JUser: :_load: Unable to load user with ID: 42

Published on 22 December 2015 by www.revolutionarycommunist.org

bolivia morales

Ten years of the Movement Toward Socialism in government

Led by the government of Evo Morales and the Movement Toward Socialism (MAS), Bolivia has undergone a profound transformation in the past ten years. The change is not just in the economic sphere, but in the shift of political power away from the traditional elite, the mostly white owners of industry and agriculture, and towards the majority, the mostly indigenous workers and campesinos.

Evo Morales emerged as a leader of coca growers in Chaparé province, who were fighting against US-funded eradication of their crops. He first ran as presidential candidate for MAS in 2002, and narrowly lost. At the next election, on 18 December 2005, Morales and MAS won with 53.7% of the vote, a previously unheard of majority in Bolivia. The previous five years had seen six presidents come and go as a result of constant political crises. It was during this period that mass struggles against neoliberal austerity - the Water War and the Gas War - paved the way for the MAS victory. 

Water War 1999 - 2000

The Water War was sparked by a 1999 agreement by the government of Hugo Banzer to privatise the water supply in Cochabamba province. This was made in order to meet privatisation targets set by the World Bank in return for $600m debt relief. The new owner, a consortium run by US multinational Bechtel, was guaranteed an annual profit rate of 16% over 40-years.

Workers and campesino organisations came together to form a Coalition for Defence of Water and Life. Over a period of six months they organised strikes and blockades, regularly bringing Cochabamba to a standstill. Key decisions affecting the movement were approved at open-air meetings attended by up to 50,000 people. 

The cancellation of the water contract as a direct result of the protests marked a turning point for Bolivia’s anti-austerity movement, showing that popular forces could defeat neoliberalism.

Read more ...

Published on 17 December 2015 by www.revolutionarycommunist.org


'Self-criticism is to correct, to rectify, not to continue doing everything in a vacuum ... either independence or nothing, either the commune or nothing!'

Hugo Chavez – 'Golpe de timon' (Strike at the Helm) speech, 20 October 2012

Venezuela's 6 December National Assembly elections represent the biggest electoral loss for the Bolivarian Revolution in its 17-year history. The Venezuelan right-wing have secured a two thirds 'super majority' with the Round-table of Democratic Unity (MUD) coalition winning 109 seats, alongside the election of three opposition aligned indigenous national assembly legislators. This gives the Venezuelan opposition a massive majority over the coalition aligned with the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) which only won 55 seats. The death of Hugo Chavez in 2013, the prolonged economic war and the international campaign against Venezuela, coupled with the PSUV government’s reluctance to confront head on the private sector’s strangulation of the economy, pushed many to switch sides and vote for the MUD's undefined promise of 'change'.

This represents a major blow to the revolutionary forces in Venezuela, which since the election of Hugo Chavez in 1998 have counted on parliamentary electoral power to promote working class interests. The two-thirds majority gives the right-wing significant powers to block the government spending necessary for the continuation of Venezuela's extensive social missions, impose or remove government ministers, dismiss vice president Jorge Arreaza, call for a constituent assembly to rewrite the constitution and seek to remove President Nicolas Maduro, either through initiating a recall referendum, or appointing Supreme Court judges to vote for his impeachment. From the moment the new assembly assumes power on 5 January 2016, the Bolivarian Chavista movement will cease to have legislative control over the country and the MUD will have the means to derail every attempt to pass new laws advancing the interests of the working class and poor.

Read more ...

Published on 15 December 2015 by Granma

victims deal

Representatives of the Revolutionary Armed Army of Colombia (FARC-EP) and the Colombian government forces signed an agreement this Tuesday on the issue of victims of armed conflict, within the framework of the peace talks.

The pact is the fourth major agreement between the parties during the peace negotiations in Havana since 2012. Other big deals covered land issues and rural development, political participation of the insurgency and drug trafficking.

A delegation composed of 10 representatives affected by the armed conflict left for Havana on Monday to sign the agreement on Tuesday, which touches on truth, reparation and guarantees to not repeat violence, as well as a system of transitional justice.

Before signing the final deal on the peace dialogue, the talks will entered their final stage aimed to cement the end the conflict. Both parties will also discuss mechanisms to ratify, implement and ascertain a possible final consensus.

The representative delegation of the FARC-EP presented a 10-point proposal on Monday to ensure an end to the war and make a significant contribution to building a stable and lasting peace.

The text, published on the website of the insurgency group, detailed initiatives on two agenda items currently discussed with the government of President Juan Manuel Santos, including a bilateral ceasefire and the disarmament of the rebels and the end of armed operations against them.

Last September, the two parties signed a preliminary 13-point agreement to achieve an end to the conflict that has gripped the country for over 50 years.

One of the most important points for the FARC-EP has been recognition as a political movement in Colombia, as well as an end to paramilitarism, which has led to thousands of internal displacements, especially in the countryside.

The parties aim to sign the final peace agreement before March 23, 2016.

Published on 13 December 2015 by Washington Post


The big news out of Venezuela’s Dec. 6 legislative elections is the victory of the opposition United Democratic Roundtable (MUD) over the incumbent United Socialist Party (PSUV) of President Nicolás Maduro. Shockingly, the MUD achieved a two-thirds supermajority in the National Assembly, which, according to the constitution, could allow it to remove Supreme Court judges (Art.265), appoint key officials such as an independent attorney general and a national comptroller (Art.279), and approve amendments to the constitution itself, subject to ratification by referendum (Art.348).

That supermajority is razor-thin. The MUD claims 112 seats out of 167 — exactly two-thirds. Anything less than perfect unity and the list of powers available to the MUD diminishes considerably. But how did the MUD achieve this landslide win in an electoral environment widely regarded as stacked in favor of the PSUV? A variety of factors were at play, and the MUD caught some remarkable breaks.

First, the most important element of the Venezuelan electoral system was not stacked toward the PSUV, per se, but toward whichever alliance is the largest. That is, the system is set to deliver to the largest party or coalition a greater share of seats than its votes might suggest. At the time the electoral law was crafted, no one imagined that the largest party could be any other than the PSUV. That bit of hubris came back to bite the incumbents.

Sixty-eight percent of the Assembly seats are allocated in winner-take-all contests, in districts with one, two, or three seats available. Voters in these districts can cast as many votes as there are seats. As long as voters cast all their votes for candidates of the same party or alliance, the team with the most supporters in a given district can take all its seats. Venezuelan voters did just that, and every district produced a sweep for either the MUD or the PSUV. Most of these, of course, went to the MUD, which captured 81 of these seats to the PSUV’s 32.

The second tier of the electoral system, accounting for 30 percent of the Assembly’s seats, provides party-list competition in Venezuela’s 23 states plus the Capital District. There, the MUD’s win — 28 seats to the PSUV’s 23 — was more in keeping with its overall vote share of 55 percent to 40 percent (with 5 percent going to other lists). So far, then, the seat tally is 109 to 55, three short of the 112 needed for the MUD to transform Venezuelan politics. So where did those last three seats come from?

Read more ...

By Mark Weisbrot. Published on 3 December by Huffington Post

sos cnn

The campaign for Venezuela's Dec. 6 National Assembly election is only three weeks long, but in the United States it started about six months ago with leaks by anonymous U.S. officials making unsubstantiated allegations that Venezuelan officials were running a "cartel." More recently, relatives of Venezuela's first lady Cilia Flores were arrested and taken (not extradited) to the U.S. after being lured by DEA agents to Haiti. Then last week, when an opposition politician was shot and killed, the secretary general of the Organization of American States, Luis Almagro, immediately joined Washington in trying to make it look like a political murder. Within a day, evidence from investigations appeared to show that the victim was likely a gang member killed by a rival gang. 

To understand the strategy of the U.S. government and its allies -- including Almagro and now the president-elect of Argentina -- we have to look at what happened in the 2013 Venezuelan presidential election. In 2013, President Maduro won by 1.5 percentage points, but there was absolutely no doubt about the result. Because of the extensive safeguards in the voting process -- including an immediate audit, with witnesses, of a random sample of 54 percent of voting stations -- former U.S. president and election expert Jimmy Carter called Venezuela's election system "the best in the world."

Read more ...

Published on 9 December 2015 by Venezuela Analysis


The United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) suffered a crushing defeat in Sunday’s National Assembly elections, winning just 55 of 167 seats. Formerly in opposition, the Venezuelan right took a two-thirds majority with 112 seats, gaining control of the South American country’s legislature for the first time in 17 years.

The outcome affords the Venezuelan right an unprecedented opportunity to roll back the gains of the Bolivarian Revolution by legal means, without having to resort to coups or other forms of extra-institutional violence. But will they succeed?

Counter-Revolution without Counter-Hegemony?

Under Venezuela’s democratic system, the single-house National Assembly holds enormous power: a two-thirds super-majority can pass or revoke organic constitutional laws, replace Supreme Court magistrates, appoint the heads of crucial public institutions such as the Public Prosecutor’s office and the National Electoral Council, and even convene a constituent assembly to rewrite the constitution.

In short, a two-thirds majority gives the opposition all of the institutional weapons necessary to reverse many of the key transformations of the Venezuelan state achieved by the Bolivarian Revolution over the last seventeen years.

They will now be empowered to revoke critical revolutionary legislation such as the Organic Law of Communes, the Organic Work and Workers’ Law (LOTTT), among numerous others, repeal international treaties such as the ALBA-TP and PetroCaribe, as well as pack the Supreme Court with an eye towards impeaching President Nicolas Maduro.

However, while the opposition has indeed won a super-majority and the concomitant legal power to pursue these changes, this does not necessarily mean that they have a popular mandate to carry out such a reactionary agenda.

Read more ...

Published on 3 December by Venezuela Analysis

cameron rajoy

Last Tuesday several European newspapers published an open-letter written by high ranking rightwing political figures in the European Union (EU) and Latin America, criticising the Venezuelan government and its institutions for violating democratic norms just a few days before the country heads to parliamentary elections this December 6th. 

Signed by: Mariano Rajoy (President of Spain), David Cameron (Prime Minister of Great Britain), Manuel Valls (Prime Minister France), Thorbjørn Jagland (Secretary General of the Council of Europe), Felipe González (former President of Spain), Henrique Cardoso (former President of Brasil) and Ricardo Lagos (former President of Chile),the letter accuses the Maduro administration of an “abuse of power,” breaching “democratic” ideals associated with “Western political culture” and using foul play to turn the upcoming election results in its favour. 

Entitled “Venezuela can have free and fair elections”, the letter was widely republished amongst the LENA group (Leading European Newspaper Alliance) and in newspapers such as El País (Spain), Die Welt (Germany) and the Miami Herald. 

In particular, the political figures take up the defence of jailed political opposition leader, Leopoldo Lopez, who was sentenced to 13 years in prison by Venezuelan institutions earlier this year for crimes related to the 2014 “barricades”, including incitement to public violence, association to commit crimes, and promoting damage and arson. His wife Lilian Tintori is currently at the forefront of an international campaign to release him. She met with Mariano Rajoy, the European Parliament and other European politicians in October.

Read more ...

Published on 26 November 2015 by TeleSUR English

luis diaz 2

On Wednesday a regional opposition leader, Luis Manuel Diaz, was shot during an election campaign event. Just over a week out from Venezuela’s decisive National Assembly elections, the country’s opposition and certain key national and international media were quick to blame the government.

The head of AD, Henry Ramos wrote on Twitter just minutes after the murder that Diaz had been killed by a shotgun. He claimed he was shot "by armed PSUV gangs from a vehicle." The BBC, and Reuters were quick to cover the story, though they have rarely covered the hundreds of rural workers, indigenous, union, and pro-government activists who have been murdered over the last decade. The Guardian was quick to cover the U.S. condemnation of the murder, with the U.S. quick to label the murder government sponsored “intimidation” of the opposition.

However, the government and government supporters would have little to gain, politically, from such an incident, and it’s convenient for the opposition to be able to claim to know who the shooter was and what his political intentions were within minutes of the event. An examination of who Luis Diaz was and the circumstances show that other scenarios are likely:

Read more ...

Published on 22 November 2015 by TeleSur English

Macri Nov15

Argentina’s president-elect, Mauricio Macri, vowed to make drastic changes Monday to open up the economy to investors and rearrange foreign ties after his electoral victory over government-backed Peronist candidate Daniel Scioli on Sunday. “You made the impossible possible,” Macri of the Let’s Change coalition said to supporters Sunday night. Indeed, Macri’s victory marks the first time the corporate elite-aligned, right-wing has come to power in Argentina through democratic means.

Macri, a businessman and former mayor of Buenos Aires, has promised to cut capital controls and trade restrictions in the name of boosting the ailing economy. He is also expected to cut subsidies to energy and transportation sectors. "The is the beginning of a new era that has to carry us toward the opportunities we need to grow and progress," Macri said to supporters Sunday night.

Critics say Macri’s proposals will turn the country back to 1990s neoliberalism, rolling back the social welfare programs of President Cristina Fernandez and her husband, former President Nestor Kirchner, which have benefited poor and working class Argentines.

Read more ...

Donate to RATB

Enter Amount:

Find us on