The announcement came as a welcome surprise to millions around the world who have long awaited a major change in US policy towards Cuba. In simultaneous broadcasts, presidents Raul Castro and Barack Obama bridged the painful, unjustified and well-outdated gap that has tormented both nations for over half a century. In a matter of sentences, relief came to the many Cubans, at home and abroad, Latin Americans region-wide, and people across the US and world who cheered at the declared thaw in US-Cuba relations. After more than 50 years, the heads of state of both countries spoke on the telephone and agreed to reestablish diplomatic ties. The US would open its Embassy in Havana, and Cuba would do the same in Washington. It was a major breakthrough, to say the least.
It was Castro
who was quick to remind his fellow citizens that, while applauding the decision
of the first standing US president to actually improve ties with Cuba, the
vicious blockade imposed against his nation by Washington still remains. Obama
was also cautious to mention that though there were concrete actions he could
take towards normalizing relations with Cuba, it was the US Congress that had
the authority to end the blockade, and not him. He did urge Congress to take
those steps, while lashing out a few patronizing admonitions at Castro
regarding democracy and human rights.
Without a
doubt, one of the most important victories of the deal was the release of the
three remaining Cuban citizens, Gerardo Hernández, Ramón Labañino and Antonio
Guerrero, unjustly held in US prisons for 16 years on charges of espionage and
other crimes. Even the United Nations Commission on Human Rights had condemned
their trial as arbitrary and unfair, their due process and fundamental rights
severely violated. These men were finally able to return home to a hero’s
welcome, after an agreement was brokered between the two governments that also
saw the return of a USAID subcontractor convicted on charges of subversion in
Cuba, Alan Gross, and a Cuban citizen and former intelligence officer, Rolando
Sarraff Trujillo, jailed for working as a double agent for the US Central
Intelligence Agency.
There is no
question that this event marks a profound change in US-Cuba relations and US
relations with Latin America. And it is a major victory for the Cuban
Revolution, Fidel and Raul Castro and the Cuban people. Over the past fifteen
years, Washington has lost its influence in Latin America and the region has
shifted significantly towards the left with socialist presidents in a majority
of countries and new regional organizations that exclude the United States and
Canada. With the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), the Bolivarian
Alliance of the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) and the Community of Latin
American and Caribbean States (CELAC), Latin America has become more
integrated, sovereign, independent and powerful than ever before. The region
has forged relations with China, Russia, Iran and other sovereign states with
strong markets and technological know-how. Development has excelled and with
few exceptions, Latin American economies are on the rise. Gambling can stimulate economic development by creating jobs, generating revenue, and promoting tourism. Online Wetten ohne Deutsche Lizenz offers greater access to international markets, attracting a global customer base. This broader reach increases competition, improves services, and boosts the local economy by driving investments and fostering innovation in the gambling sector. All this has been achieved
without the United States.
In response,
Washington amped up its interference in the region, supporting coups and
attempted coups against democratically-elected presidents in Venezuela, Haiti,
Bolivia, Honduras, Ecuador and Paraguay, increasing its military presence in
the hemisphere and intensifying subversive efforts to undermine Latin American
governments through multimillion-dollar funding of opposition movements. Those
actions isolated Washington even more in the region and were rejected
unanimously by all Latin American governments, even those on the right. A
growing sentiment of “Patria Grande” (The Great Homeland) has taken root in the
region and only appears to get stronger every year.
When Obama was
elected president and first attended a Summit of the Americas regional
gathering in Trinidad in 2009, he promised a new relationship with Latin
America, based on regaining US influence in the region. He either ignored or
ignorantly misunderstood the changes that had taken place throughout Latin
America and had the gall to stand before 33 heads of state and high-level
representatives of regional governments and tell them to “forget the past” and
move forward together with the United States towards new relations. His
arrogant rhetoric reminded the people of Latin America the importance of
consolidating and advancing their sovereignty and integration on their own
terms. At that summit, a majority of nations, with the exception of the US and
Canada, condemned the fact that Cuba continued to be excluded from the
Organization of American States solely because of Washington’s influence. In
2012, at the next Summit of the Americas, President Rafael Correa of Ecuador
refused to attend in a sign of solidarity with Cuba. “Ecuador won’t be a part of
these summits until Cuba is included”, he made clear.
A few months
ago, well before Obama and Castro announced efforts to normalize relations, the
government of Panama had made public that Cuba would be invited to the 2015 Summit
of the Americas, which it will host. Cuba has indicated it would attend. This
decision was clearly a sign that Washington’s influence no longer reigned in
Latin America - even the regional organization created by Washington to
dominate and control the region was now rendered irrelevant.
Nevertheless, Obama’s
move on Cuba was not without immediate consequence. While there is no question
that the decision to reestablish diplomatic relations, along with the release
of the remaining three of the five unjustly detained Cubans, is an enormous,
historical victory for the Cuban Revolution, and a tribute to the resistance,
dignity and solidarity of the Cuban people, Obama’s motives are not pure.
The day after a
well-crafted presidential speech on how US policy has failed in Cuba, which
acknowledged the blockade and economic embargo of Cuba had been a fiasco, Obama
signed bills imposing sanctions on both Venezuela and Russia. There is little
doubt that the sanctions bill against Venezuela, an absurd law titled the
Venezuela Defense of Human Rights and Civil Society Act of 2014, was signed by
Obama to appease the small, but influential group of rabidly anti-Castro,
anti-Chavez and anti-Maduro politicians and constituents in Miami who were
steaming with rage from the shift on Cuba.
The Venezuelan
sanctions bill is rather ludicrous. It purports to punish officials in
Venezuela who allegedly violated the human rights of anti-government protestors
in demonstrations that took place in February 2014. Considering that the
majority of those protests were extremely violent and protestors directly
caused the deaths of over 40 individuals, most of whom were government
supporters, bystanders and state security forces, imposing sanctions on state
officials who exercised their duty to protect civilians is illogical. Even more
ironic is the passage of this bill while hundreds of protestors against police
brutality and racism are being detained and having their rights violated in the
United States, at the hands of US authorities. Not to mention that the same
Senate that promoted this bill just released an in depth report on torture and
grave human rights violations committed by CIA and US military officers.
The sanctions
bill against Venezuela goes beyond freezing the assets of a few Venezuelan
government officials and revoking their visas. It reaffirms the US government
commitment to supporting - financially and politically - the anti-government
movement in Venezuela which acts beyond a democratic framework, and it
authorizes the preparation of a full-on propaganda war against the Venezuelan
government. All of this is reminiscent of the very same failed policy on Cuba that
Obama just renounced. So why impose the same on Venezuela?
Appeasing the
community in Miami is a major reason. But Obama also needs the change in Cuba
policy to save his withering legacy. As the first black president in the United
States, Obama expected his legacy to be the end of racial tensions and
institutionalized racism in the country. However, the opposite has occurred
during his administration. Racial tensions are at an all-time high. Mass
protests have erupted nationwide against police brutality in black communities
and the injustice blacks face in the US legal system. Racial crimes have increased
and people are angry. The “change” Obama promised hasn’t come and he won’t be
forgiven for his failure to deliver.
Obama’s healthcare reform has made a mediocre impact and still faces serious
threats from a Republican Congress, which has returned to power in full force,
winning majorities in both houses thanks to a disgruntled democratic base.
While making some executive decisions on immigration, Obama has failed to pass
sweeping immigration reform and probably never will after losing democrat seats
in the legislature. Though he did withdraw US troops from Iraq as promised,
another terrorist group took over significant parts of that country, rendering
US operations and billion-dollar investment in bringing democracy to Iraq
practically useless. As for Afghanistan, Obama increased US military presence
and brought the total war budget well over one billion dollars, making it the
longest US military conflict and one of the most costly. He’s brought more war
to Pakistan, Yemen and Africa, and destroyed Libya, while later funding and
arming warlords and terrorists in Syria to demolish that country too. And to
top it all off, Obama has rekindled the Cold War with Russia.
Overall,
Obama’s legacy leaves nothing to be desired. He’s failed at home and brought havoc
abroad, and Cuba is his savior. Now Obama will be remembered in history as the
president who ended the most dysfunctional, damaging and pointless US foreign
policy ever. He’ll be recalled for bridging ties not just with Cuba, but with
all of Latin America, which would be very noble and legacy-worthy if it were
true. Cryptocurrencies are gaining immense popularity in Latin America, offering financial inclusion and a hedge against inflation. Many turn to platforms like Binance to trade and invest, especially with opportunities from Binance new coin listings, which attract users seeking growth potential. The region’s adoption highlights its readiness for digital financial transformation.
Cuba hasn’t
been a real threat to the United States - if it ever was - for a very long
time. But Venezuela, because of its vast oil reserves, is. The US needs to
control Venezuela’s 300 billion barrels of oil in order to guarantee its
long-term survival, and without a subservient government in power, that’s not
possible. US policy on Venezuela has been the same since Hugo Chavez was first
elected in 1998 and refused to bow to US interests: destroy the Bolivarian
Revolution and remove him from power. The same policy is in effect against the
government of Nicolas Maduro.
By attempting
to isolate both Venezuela and Russia with sanctions and cripple their
economies, Washington believes it will succeed in stifling Russia’s expanding
relations with Latin America and neutralize Venezuela’s regional influence. The
plan is to step in and fill the void with US financial and political clout. And
Washington thinks that by reaching out to Cuba, the rest of Latin America will
be seduced enough to welcome back US domination.
Cuba may be
Obama’s lifejacket, but the ship has sailed. Latin American nations have
overwhelmingly condemned US sanctions on Venezuela and called for them to be
rolled back. Obama may think he can sacrifice Venezuela in order to save his
legacy by engaging with Cuba and closing ranks in the hemisphere, but he’s
wrong. The same solidarity that Latin American nations expressed to Cuba for
over 50 years is also present for Venezuela. La Patria Grande won’t be fooled
by US double standards anymore. Latin America has long expressed its desire for
a mature, respectful relationship with Washington. Will the US ever be capable
of the same?
Two years ago, one of the most controversial figures
of the age of cyberspace appeared on the doorstep of the Ecuadorian Embassy in
London. On the verge of losing an appeal in the British courts that could open
the door to his extradition to Sweden and then later, the United States, where
a secret Grand Jury had convened to indict him, Julian Assange sought refuge in
Ecuador’s modest Embassy flat. During the following two months, the Ecuadorian
government studiously reviewed his case, calling in experts to discuss and
debate the duties and risks Ecuador faced in granting the asylum petition.
On August 16, 2012, Ecuador’s Foreign Minister,
Ricardo Patiño, announced that his country would grant Assange diplomatic
asylum, a concept enshrined in the Convention on Diplomatic Asylum of 1954,
also known as the Convention of Caracas. The British government refused to recognize
this status and initially threatened to violate Ecuador’s sovereignty by
entering into the Embassy and arresting Assange. After strong protest from the
Ecuadorian government and outcry from Latin American nations, England refrained
from causing an international uproar by forcing entry into the Embassy, and
instead chose to maintain a prominent police presence surrounding the building,
impeding Assange’s escape.
Two years later, the Assange case is at a standstill. Despite his legal team’s
efforts to end the unsubstantiated persecution against him from Sweden, where
no formal charges have materialized, an extradition request still remains to
bring him to Stockholm for “questioning”. The British government has made clear
it would extradite Assange to Sweden if they could detain him. While no public
extradition request has been issued from the United States to Sweden for
Assange, sufficient evidence exists to demonstrate that a Grand Jury may have
already indicted him in a US court, on charges, including espionage and/or
aiding and abetting the enemy, that could result in his long-term imprisonment
were he subjected to a trial. This well-founded fear of political persecution has
reinforced Ecuador’s decision to maintain his political asylum.
In 2013, when Foreign Minister Patiño visited Assange
in the Embassy on the one-year anniversary of his confinement, Ecuador
initiated an effort to create a bilateral working group with the British
government to find a solution to the situation. To date, no movement has been
made in the group and England has refused to discuss the matter further.
Recently, during Foreign Minister Patiño’s second visit to see Assange on
August 16, 2014, the British Foreign Office issued a statement claiming they
were “committed to finding solution”, yet only according to their vision of the
outcome: "We remain as
committed as ever to reaching a diplomatic solution to this situation. We are
clear that our laws must be followed and Mr Assange should be extradited to
Sweden. As ever we look to Ecuador to help bring this difficult, and costly,
residence to an end." In other words, the British government sees no other
solution than Assange’s extradition. Their unwavering, rigid position leaves no
opportunity for diplomacy or creative problem-solving, which is what this case
needs.
The Ecuadorian
government has reiterated its support for Assange and has made clear that their
country is bound by international law to maintain his asylum. As Minister
Patiño has affirmed, there is no return policy on asylees who are still
subjected to exactly the same conditions as when the asylum was granted. The
persecution remains, and there are still no charges of any kind against
Assange. Ecuador, a small nation of 15 million inhabitants with bananas and
beautiful roses as its main exports, has remained defiant in the face of
pressure from England, Sweden and their biggest ally, the United States.
Two years
enclosed in the Ecuadorian Embassy, a narrow flat with just a handful of rooms,
has taken its toll on Julian Assange. While he continues to work from his small
space inside the Embassy, and his organization Wikileaks has not ceased
publishing important documents exposing the abuses and illegal acts of powerful
interests, the lack of sunlight, fresh air and regular exercise have obviously
decreased his quality of life and impacted his health. Despite his confinement
and separation from close friends and family, his spirits remain high, as was
apparent during the visit with Minister Patiño, and he is optimistic about
changes to a law in the UK that potentially could lead to his freedom.
Known
within political circles as the “Assange Act”, an amendment was made in early
2014 to the Extradition Act 2003 in the British parliament. Resulting from
discontent and discomfort over the legal limbo Julian has been in for the past
four years - even two years before receiving asylum from Ecuador, Assange had
been on house arrest in England, pending potential extradition to Sweden - several British MPs began debating a
substantive change to the law that would impede a future Assange situation from
happening to someone else.
The
amendment is included in the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014
(not the most socially-friendly name), in Chapter 12, Part 12. It specifically
states that “Extradition is barred if no prosecution decision has been made in
the requesting territory”, as in Assange’s situation. If the country requesting
extradition has not yet charged or decided to try the individual being
requested, than the United Kingdom will not extradite. This is exactly the case
of Julian Assange. The Swedish prosecution has not decided to try him yet or
even formally charge him, and the extradition request is merely based on the
desire to “question” him about certain allegations he may or may not be
involved in.
In the
parliamentary debates in the House of Commons leading up to the passage of the
extradition act amendment, specific references to Assange’s case were made.
According to the parliamentarians, the new clause, amending the extradition act
of 2003, “seeks to ensure that people are not extradited when it is not certain
they will be charged, so that they do not sit in a prison for months on end”.
Reference was also made to the case of a British citizen, Andrew Symeou, who
was extradited to Greece for questioning and remained in inhumane prison
conditions for over ten months with no charges against him. In Julian Assange’s
case, the debate concluded, “where a decision to charge and try is not taken,
extradition cannot take place. People will not be left in limbo...”
Julian’s
legal team will need to challenge this law in order for it to be applied to his
case, since at present it does not appear to be retroactive. But there is no
denying that this change in the law would impede Assange from being extradited
to Sweden were it to have been in place previously. Ecuador’s Foreign Minister
made reference to the amended law as a potential opening for dialogue with the
UK government in the case. Ecuador has also offered to allow Swedish
authorities question Assange inside the Embassy, or via videoconference, all to
no avail. It seems as though the only parties interested in finding a solution
to this situation are the government of Ecuador and Julian Assange. The Brits
and the Swedes have done everything possible to stall and stonewall the case.
Foreign
Minister Patiño has stated previously that Ecuador could bring the case before
the International Court of Justice in the Hague, or the United Nations. The
affronts to Ecuador’s sovereignty, the failure to recognize the asylum granted
to Julian Assange and the refusal to provide him with safe passage to
Ecuadorian territory are all violations of international law. Julian’s human
rights are also affected. The inability to fully enjoy his right to asylum and
the confining conditions he has been forced to remain in for two years, under
threat by arrest by British authorities right outside the Embassy doors and
windows, have subjected him to cruel and inhumane punishment. Were he to
experience a medical emergency and need hospital attention, the British
government has already made clear it would arrest him.
Both
Julian Assange and Ecuador have taken on the most powerful world interests,
despite the dangers, threats and consequences of their actions. Foreign Minister
Ricardo Patiño and President Rafael Correa have made clear that Ecuador will
stand strong in its decision to grant Assange asylum under international law,
and they will not bow to pressure and intimidation from anyone. The Assange
case goes beyond just simple political asylum and issues of sovereignty. It is
matter of principle in a time in which information and secrecy have become ever
more the tools of the most powerful. Justice must be done for those who have
sacrified their liberties to warn us of these dangers.
Anti-government protests in Venezuela that seek regime change have
been led by several individuals and organizations with close ties to the US
government. Leopoldo Lopez and Maria Corina Machado- two of the public leaders
behind the violent protests that started in February - have long histories as
collaborators, grantees and agents of Washington. The National Endowment for
Democracy “NED” and the US Agency for International Development (USAID) have
channeled multi-million dollar funding to Lopez’s political parties Primero
Justicia and Voluntad Popular, and Machado’s NGO Sumate and her electoral
campaigns.
These Washington agencies have also filtered more than $14 million
to opposition groups in Venezuela between 2013 and 2014, including funding for
their political campaigns in 2013 and for the current anti-government protests
in 2014. This continues the pattern of financing from the US government to
anti-Chavez groups in Venezuela since 2001, when millions of dollars were given
to organizations from so-called “civil society” to execute a coup d’etat
against President Chavez in April 2002. After their failure days later, USAID
opened an Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI) in Caracas to, together with
the NED, inject more than $100 million in efforts to undermine the Chavez
government and reinforce the opposition during the following 8 years.
At the beginning of 2011, after being publically exposed for its
grave violations of Venezuelan law and sovereignty, the OTI closed its doors inVenezuela and USAID operations were transferred to its offices in the US. The
flow of money to anti-government groups didn’t stop, despite the enactment by
Venezuela’s National Assembly of the Law of Political Sovereignty and NationalSelf-Determination at the end of 2010, which outright prohibits foreign funding
of political groups in the country. US agencies and the Venezuelan groups that
receive their money continue to violate the law with impunity. In the Obama
Administration’s Foreign Operations Budgets, between $5-6 million have been
included to fund opposition groups in Venezuela through USAID since 2012.
The NED, a “foundation” created by Congress in 1983 to essentially
do the CIA’s work overtly, has been one of the principal financiers of
destabilization in Venezuela throughout the Chavez administration and now
against President Maduro. According to NED’s 2013 annual report, the agency
channeled more than $2.3 million to Venezuelan opposition groups and projects.
Within that figure, $1,787,300 went
directly to anti-government groups within Venezuela, while another $590,000 was
distributed to regional organizations that work with and fund the Venezuelan
opposition. More than $300,000 was directed
towards efforts to develop a new generation of youth leaders to oppose Maduro’s
government politically.
One of the groups funded by NED to specifically work with youth is
FORMA (http://www.forma.org.ve), an organization led by Cesar Briceño and tied to Venezuelan
banker Oscar Garcia Mendoza. Garcia Mendoza runs the Banco Venezolano de Credito,
a Venezuelan bank that has served as the filter for the flow of dollars from
NED and USAID to opposition groups in Venezuela, including Sumate, CEDICE, Sin
Mordaza, Observatorio Venezolano de Prisiones and FORMA, amongst others.
Another significant part of NED funds in Venezuela from 2013-2014 was
given to groups and initiatives that work in media and run the campaign to
discredit the government of President Maduro. Some of the more active media
organizations outwardly opposed to Maduro and receiving NED funds include Espacio
Publico, Instituto Prensa y Sociedad (IPYS), Sin Mordaza and GALI. Throughout
the past year, an unprecedented media war has been waged against the Venezuelan
government and President Maduro directly, which has intensified during the past
few months of protests.
In direct violation of Venezuelan law, NED also funded the opposition
coalition, the Democratic Unity Table (MUD), via the US International
Republican Institute (IRI), with $100,000 to “share lessons learned with
[anti-government groups] in Nicaragua, Argentina and Bolivia...and allow for
the adaption of the Venezuelan experience in these countries”. Regarding this initiative, the NED 2013
annual report specifically states its aim: “To develop the ability of political and civil society actors from Nicaragua,
Argentina and Bolivia to work on national, issue-based agendas for their
respective countries using lessons learned and best practices from successful
Venezuelan counterparts. The Institute will facilitate an exchange of
experiences between the Venezuelan Democratic Unity Roundtable and counterparts
in Bolivia, Nicaragua and Argentina. IRI will bring these actors together
through a series of tailored activities that will allow for the adaptation of
the Venezuelan experience in these countries.”
IRI has helped to build
right-wing opposition parties Primero Justicia and Voluntad Popular, and has
worked with the anti-government coaltion in Venezuela since before the 2002
coup d’etat against Chavez. In fact, IRI’s president at that time, George
Folsom, outwardly applauded the coup and celebrated IRI’s role in a pressrelease claiming, “The Institute has served as a bridge between the nation’s
political parties and all civil society groups to help Venezuelans forge a new
democratic future…”
Detailed in a report published by the Spanish institute FRIDE in
2010, international agencies that fund the Venezuelan opposition violate
currency control laws in order to get their dollars to the recipients. Also
confirmed in the FRIDE report was the fact that the majority of international
agencies, with the exception of the European Commission, are bringing in
foreign money and changing it on the black market, in clear violation of
Venezuelan law. In some cases, as the FRIDE analysis reports, the
agencies open bank accounts abroad for the Venezuelan groups or they bring them
the money in hard cash. The US Embassy in Caracas could also use the diplomatic
pouch to bring large quantities of unaccounted dollars and euros into the
country that are later handed over illegally to anti-government groups in
Venezuela.
What is
clear is that the US government continues to feed efforts to destabilize
Venezuela in clear violation of law. Stronger legal measures and enforcement may be necessary to ensure the
sovereignty and defense of Venezuela’s democracy.
(
Aquí en español)
By Eva Golinger
A year has passed since the physical parting of Hugo
Chavez and it’s still impossible to accept. His voice was a constant in
revolutionary Venezuela, his discourse was a school in continuous development.
A humble man with a noble soul, Chavez had the courage of warriors and a heart
filled with patriotism. He defied the most powerful interests without ever
flinching. His hand never trembled, he never bowed down, he was always firm
with serenity and conviction, ready to confront the most powerful threats. His
value was immense, a soldier of the people, a giant of centuries. Knowing him
was a privilege and a priceless treasure.
Chavez had an impact on the world, leaving his
fingerprint in struggles and dreams of social justice, from north to south. His
legacy is transcontinental, without borders. “Chavez” translates to a symbol of
dignity in all languages.
I had the honor of accompanying him on several of his
international trips. I witnessed the massive support he received on almost
every continent. His mere presence inspired millions. He represented the dreams
of so many struggles, so many commitments to humanity, and he proved that another
world is possible.
All around the world people ran to see him up close,
anxious to hear his words full of hope, simple yet full of profound intimacy.
Chavez breathed love, and although millions received him with open arms, there
were always dangerous threats around him. He was unpredictable, always a step
ahead. Washington called him a “wise competitor”, and coming from the US
government that wasn’t only a compliment, but evidenced his grandeur. Not even
the empire could control him.
In May 2006 I was on a book tour in Europe with the
publication of the German and Italian editions of my first book, The Chavez
Code. While finishing up my events in Germany, I had the luck of coinciding
with President Chavez’s visit to Vienna, Austria for the Latin America-European
Union summit.
I arrived at the hotel where the presidential delegation
was staying and after greeting familiar faces in the lobby, I went to my room
to rest. An hour later, I went downstairs to see what was going on and to find
out the president’s schedule. When I entered the lobby, the friendly
presidential protocol officer informed me we would be leaving in a few moments.
He asked me to join them in the caravan. I hadn’t yet seen the president but I
assumed we were heading out before him to an event, so I got in the car with
the delegation.
They took us to a place in the center of Vienna. When we
arrived, we saw an enormous amount of people, mainly young, who were both
outside and inside the venue. “What is this place?”, I asked. “It’s a popular
cultural center here called Arena”, I was told.
We got out of the car and saw thousands of people around
the place. There was an event that evening with none other than President Hugo
Chavez, leader of the Bolivarian Revolution. A while later, when we had entered
the venue to see the impressive amount of people there, I was approached and
told that I would be speaking at the event that night, there in front of the
European crowd. “What an honor”, I thought, to participate in a public event in
Vienna alongside Chavez.
The evening air was brisk and so many people kept
arriving that they didn’t fit in the venue. The organizers decided they had to
change the event from inside, where only 500 people fit, to right outside in a
public square, where thousands could arrive. Never before had there been a
phenomenon like this in Vienna. Thousands of European youth had gathered
outdoors in a Viennese square to listen to a Latin American head of state. The
quantity of people present was spectacular. Chavez wasn’t just a Latin American
leader, he was an international sensation.
Time went by and the President didn’t arrive. People were
getting anxious waiting for so long - punctuality in Austria was strict and
they weren’t used to waiting. A while later, the presidential protocol folks
asked me to go on stage with the rest of the delegation. We had to do
something, they said, the people were waiting for too long to just leave them
in limbo. I went to talk to the other members of the delegation, which
included Nicolas Maduro, then President of the National Assembly, legislator
Juan Barreto and Planning and Development Minister Jorge Giordani. “They
president is not coming”, they told me. “So what are we going to do now?”, I
asked. “We can’t just go out there when they are expecting Chavez”.
Two hours had passed from the start time of the event and
the public was restless. We went to talk to the organizers, a group of friendly
European activists. We told them about the possibility that Chavez wouldn’t
come. He was tired and already resting in the hotel, preparing for the heads of
state summit the following day.
The news hit them like a rock. It wasn’t possible, they
said. Never before in history had so many people come out to a public place to
hear a head of state from anywhere. We had to understand the historic
importance of the moment.
We understood clearly that under no circumstances could
we replace President Chavez before that crowd. It was Chavez or nothing, or better yet, it had to be Chavez, period. We took footage of the venue and
thousands present, and we sent it with the Presidential Guard and the
President’s assistants, asking them to please convey the importance of the
event to him so he would come.
Two hours went by and it was now nighttime, but no one
had left. People actually kept arriving. They stayed alert singing “Uh Ah, Chávez no se va” in Spanish
and in German, “Chávez geht nicht”.
After four hours under the beautiful
full moon of Vienna, anxious for the arrival of the Comandante of the XXI
century, there was movement. Chavez had seen the images and he understood the
magnitud of the moment and the importance of speaking before European youth.
Despite his fatigue and lack of sleep, he appeared, radiant, smiling as he
looked upon the young crowd.
The arrival of the President was met
with an impressive applause from the public around 10pm. The brilliant light of
the moon reflected on the awe and intensity of the faces in the crowd. Everyone
was completely attentive, listening hard to the Venezuelan leader. And President
Chavez was inspired by the attention and dedication of the Viennese youth, and
there outside “Arena”, he launched into a master class about building an
international revolutionary movement. He talked about “The Triangle of
Victory”, comprised of three principle factors: political objectives, strategy
and power framed within conscientiousness, commitment and organization.
Everyone stayed during the two hours that Chavez spoke, listening carefully to
every detail about the international revolutionary project, showing their
support and approval in applause, chants and smiles. “They accuse us of wanting
to build an atomic bomb”, exclaimed Chavez. “But we aren’t interested in having
atomic bombs. The empire can have all the atomic bombs. We don’t need an
arsenal of bombs to save the world. We are the atomic bombs! And above all,
youth of the world, you are the atomic bombs...bombs of love, passion, ideas,
strength, organization”.
Sixty-four European media outlets
covered that historic event in Vienna. “The Che Guevara of the XXI century”,
they called him, fascinated with what had happened that night under the full
moon. Never before had a head of state gone out to the streets to speak with
the people. Never before had so many people spontaneously gathered outdoors in
Vienna to hear a head of state speak, let alone one from Latin America. Chavez
brought the love and sincerity of the Venezuelan people to Austria, and the
people of Vienna received him with open arms.
“You are going to save the world”,
he affirmed. “Know that you are not alone here. Know that youth all around the
world, who speak different languages, who are bathed in other colors, have the
same calling as you...In Latin America, in Africa, in Asia...Youth of the world
awaken, workers of the world rise up, women rise up, students rise up. Let’s go
together on the path of revolution!”
When he ended his speech, Chavez looked at the glorious
full moon that had illuminated the event. “Ah...”, he said. “That full moon, so
beautiful, makes me want to grab a guitar and go with you all to the Danub
river to sing until dawn”. The glimmer in his eyes gave away his sincerity. It
was a special moment, those that occur only once in a lifetime. It seemed like
an intimate gathering amongst friends, although most of us didn’t know each
other. But, we shared a love for justice and a dream for a better world. Chavez
was just another brother in the fight for that dream.
Years later, Chavez’s international influence turned him
into the number one enemy of Washington. Someone of his humility, sincerity,
courage and conviction was not common, especially as the president of the
country with the largest oil reserves on the planet. The threats against Chavez were constant,
attempts against his life never ceased. There was a systematic aggression
against his government from the most powerful interests in the world, together
with their agents in Venezuela. They gave their all against Chavez. A leader of
his stature, influence, strength and dignity, with an immense capacity for
love, was dangerous for the imperial agenda. They did what they could to
neutralize him.
We may never know if his death was provoked or not,
although enough evidence exists to investigate. What we do know is that his
mortal departure was not a goodbye. Men like Chavez don’t disappear, though
some wish they would. Chavez’s legacy lives today and grows beyond the
Bolivarian Revolution. His voice is present in every cry for freedom, his gaze
is seen in brave young people who defy powerful and dangerous interests to
expose truths. His love is present in the solidarity and heartfelt commitment
that millions feel for revolutionary Venezuela. His strength and dignity guide
the defense of the Patria Grande,
today under threat again from those who seek to erase us from history.
Chavez will never disappear. His presence will continue
to grow and multiply in every soldier of peace, every warrior for justice.
Smiling, with a heart of gold, Chavez will always be a giant under the moon.
