|
Opposition marches turn violent in Venezuela
Compiled by Greg White
Mar. 2 (AGR)-- Controversy over a possible recall referendum
on the presidency of Hugo Chavez sparked intense outbreaks of violence
in Venezuela. Opposition groups clashed with government forces as the
annual G-15 summit of developing nations opened in Caracas.
A march “in defense of the signatures” drew thousands of anti-Chavez
protesters Friday, Feb. 27, in Caracas, and the front lines of the demonstration
crossed the security perimeter that had been erected to protect the
heads of state and officials gathered for the summit of the Group of
15 (G15) developing countries.
The National Guard pushed back those groups with tear gas and plastic
bullets, and confrontations spread to several streets throughout the
city, as well as adjacent residential areas -- home to many participants
in the opposition marches -- turning them into centers of chaos. Army
units reinforced the presence of the National Guard as the troops tried
to clear the main routes through Caracas that had been blocked by opposition
groups.
Two people died from gunshot wounds, one a Chavez supporter and the
other a member of the opposition, and dozens of people were injured,
several of them by bullets.
President Chavez accused the metropolitan police of Caracas, under the
authority of opposition mayor Alfredo Pena, and other municipal forces
of providing protection for the violent protesters. “If it is necessary
to intervene [in those police forces] with armored tanks, I will do
so. I have already given the orders,” he said. The opposition claimed
that the National Guard and police loyal to the president are fomenting
violence.
Despite the violence, the G-15 summit is bringing together leaders from
Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean began with Chavez urging
the leaders to reject free-market policies imposed by industrialized
nations. “Globalization has not brought expected independence.
It has increased dependence,” he said. “Free market ideology
was created by the North to serve its own interests.” He accused
the United States and the European Union of spending billions of dollars
on subsidies that shut out Third World products while demanding that
poor countries eliminate any barriers to their imports. Chavez is a
vocal opponent of US-led negotiations to establish a free trade zone
throughout the Western Hemisphere.
Near the summit site at the downtown Hilton Hotel in the capital, guard
troops fired dozens of tear gas canisters at the jeering crowd of anti-Chavez
protesters, who responded by throwing rocks. Some in the crowd set trash
and tires ablaze. Dozens of opposition protesters blocked a Caracas
highway late Friday with burning tire barricades, while others banged
pots and pans to protest the violence.
Opposition leaders called the demonstration to protest against further
delays in the verification of signatures for a referendum on whether
Chavez’s term should be cut short. The National Electoral Council
(CNE), voted by a 3-2 majority to place “in question” hundreds
of thousands of signatures gathered in December to petition for a referendum
on whether Chavez should remain in office. The CNE doubts that those
signatures are legitimate, and the ones already deemed valid are less
than the 2.4 million (20 percent of the electorate) required for convening
a referendum. The Council said it will give voters the opportunity this
month to confirm whether or not they signed the original petition.
The opposition coalition known as the Democratic Coordinator says the
move is a scam that violates the good faith of the signatories. Opposition
leaders are urging the CNE to “send for repair” the petitions
in which the personal information about the signatories appear in similar
handwriting, though different from the signatures, which led the electoral
authorities to doubt their authenticity. The opposition is divided about
whether to accept a CNE offer for clarifying the signatures.
Should a referendum be held and President Chavez loses, the constitution
stipulates a replacement be chosen by a general election within 30 days.
If he wins or if no referendum is held, then he will serve out his term
until 2006. Chavez was elected in 1998 and re-elected in 2000 to a six-year
term.
Violence continued sporadically throughout the weekend, resulting in
dozens of injuries. The barricades and the clashes shook up the routines
of a dozen middle-class districts in Caracas, and also in parts of the
western cities of Maracaibo, Barquisimeto, Valencia and San Cristobal.
Military helicopters roared in low runs over Caracas as soldiers fired
tear gas and plastic bullets to repel several hundred opposition demonstrators.
Two international journalists were shot. Cameraman Felipe Izquierdo,
of the US-based Spanish language TV network Univision, received a bullet
in the foot, and Juan Barreto, photographer for the French news agency
AFP, was shot in the hand and in the abdomen. “A young man who
was in the opposition group shot me in the chest with a 9mm pistol.
Fortunately, my bullet-proof vest saved me,” Barreto told IPS.
On Sunday, Chavez convened some 150,000 followers, coming from different
parts of the country, along the main highway through Caracas. The rally
was a “protest against US intervention,” because Chavez maintains
that the opposition is guided by the dictates of Washington, and is
trying to repeat the coup d’etat that removed him from power for
two days in April 2002. He accused President Bush of heeding advice
from “imperialist” aides to support the coup. “He was
an asshole to believe them,” Chavez roared at a huge rally of supporters
in Caracas.
Chavez’s claims of US intervention have been bolstered by documents
recently obtained by the Venezuela Solidarity Committee through the
Freedom of Information Act. The documents reveal a consistent pattern
of funding from various US government departments and agencies, such
as the State Department and the National Endowment for Democracy, to
a variety of well-known anti-Chavez groups in Venezuela.
One memorandum between the US State Department and the NED revealed
that a payment of $1 million had been awarded to Venezuelan opposition
groups immediately after their failed coup against Chavez’s government
in April 2002. Another revealed that Accion Campesina (Farmers’Action)
received more than $80,000 to engage in efforts to hinder the passage
and implementation of the government’s land reform law in 2002-03.
Another anti-Chavez organization, Sumate, received $53,400 for “electoral
education” between September 2003 and September 2004. The funds
awarded to Sumate were, according to the NED grant, to “train citizens
throughout Venezuela in the electoral process and to promote participation
in a recall referendum.”
Chavez said Sunday that if Washington interferes in Venezuelan politics
against him, “not one drop of Venezuelan petroleum will go to the
United States.” Currently, Venezuela exports 1.5 million barrels
of oil to the US market daily.
“Venezuela is not Haiti and Chavez is not Aristide,” he said.
Sources: BBC, Green Left Weekly,
Independent (UK), Inter Press Service
US pushes plan to go after suspected
WMD
By Haider Rizvi
United Nations, Feb. 27 (IPS)— The United States is pressing
the UN Security Council to endorse a draft resolution that would allow
the use of force against “entities and individuals” suspected
of trying to develop, possess or transfer weapons of mass destruction
(WMD), diplomats and observers here say.
Though they say they are equally concerned about proliferation of the
weapons, many Security Council members fear the resolution would give
Washington a free hand to unilaterally deal with the as yet undefined
“entities and individuals.”
The draft resolution states that some countries “may require assistance
within their territories, and invite states in a position to” prevent
the proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, rockets,
and vehicles capable of delivering such weapons, a phrase that makes
many suspicious of US intentions.
The proposal “should not be a context to whip the countries,”
said an Asian diplomat who did not want to be named. “How can we
talk about faceless actors when there’s no agreed definition of
terrorists? You know, whom you called a terrorist yesterday could be
a president today.”
According to the draft, Washington wants the Security Council to ask
all member nations to help prevent and “if necessary, interdict
shipment of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons, their means of
delivery, and related material in accordance with the international
and national laws.”
“This is a dangerous concept,” said an Asian diplomat who
also requested anonymity. “This can be misused by adversaries in
the name of interdiction.”
The US resolution stems from the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI),
a plan announced by President George W. Bush in May last year as a step
towards creating new legal agreements authorizing the search of planes
and ships carrying suspect cargo.
The PSI has been endorsed by nine European nations, including Britain,
Germany and France, as well as Australia. Washington and its allies
claim the proposal is legal under the UN Charter and the Security Council
Presidential Statement of 1992.
But legal experts say neither of those regulations gives nations the
authority to interdict shipments on the high seas.
Diplomats say negotiations have stalled on the question of the definition
of “interdiction” because two of five permanent Council members,
China and Russia, have refused to go along with the current draft resolution.
“The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is a serious
issue,” Russia’s UN Ambassador Sergey Lavrov told reporters
recently. “But we need to develop a language which is clear.”
“It’s a sensitive issue,” said Chinese ambassador Wang
Guangya, who is also president of the Security Council for February.
“It can be best solved by the judgments of the International Atomic
Energy Agency” (IAEA), the UN’s nuclear watchdog, he added.
Recent IAEA investigations into Iran’s nuclear program led to the
arrest of Pakistani nuclear scientist Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, who publicly
confessed his involvement in transferring his country’s nuclear
technology to other nations.
Diplomats say so far that case is the only example that could be used
to define the “entities and individuals” in the draft US resolution.
But Pakistan, a non-permanent Security Council member, sees the case
in a different light. “Dr. Khan was an aberration,” a Pakistani
diplomat said. “He has been taken care of.”
A US diplomat had a different interpretation. “This resolution
is trouble for [Pakistan],” he said.
Negotiations on the resolution have so far been confined to the five
permanent members of the Security Council, which frustrates some non-permanent
but elected members.
“Why is it up to the P-5 (permanent five) to determine the agenda
of non-proliferation?” asked a diplomat from a non-permanent member
nation. “On the one hand, they are the preachers. On the other
hand, they are the sinners.”
All permanent members — the United States, Russia, Britain, France
and China — continue to possess thousands of nuclear weapons in
their arsenals. Washington is no longer making it a secret that it is
producing a new generation of those weapons.
Experts on international law say they share the concerns of the elected
members of the Security Council — that Washington might use force
against some nations under the pretext of implementing a UN Security
Council resolution.
“They are right,” said John Burroughs, executive director
of the Lawyers Committee for Nuclear Policy, a US-based non-profit disarmament
advocacy group.
“They think if you get this resolution on paper, the US may use
military force like it did in Iraq, even though the UN did not approve
it.”
Washington is seeking Security Council approval under Chapter 7 of the
UN Charter, which binds states to implement Council decisions. But Burroughs
says he and his colleagues, who have been working on issues related
to weapons of mass destruction for more than two decades, doubt if the
move to adopt the WMD resolution is legitimate.
“There is nothing in the UN Charter that gives the Security Council
the authority to adopt global legislation,” he said. “This
resolution deals with complex situations” and involves individuals
not acting on behalf of states.
Burroughs suggests that any effective implementation of such a proposal
would require the involvement of the UN secretary-general and the body’s
department of disarmament, in addition to negotiations on multilateral
agreements such as the Biological Weapons Convention.
Diplomats say non-permanent Security Council members want to address
the issue of proliferation by enhancing the agenda on disarmament. But
Washington and other permanent members prefer to deal with it separately,
they add.
“This is the basic problem with the US and others,” said Burroughs.
“They think the terrorism threat can be solved with non-proliferation
efforts. That’s not right. It’s going to require eliminating
weapons of mass destruction everywhere. It requires political will to
do so.”
Agent Orange victims buoyed by US lawsuit
By Tran Dinh Thanh Lam
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, Feb. 26 (IPS)— “I’m
glad that finally some concrete action has been taken against American
chemical firms, asking them to be responsible for the harm that their
Agent Orange has done to Vietnamese people,’’ said 54-year-old
Vietnam War veteran Nguyen Vinh.
Vinh, who blamed his cancer and his daughter’s cerebral palsy on
the defoliant used by US and South Vietnamese forces between 1961 and
1971, referred to a lawsuit filed by Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange
on Feb. 5 in federal court in Brooklyn, New York.
The first-of-its-kind action seeks compensation for health problems
tied to the defoliant’s carcinogenic active ingredient, dioxin.
Prepared with help from the newly formed, non-governmental Vietnam Association
for Agent Orange Victims (VAAOV) on behalf of three Vietnamese plaintiffs,
the lawsuit has invigorated many others, including Vinh.
“I’m going to ask VAAOV to help lodge my case soon,’’
said Vinh, who said he was exposed to Agent Orange while fighting against
US troops in Tay Ninh Province, near the Cambodian border.
Like Vinh, many victims — who cope daily with cancers, nervous
disorders and other illnesses tied to high dioxin levels in their blood
— are watching the latest lawsuit closely to see if they, too,
might overcome poverty and ease their suffering with money won through
legal action.
The lawsuit names three victims: Nguyen Van Quy, who suffers from lung
cancer and fathered two children with birth defects; Nguyen Thi Phi
Phi, who has had four miscarriages; and breast cancer patient Duong
Quynh Hoa.
US forces sprayed some 76 million liters of Agent Orange and other defoliants
during the Vietnam War, in a campaign known as Operation Ranch Hand.
Its goals were to deprive Viet Cong (revolutionary) troops of vegetation
they used for cover and food.
International scientists and Vietnamese government officials have said
that Agent Orange has damaged Vietnam’s environment, destroyed
forests, killed animals, and caused health problems not only to Viet
Cong troops but also to US soldiers operating in the region.
In 1984, US veterans won $180 million in compensation for death and
illness from Agent Orange manufacturers, in a settlement that involved
no admission of liability on the companies’ part. The US Supreme
Court ruled last year that veterans could press further claims despite
the earlier settlement.
Vietnam’s government has put the number of Agent Orange victims
nationwide at more than three million, but a Columbia University study
published last year suggested the figure is closer to five million and
that the contamination is much worse than previously thought.
Victims are scattered throughout northern and southern Vietnam and the
problem was exacerbated by US and allied forces when they abandoned
dioxin at numerous southern air bases. The chemical then leaked into
the water table, scientists said.
The government, which has tried to help Agent Orange victims but faces
complaints that its aid has come too late and is too little, is not
party to the victims’ lawsuit.
Tran Thanh Danh, a 57-year-old former lieutenant colonel in the People’s
Army, said, “The US should be taken to account for the Agent Orange
issue. If the government dares not ask compensation from the US, then
we will do it ourselves.”
Danh said the government preferred to seek humanitarian and rehabilitation
aid for victims, rather than confront US firms with legal action, so
as not to damage relations between the two countries.
Nguyen Trong Nhon, deputy chairman of VAAOV, said the US government
ought to do more to help.
“We have already helped the US with the MIA issue,” he said,
referring to Vietnamese efforts to locate and repatriate US troops,
or their remains, reported missing in action during the war. “Now,
it’s their turn to help us solve the Agent Orange problem.”
Nhon, a former health minister and president of the Vietnam Red Cross,
said the government had asked Washington to help Vietnamese Agent Orange
victims but its efforts had yet to yield results.
That was why his association was formed earlier this year to help Vietnamese
plaintiffs, he added.
“It’s high time for us to use the legal way,” Nhon said.
“Even in the US, war veterans affected by Agent Orange did not
get any assistance and had to lodge a lawsuit.’’
Le Van Tran, a lawyer here, said that the lawsuit ought not to rankle
relations between Washington and Hanoi.
“We have finally learnt to play the legal game with the US, just
like the game it has played against our catfish and shrimps,’’
he said, referring to recent trade disputes.
“It is a civilian case,’’ he added. “Vietnamese
citizens have the right to ask US chemical firms to compensate them
for the harmful effects of their products.”
VAAOV’s Nhon said his group planned to help other Agent Orange
victims to file suit but cautioned that the process could be arduous.
’”There are lots of Agent Orange victims in Vietnam but it’s
not an easy thing to complete the necessary documents required by US
law,’’ Nhon said.
Even so, he added, “We hope to win the first lawsuit to make a
good debut for other cases to come.’’
|
