The U.S. Embargo against Venezuela:
The State Department’s Mock Indignation Gives
a Bad Name to U.S. Diplomacy
Council on Hemispheric Affairs
Following the announcement by the State Department that it was
imposing an arms sale sanction against Venezuela, a Chávez
advisor infuriated Washington when he responded with an apparently
retaliatory announcement that Caracas would consider selling its
American-made F-16’s to Iran. The proposed sale irritated U.S.
policymakers, whose initial imposition of the embargo was rationalized
by the vague, if not totally contrived, accusations involving Hugo
Chávez’s friendship with the leaders of U.S. classified
rogue states of Cuba and Iran. Caracas’ threat of selling off
the F-16 is somewhat logical, as the U.S. earlier had denied Venezuela
the parts necessary to maintain its fleet of 21 F-16’s, rendering
those aircraft — which are in need of upgrading and repair
— little better than scrap metal.
In a certain sense, Washington’s new round of bluster can
be properly seen as merely part of an ongoing war of words and spleen
against Caracas, in which Chávez more than holds his own,
much to the joy of the average Latin American. Venezuela and the
U.S. have exchanged countless salvos of sharp rhetoric at each other,
with Chávez describing the U.S. as a “pig” whose
appointment at the slaughterhouse is imminent, and Secretary of
State Rice portraying the Chávez administration as unconstructive
and as being “a negative force in the region.” Venezuela’s
gonzo response to the new U.S. embargo fits into the milieu of bounteous
hot air that has become increasingly typical between the two countries,
though it has not yet ended up with the CIA ultimately being called
in to settle matters.
Bringing in Goebbels
There is some reason to believe, however, that the State Department
actually does have a plan, and that these verbal jabs on Washington’s
part have a calculated purpose, as they seem to represent a concerted
attempt to undermine the legitimacy of Chávez’s constitutional
government. This effort already has included backing a failed coup
against him in April 2002 – which has resulted in unremitting
hostility ever since. It is also worth commenting that Chávez’s
own reaction has been only slightly less confrontational. The big
difference is that Chavez is being the playful, irascible, confounding
and confrontational wunderkind that he always has been.
As for the State Department, with Secretary Condoleezza Rice as
its author, its Venezuela policy continues to be bovine, hypocritically
cynical and grossly unprofessional in promoting a heavy handed policy
against Venezuela, as much based on inventions and gross exaggeration
as on facts. This strategy, after it condemns all other peaceful
options and decides to turn to a CIA deployment or negotiates an
agreement with a contract killer to eliminate Chávez in order
to safeguard the U.S.’ oil supply from the regime, would cost
Washington dearly.
Taking the high road that should strike a responsive chord with
most Latin Americans, the Venezuelan leader observed that the United
States “tramples on small and weak nations.” Yet at this
point, Chávez neither has threatened nor halted supplies
of oil to the United States. Nor did he seem particularly distressed
by the sanctions. An official Venezuelan foreign ministry communiqué
was issued stating that the U.S. accusation was “despicable”
and was “based on a futile campaign to discredit and isolate
Venezuela, to destabilize its democratic government and prepare
the political conditions for attack.”
One can only hope that somewhere in the Bush administration, a
concentration of fast disappearing wisdom remains, and that it can
bring to a halt to the State Department’s precarious –
if not suicidal – descent into reckless arrogance and sprawling
self-indulgence. As of now, the administration’s game plan
is primitively simple and grossly offensive. Inspired by Nazi-era
propaganda czar Joseph Goebbels, the model is to keep on relentlessly
denouncing Chávez as a “dictator” until the public
begins to automatically accept the connections between the word
and the man.
Of course, standing in the way of the administration’s success
in convincingly making its case is the fact that Chávez’s
political movement has won twice the number of highly attended elections
than President Bush has, and by consistently far larger majorities—around
60 percent better. Furthermore, the TV networks are overwhelmingly
dominated by the Chávez-hating middle-class opposition, and
the same is true for the print media. To describe today’s Venezuela
as a dictatorship is an unmitigated lie, and despite the adamant
pleas of Rice and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, it is subscribed to
only by a questionable sector of the U.S. media, led by Washington
Post columnist Jackson Diehl and the extraordinary science fiction
editorial page of the Wall Street Journal.
—May 18th, 2006
The Council on Hemispheric Affairs, founded in 1975, is an independent,
non-profit, non-partisan, tax-exempt research and information organization.
It has been described on the Senate floor as being “one of
the nation’s most respected bodies of scholars and policy makers.”
For more information, please see our web page at www.coha.org; or
contact our Washington offices by phone (202) 223-4975, fax (202)
223-4979, or email coha@coha.org.
Connexions
Library Title Index - Connexions
Directory A-Z Index - Connexions
Directory Subject Index
Connexions
Links - Periodicals
& Broadcasters Online - Volunteer
Opportunities
Publicity
& media relations resources - The
Connexions Digest Archive
Connexions
Phone: 416-964-5735
E-mail:
www.connexions.org
|