The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

The free fall of the Venezuelan opposition: the dismissal of Guaidó compromises his influence and assets abroad

2023-02-15T10:44:12.322Z


The dissolution of the so-called "interim government" of anti-Chavismo presents collateral damage that deepens the internal crisis of opponents of Maduro


The United States has decided to take possession of the Venezuelan Embassy in Washington once the Venezuelan opposition annulled the existence of the so-called interim presidency, an alternative to that of Nicolás Maduro, which was exercised until last month by Juan Guaidó.

Washington argues that with the liquidation of the executive platform that had been unaware of Chavista legality since 2019, there is no legitimate interlocutor with whom to establish contact as political recognition, and that the attempts of the so-called Asset Protection Commission, appointed by the National Assembly of the year 2015, for replacing the Interim Presidency, are not applicable.

The decision of the United States, which many people in Venezuela took for granted, has taken certain political sectors promoting the current status of the post-interim period by surprise, and has fueled the bitter exchange of claims made by factions of the Venezuelan opposition, taking responsibility for the failure for forcing a transition to democracy in the country.

In particular, fears have increased that the dissolution of the Interim Presidency will precipitate the loss of political spaces and the international assets that the Venezuelan opposition has controlled and administered once the irruption of Juan Guaidó from parliament took place, ignoring the Government of Nicolás Maduro, with the support of the international democratic community.

The end of the interim, an aspiration shared by many anti-Chavistas, now presents its collateral damage.

This concern was expressed with all its letters by the Venezuelan Constitutional Bloc, which brings together several of the most respected jurists in the country, and which tenaciously opposed the legislative decision to dissolve the so-called Interim government.

“The legislative measure not only eliminates the Interim Presidency of the Republic embodied by Deputy Juan Guaidó,” the Constitutional Bloc stated in a statement published in January.

“But also the representation designated by the interim before multilateral organizations, allied governments, transnational Venezuelan companies and judicial instances before jurisdictions abroad.

The constitutional foundation that sustains the democratic transition against the usurping regime is also weakened.

In addition to the diplomatic headquarters and the political lobby, they include the property of Citgo, one of the largest crude oil processors in the United States;

the gold reserves of the Bank of England;

money withheld in Portugal and the position in the Organization of American States.

Some news spokespersons close to the opposition even dare to predict the end of the per diems charged by the opposition deputies of the 2015 parliament. The Colombian petrochemical company Monomeros has already been recovered by the Maduro government.

There are in total, according to sources, 145 cases of asset protection.

Sources close to the dismissed interim government that requested to keep their name confidential have assured that the Asset Protection Commission of the National Assembly was taken by surprise by this US decision to retain the Venezuelan embassy based on the provisions of the Vienna Convention.

Everything seemed ready for the G-3 (Primero Justicia, Acción Democrática and Un Nuevo Tiempo, the majority parties in Parliament in 2015), to appoint Fernando Blasi as the country's new consular representative, replacing Carlos Vecchio.

This version is rejected in Primero Justicia.

The President of the National Assembly in 2015 -which the Opposition claims to be the only legitimate one-, Dinorah Figuera, from Primero Justicia, affirmed that the opposition leadership was not at all taken by surprise by Washington's announcement, that the entire procedure was coordinated, and blamed the outgoing ambassador of the interim government in the United States, Carlos Vecchio, and the ambassador to the OAS, Gustavo Tarre, for having precipitated this outcome by “unilaterally” resigning from their posts.

Figuera's statements produced an immediate and angry response from Vecchio and Tarre.

"In politics you have to be serious and you have to take responsibility for the decisions that are made," Vecchio declared.

“I never gave up my position as ambassador to the United States.

I ask Congresswoman Figuera to review the modification of the Transition Statute that she and her colleagues approved.

In its article 20, all interim charges are eliminated.

The United States has taken temporary possession of that property (the embassy) because it does not recognize the 2015 parliament as a government,” she added.

The political leaders of the G-3 have had some reluctance to address the issue.

“There is no Venezuelan asset subject to US jurisdiction that is going to be lost, unless the United States decides so,” says economist and international consultant Francisco Rodríguez.

“Regardless of who is recognized as the government, no creditor can seize assets from Venezuela unless they have a license.

He applies to cases like Citgo, ”a corporation whose ownership is highly compromised for Venezuela in the courts.

The economist acknowledges that, in the case of gold from the Bank of England, the dissolution of the interim government increases the possibility that the Maduro Executive will win that case and obtain those resources, estimated at around 930 million euros.

Follow all the international information on

Facebook

and

Twitter

, or in

our weekly newsletter

.

Source: elparis

All news articles on 2023-02-15

You may like

Trends 24h

News/Politics 2024-03-28T06:04:53.137Z

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.