Reasons for the skepticism in the dialog in Venezuela

Historically, students have represented a natural leadership in Venezuela. Their contagious determination, bullet-proof conviction, just demands and the nonexistence of hide interests on their part, make their movement a hurricane. Any reasonable government would take them seriously. But every now and then we have a scenario where, thanks to some tricks disguised as a democratic system, the Government is not reasonable... and we find ourselves in a dead-end. 

On one hand, there is the administration that counts on a long and barely legitimate advantage on all the branches of government, weapons, mass media, a constant source of money and the willingness to continue enjoying their current position. On the other hand, there are the students, armed with their ideals, trying to get ahead and knowing that a decent future is not possible under these circumstances. There is no surprise in the fact that they inspire affection in the majority of Venezuelans.

But those are not the only arms of the students. A very important one was omitted by a Government that underestimated them: their ability to summon.

Not only they came to an agreement, but they are communicated and scattered all over the Country. They know how to organize themselves and use social networks to publish their denunciations to the world. As a result, what the administration saw as a childish tantrum, has become a two-months-and-counting riot. 

Maduro failed calculating the dimension of the protests, not only about their extension, but about the depth of the popular discontent. The violence of civilians armed by the Government, the illegal persecution of dissidents, the siege to mass media and journalists, the food scarcity due to the economic failure and the lack of attention to the interests of Venezuelans, are claims made by the whole society.

That is how we came to this point, where the Government understands that, in order to maintain its international image, it must call for a "dialog". But, when protests come from wide sectors of the society, who do you choose as an interlocutor?

The coalition of opposition political parties, Mesa de la Unidad Democrática (MUD), has made a great work saving the few democratic chinks that are left in the Country, but, as they said in the first debate with the administration´s spokesmen, they do not represent the students. 

The MUD did not call for the protests, not always supported them and has no power to cease them. If the Government wants to restore the normality in Venezuela, it is only logic to involve the student´s movement to the dialog. But we already said that, every now and then, Governments are not reasonable.

The situation is really complicated and you have to add radicals from both sides. Ones want to collapse the country forcing a national strike, and the others intimidate protesters and their families shooting here and there over the media class residential areas. None of them have the support of the majority of the civil population, but they play an important role on the development of the events.

In conclusion, saying that there is a "dialog" in Venezuela is being gullible. From its palace, a Government talks to a group of people who bring complaints, and receive the same answers with disdain: you want to overthrow us because you are fascists and stateless. Meanwhile, on the streets, the students go on with their fight, unconnected to the Government´s show business and the international supervisors, whose work leave a lot to be desired if they are not able to ask why the stars of this story are not invited to the debate.

Published on Zhandra Zuleta´s original blog on April 15th, 2014.


Twittear