Reason over might

2005-06-09T21:25:00.000+02:00

Locked up, Bitburg, 2005.

Cuba's decline: By the numbers

2005-06-09T20:46:00.000+02:00

The disastrous "progress" that Cuba has experienced over the past 40-50 years, during its "pretty revolution", can be quantified. The following figures are attributed to UN, FAO, and UNESCO sources and tell it all. A catastrophic decline in living standards, productivity, healthcare, and income -- all attributable directly to the Great Leader, F. Castro himself, beloved icon of the dreaming revolutionary left (see table below).

Interestingly, there has been no tradeoff for Cubans: they have not received better living conditions in exchange for less freedom or greater freedom in exchange for worse living conditions. Instead, they have received the worst of both worlds. They suffer their ignominious, imposed poverty in conditions of oppression, in a police state that negates civil liberties, where freedom of expression and political activity are remote dreams, where an arbitrary legal system means that anything you do or say can be held against you at the whim of the dictator and his minions.

A rather obvious question following from the information is: How daft would you have to be to emulate such an economic/political model? Very daft indeed, I should say. It is simply incomprehensible to me that a leader could choose the worst role model instead of the best as an example for his country to follow. Unless, of course, that leader does not have the best interests of his fellow citizens at heart at all, but rather follows personal goals of his own, such as power, money, and recognition from revolutionary has-beens in Cuba and some European circles. I am still not decided on whether Venezuela's Chávez is malevolent or merely deluded, or perhaps a dangerous mixture of both. But about one thing there can be no doubt: He is putting Venezuela on a seriously wrong track and needs to be stopped.

Here are the figures that describe Cuba's decline:

Population in million inhabitants
1959: 6
2004: 12

Per capita income, $ per year
1959: 1200
2004: 70

Telephones per 100 inhabitants
1959: 15
2004: 3,5

Electricity consumption per capita, watts
1959: 450
2004: 75

Consumption of calories, calories per inhabitant and day
1959: 2800
2004: 1100

Meat consumption, pounds per inhabitant and year
1959: 76
2004: 12

Consumption of eggs, units per inhabitant and year
1959: 47
2004: 13

Consumption of chickens, pounds per inhabitant and year
1959: 12
2004: 5

Number of cars per 1000 inhabitants
1959: 38
2004: 10

1 city bus per ... inhabitants
1959: 300
2004: 25000

1 intercity bus per ... inhabitants
1959: 2000
2004: 35000

Number of televisions per 1000 inhabitants
1959: 66
2004: 15

Number of TV stations
1959: 7 (2 in colour)
2004: 2

1 medical doctor per ... inhabitants
1959: 950
2004: 750

1 dentist per ... inhabitants
1959: 2100
2004: 1850

Head of cattle, million
1959: 6
2004: 1,8

Rate of inflation, percent per year
1959: 1,8
2004: 25

Number of newspapers
1959: 18
2004: 2 (no dailies)

Number of tourists per year
1959: 750.000
2004: 1.200.000

Sugar harvest, million tons
1959: 7
2004: 1,8

2005-05-26T01:31:00.000+02:00

Sunset, Germany, May 2005.

When will the EU wake up?

2005-05-26T00:16:00.000+02:00

As is his wont, Castro did not play nice with EU parliamentarians who wanted to see grassroots democracy in action in Cuba. Several delegates were expelled from the ageing dictator's property. Surprisingly, the EU appeared not to have expected this to happen and is acting unhappy. I wonder for how long their ire will last?

By the by: what is even more interesting is that the Cuban's dissidents were able to hold their meeting at all. According to Castro's behaviour patterns in the past, this means that another crackdown is forthcoming. Stay tuned.

Below: Two reports by the Spiegel, taken from here and here, and translated.

Expelled parliamentarian attacks EU

CDU member of parliament Arnold Vaatz has criticised the policies of the European Union towards Cuba after being expelled from the island nation. The EU has made itself an "accomplice" of Castro's regime, he said.

The Cuban government was now exploiting the manoeuvring space that politicians such as Spanish prime minister José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero and others had opened up by lifting diplomatic sanctions, Vaatz told the "Leipziger Volkszeitung". "In this way, the EU has made itself an accomplice of the regime", the CDU politician said.

Vaatz, deputy chairman of the CDU parliamentary group in the Bundestag, wanted to meet with representatives of the Cuban opposition. He was evicted from the country in Havana on Thursday, brought to the airport and put on a plane to Madrid. The [German] federal government subsequently cited the Cuban ambassador in Berlin for talks at the foreign ministry.

Vaatz said he wanted to break the contact ban with Cuban dissidents. "And that was accomplished", he emphasised. In the "Sächsische Zeitung", which is published in Dresden, he called on the EU to start inviting Cuban dissidents to events at the European embassies in Havana again.

Vaatz said he was reminded of the German Democratic Republic [former communist East Germany] while in Cuba. He was prevented from making telephone calls and was unable to make contact with the German embassy. Afterwards, he was held for five hours with the Czech delegate Karel Schwarzenberg in a small bus in an underground parking lot and then put on a plane to Madrid.

Vaatz commented that there was a wide-spread "Cuba romanticism" in Europe. This was part of a virtual Cuba that the government of that country was trying to present to the global public. "What's really terrible about this is that parts of the European public are willing to fall for this virtual Cuba. Just like they were prepared to fall for the virtual socialism in the GDR", Vaatz told the "Sächsische Zeitung".

EU condemns expelling of German parliamentarian
By Carsten Volkery

Today, the biggest congress of the Cuban opposition ever held began in Havana. CDU member of parliament Arnold Vaatz wanted to participate, but was expelled -- just like several other politicians. The head of the EU's representation in Havana told SPIEGEL ONLINE that the éclat would have diplomatic consequences.

Vaatz and a Czech senator, Prince Karel Schwarzenberg, were invited for dinner yesterday at the Czech residence in Havana. But the diplomats who were attending the event waited in vain. "We had no idea where they were", Sven Kühn von Burgsdorff, head of the EU representation in Havana, told SPIEGEL ONLINE.

Calls of the diplomats to the Cuban government were in vain. Only investigations made with the airlines Iberia and Air France brought certainty: Vaatz and Schwarzenberg had been expelled. The Cuban police had fetched them at their hotels and brought them straight to the airport.

"At 5:45 p.m., a policeman in uniform and a plainclothes policeman entered my hotel room together with a hotel employee who translated from Spanish into English. The policemen told me that it was a passport control", Vaatz told the Deutsche Presse-Agentur (dpa). His passport and his airline ticket were taken from him. His requests to speak to the German ambassador received no response. Instead, he was driven to the airport and put on the plane to Madrid.

Expelled "in terms of Cuban law"

The crime of the two politicians: they were on the island with tourist visas and wanted to visit a congress of civil rights activists that began today. The meeting, which 500 participants were expected to attend, was the first large meeting of the Cuban opposition. It was being held in the garden of a civil rights activist where additional toilets had already been put up. Such meetings are illegal, as is taking part in them.

"Vaatz and Schwarzenberg were expelled in terms of the Cuban legal reality", Kühn von Burgsdorff explained. Four years ago, a Czech delegate was even imprisoned for three months after he had travelled to Cuba on a tourist visa and met with independent journalists.

Nonetheless, the eviction was of course "not legitimate", said Kühn von Burgsdorff. "This will definitely not make the dialogue with the EU any easier." A speaker of the EU Commission in Brussels called the eviction unacceptable. The EU will revise its policy towards Cuba in June. New sanctions against the island are a possibility.

There had recently been a rapprochement between the EU and Cuba at the initiative of Spain after the so-called "Cocktail Wars" had been resolved: several EU states, among them Germany, declined to invite dissidents to the New Year's reception at their embassies in the future. Cuba subsequently announced it was resuming diplomatic relationships, which had previously been put on ice.

"Typical behaviour of a totalitarian state"

Just before his plane departed, Schwarzenberg was able to tell an AP reporter via cellphone that "This is the typical behaviour of a totalitarian state". Vaatz, former GDR civil rights activist, spoke of a "violation of international law". He had been in Cuba since Whitmonday and had already met several dissidents, in my capacity as a "private individual", as Vaatz emphasised.

German foreign minister Joschka Fischer condemned the eviction. It was a "legitimate concern" of a German domestic politician to speak to the entire political spectrum in Cuba. This had been conveyed to the Cuban ambassador, who was cited to the Foreign Ministry.

The congress, which is taking place in a suburb of Havana, is being organised by the Cuban civil rights activists Martha Beatríz Roque, René Gómez, and Félix Bonne. Roque was one of 75 dissidents who were arrested in 2003. This occurrence had led to the freezing of relationships between Cuba and the EU. Roque was released on bail. If arrested again, she faces 20 years in prison.

Castro keeps Havel and Gorbachev at arm's length

From the start, Castro's government had prevented foreign observers from travelling to the event. According to the EU representation in Havana, it denied 43 French delegates the corresponding visas. Similarly, the Cuban government declined issuing visas to two dozen EU members of parliament. The most prominent visa denials went to former Czech civil rights activist and president Vaclav Havel and the former Soviet state president Michail Gorbachev. On Tuesday, two Polish delegates had already been expelled.

The CDU/CSU parliamentary group's spokesperson on foreign affairs, Friedbert Pflüger, sharply condemned the eviction of the policitians and demanded a more critical attitude of the [German] federal government concerning the Castro regime. "Once again, it has been shown that silence and trying to curry favour do not work", Pflüger told the "Welt" newspaper.

The SPD parliamentary group's spokesperson on Latin America, Lothar Mark, deplored the incident "fundamentally" in speaking to SPIEGEL ONLINE, but did not want to state a position as long as the report of the German ambassador in Havan was not available.

Attachés from several European embassies will participate in the congress. The EU representation is also represented with two observers.

The meeting is splitting the Cuban dissident scene. Although it will probably be the largest opposition meeting ever to be held under Castro, several of the most famous names will be staying away, among them Oswaldo Paya, speaker of the "Christian Liberation Movement". The event was a "huge fraud" because it was being supported by radical Cuban exiles from Florida and would therefore damage the reputation of the Cuban protest movement, Paya wrote in a press release.

Paya and Roque have been linked through personal dislike for a long time. Roque had sabotaged Paya's two big civil rights initiatives, the Varela Project and the National Dialogue.

Benedict XVI and Venezuela

2005-04-22T23:21:00.001+02:00

As a boy and teenager, Josef Ratzinger experienced National Socialism in Germany at first hand. Though he participated, albeit unwillingly, in the movement's youth organization, few people nowadays (with the apparent exception of some UK tabloids) would argue that he would defend Nazism or similar fascist ideologies. Quite the contrary, in fact: Venezuelan journalist Nelson Bocaranda describes the following events that seem to indicate that the new pope, like his predecessor, clearly sees totalitarian ideologies for what they are.

THE VATICAN: Five days before the conclave and the secret vote. Various cardinals and bishops were conversing in the Santa Marta residence. A German cardinal -- there were six from this country -- dropped a tough statement into the conversation to emphasise a point that was being discussed: "fascism, nazism, communism, chavism... all of this comes from the same source and uses the same tactics". He surprised everyone with his inclusion of the Venezuelan political movement, and two of the participants asked what it was. He explained it to them. Today this cardinal is more important than he was at that time...

It is good to know that the new pope is aware of what is going on in Venezuela. I hope to see him take a stand against the Miraflores petrocrat; while that wouldn't convince Chávez to do the honorable thing and resign, it would mean that an important and authoritative voice would be added to the ever-increasing international chorus clamouring for change in Venezuela. For Venezuelans, it might help give them the courage to confront their inept and malevolent government and replace it by something better.

2005-04-22T23:21:00.000+02:00

Saviour at Tibidabo, Barcelona, April 2005.

Stability vs. change: Benedict XVI's task

2005-04-20T22:44:00.000+02:00

On Tuesday, 115 old men elected one from their midst to be the leader of the world's biggest religion. The new pope will lead an amazing organisation: it is not only the world's largest, with over a billion members worldwide, but also its oldest, with an uninterrupted history dating back almost 2,000 years. Growing to such a large size and surviving for such a long time are remarkable feats. How was they accomplished?

In essence, what the catholic church has managed to do is strike the right balance between flexibility and rigidity. It has adapted -- not always smoothly, of course -- to changing environmental pressures while maintaining an ideological and cultural core that has changed only very slightly over the millenia. Benedict XVI's task will be to continue maintaining the balance as best he can.

What are the main goals of the catholic church as an organisation? Contrary to what some critics may believe, maximising profits is not one of them. Instead, the church aims to maximise its membership without essentially diluting or changing its core values. In some areas of the world -- notably Europe, and to a lesser degree the USA -- there's a conflict between the two main goals. If the church refuses to modify its position on issues such as lay participation, women's rights, and sexual self-determination, it will unavoidably lose even more members. If it adapts in response to demands from members in the first world countries, it runs the risk of losing authority and identity -- which could lead to a further loss of membership.

Cardinal Ratzinger's position in this goal conflict has always been clear: he prefers a smaller, purer church to a more inclusive, but diluted one. Though I do not agree with many of the church's positions, I believe this to be a strategically sound decision. The church's greatest asset is its authority (and not its real estate, art collection, antiquities, company investments or stocks of precious metals and gemstones). This is the one asset which it must protect above all others -- even at the risk of alienating some members. And the way to protect its position of authority is to change very little, if at all; and never overtly in response to outside pressures, but only in accordance with its history and the evolving consensus of its leaders.

2005-03-31T01:09:00.000+02:00

Wondering, Germany, February 2005.

Mediocrity as government policy

2005-03-30T23:49:00.000+02:00

Miguel posted an article today on yesterday's appearance by Venezuela's two Ministers of Education (yes, they have two: one for normal and one for higher education) before the Venezuelan legislature, where they defended their proposals for reforms of the education system. The proposals have garnered sharp criticism from many sectors of Venezuelan society. One of the ministers (A. Istúriz) elaborated on a pet peeve: apparently, he believes that Venezuela has produced too many "meritocrats" in the past.

Obviously, this situation cannot be permitted to continue, so he's proposing to modify the educational system so as to stop producing them. He allegedly considers "meritocrats" to be "stateless", i.e. insufficiently loyal to Chávez's ravenous revolution; what Venezuela's government apparently needs are larger numbers of patriotic, mediocre yes-men (and yes-women, of course) who won't cause any trouble through oligarchic activities such as thinking for themselves and demanding accountability from their leaders, for instance.

Permit me some idle speculation: I presume that when Minister Istúriz submits to surgery, he chooses a meritocratic surgeon who knows what he's doing rather than a Nick Riviera without qualifications. I assume that when his car needs fixing, he seeks the help of a mechanic who has proved his mettle rather than a mediocre junkyard meddler. I assume that when he needs someone to upgrade his computer, he chooses an experienced and reliable technician rather than an unskilled party member from the boondocks.

So if he -- as I assume, though of course I have no direct proof -- chooses quality over mediocrity for issues affecting his own life, then why would he be promoting mediocrity over quality for issues affecting his country?

[ROTFL of the week: Venezuela's Attorney General, Isaias Rodriguez, has declared that the country's recent buying spree for figher aircraft, assault rifles, warships, and attack helicopters is a "message of peace". I wonder what they would have bought if they were preparing for war?]

2005-03-28T19:43:00.000+02:00

Autumn ivy, Germany, 2004.

Measurement as a tool

2005-03-28T19:02:00.000+02:00

An article on Unionradio's website caught my eye today. Though it was nothing exceptional in itself -- simply the edited opinions of a university professor specialising in public policy who believes that the Venezuelan government's social missions are inefficient -- it struck a chord.

A few years ago, a U.S. professor held a lecture at my university. He used one phrase that has stuck in my memory ever since: "If you can measure it, you can improve it." This, too, sounds like nothing special, but describes an amazingly powerful tool in almost all areas of social interaction. In the area of public administration, institutions that measure their own performance soon start improving it. It appears to be almost inevitable. As soon as individuals can see how they're doing, they try to do better (unless there are more powerful counter-incentives, of course).

Obviously, this does not just work in companies or public organizations. It also works on the level of governments. That is what makes the democratic system so successful when it is allowed to work properly: elections can be seen as a measurement instrument that gauges an government's performance in terms of how satisfied voters are. The better a government performs and the more citizens are satisfied as a consequence, the more votes it receives -- and the greater is the likelihood that it will be allowed to continue governing.

This is why tampering with the election mechanism, as was blatantly done before last year's recall referendum in Venezuela, is more than simply a disenfranchisement of voters (or, at the very least, a dilution of their votes): it is practically a guarantee for inefficiency in government. A government that is not accountable to its voters, that is as intransparent as black ink in an inkwell, that spins information and distorts facts on a permanent basis, has no incentive to perform efficiently. Corruption and squandering of resources on an immense scale are sure to follow.

This is interesting because an intransparent government provides little concrete data for factually establishing that resources are being wasted. But in spite of this, the inefficiency cannot be hidden: the intransparency itself is circumstantial, but no less incontestable proof. As shown in the article below, a lack of measurement can lead not only to resources being wasted, but even to lives being lost as resources are invested in the wrong areas.

Questioning the efficiency of the government’s social “Missions”

Marino González, an expert in public policy and professor at Simon Bolívar University, believes that the results of the government’s “Mission” programmes do not fulfil expectations because they follow political aims rather than [social] objectives such as helping citizens solve their problems.

“We are confusing measures with goals. The strategy of the Missions has much more to do with elements of an ideological or political nature than with services directed towards the communities. Barrio Adentro, for instance, has not been providing any information on its activities since January 2004. The data they do have only indicates the number of persons attended to, but does not provide any information on the types of problems solved”, said González.

One instance of the inefficiency of the policies the government is applying in the area of health, according to González, are the recent mortality rates as presented by the Ministry of Health.

“In 2003, the infant mortality rate increased in two consecutive years from 18.2 to 18.5, which is primarily a consequence of the increase of easily preventable illnesses such as lung disease, the incidence of which increased by 40 percent, and digestive disorders such as diarrhea, which increased by more than 30 percent,” he explained.

González believes that the mortality rates “confirm that in Venezuela, malnutrition is a public health problem that should be a focus of public policy, and in terms of mother-child care, the state does not dispose of any adequate services for avoiding the deaths.”

“President Chávez’s government is working towards building and extending an immense, inefficient state structure that consumes many resources and that is completely removed from the real problems of the citizens; military, political, and strategic objectives take precedence over what is happening to citizens on the street”, added the public policy expert.

He believes that it is because of this strategy that the government “cannot hide a large number of failures in companies, extending from electricity generation to any other type of production”.

In González’s opinion, Venezuelans should be worried about the perspectives offered by a country with large income on the one hand, but disproportionate expenses on the other hand. These resources, which should be directed towards areas such as health, education, social security – which is what gives us quality of life – are not being controlled or monitored.

2005-03-15T22:35:00.000+01:00

Fireworks in Caracas, December 2004.

History repeating?

2005-03-15T21:37:00.000+01:00

I'm back after a somewhat prolonged absence -- apologies to my readers! As so often happens, I was busy with events in my... other? real? physical? wetware? life. But things seem to have quietened down a bit now on that front, and I'm hoping to post more regularly in the future.

An interesting observation about the current developments in Venezuela is how often one has the impression that a low point has been reached, and that things should now begin to improve -- only to be shown time and time again how the Chávez regime manages to outdo itself once again, plumbing new depths every few months.

Events this past week have continued that trend. Two young soldiers were burnt while being held in a military confinement cell. They died of their injuries yesterday, after their conditions had reportedly started improving. It is hard to believe that this was an accident. There are presumably not that many flammable substances in a prison cell (the mattresses?), nor that many ways of lighting them (or are Venezuelan military prisoners issued with matches and petrol?). And incidents of this type are, as far as I know, not common in other parts of the world.

The agony of being caught with a fire in a confined space, with no way to escape, must be indescribable. What makes it even more terrifying, not to mention suspicious, is that this was not the first time that something like this happened. Almost exactly a year ago, on 30 March 2004, a similar incident occurred at Fuerte Mara, a military base in Zulia state. Eight soldiers, who had reportedly signed in favour of the referendum to revoke president Chávez and who were being held in a confinement cell, got burned. Two of the soldiers died, one after his condition had already been improving and he had stated to the media that the fire had originated outside the holding cell.

After the first fire, the authorities promised a complete investigation, the results of which were inconclusive, except that an army general (General Usón) was condemned to five and a half years in prison for daring to state on TV his belief that the fire could have been caused by flamethrowers. Needless to say, the authorities have again promised a complete and full investigation into the more recent burning. Odds are that they will again present no concrete findings, but will use the investigation to target anyone who dares disagree with them.

Finally, even if we assume that both of the burning incidents were accidental, would it then not behoove the government authorities to undertake steps that would prevent such a thing happening again? Of course it would. Like so many other examples, these events show that the Venezuelan government is characterised above all by an intransparent mix of criminal negligence and just plain criminality.

2005-03-01T18:33:00.000+01:00

Church in Maracaibo, Venezuela, January 2005.

Chávez and the church

2005-03-01T18:08:00.000+01:00

A German-language, catholic newspaper, Die Tagespost, has published an article on President Chávez's Venezuela and the president's relationship with the catholic church. This is a relationship increasingly fraught with difficulty, as the article shows. There is a significant potential for conflict here because the catholic church still exerts a strong influence in Venezuela, like in most Latin American countries (even though secularisation is increasing, as is the influence of the so-called evangelical churches).

Open hatred against anything spiritual
In Venezuela, a severe conflict between the church and the state is brewing – the process of cubanisation under Hugo Chávez continues
By Jürgen Liminski

As the conversation moves to the topic of politics, the bishop takes his cellular phone out of his pocket, turns it off and removes the battery. Now he can be sure that he can’t be overheard. Since the meetings between Venezuela’s president Hugo Chávez and the Cuban dictator Fidel Castro over the past few years, he says he can sense the government in Caracas toughening its stance vis-à-vis the church. During the past year, the government has singled out the bishops for attacks and has been trying to incite the people against the shepherds. In public speeches, Chávez reviles the church for being corrupt and the bishops for being “pigs”, according to the cleric, and is trying to set up his own national church. He has not managed to do so yet because the people have no faith in such initiatives. But in individual cases, he has managed to “buy” some priests. Overall, there’s a climate of intimidation. Some bishops can’t travel on their own anymore, and certainly not at night.

Little is known about all this in Rome, and nothing in Europe. Here, two main aspects are known of Venezuela: It has a lot of oil and good rum. And that is enough for most politicians involved in foreign affairs. As long as elections are held some way or another, the country imports lots of goods from Europe, pays its debts and the situation appears stable overall, then only the barrel and the bottle remain in the short-term memory. A disastrous mistake. A crisis is brewing in Venezuela that will probably have negative effects on European markets as well at some point in time.

The new, old president Hugo Chávez has a masterplan. He emulates his idol, Fidel Castro, and wants to turn the country into a communist dictatorship extending across the entire region, i.e. including Colombia, Peru, and Bolivia, in the name of liberation – in Latin America, this is always carried out in the name of the historical hero of independence, Simón Bolívar. The plan is to extend his vision across the entire subcontinent via the new leftist governments in Brazil and Argentina. That may seem presumptuous. But Chávez has money, lots of money. In the past year alone, Venezuela exported oil worth 24 billion dollars to North America; daily production is equivalent to three million barrels – almost as much as Saudi Arabia’s. The state-owned oil company Citgo disposes over 14,000 petrol stations in the United States and is the second-biggest supplier there. This also explains in part Washington’s patience with the ruler in Venezuela, who buys his people and is giving an international rebirth to socialism.

Revolution according to the “proven” Cuban pattern

The pattern for the “Bolivarian Revolution” is also well-known. Chávez knows it from his brother, who gave him extra lessons in Marxism and is now the ambassador in Cuba. First, you ensure the population’s basic needs are met – food, health, education – then you restrict the liberties and finally you export the revolution from the basis of a solid dictatorship. This is how it’s happening: Chávez is buying his people with interest-free credits for cars, furniture, consumer goods. A taxi driver, for instance, is satisfied with the Chávez government. It has financed his car. The street sweeper is also satisfied: he is picked up in the morning, given a uniform, taken to his place of work and brought back home in the evening. He gets eighty dollars a month, enough to live on, because electricity and water are free of charge and he has food to eat during the day. The fact that he and many other Venezuelans are not engaged in any investment activities and that the economy is dependent on oil revenues, i.e. that the country is hardly producing, but instead only consuming and thereby not creating any wealth, is not apparent to him. But he does see that Chávez has removed the old, corrupt clique from the leadership of the nation. The fact that Chávez has installed himself with a different clique does not bother him.

Cuban experts, above all medical personnel, distribute medicines in first-aid stations and are now also beginning to indoctrinate people engaged in education; more than a thousand Venezuelan teachers have already completed courses in Cuba. The next step could be strangling or confiscating the catholic schools. TV and radio are mostly synchronized with the regime. The only opposition comes from parts of the press and the catholic church. Its credibility is a thorn in the eye of the regime. Leading bishops are electronically bugged and shadowed. Anonymous threats and open insults are no longer a rarity either. Officials stoke open hatred against anything spiritual. Up to now, only the Adenauer Foundation and the international aid organization “Kirche in Not” (Church in Need) have reacted to the Cubanisation and stealthily increasing dictatorship in Venezuela. The foreign policy establishment in Brussels, Berlin, Rome, Paris, and London, on the other hand, is sleeping the sleep of the just. It is like at the times of the “Speckpater” (Bacon Priest): There’s a church in need and “Church in Need” sees it and goes there.

A dangerous mix of oil, drugs, and terrorism

The revolution is being exported via the existing guerilla infrastructure in Colombia. When the Colombian government, which is supported by the United States in its war on terrorists and the drug mafia, recently had a guerilla leader kidnapped in Venezuela, the result was a diplomatic crisis. It became known that Venezuela serves as a safe haven for narco-terrorists, from where they plan and execute operations. Washington is restraining itself – up to now. But the connection between petrodollars, drugs, terror, and ideology has attracted its attention. It contains a potentially explosive effect on the oil markets, and on the oil price. This makes caution a necessity. But looking away is not a solution. And least of all an appeasement policy such as that practiced by Spain regarding Cuba.

Europe, and Germany especially, holds great prestige in Latin America. This should be thrown in the balance to contain Chávez, the revolutionary -- before it’s too late and the laments about the oil price and the rebirth of socialism from this corner of the world again drown out everything else.

2005-02-17T21:17:00.000+01:00

Conspiratorial cafe scene, Barcelona (Spain), August 2002.

Satire in Cuba

2005-02-17T20:41:00.000+01:00

I've just been sent a report published in Spanish on BBC Mundo about an (illegal) DVD making the rounds in Cuba; it parodies the Cuban situation and gives its oppressed inhabitants something to laugh about. Freedom to express one's opinion is a great thing, and I hope the Cubans get more of it in the future. Satire as used in the clip is a highly effective tool to highlight the absurdity of a situation, though it is inevitably tinged with bitterness.

Secret video causes stir in Cuba
by Fernando Ravsberg -- BBC Mundo, Havana

A video clip, "Monte Rouge", is secretly making the rounds on the island, with the satirical script by Eduardo del Llano and the acting by Luis Alberto García, Néstor Jiménez and del Llano himself provoking laughter in Cubans.

"Good day, my name is Rodríguez, this is my colleague Segura, we've come to install the microphones." This is the sentence two officials of State Security use to introduce themselves after knocking on the door of citizen Nicanor O'Donell.

For 15 minutes, Nicanor tries to understand the new policy, in terms of which he is asked to continue criticising the government, but, from now on, preferably within the room in which the microphones are being installed.

All of this is seasoned with many elements of everyday Cuban life, from the gasoline that Nicanor steals at work to the offer by one of the Security agents to sell him illegal equipment.

"Our mission is to install some microphones in your house in order to overhear your anti-government comments directly", explains one of the two agents to the astonished citizen, Nicanor O'Donell.

Nicanor progresses from surprise to indignation, stating that now "they no longer even try to hide it", to which one of the agent responds that "customers are impossible to understand, before this they complained because we didn't show our faces".

Finally, Nicanor gives in to the menacing stares and lets them enter, offering them a typical Cuban coffee and working together with the two agents to identify the best location for the microphones in his house.

One of the officials asks him directly: "Where do you usually criticise the government, in which part of the house?" To which Nicanor responds that "in every part, here, in the room, in the kitchen, in the kitchen!"

The agents tell Nicanor that he was chosen to have microphones installed because his criticism is "really insightful", and furthermore because his house is nearby and they had no car available.

They explain to him that he should be happy: "You live alone and the State has assigned two microphones for your needs", says Rodríguez and adds that there are families with ten people where not even a single microphone has been installed so far.

When they ask him to do a soundcheck, the State Security official suggests that he say "something subversive to warm up with", and citizen O'Donell shouts: "I'd really love to have a satellite dish".

At the end of the clip, one of the agents offers to sell him one of the satellite dishes, which are prohibited in Cuba, "but this has to remain between you and me because this guy is a bit square", he says, referring to the other policeman.

The video clip is being passed around Cuba on DVD and is viewed on personal computers, most of which are also illegal as their sale to Cubans is prohibited.

Naturally, nobody who has seen the clip or passed it on to others wants their name to be mentioned, but in general all of the opinions gathered by the BBC were positive, regarding both the script and the realisation.

"I don't know how they dared to do something like this, but it's great, it's an excellent satire", said a manager and added that "I've seen it lots of times and every time I have to laugh more and see new details".

"No doubt about it, it recreates our reality with a fantastic ironic humour", a university student told the BBC.

"Now we'll have to see what happens to the people who made it and who acted in the clip", she added.

2005-02-12T10:39:00.000+01:00

Mugabe and Chávez on friendly terms in Venezuela, 2004.

Zimbabweans in exile start new newspaper

2005-02-12T00:07:00.000+01:00

I've just read on a blog linked to the UK Guardian newspaper that Zimbabweans living in exile have started a new newspaper to spread the news they've been prohibited from distributing in their own country. Mazel tov on their initiative -- you go, guys! Shine the light of publicity in all the darkest corners!

A voice for the voiceless

The first issue of a new newspaper compiled by Zimbabwean journalists in exile hit the streets today. The Zimbabwean is compiled by more than 50 refugees who have given their services free of charge to get the venture started. It is edited by Wilf Mbanga, the founder of the publishers of The Daily News, which was closed down by Robert Mugabe's regime in 2003. The weekly tabloid, which will be printed in Britain and South Africa, also has a website, although this is still very much in its infancy and will not be fully up and running until mid-March.

The paper's stated intention is to give a voice to the three million Zimbabweans - some 25% of the country's population - living in exile. An estimated one million live in Britain and two million in southern Africa, mainly in Botswana and South Africa.

On its website, The Zimbabwean promises to be "a newspaper dedicated to freedom of expression and access to information for all the peoples of Zimbabwe, founded on the sacred principles of journalism - fairness and honesty", and aims to "play a role in opposing everything offensive to basic human decency and hostile to peace, in order that Zimbabwe may return to the path of wisdom and sanity, and become once again an honourable nation, governed by honourable people with due respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law".

2005-02-10T13:40:00.000+01:00

Lake Maracaibo containment wall, December 2004.

Chávez with China and the Mullahs

2005-02-10T13:24:00.000+01:00

Leading German news magazine Der Spiegel (No. 6/2005) ran a short article on Chávez's plans for his oil exports. As is so often the case, Chávez has set the cat among the pigeons with his intentions. I wonder whether he will stay in power long enough to see his plans come to fruition; I suspect he won't. (Keeping in mind that in many other areas, notably generating wealth and increasing civil liberties, his grandiose announcements have come to nought -- not even after six years of concentrating power in his own hands.)

Oil for China's Refineries

Leftist populist President Hugo Chávez wants to reduce his dependency on oil experts to the USA with the help of the mullah regime in Teheran. Iranian experts are to assist sales staff of Venezuelas state oil company, PDVSA, in opening up new markets in Asia -- currently, far more than half of all deliveries goes to the United States. Chávez main focus lies on increasing the exports to China. Last week, he sealed an agreement with Beijing that will allow the People's Republic to develop gas and oil reserves in Venezuela. For the moment, the plan to increase the exports is being scuppered by technical problems: Venezuelan oil is very heavy, and China does not dispose of the necessary refineries. Furthermore, Venezuela has no access to the Pacific. Caracas is therefore negotiating with Panama and Colombia about building pipelines to their maritime ports -- thereby greatly irritating Washington. U.S. oil companies that have invested in Venezuela are worried that the "Chávez effect" could affect their sales. Caracas has already announced its intention to stop its exports to the USA should Washington interfere in the "internal affairs" of Venezuela because of the oil trade. Three years ago, the USA had already approved of an attempted coup against Chávez.

2005-02-08T14:34:00.000+01:00

Dodge Ram pickup truck -- before enlargement.

Is this progress?

2005-02-08T13:29:00.000+01:00

The New York Times has an article today on the growing popularity of large pickup trucks, which appear to be supplanting SUVs as the braggards' wheels of choice. I find this to be an amazing development, as it goes against the trends towards increasing urbanisation (and hence, a lesser need for individual trucks), miniaturisation, the growth in the services sector, and growing awareness of the need to use limited resources more efficiently. Here's an excerpt from the article (italics are mine):

The average pickup truck has become 40 percent heavier in the last two decades and 11 percent less fuel-efficient, according to estimates by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Big pickup trucks are an even more formidable threat to people in cars than the largest S.U.V.'s, according to statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Fatality rates for the occupants of large pickup trucks are modestly higher than those for other family vehicles like large cars and minivans because of the trucks' increased rollover risk, a government crash study in 2003 indicated.

On Wednesday at the Chicago Auto Show, DaimlerChrysler is planning to introduce one of the largest passenger cabs yet as an option on its full-size pickup truck, the Dodge Ram. The new cabin, to be called the Mega Cab, is 20 inches longer than the largest Ram passenger cab now.

Weighing in at more than three tons unloaded, the Ram Mega Cab seats six and joins a group of new passenger trucks that are so heavy that they fall outside federal fuel economy regulations for most other passenger vehicles. The makers are not even required to post mileage figures on a window sticker.

Unlike some more exotic giant pickups, like the new 18-wheeler-size CXT from International Truck and Engine, the Dodge Ram Mega Cab will be positioned as a mass-market product. Chrysler executives estimate that they can sell 50,000 to 100,000 of them a year, according to a person close to the company's planning.

[...]

Full-size pickup trucks rose to 14.8 percent of the nearly 17 million cars and trucks sold in the United States last year, from 14.1 percent a year earlier and 8.4 percent at the beginning of the 1990's, according to Ward's AutoInfoBank. By contrast, the market share of compact pickups has been cut in half over the last decade.

Last year, middle- and large-size S.U.V.'s fell to 15.9 percent of the auto market, down from 16.5 percent a year earlier, according to Ward's, while smaller models continued to grow sharply.

Perhaps U.S. cars are getting bigger because their drivers are getting bigger? The prevalence of obesity among U.S. adults increased by an astonishing 61 percent between 1991 and 2001.

The trend towards bigger and more wasteful cars is increasing the United States' reliance on foreign oil producers, which is an important factor in worldwide political destabilisation (witness the wars on Iraq and perhaps soon Iran, the unrest in Nigeria, as well as the availability of greater resources to petro-autocrats such as President Chávez in Venezuela and President Mbasogo in Equatorial Guinea).

I do hope that more U.S. citizens become aware of the impact their personal choices have on their own country and on the rest of the world. At the moment, the USA makes up less than one twentieth of the world's population, yet it produces a quarter of the world's CO2 emissions! It is by far the world's biggest polluter, and its cars should be becoming more fuel efficient, not less. The trend described above is not progress, guys! (I'm assuming most of the pickup drivers are men.)

2005-02-07T22:49:00.000+01:00

Rubbish collection notice, Caracas, 2005.

The revolution? Pretty, it ain't.

2005-02-07T19:08:00.000+01:00

During a speech on 23 January 2005, President Chávez addressed some remarks to Condoleezza Rice, who had referred to him as "a negative influence" for the region during her Senate confirmation hearings for the post of U.S. Secretary of State. Repeating earlier statements, he called her "illiterate"; on this occasion, he elaborated further by speculating that her statements about him were motivated by sexual frustration. He suggested that some of his minions could provide Dr. Rice with some relief, as he himself was too busy and was in any case unwilling to "make the sacrifice" for his country.

Here are some excerpts from Chávez's speech in translation (source: transcription on the homepage of the Venezuelan Ministry for Propaganda, Minci). Note the rambling nature of the diatribe (which was edited in this case); Chávez's speeches typically go on for hours without going anywhere.

"First she [Rice] said that she was very irritated, a few days ago, by Chávez, by the tyrant Chávez, the caudillo, that he was a threat to the people of the world and of America. Afterwards, the next day, they asked her again, seems like she's dreaming about me.

[...]

Well, even if she's the foreign minister of that imperialist government and it's doctor Alí Rodríguez's [the Venezuelan chancellor, or foreign minister] turn to meet her, I'm capable of inviting her to a meeting to find out, well, what's this thing that you've got with me? We're going to arrange this, let's see. Do you [the audience] want me to invite her? I'll do what you tell me to. A short while ago, someone suggested to me: 'Look, why don't you ask her to marry you to see if this will sort itself out?' Should I propose marriage to her? [Audience: Nooo.] What bad luck this lady has! You said no. Well, but really she first said she was very irritated, the next day she changed, it would be good for a good psychiatrist to analyze this, because the next day they asked her again and what she said was that she was not irritated, no, but that now she was sad. Oh daddy! She was very sad and depressed because of Chávez, because of this tyrant. Afterwards she went on to say that Chávez is a bad influence on the continent.

[...]

Mister Bush, now accompanied by a new Secretary of State, the Mr. Condolencia Rice [sic], Condolencia Rice. I am sorry not to have sent her Fidel, send me, please, the method "Yo si puedo" [a basic reading course] to send it in English to Condolencia Rice, I forgot to send it to her again, one has so much to do, because she is showing a complete illiteracy with regards to what's happening in Venezuela and to what's happening in the world and to what's happening in Latin America.

[...]

I can't marry Condolencia because I have a lot of work to do, she'll have to look for some other options, she should forget about me for a while. Alí Rodríguez could do it, Cristóbal Jiménez is there, available; well, Juan Barreto is single; somebody else should make this sacrifice for the fatherland, you can ask me to do anything, but don't ask me to do this. Nicolás Maduro, Pedro Carreño."

The following text by sociologist Tulio Hernández sums up pretty well what Chávez's statements reveal about his sexist and chauvinist mindset.

Rural Machismo as a Political Problem
by Tulio Hernández

I ask the reader to imagine for a moment what would have happened if President Chávez, instead of targeting his rage -- disguised as a taunt -- against the person of Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State of the United States government, had aimed it at President Bush. Let's picture for a moment what would have been the outcome if the Venezuelan president, with his [guachamaronería] as always, had developed a sequence with the following tone in front of the hypnotised multitudes that venerate him, like they once venerated Perón, as they still do with Fidel in Cuba, as they did with Hitler: "Ooooh baby, Dubya, you've really got it in for me, you don't like anything I do, perhaps it's because you want me to give you what's coming to you? But I won't sacrifice myself, let Juan Barreto do it; he's single".

We can imagine it, but we know that this would never have happened and is never going to happen. Because President Chávez, as he has shown during his six long years in government, does not consider the qualities or defects inherent in the male condition to interfere with the work or behaviour of rulers. Those of the female condition, on the other hand, do.

When the Venezuelan president -- with this unmistakable culture of a rural adolescent who has not managed to understand the progress the democratic world has made in this area with regard to differences, be they of gender, politics, nationalities, ethnicity or sexual preferences -- plays with irony based on the hypothesis that Condoleezza Rice is in love with him and begins with her verbal harassment when her love is not returned, he is sending a very concrete message. He is saying, with the ancestry, the authority and the persuasiveness that his condition of being president and exalted communicator confer on him, that Doctor Rice is acting not because she is a high-level government official, because she has a high capacity for discernment, or because she is employing her personal analytical ability based on her beliefs. No, Condoleezza Rice is acting like a woman, and therefore, her motivation is neither political nor intellectual: it is rather derived from an eager and unsatisfied vagina that is waiting for a tropical "bull" and third-world man like himself to give her the satisfaction she needs. You don't have to be Roland Barthes to understand that this is the message being transmitted.

But this is not the first time that the president has acted out his mysoginist sexual exhibitionism in front of the spellbound faces of his numerous followers. A long time ago, when he was just beginning his period of government, he surprised the country by announcing, live and on national TV, to his wife, the then Mrs. Marisabel de Chávez, that that same night, upon returning to La Casona, he would "give her what she had coming to her" ("darle lo suyo"). In popular Venezuelan speech, darle lo suyo, just in case we have any foreign readers, is a typically macho phrase that refers to the sexual act, understood as an offer of satisfaction that the man makes to the woman to calm her yearnings. Therefore, if one wants to denigrate the behaviour of a woman who, for instance, is very demanding at work, one would say: "What she needs it someone to give her what she's got coming to her!" (“¡A esa lo que le hace falta es que le den lo suyo!”), or, a bit more crudely, "to give it to her where she needs it" (“que le den por donde es”). There is, conversely, no equivalent disqualification that could be used to attribute the same motivation to a male behaviour.

What the president has not realised -- on the whole, his life has been very much centered on political conspiracy and military discipline -- is that there are countries where a person could be sued or even jailed for offending someone publically on the basis of their personal traits deriving from gender, race or sexual preference, and that rude remarks like the ones he has been aiming successively at Doctor Rice -- calling her an illiterate, firstly, disqualifying her actions based on the supposed condition of being a besotted woman, secondly, and thirdly, adding an ambiguous and contemptuous suspicion ("let someone else sacrifice himself"), thereby referring -- one can't be too sure -- to her supposed ugliness, her condition of being Afro-American, or simply to her being an agent of imperialism -- could come at a high price in legal terms in the United States or Europe, where the offense of sexual harassment includes verbal harassment.

All this is without even mentioning that in any decent country gestures such as this would not provoke knowing little laughs and applause, as we saw on the part of his ministers and mayors on Sunday, including some female ministers; instead it would produce embarassment in all social and political sectors in response to such a testimony to backwardness, vulgarity, and immaturity on the part of the authority that offered them publically.

That's why I believe we should not take the incident as a joke. Nor should we belittle it, as was tried by certain common ignorants, who used the argument that the offended party is a very powerful woman, a figure of imperialism and savage neoliberalism, and that therefore it is acceptable to insult her, because in the end, she can defend herself. The militant machismo, the public display of bad manners and the emotional outbursts of the president, which are comparable only with those of Governor Acosta Carlez (king of the burp)*, should be treated as a political problem that muddies the relationship between the president and those opposing him as well as with the governments and authorities of befriended countries.

In his private and personal life, Hugo Chávez as an individual has the right to express himself as he pleases regarding women and those opposing him. But as President of the Republic, he has a duty to maintain a minimum of decorum and respect for others, because when he took on these functions he stopped being free; he cannot act according to his personal judgment because he holds an office that obliges him to place the national interest and collective respect above what he does and says in public. At the end of the day, he is the spokesperson for all Venezuelans on the international stage, and that is how he should behave.

You might ask yourself what's the use of such a display of the virtues of the Ley Resorte (media gag law) for protecting children from the pernicious effects of television, when it is the President of the Republic himself who, on national TV and during children's hour, takes it upon himself to communicate three types of values that more advanced society nowadays are trying to banish forever: hate between human beings, contempt for and underestimating the female condition, and machismo as the foremost principle governing the relationship between men and women.

There is definitely a ghost haunting Venezuela: the ghost of backsliding and regression to the myths, the ethics and aesthetics characteristic of the 19th century and the first two decades of the 20th, to the times of rural caudillos who based their power on the enormous size of their testicles.

* During the 2002 national strike, then General Acosta Carlez led an army unit to secure the strategically important Coca Cola deposits at that company's plant. Live on camera, the General took a swig from a bottle of Coca Cola, looked into the camera and offered a long and resounding burp. Since that day, he has been associated by all parties with burping; even Chávez himself calls him the general of the burp. Acosta Carlez was rewarded with the governorship of Carabobo state for carrying out this brave and dangerous mission.

A Venezuelan journalist, Carlos Alberto Montaner, described the scene as follows:

We thought that Venezuelans were hungry, but it wasn't true: they were thirsty. And so it came that colonel Chávez sent his best men to occupy the Coca-Cola and beer depots by military force in order to mitigate this terrible scourge. Rum will probably be the next objective. What could be more patriotic for a Bolivarian government than handing out Cubalibres to the thirsty and starving masses?

At the head of the hardened anti-Coca-Cola troops there marched a young general, Acosta Carlez, tall and haughty, notably portly, who opened a bottle, bravely swallowed its contents without even bothering to measure its content of carbohydrates -- the chavista soldiers don't know the meaning of fear -- turned his gaze to the television cameras and launched a prolonged and devastating burp that sent tremors through the precinct. "A terrible spectacle", said analyst Joaquín Pérez later. "It could have been worse", responded the brilliant writer Carlo Raúl Hernández laconically. "Imagine what would happen if he raided a avocado or black bean warehouse..."