A+ R A-

Obama is Hostile Toward Venezuela

E-mail Print PDF

Share this article with a friend

(NNPA) When President Obama was first elected, in 2008, much of the world waited to see what sort of changes he would introduce in the relationship of the U.S. towards the rest of the planet. In fact, he was prematurely awarded the Nobel Peace Prize based on expectations that the U.S. would pull back from wars and bullying. Even skeptical leaders, such as the late president of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, were prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Despite the hopes and prayers, this administration has done precious little to rebuild ties with countries that were threatened by the Bush administration. Case in point: Venezuela. The most recent issue, which is highly ironic, to say the least, has been the refusal of the Obama administration – at least as of the writing – to recognize the results of the recent Venezuelan election. By a slim majority, Nicolas Maduro won his race for president. The opposition in Venezuela cried foul, as was expected. Yet the Venezuelan elections have not been challenged by independent observers. Rather, there has been a recognition that the election results were close, a phenomenon with which we in the U.S.A. should be quite familiar.

What happened next was odd. The U.S.A. refused to recognize the results of the election, claiming that there was a need for a recount. Now, let’s get this one straight. From the country that in November 2000 had an election that was stolen (Bush v. Gore) and where a recount was stopped by the Supreme Court, we have the audacity to demand that another country carries out a recount? In fact, the U.S.A. is asking a country that has elections that have consistently been proven to have been clean to conduct a recount?

Despite the fine rhetoric, the Obama administration has continued the tried and true path of most U.S. administrations in treating Latin America as if it is the backyard of the United States. Rather than recognizing the sordid history of the relationship between the U.S.A. and Latin America, whereby the U.S. has consistently intervened politically, militarily and economically in the internal affairs of the region, the Obama administration seems to be following a path of more subtle destabilization. It has offered fine rhetoric about better relationships with the rest of the hemisphere. At the same time it has reinforced a traditional U.S. dominant role. A case in point was the Honduran coup of 2009 where the Obama administration first condemned the coup. This was then followed by U.S. efforts which undermined attempts to return the rightfully elected president to office.

The behavior of the Obama administration gives every Latin American and Caribbean leader pause because, in effect, it suggests that the U.S.A. will continue to exert its influence, not through diplomacy, but through implied threats. In the case of Venezuela, the failure to recognize the legitimate Venezuelan elections is tantamount to giving the signal that a coup in Venezuela would be a legitimate response.

No more nice speeches, Mr. President. If you want to act like Teddy Roosevelt, let’s be more honest.

Bill Fletcher, Jr. is a Senior Scholar with the Institute for Policy Studies, the immediate past president of TransAfrica Forum and the author of “They’re Bankrupting Us” -And Twenty Other Myths about Unions. Follow him at www.billfletcherjr.com.

Add comment

By using our comment system, you agree to not post profane, vulgar, offensive, or slanderous comments. Spam and soliciting are strictly prohibited. Violation of these rules will result in your comments being deleted and your IP Address banned from accessing our website in the future. Your e-mail address will NOT be published, sold or used for marketing purposes.


Security code
Refresh

Comments  

 
+1 # Gerrardo 2013-05-03 08:39
Maduro illegally applied $143 million in government funds to his 4 month campaign. Capriles had private funds for his legally limited 10 day campaign. Capriles was limited to 4 minutes of air time on TV or radio per day to campaign. Maduro broke the rules and had unlimited air time and proved time. It was not a fair election.
A recount would only confirm that Maduro won. Why doesn't the government do a recount and prove once and for that they won. The reason is that they use fraud and cheated in numerous other ways.
Reply
 
 
0 # Chris M 2013-05-04 13:41
"The crucial role played by media in ensuring free and fair elections was apparent in a number of settings. Political contests in countries including Russia, Venezuela, Ecuador, and Ukraine demonstrated that a level electoral playing field is impossible when the government is able to use its control over broadcast media to skew coverage, and ultimately votes, in its favor. By contrast, more balanced and open media coverage prior to electoral contests in Armenia and Georgia helped lead to gains for opposition parties and, in Georgia, a peaceful transfer of power."

http://[censored].freedomhouse.org/article/freedom-press-2013-middle-east-volatility-amid-global-decline
Reply
 

Quantcast

BVN National News Wire