How to break the spell of Groundhog Day in Venezuela

For 20 years in Venezuela, history has been repeating itself, although with different plots.

The outcome is the same: a Government that cannot put an end to the opposition, even though it tries with almost all its might, and an opposition that fails to come to power, even though it uses almost any resource.

This picture became more dramatic in the last decade of Maduro control.

Analyst Dimitris Pantoulas called it a catastrophic draw.

Others, more in tune with pop analysis, named it Groundhog Day, inspired by a film in which the protagonist is trapped in a time loop that leads him to repeat the same day over and over again.

Any conflict becomes complicated when layers are added.

The Venezuelan case is faced with several dilemmas, the synthesis of which could be why an authoritarian government is going to leave power if the benefits it obtains, by remaining, are greater than the losses caused by constant violations of the rules of democracy. .

The 2024 election year began for the South American country with typical moves by the Government to curb discontent among its ranks, while applying the harshest hand it can use, at this time, against traditional opponents.

In recent weeks, the Maduro Government revealed five alleged assassination conspiracies that include military personnel, persecuted those who organized the opposition primary elections, released about thirty political prisoners and deprived another group of freedom.

The icing on the cake of this period was put on January 26 when the judges of the Supreme Court of Justice admitted most of the protections requested by politicians who were disqualified, but ratified, without trial or right to defense, the penalty against candidate María Corina Machado and former candidate Henrique Capriles Radonski.

The leadership's tactics are not surprising because they are part of its toolbox: take advantage of the gaps in the opposition sectors, criminalize dissidence, buy time, lobby

internationally

and move towards non-competitive, non-free elections, with the conviction of that the worst that can happen is to return to the period of international sanctions.

Therefore, the questions are directed more towards the opposition.

What does the leadership need to do to not only counteract the actions of an authoritarian government, but also take advantage of the few windows that still remain?

How to prevent the country from moving towards a scenario similar to that of Nicaragua?

“It is clear that the objective of Maduro and his coalition is to preserve power at the lowest possible political and economic cost,” comments Stefania Vitale, a student of authoritarian systems.

She maintains that the results of the opposition primary elections increased the autocrat's dilemmas, but the need to articulate opposition factors has also become evident.

On my most recent trip to the country I once again perceived a great desire for change.

All the surveys reflect it.

I also noticed another aspect which is hope.

And the context is one of great frustration, not only against the government but also against some traditional opposition factors.

According to different analysts, Machado's figure cannot be easily dispatched even if he is disabled.

However, the possibility that the fight to return to democracy may be personalized divides several in the opposition.

Added to this is that some politicians are trying to decipher the results of October 22, 2023 when Machado took 92% of the votes.

Carmen Beatriz Fernández, from the University of Navarra, maintains that the dilemma regarding Machado is not such, since, in her opinion, she is not Maduro's main enemy, but rather the hope that was awakened in the primary process.

An “emotional engine” that the candidate and the internal elections rescued last year and that forces the opposition leadership to organize and respect Machado's ancestry.

For Vitale, the formal coordination of the opposition is essential, with clear rules that allow decisions to be made transparently and conflicts to be resolved within an institutional framework.

For her part, Maria Fernanda Madriz, an academic at the Communication Research Institute (Ininco UCV), considers that the situation shows the need to enable a political project for all those who seek the democratization of the country.

“People don't make historical changes;

The most lasting historical changes are made around projects and sectors and blocks within societies,” she says.

From my perspective, the window of opportunity to achieve democratic change in the country is still open.

However, I get the impression that the leaders continue to read Venezuela through the lenses of the past.

That includes the government, which by remaining in power for so long lost its compass;

to some members of the opposition leadership and other sectors who, instead of raising the costs of maintaining the system, believe that to achieve some quotas it is better to get used to living with a gun to your temple.

The catastrophic spell or tie can be broken with various potions.

None is a secret.

That's why it might be wise to look at the nuances.

Different negotiation experts who have approached the Venezuelan conflict always draw attention to the fact that despite the terrible tensions and painful episodes of political violence, the country has not reached a civil war.

It is a self-limit, which, for different reasons, has prevailed.

That is a distinctive characteristic of other processes.

On the other hand, although I count myself among those who have mixed thoughts about the negotiating table between the government and the Unitary Platform, I appreciate the fact that both sides, at least discursively, have expressed their willingness to respect the Barbados agreements.

The model to resolve the conflict has already been drawn in the pact of electoral guarantees signed last October.

The fact of sharing the same misfortune can offer Machado and Capriles, who are currently like oil and water, the opportunity to lead a strategy that allows progress in a scenario of change in the country.

Maybe get more inspiration from Guatemala and stop seeing Nicaragua so much.

Capriles has been one of the most coherent politicians in the country.

At this moment he does not have popular support, but he has influence in different national and international spaces.

I would invite the ruling force to remember what Hugo Chávez taught them when facing an electoral campaign: with all the advantage with which he used to start, he always considered the scenario of losing.

Given that, according to witnesses at different strategic meetings, he said: if we lose, we surrender and go to the governorships and in a short time we will be back.

The Maduro leadership does not contemplate that possibility, although all the numbers indicate that if the elections were held tomorrow they would be defeated, even by a possible unnamed candidate, a replacement for Machado.

According to data from the firm Poder y Economía, this hypothetical replacement already starts with 54% support, as long as it receives the endorsement of the opposition leader, explains political scientist Ricardo Ríos.

The electoral route is complex, but so far it is the only desirable route.

How to navigate it and take advantage of the need for change and the resurgence of hope is not only the task of Machado, who on January 29 reiterated that he continues on the path of votes.

Nor is it the duty of an opposition factor, but of the democrats inside and outside the country.

But it's not enough to say it, what you have to do is do it.

Follow all the information from El PAÍS América on

Facebook

and

X

, or in our

weekly newsletter

.

Subscribe to continue reading

Read without limits

Keep reading

I am already a subscriber

_