An Attack on Venezuela’s Democracy

LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN, 12 Aug 2024

Leonardo Flores | CodePink - TRANSCEND Media Service

From CodePink

31 Jul 2024 – A massive cyberattack, a global disinformation campaign and armed gangs are key elements in an attempted coup in Venezuela following presidential elections on July 28. The results of those elections, in which 10 candidates competed, saw President Maduro win 51.2%  of the vote against opposition leader Edmundo González’s 44.2%, with 80% of the vote counted. The remaining eight candidates combined for 4.6%, in a vote that has become controversial for all the wrong reasons. González and his far-right allies rejected the results and alleged fraud.

For months, the Venezuelan government has been denouncing the far-right’s strategy for these elections: use friendly pollsters to disseminate wildly inaccurate polls, favoring Gónzalez; denounce the elections before they were held; denounce the results before they were announced; and lead violent street protests similar to those of 2014 and 2017 (guarimbas).

As predicted, the far-right forced a narrative of fraud into social and traditional media, while armed gangs and paramilitary actors sowed terror in the days following the election, attacking public institutions, security forces and innocent bystanders. Chavismo responded with a massive rally in Caracas to  support the electoral results and oppose the violence.

Although tensions remain, the government appears to have snuffed out the coup. The situation is complicated by the fact that Venezuela’s National Electoral Council (an independent branch of government solely responsible for elections) was hit by a massive cyberattack the night of the elections, that continues to affect its website as of July 31.

Venezuela’s Electoral Process and a Cyberattack

Anyone familiar with Venezuela’s electoral process would know to be skeptical about allegations of fraud in the vote count. This process, the same one lauded as the “best in the world” by Jimmy Carter twelve years ago, is renowned for its safety and transparency. This two-minute video by Venezuelanalysis is one of the best explainers of why fraud is nearly impossible.

The CNE is led by a council of five rectors; currently, three are aligned with the government, while two are aligned with the opposition. If there was widespread fraud, why have the opposition members of the CNE stayed silent?

Key to understanding the claims of fraud is that once polls close, the voting machines print out the local results (actas) before transmitting them to CNE headquarters for a complete digital tally. Copies of the actas are given to witnesses from any political party present at each precinct.

Prior to the election, eight candidates – including President Maduro – signed a pact with the CNE agreeing to respect the results. González refused to do so and his party said it would not abide by the CNE results, but rather would solely recognize their own actas. The only way to ensure that a picture or scan of an acta is real is to compare it to actas published by other political parties and the CNE’s localized results.

This is impeded by the cyberattack on the CNE. According to a CNE technician, the hack could not alter the vote count, but delayed the transmission of the results. This meant that the CNE published its first report on results later than expected, and delayed the publication of precinct-level results, which in other elections appeared on its website within a day or so of the vote.

This delay was crucial in allowing the opposition to frame the elections as irregular and fraudulent. The New York Times published an analysis of the opposition’s alleged actas, in an effort to lend credence to their claims of fraud. However, at the moment there is no reason to believe those actas are real, and every reason to believe that the far-right opposition is lying about the results. They cried fraud in the 2004, 2013, 2017, 2018 and 2023 elections, without presenting credible evidence. No actual evidence has been presented to bolster their claims.

Disinformation Campaign

In the months prior to the elections, pollsters with links to the opposition claimed González had a huge lead. These pollsters have a history of bias in favor of the opposition. In the 2018 presidential elections, they were wrong by an average of 26 percentage points.

On election day, the opposition widely disseminated an exit poll by a U.S. funded firm with links to the CIA. Exit polls have been banned in Venezuela after they were used to destabilize the country following the 2004 referendum. This poll was cited by mainstream media, far-right operatives and political figures as “proof” that the CNE’s results were fraudulent. Note that a different exit poll by Hinterlaces, a firm seen as friendly to the Venezuelan government, came much closer to predicting the results.

As of July 31, the opposition claimed to have more than 81% of the actas, giving González a 67% to 30% victory over Maduro. They uploaded their alleged actas onto a slick website, further demonstrating that this was a coup long in the making. For its part, the pro Maduro coalition planned to release its actas on July 31.

The opposition figures fed a narrative of a landslide González victory and outright fraud committed by the Maduro government. This led to a social media campaign featuring the use of a major bot network and AI that amplified claims of fraud and engaged in making fake news go viral. Among those complicit in spreading disinformation were Elon Musk – whose own social media platform put disclaimers on several of his posts – and Argentine President Milei, who called for a coup in Venezuela.

The barrage of disinformation and fake news about the results set the stage for the next phase of the attempted coup: violence committed by fascistic paramilitary groups and armed gangs.

Violence and Armed Gangs

In the late hours of the 28th, opposition protesters were called to the streets by their far-right leaders. While some protests were peaceful, others were not; disinformation in social media disinformation painted a chaotic picture of Venezuela in which average citizens were being brutalized by security forces.

There are too many social media examples to choose from, but I will note two:

1. A right-wing operative claimed a police officer pointed a gun at a woman and her child. Video of the incident shows him urging them to leave the area with his arms.
2. A man on the street wails for the death of his friend and blames police for his murder, as his friend lies on the ground next to him, “blood” on the street. Video of the incident then shows the man alive and well, seated behind his friend on a motorcycle; the “blood” remains on the street next to the front wheel.

Several great threads are documenting some of the more egregious examples, including the one at this link.

On the day after the election, Venezuela experienced violence as paramilitary groups and armed gangs burned buildings, sacked and looted a regional CNE headquarters, blocked roads, attacked police and military, beat up people who looked “chavista”, attempted to attack a hospital, burned a community radio station and  school, tore down statues of Chávez and Indigenous leaders, attacked local community leaders, military installations and food distribution centers, among others.

It is unclear how many people were killed as a result of this wave of violence.

Capture gang members claim to have received $150 to participate in “Maria Corina Machado’s activities in Caracas” (roughly at minute 31:40 in the link), including claiming fraud on July 28, and take to the streets on July 29 to cause damage and disturbances, leading to a “bloodbath.”  Note that prior to the elections Maduro was widely condemned in corporate media for suggesting there would be a bloodbath if the far-right attempted to seize power.

The Venezuelan government reports that some of the violent actors were caught with Captagon, a stimulant used by mercenaries and terrorists throughout the world to maintain focus.

Maduro made even more serious claims about the U.S. role in the attempted coup. In a meeting of the Council of State, he said the perpetrators of violence “entered [Venezuela] on planes we allowed the United States to bring migrants on. It was an operation of trickery in U.S. imperial diplomacy.” (As part of dialogue over the past year between the two countries, Venezuela allowed deportation flights from the U.S.)

President Maduro also noted that the violence was “financed by the United States and Colombian narcotrafficking.” Prior to the elections Colombian paramilitaries reported being approached by the far-right to carry out attacks in Venezuela. Moreover, last month opposition figure Carlos Prosperi said that right-wing operatives and politicians were getting up to $9,000 a month from funds stolen from the Venezuelan state by the U.S. government.

As of July 31, the violence has mostly ended but the disinformation campaign continues.

Why Maduro Won and the Far-Right Lost

Central to the idea of the disinformation campaign is the idea that Maduro could not possibly have won. A key element of this narrative has been the decades-long, systematic attempt to make chavistas invisible – to pretend that the biggest political force in the country simply does not exist.

Corporate media rarely shows us the massive demonstrations in support of the government prior to and after the elections. Western think tanks never analyze the depth of organization throughout the different layers of chavismo and the interactions between these layers that not only creates a formidable machine to get out the vote, but also to mobilize on the streets in moments of crisis (federal, state, municipal, political parties, communes and other expressions of people’s power).

This is one of the reasons that the opposition’s claim that Maduro only took 30% of the vote (3.2 million votes, per their figures) lacks credibility. In the 2018 presidential elections, Maduro won with 6.2 million votes. Since then, Venezuela has experienced: three and a half straight years of economic growth; inflation under control and at historically low levels; 96% of food consumed is now produced in the country; a huge boom in entrepreneurship; and an economy projected by the IMF to have among the highest growth in Latin America.

On top of that, social programs have been strengthened. The Great Housing Mission reached 5.1 million dignified public housing units delivered (assuming 3-4 people per household, that may be anywhere between 50-66% of the population). The local committees for supply and production (CLAP) continue to distribute discounted or free food to millions of families every month, which may well have prevented famine during the worst of U.S. sanctions.

The base of chavismo was energized and the PSUV itself has more than 5 million members. In fact, even the markets were betting on Maduro, as was Chevron, which inked another oil deal with the government in the run up to the election.

On the other side, the opposition ran a terrible campaign. Edmundo González was rarely on the campaign trail, and instead he was represented by his proxy Maria Corina Machado – the latest opposition figure to have Washington’s full blessing. Their plan to privatize everything from the oil industry to public housing did not resonate with a population deeply familiar with the neoliberal shock therapies of the 90s. Close ties to Argentina’s Milei and Israel, did not resonate amongst a population that is watching the economic disaster in Argentina and the genocide in Palestine.

Opposition leader Henrique Capriles – a two time presidential loser  who continues to be a major player – characterized Gonzalez’s campaign as “the worst he’s ever seen.” Two opposition governors and nearly a dozen mayors flipped their support to Maduro in the days prior to the election. The aforementioned Prosperi, who actually participated in last year’s opposition primaries only to denounce them for widespread irregularities (primaries where Machado won a non-credible 92% of the vote), also flipped his support to Maduro. Why would opposition leaders do this if they believed a victory was within reach?

U.S. & International Response

The Maduro victory has been recognized by dozens of countries, including China, Russia, Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Honduras, and Qatar, among others, as well as multilateral organizations such as OPEC and Alba (Bolivarian Alliance for Our Americas). On the flip side, Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay, Costa Rica and Peru, among others, refused to recognize the elections. Peru – which is led by de facto dictator Dina Boluarte – went so far as to recognize González as the president (Guaidó 2.0, as Maduro called it).

Brasil, Colombia and – to an extent – Mexico, are playing a strategic role of “wait and see,” defending Venezuela’s sovereignty to greater (Mexico) and lesser (Colombia) degrees. They appear to be positioning themselves in such a way to try to influence the Biden administration to moderate its response.

It is not surprising that the chaos in the U.S. executive branch has led to differing statements from Biden, Harris and Secretary of State Blinken. The first to pronounce herself was Harris, who tweeted on Sunday that the U.S. “will continue to work toward a more democratic… future” for Venezuela, remarks widely interpreted as admitting the far-right had lost. Blinken then expressed “serious concerns that the result announced does not reflect the will or the votes of the Venezuelan people.” However, on July 30 Biden, following a conversation with Brazilian President Lula, called for the release of voting data, stopping short of endorsing the fraud narrative.

Possible Consequences of the Attempted Coup

This division within the U.S. government points at a possible reason for the attempted coup: the poisoning of relations between the U.S. and Venezuela. Over the past year, the United States engaged in dialogue with Venezuela and partially softened oil sanctions, in exchange for certain “electoral guarantees.” The coup attempt will make it difficult for the Biden administration to continue its policy of easing the pressure off Venezuela. It will also materially benefit Machado and her allies, who will keep receiving Venezuelan funds held in U.S. accounts to continue their regime change endeavors.

In Venezuela, there is confidence that CNE results will match the ballot receipts, confirming the integrity of the election. Criminal elements are being captured, and military forces have repeatedly expressed their support for the Constitution and elections.

The coup appears to be over, though it would be shameful if it leads to a hardening or prolonging of sanctions. The real “irregularity” is the decade-long economic war Venezuelans have endured. They voted under threat of their lives being turned upside down again, of their family members dying of preventable conditions or leaving as economic refugees. Despite the threats, they rejected the far-right candidate and voted for peace. Hawks in Washington will do all they can to make them pay for their vote.

_______________________________________________

Leonardo Flores is a Venezuelan political analyst, activist and founding member of the Venezuela Solidarity Network. 

Go to Original – codepink.org

Share this article: email mastodon facebook 🔗 copy link

DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

There are no comments so far.