.
By Siddharth Varadarajan
Caracas: If oil is the engine of Venezuela's newfound determination to assert its independence from the U.S., then PDVSA, the public sector company that controls the extraction, refining and sale of the country's crude oil, is undoubtedly its motor.
Before President Hugo Chavez came to power, PDVSA was on the verge of being privatised. Its wharves and jetties were to be transferred to private hands and the company's entire data processing system was turned over to a U.S. firm, Intesa. Worse, oil was being sold below cost to Citgo, a U.S.-based PDVSA subsidiary in order to subsidise the U.S. economy.
In 2002, Mr. Chavez's opponents engineered a strike in PDVSA. The oil shutdown was to play as crucial a role in the U.S.-backed putsch against Venezuela's radical President as the truckers' strike did in the 1973 coup against Salvador Allende in Chile. Intesa pitched in as well.
According to Rafael Ramirez, Venezuela's Oil Minister, the U.S. company used the passwords and codes it had copied to a mirror site in Houston to pull the plug from PDVSA's computer network.
$3 billion
All of this now just a bitter memory, for the Chavez Government has moved rapidly to put PDVSA on a firm footing. Executives and employees who backed the coup have been sacked and urgent steps taken to restore production to the approximately 2.8 million barrels being produced before the 2002 crisis. The oil giant's revival was overseen by Ali Rodriguez, a onetime leftist guerrilla and former head of OPEC, who has since been appointed Venezuela's Foreign Minister. Today, production is up and PDVSA was recently able to raise $3 billion through an international bond issue.
In line with their president's `Bolivarian' vision for an integrated Latin America free from foreign domination, Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. Ramirez have sought to use oil and PDVSA as levers to build close economic links with the rest of the continent.
One of the most interesting experiments is Petrosur, a pan-continental company linking public sector energy companies in South America. PDVSA has already teamed up with Argentina, and is in fact helping President Nestor Kirchner rebuild an independent Argentine energy sector dismantled during the privatisation frenzy of the Menem days. When Venezuela joined Mercosur, the trade bloc linking Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Bolivia, as an associate member this July, Mr. Chavez promised that PDVSA would source up to $4 billion worth of oil sector components and machines from Brazilian and Argentine firms. The Venezuelans are hopeful Petrobras from Brazil will sign up to Petrosur and Mr. Chavez has also floated a proposal for `Petrocaribe' to build energy self-reliance and cooperation in the Caribbean.
"Imagine our strength if the oil companies of Venezuela, Brazil, Mexico, Argentina and elsewhere all got together," Mr. Chavez said last week.
Backbone
Venezuela believes the energy sector could be the backbone of continental integration. In an interview to venezuelaanalysis.com earlier this year, Mr. Rodriguez said there were two visions of integration.
The first is the neo-liberal model involving the opening up of countries to foreign companies; and the second, a model based on the complementarity of economies.
It was only the latter which allowed the inclusion of social and economic factors which transnational corporations tended to exclude. Thus, Argentina could supply meat and wheat to Venezuela, in exchange for oil. And Venezuela gets to reduce its dependence on the U.S. as its main customer for oil.
"We joined Mercosur to liberate us from the North", said Mr. Chavez. Last week, he publicly floated the idea of a Latin American Central Bank and Monetary Fund. "Where are our reserves kept? In the banks of North America. That money is used to lend money to us. This is a stupid thing. If we had a Latin American Central Bank, we could all simply withdraw from the IMF".
Apart from Petrosur, Venezuela is also looking very closely at proposals to price crude oil in euros rather than dollars. The idea is a subversive one, since it has the potential of undermining the `Petrodollar' that allows the U.S. to run huge spending deficits. But Venezuelan officials caution that any change in pricing norms would have to be an OPEC-wide decision. The U.S. is still the most important energy market for Venezuela but PDVSA would be willing to look at new pricing options — perhaps involving a basket of dollars and euros — for strong emerging markets like China and India.
Despite the external dimension to PDVSA's activities, the company remains wedded to the notion of social responsibility.
Rejecting the opposition criticism that the PSU was being forced to spend money on education and health programmes, Mr. Ramirez recently said: "We are investing in the most important capital of the oil industry, which is the development of knowledge of our citizens... It is elemental for the productivity of a country that one attacks the problems that affect the health (and education) of the population."
© Copyright 2000 - 2005 The Hindu
The Hindu
Inside Venezuela-III
Using oil as a lever against U.S.
By Siddharth Varadarajan
Caracas: If oil is the engine of Venezuela's newfound determination to assert its independence from the U.S., then PDVSA, the public sector company that controls the extraction, refining and sale of the country's crude oil, is undoubtedly its motor.
Before President Hugo Chavez came to power, PDVSA was on the verge of being privatised. Its wharves and jetties were to be transferred to private hands and the company's entire data processing system was turned over to a U.S. firm, Intesa. Worse, oil was being sold below cost to Citgo, a U.S.-based PDVSA subsidiary in order to subsidise the U.S. economy.
In 2002, Mr. Chavez's opponents engineered a strike in PDVSA. The oil shutdown was to play as crucial a role in the U.S.-backed putsch against Venezuela's radical President as the truckers' strike did in the 1973 coup against Salvador Allende in Chile. Intesa pitched in as well.
According to Rafael Ramirez, Venezuela's Oil Minister, the U.S. company used the passwords and codes it had copied to a mirror site in Houston to pull the plug from PDVSA's computer network.
$3 billion
All of this now just a bitter memory, for the Chavez Government has moved rapidly to put PDVSA on a firm footing. Executives and employees who backed the coup have been sacked and urgent steps taken to restore production to the approximately 2.8 million barrels being produced before the 2002 crisis. The oil giant's revival was overseen by Ali Rodriguez, a onetime leftist guerrilla and former head of OPEC, who has since been appointed Venezuela's Foreign Minister. Today, production is up and PDVSA was recently able to raise $3 billion through an international bond issue.
In line with their president's `Bolivarian' vision for an integrated Latin America free from foreign domination, Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. Ramirez have sought to use oil and PDVSA as levers to build close economic links with the rest of the continent.
One of the most interesting experiments is Petrosur, a pan-continental company linking public sector energy companies in South America. PDVSA has already teamed up with Argentina, and is in fact helping President Nestor Kirchner rebuild an independent Argentine energy sector dismantled during the privatisation frenzy of the Menem days. When Venezuela joined Mercosur, the trade bloc linking Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Bolivia, as an associate member this July, Mr. Chavez promised that PDVSA would source up to $4 billion worth of oil sector components and machines from Brazilian and Argentine firms. The Venezuelans are hopeful Petrobras from Brazil will sign up to Petrosur and Mr. Chavez has also floated a proposal for `Petrocaribe' to build energy self-reliance and cooperation in the Caribbean.
"Imagine our strength if the oil companies of Venezuela, Brazil, Mexico, Argentina and elsewhere all got together," Mr. Chavez said last week.
Backbone
Venezuela believes the energy sector could be the backbone of continental integration. In an interview to venezuelaanalysis.com earlier this year, Mr. Rodriguez said there were two visions of integration.
The first is the neo-liberal model involving the opening up of countries to foreign companies; and the second, a model based on the complementarity of economies.
It was only the latter which allowed the inclusion of social and economic factors which transnational corporations tended to exclude. Thus, Argentina could supply meat and wheat to Venezuela, in exchange for oil. And Venezuela gets to reduce its dependence on the U.S. as its main customer for oil.
"We joined Mercosur to liberate us from the North", said Mr. Chavez. Last week, he publicly floated the idea of a Latin American Central Bank and Monetary Fund. "Where are our reserves kept? In the banks of North America. That money is used to lend money to us. This is a stupid thing. If we had a Latin American Central Bank, we could all simply withdraw from the IMF".
Apart from Petrosur, Venezuela is also looking very closely at proposals to price crude oil in euros rather than dollars. The idea is a subversive one, since it has the potential of undermining the `Petrodollar' that allows the U.S. to run huge spending deficits. But Venezuelan officials caution that any change in pricing norms would have to be an OPEC-wide decision. The U.S. is still the most important energy market for Venezuela but PDVSA would be willing to look at new pricing options — perhaps involving a basket of dollars and euros — for strong emerging markets like China and India.
Despite the external dimension to PDVSA's activities, the company remains wedded to the notion of social responsibility.
Rejecting the opposition criticism that the PSU was being forced to spend money on education and health programmes, Mr. Ramirez recently said: "We are investing in the most important capital of the oil industry, which is the development of knowledge of our citizens... It is elemental for the productivity of a country that one attacks the problems that affect the health (and education) of the population."
© Copyright 2000 - 2005 The Hindu
15 December 2004
Inside Venezuela II: Endogenous development centres hold the key here
15 December 2004
The Hindu
Inside Venezuela-II
Endogenous development centres hold the key here
By Siddharth Varadarajan
Caracas: In most places, the word globalisation conjures up images of businessmen and corporate consultants on six figure salaries making offers that governments cannot refuse.
But in Nuevo Horizonte, a vast barrio, or slum, strung out like dirty linen high above the Venezuelan capital, globalisation means Martha Perez Miranda, a smiling 50-something Cuban dentist, who fixes poor folks' teeth for free. Along with three other Cuban doctors and a small team of local nurses and medicos, Dr. Perez helps run a clinic which provides a range of primary healthcare services to a population that until now had to travel several kilometres away for a basic check-up.
Despite a steady stream of patients the whole day, the small clinic is spotlessly clean. Marco, an unemployed man in his 20s having a filling put in was in no mood to talk to a journalist. But an older woman waiting her turn was full of praise for the clinic, which opened its doors just six months ago. ``The doctors live right in the barrio so if we need some help at night, they're always available.''
Doctors in exchange for oil
Across Venezuela, several thousand Cuban doctors are involved in this novel experiment called Barrio Adentro (literally, `into the barrio') aimed at bringing free healthcare to some of the country's poorest — and sickest — communities. The Cubans work here for two years on equipment provided, for the most part, by the Cuban Government. In exchange, Venezuela, which is poor in doctors willing to forsake the private sector's high fees but is rich in oil, makes sure the beleaguered socialist island doesn't lack for energy.
Though this unique collaboration is a textbook example of two countries using comparative advantage to mutual benefit, politicians opposed to the President, Hugo Chavez, see things differently. The Opposition — who did precious little to provide healthcare or education to the poor when they were in power — say the social programmes, including Barrio Adentro, are a waste of money. They are also critical of Mr. Chavez's decision to make PDVSA, the State oil company, directly fund a part of these programmes.
Incredibly, some of Mr. Chavez's opponents even see the involvement of Cuban doctors as part of a sinister plot to indoctrinate the Venezuelan poor in Marxism.
In April, the International Monetary Fund declared Venezuela had to take immediate measures to scale back government spending to what it felt were more prudent levels. And last week, Agustin Carstens, Deputy Managing Director, IMF, said the Chavez Government's social expenditures were "unsustainable".
So far, however, there is no sign that Mr. Chavez intends to follow this advice. The IMF and World Bank, he says, are part of imperialism's project of global domination and people around the world must resist the pressure they exert.
For the Venezuelan President, his well-funded social programmes not only improve the lives of millions of people but also help extend and cement the political base of the `Bolivarian movement' that he leads.
At the Fabricio Ojeda `nucleus of endogenous development' in a working class neighbourhood of Caracas, another of Mr. Chavez's unique experiments is slowly taking shape. A derelict warehouse compound and oil storage terminal of PDVSA has been turned into a community centre, complete with a state-of-the art secondary health care centre and large workshops for teaching unemployed youth how to make shoes and clothes. Several hundred boys and girls get on-the-job training here every day, making around $90 a month (Rs. 4,000) in the process. By way of comparison, a woman running a small fruit and vegetable shop in Nuevo Horizonte said she made $100 a month working 12 hours a day.
Asked about what she thought of `Commandante' Chavez, Flora, a plump teenager who was deftly working a sewing machine, smiled broadly and said, "Everybody here is a Chavista".
With poverty and unemployment all pervasive — half the urban population of Venezuela is believed to work in the `informal' sector — the poor appear solidly behind the commandante. A charismatic and even messianic leader who often delivers speeches that are two or three hours long, Mr. Chavez knows the mere promise of a better life is not enough.
Venezuelan officials say the endogenous development centres hold the key to improving the lives of the poor, and that the Government plans to set up as many as a thousand centres across the country.
The population of Venezuela is 24 million. As long as oil sells for $40 a barrel, finding the money for these social programmes should not be difficult. But even if the price of oil falls, they are confident the positive spin-offs from social expenditure will put the country onto a higher growth path.
© Copyright 2000 - 2005 The Hindu
The Hindu
Inside Venezuela-II
Endogenous development centres hold the key here
By Siddharth Varadarajan
Caracas: In most places, the word globalisation conjures up images of businessmen and corporate consultants on six figure salaries making offers that governments cannot refuse.
But in Nuevo Horizonte, a vast barrio, or slum, strung out like dirty linen high above the Venezuelan capital, globalisation means Martha Perez Miranda, a smiling 50-something Cuban dentist, who fixes poor folks' teeth for free. Along with three other Cuban doctors and a small team of local nurses and medicos, Dr. Perez helps run a clinic which provides a range of primary healthcare services to a population that until now had to travel several kilometres away for a basic check-up.
Despite a steady stream of patients the whole day, the small clinic is spotlessly clean. Marco, an unemployed man in his 20s having a filling put in was in no mood to talk to a journalist. But an older woman waiting her turn was full of praise for the clinic, which opened its doors just six months ago. ``The doctors live right in the barrio so if we need some help at night, they're always available.''
Doctors in exchange for oil
Across Venezuela, several thousand Cuban doctors are involved in this novel experiment called Barrio Adentro (literally, `into the barrio') aimed at bringing free healthcare to some of the country's poorest — and sickest — communities. The Cubans work here for two years on equipment provided, for the most part, by the Cuban Government. In exchange, Venezuela, which is poor in doctors willing to forsake the private sector's high fees but is rich in oil, makes sure the beleaguered socialist island doesn't lack for energy.
Though this unique collaboration is a textbook example of two countries using comparative advantage to mutual benefit, politicians opposed to the President, Hugo Chavez, see things differently. The Opposition — who did precious little to provide healthcare or education to the poor when they were in power — say the social programmes, including Barrio Adentro, are a waste of money. They are also critical of Mr. Chavez's decision to make PDVSA, the State oil company, directly fund a part of these programmes.
Incredibly, some of Mr. Chavez's opponents even see the involvement of Cuban doctors as part of a sinister plot to indoctrinate the Venezuelan poor in Marxism.
In April, the International Monetary Fund declared Venezuela had to take immediate measures to scale back government spending to what it felt were more prudent levels. And last week, Agustin Carstens, Deputy Managing Director, IMF, said the Chavez Government's social expenditures were "unsustainable".
So far, however, there is no sign that Mr. Chavez intends to follow this advice. The IMF and World Bank, he says, are part of imperialism's project of global domination and people around the world must resist the pressure they exert.
For the Venezuelan President, his well-funded social programmes not only improve the lives of millions of people but also help extend and cement the political base of the `Bolivarian movement' that he leads.
At the Fabricio Ojeda `nucleus of endogenous development' in a working class neighbourhood of Caracas, another of Mr. Chavez's unique experiments is slowly taking shape. A derelict warehouse compound and oil storage terminal of PDVSA has been turned into a community centre, complete with a state-of-the art secondary health care centre and large workshops for teaching unemployed youth how to make shoes and clothes. Several hundred boys and girls get on-the-job training here every day, making around $90 a month (Rs. 4,000) in the process. By way of comparison, a woman running a small fruit and vegetable shop in Nuevo Horizonte said she made $100 a month working 12 hours a day.
Asked about what she thought of `Commandante' Chavez, Flora, a plump teenager who was deftly working a sewing machine, smiled broadly and said, "Everybody here is a Chavista".
With poverty and unemployment all pervasive — half the urban population of Venezuela is believed to work in the `informal' sector — the poor appear solidly behind the commandante. A charismatic and even messianic leader who often delivers speeches that are two or three hours long, Mr. Chavez knows the mere promise of a better life is not enough.
Venezuelan officials say the endogenous development centres hold the key to improving the lives of the poor, and that the Government plans to set up as many as a thousand centres across the country.
The population of Venezuela is 24 million. As long as oil sells for $40 a barrel, finding the money for these social programmes should not be difficult. But even if the price of oil falls, they are confident the positive spin-offs from social expenditure will put the country onto a higher growth path.
© Copyright 2000 - 2005 The Hindu
14 December 2004
Inside Venezuela I: The Chavez phenomenon and the U.S.
14 December 2004
The Hindu
Hugo Chavez
The Hindu
Inside Venezuela-I
The Chavez phenomenon and the U.S.
By Siddharth Varadarajan
Hugo Chavez
CARACAS: Shortly after he appeared on national television in October 2001 holding aloft bloody photographs of children killed by the U.S. bombing of Afghanistan, President Hugo Chavez Frias of Venezuela received a visit from Donna Hrinak, then Washington's Ambassador to the oil-rich South American country.
Recalling his meeting with the U.S. envoy at an international conference here last week, Mr. Chavez said his televised message had simply been that one could not fight terrorism with terrorism. "But the Ambassador came to me and demanded, `You must rectify your position.' I replied: `You are talking to the President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. You are dismissed. When you learn what the job of an Ambassador is, you may come back'."
"As for our position," he thundered before an audience of artists and intellectuals from around the world, "we did not rectify it. We ratified it. We condemn 9/11 and the Madrid train bombing, but also the bombing of cities like Fallujah and the assassination of children." The "anti-terrorism" of the U.S.-led `war on terror,' he said in reply to a question, "is simply terrorism. Justice is the only road to peace."
At a time when most countries are vying with each other for a place under Pax Americana, the Venezuela of Mr. Chavez is an aberration, a rude and insistent interruption in the otherwise triumphant march towards the End of History. From the war on terror to free market economics, privatisation, cutbacks on social expenditure and the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas, Mr. Chavez opposes the Washington orthodoxy on just about everything. He has embraced the Cuba of Fidel Castro, supplying the socialist island petrol in exchange for doctors, which the urban and rural poor in Venezuela never had access to despite their country's vast oil wealth. "When Aznar (the former Spanish Prime Minister) told me not to be friendly with Castro," herecalled: "I said you have forgotten you are not Ferdinand VII."
But if Mr. Chavez and his supporters — he handily won a recall referendum earlier this year with a plurality of 60 per cent — speak out against the new imperialism of Washington, the Bush administration too considers the Venezuelan leader an implacable foe. The U.S. resents his efforts to get Latin America to unite and is afraid his subversive social and political experiments might prove contagious in a region that has been impoverished by more than two decades of neo-liberal economic policies. "In order to defend humanity," Mr. Chavez declared last week, "we have to go on the offensive. And now is the time to say that another world is possible."
More than anything else, of course, the U.S. does not like the fact that an independent-minded leader such as Mr. Chavez is sitting astride one of the largest oil reservoirs in the world. Indeed, at 2.6 million barrels a day, Venezuela is currently OPEC's (Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) third largest producer of crude, behind only Saudi Arabia and Iran. And the U.S. is its biggest customer.
In 2002, the U.S. supported a short-lived military coup against Mr. Chavez, a former paratrooper who was elected President in 2000. The putsch was defeated by a combination of people's power — with thousands of poor Venezuelans taking to the streets to defend their leader — and infighting within the traditional elites of the country. Central Intelligence Agency documents recently released under the Freedom of Information Act reveal that Washington knew of the coup plot well before it was carried out. And once the coup failed, the U.S. used the bipartisan Washington-based National Endowment for Democracy to funnel money to the recall referendum campaign against Mr. Chavez.
Even his bitterest critics concede that Mr. Chavez's `Bolivarian revolution' — which combines elements of Marxism and Christianity with the military populism so unique to the region — makes him virtually unbeatable politically without intervention from outside. "That's assuming, of course, that the money he's pouring into unproductive social programmes doesn't bankrupt the `revolution' first," a businessman told The Hindu .
© Copyright 2000 - 2005 The Hindu
02 December 2004
U.N. panel not for change in veto power
2 December 2004
The Hindu
U.N. panel not for change in veto power
By Siddharth Varadarajan
NEW DELHI, DEC. 1. The high-level panel tasked by the United Nations Secretary General, Kofi Annan, to study global security threats and suggest institutional reforms has come up with a number of recommendations aimed at increasing the effectiveness of the world body. Among these are two proposals to expand the number of permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, without diluting or expanding the veto power of the five existing permanent members.
The panel, whose report will be formally unveiled in New York on December 2, is expected eventually to form the basis for a reform of the U.N. system, though many of its proposals are likely to excite debate, disagreement and even consternation around the world.
Among these are its proposals on expansion of the UNSC without veto, its definition of terrorism (as any action which harms civilians or non-combatants regardless of whether the aim is to fight foreign occupation), its recommendations on countering proliferation, which borrow liberally from the agenda unveiled earlier this year by the U.S. President, George W. Bush, and its endorsement of the controversial doctrine of humanitarian intervention.
Six more members
Under the first model for the Security Council's expansion, the panel proposes six more permanent members with two each drawn from Asia and Africa and one each from Europe and the Americas. There would be, in addition, 11 non-permanent members as well, taking the size of the Council to 24. Under the second model, the number of permanent members would be kept at five but there would be a new category of eight semi-permanent members with renewable four-year terms, with 11 non-permanent members making up the balance. No candidates are named anywhere in the report.
"We recommend that under any reform proposal, there should be no expansion of the veto," the panel report says. Though it recognises the veto "has an anachronistic character that is unsuitable for the institution in an increasingly democratic age," the panel members noted they see "no practical way of changing the existing members' veto powers."
The 16-member panel was chaired by Anand Panyarachun of Thailand and had as its members, among others, Satish Nambiar (India), Qian Qichen (China), Yevgeny Primakov (Russia), Nafis Sadiq (Pakistan), Brent Scowcroft (U.S.), Amre Moussa (Egypt) and Robert Badinter (France).
NPT clause
To cope with the danger of increasing proliferation, the panel suggests that all countries sign the Additional Protocol to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) allowing intrusive full-scope inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. It also suggests the "early conclusion on an arrangement ... which would enable the IAEA to act as a guarantor for the supply of fissile material to civilian nuclear users" and that countries in the interim stop building enrichment or reprocessing facilities. Finally, the panel's report says all states should be encouraged to join the U.S.-led Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) for interdicting suspect shipping on the high seas.
On the use of force and the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive war, the panel tries to strike a middle path. It says Article 51 of the U.N. Charter (on self-defence) provides enough legal cover for one state to attack another in the face of an "imminent" threat. But if the threat posed is anything less than imminent, states have an obligation to secure the Security Council's authorisation before they can use force. Asked how the U.S. invasion of Iraq would measure up against this yardstick, a senior U.N. official who worked closely with the panel told The Hindu the mandate given by Mr. Annan was not to look at specific countries and cases, or indeed the past, but to the future.
The problem of inter-state war was one of six baskets of threats the panel studied, the other five being wars within states and the danger of genocide, the problem of infectious diseases, the dangers posed by the possession and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, international terrorism and transnational organised crime. Before detailing its specific recommendations, the report notes that "development" is the first line of defence.
The details of the report, a copy of which was provided to The Hindu ahead of the official release on condition of non-publication, have leaked out so substantially that the U.N. on Wednesday decided to withdraw its embargo.
© Copyright 2000 - 2005 The Hindu
The Hindu
U.N. panel not for change in veto power
By Siddharth Varadarajan
NEW DELHI, DEC. 1. The high-level panel tasked by the United Nations Secretary General, Kofi Annan, to study global security threats and suggest institutional reforms has come up with a number of recommendations aimed at increasing the effectiveness of the world body. Among these are two proposals to expand the number of permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, without diluting or expanding the veto power of the five existing permanent members.
The panel, whose report will be formally unveiled in New York on December 2, is expected eventually to form the basis for a reform of the U.N. system, though many of its proposals are likely to excite debate, disagreement and even consternation around the world.
Among these are its proposals on expansion of the UNSC without veto, its definition of terrorism (as any action which harms civilians or non-combatants regardless of whether the aim is to fight foreign occupation), its recommendations on countering proliferation, which borrow liberally from the agenda unveiled earlier this year by the U.S. President, George W. Bush, and its endorsement of the controversial doctrine of humanitarian intervention.
Six more members
Under the first model for the Security Council's expansion, the panel proposes six more permanent members with two each drawn from Asia and Africa and one each from Europe and the Americas. There would be, in addition, 11 non-permanent members as well, taking the size of the Council to 24. Under the second model, the number of permanent members would be kept at five but there would be a new category of eight semi-permanent members with renewable four-year terms, with 11 non-permanent members making up the balance. No candidates are named anywhere in the report.
"We recommend that under any reform proposal, there should be no expansion of the veto," the panel report says. Though it recognises the veto "has an anachronistic character that is unsuitable for the institution in an increasingly democratic age," the panel members noted they see "no practical way of changing the existing members' veto powers."
The 16-member panel was chaired by Anand Panyarachun of Thailand and had as its members, among others, Satish Nambiar (India), Qian Qichen (China), Yevgeny Primakov (Russia), Nafis Sadiq (Pakistan), Brent Scowcroft (U.S.), Amre Moussa (Egypt) and Robert Badinter (France).
NPT clause
To cope with the danger of increasing proliferation, the panel suggests that all countries sign the Additional Protocol to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) allowing intrusive full-scope inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. It also suggests the "early conclusion on an arrangement ... which would enable the IAEA to act as a guarantor for the supply of fissile material to civilian nuclear users" and that countries in the interim stop building enrichment or reprocessing facilities. Finally, the panel's report says all states should be encouraged to join the U.S.-led Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) for interdicting suspect shipping on the high seas.
On the use of force and the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive war, the panel tries to strike a middle path. It says Article 51 of the U.N. Charter (on self-defence) provides enough legal cover for one state to attack another in the face of an "imminent" threat. But if the threat posed is anything less than imminent, states have an obligation to secure the Security Council's authorisation before they can use force. Asked how the U.S. invasion of Iraq would measure up against this yardstick, a senior U.N. official who worked closely with the panel told The Hindu the mandate given by Mr. Annan was not to look at specific countries and cases, or indeed the past, but to the future.
The problem of inter-state war was one of six baskets of threats the panel studied, the other five being wars within states and the danger of genocide, the problem of infectious diseases, the dangers posed by the possession and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, international terrorism and transnational organised crime. Before detailing its specific recommendations, the report notes that "development" is the first line of defence.
The details of the report, a copy of which was provided to The Hindu ahead of the official release on condition of non-publication, have leaked out so substantially that the U.N. on Wednesday decided to withdraw its embargo.
© Copyright 2000 - 2005 The Hindu
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
