A ¡NO! for reason

I have read so many idiots in the last three hours that I am forced to write about the Colombien plebiscite of today. Never mind that it will also have consequences for Venezuela.

When you go on vacation to Cartagena and think you
have been whitewashed by your travel agent

I heard "Brexit again! Trump next!"
I read the NYT being shocked
I see people wondering how could Colombians be so stupid, ungrateful, war loving folks!?

So let´s bring some of that hubris down, shall we?

First, the idiots doing amalgam. Today's vote in Colombian is not remotely close to the conditions of Brexit or Trump. Colombia is a, partially, warn torn country where everyone knows first or second hand the consequences of decades of a FARC guerrilla cum narko organization. Most people who voted in Colombia knew full well what they were voting for even if using the same facts led to different choices. With Brexit and Trump we have people that do not have enough problems in their real lives and are thus looking for new ones.


Second, the shock of the NYT and many other pundits lulled into quite a lot of confidence of a SI result in a country notoriously wrong in its polling folks. Does anyone remember how Antanas Mockus was a shoo in against Santos 6 years ago? But even if we assume that polls are better in Colombia than what some past mistakes may want you to think, the "shock" reflects also an inexcusable ignorance about what moves people in Colombia. Here in Venezuela the regime was careful not to embark in excess optimism, for once. The opposition, if anything, was shocked that the SI rode high in the polls. We all knew better. The cartoon on the side tells you what we thought of the Trojan dove.

So we come to the explanation of what happened.  I had decided not to write about the whole peace process much because, well, I have other priorities these days. But inspiration came tonight. Let's first go into the errors of Santos,

We can start with hubris, thinking that because he defeated the FARC as Uribe defense minister he was the hawk that could make peace credible. He got so enamored of this role that when things started becoming difficult he was unable to backtrack and forged ahead until today's crash.

Then came the choice of Havana and Castro's guidance to negotiate with its allies, the communist FARC. If at first there could be a case written for it, if anything to guarantee the discretion that the Cuban jail brought, it soon became clear that Santos was negotiating on the FARC turf, on the FARC mood swings, etc. But it got worse. As Venezuela started to unravel fast, that this one was a guarantee of the process became a minus. Colombians simply could not help but think as to whether an agreement with the FARC, made in Havana under the eyes of Venezuela's colonial masters, had a Venezuelan like future in store.

And there was Santos reelection problem. For many reasons having been elected the first time by right wing votes he got his narrow reelection courtesy of  weak left wing votes. That gave back some strength to a left that most thought Colombians had outgrown in its ideologies and appeal. Many did not appreciate.

I suppose that a mix of all that, plus an economy not performing too well in recent years pushed Santos to make concessions he should not have done. But the man wants a Nobel and a blessing by Pope Francis, so a special judicial court, and special political rights, and no jail terms were a low price for the "surrendering" FARC. In fact, I understand that some thought that the FARC got it easier than what the paramilitaries got in the much criticized deal of Uribe.

I for one always thought that the NO would prevail. I was surprised to hear that polls gave a significant lead to the SI,  but "Mockus" I thought! Then again I found it fishy that one week before the vote Santos had in Cartagena a massive signature ceremony with all dressed in white and coming from all around the world, including the UN secretary. Before the vote?

But I suppose I had heard too many stories of Colombians leaving their Venezuelan lives to restart in Colombia. I had heard too often the more and more condescending tone used by Colombians when asked about Venezuela on TV. And more. It was clear to me that a large chunk of Colombians did not want to risk a Venezuelan like future and they were going to fight such prospect.

My surprise, if you ask me, is that the SI went as high as it went. But I understand that the campaign conditions were grossly unfavorable for the NO side . I suppose that rubbing often with FARC and Chavistas has taught Santos a few lessons on how to "win" elections.........

I am not going to speculate on what happens to Colombia next. Already all parts have announced that in spite of all the electoral threats and lies, they are all going to work together, now, to improve the current agreement. Which at least leaves me the satisfaction of shutting down fast a lot of creeps saying that Colombians are warmongering idiots.

What is interesting for this blog readership is the effect on Venezuela.

First, Santos has been way too kind on Maduro even if he obviously dislikes the regime. But he needed Venezuela support to secure the deal, understanding full well that a chavista Venezuela would be a haven for renegade FARCs wishing for a return to action at some future time. Never mind the drug traffic now using Venezuela as its main base.  This is no more. Now that penalties, even if not severe, will be applied to FARC leadership crimes, a secure base is less crucial for Santos or the FARC (if a deal is eventually reached, of course). Thus I suspect that Santos, in front of a totally unpalatable Maduro, will be more strict with Venezuela's abuse, and when done on Colombians in particular. In addition, being tougher on Venezuela (which is, face it, an increasingly irrelevant country) will bring him dividends while negotiating with Uribe folks the rewriting of the peace agreement.

For Venezuela itself we are getting rather bad news, The safe havens inside Venezuela are now well set and if anything Castro and the FARC are after today going to insist further on their safety and intervention in Venezuelan affairs. Maybe a little too much for the military taste. Maybe a little bit too much to make the necessary changes to avoid general starvation. Maybe a little bit too much for foreign countries who were made a mockery of in Cartagena a few days ago and now may want to make sure it does not happen again, in Cartagena or Caracas.

Is the sentence on Leopoldo Lopez relevant?

No, this is no bait title. Whether Leopoldo Lopez is freed or condemned today has become almost irrelevant for the coming history. As I type this a small crowd of opposition leaders (small on purpose, by the way) is barred from the court building where the final sentence on Leopoldo Lopez is supposedly to be pronounced at any minute. And whatever the result is, even if I learn it as I type, it does not change much the coming text.


I think the regime will condemn Leopoldo Lopez. They are crazy enough to do that and make Lopez the "great" leader of the opposition. Capriles has been fading steadily and even went into ridiculous having to fight a silly battle on Tweeter to pretend that he did not say what he said on some of the fallout of the Colombian border crisis. Maria Corina Machado seems to have realized that Primero Justicia and AD, and others, prefer to keep chavismo at Miraflores before giving her a chance at anything. Thus she seems to have decided to support Lopez until better days come for her. Henri Falcon is now fatally flawed as he is trying to position himself as a transition figure that would allegedly draw in a chavismo dissidence. And there is no one else, really, that can even pretend at disputing the leadership to Lopez.

Whether the leadership of Lopez is what the country needs is now irrelevant.  The regime not only has made this to happen, but it is speeding up the final outcome by its inability to face to the economic and political crisis of Venezuela. Recent polls are lapidary and even "pro Chavez" pollsters give a double digit advantage for the opposition, big enough that one can hardly see a way for the regime to reduce it. Somewhat it will shrink some as the campaign goes on but 2 years of mismanagement and long lines for a little bit of food and toilet paper cannot be forgotten easily.

The regime has tried all sorts of tricks to distract public opinion and try to create excuses that would allow it to at the very least postpone elections. The latest attempt, by manufacturing a crisis with Colombia is going nowhere. The alleged victory at the OAS  was notable not by its narrowness but by the fast shrinking influence of Venezuela there. Next crisis vote and the regime will lose at the OAS. After a weak to dismal initial reaction of Colombia's president Santos, this one has taken successfully the initiative. The "defeat" at the OAS has allowed it to criticize Brazil for its lack of leadership and to wave away the UNASUR empty shell, an humiliation for it considering that an Colombian ex-president is at its helm. Then he went to the border with lots of international guests to hold a cabinet meeting with the victims of Venezuela's abuse. Then the foreign minster Holguin described with details the duplicity and web of lies weaved by the regime in its failed propaganda.

In contrast not only Maduro has failed to call an equivalent meeting on the Venezuelan side, knowing full well that he would be booed loudly, but the wannabe conquering hero went to China to ask for survival cash for the elections of December. In short, the border crisis seems to have brought him zero benefit on the Venezuelan side.

What is left to do for the regime? This one cannot afford to lose elections because a real government will send a few of its members to jail. So a new crisis has to be created and what better than giving Leopoldo Lopez a maximum sentence. Heck! Why not have him murdered in jail to see if the opposition rise in protest so it can be brutally crushed and elections outright cancelled.

That would be a terrible mistake for the regime, the last straw internationally to force many into recognizing its rogue nature, and speed up the economic downfall: the easiest way to undo the regime, fast, without military intervention. The writing is on the wall. US Secretary of State has posed a few days ago with the wife of Lopez. Thomas Shannon, the political operator that posed with Diosdado Cabello a few weeks ago posed a few days ago with a second fiddle at Lopez party, thus equating him to Cabello in importance, a terrible insult for a narcissistic rogue like Cabello, The Spanish Senate has had a nearly unanimous vote to demand that the Spanish government do more for Venezuelan political prisoners. Last but not least, under internal pressure the weakening Roussef government has had to admit (accept?) that there is a need for international supervision for the December vote in Venezuela.

Truly, can the Venezuelan regime be so blind? It is, because it is a rogue regime, because Maduro obeys Cuban orders, because Cuba cannot give up under any pretense whatever alimony it still cashes from Venezuela. Because, very simply, it has run out of ideas and has only violence left in its belt.

In the end it does not matter. If Lopez is not condemned, and freed, the opposition gets a boost. If Lopez is kept in jail, the injustice will be too flagrant and the opposition not only will also get a boost, but it will get another one from overseas. My guess is that the regime will go ahead and condemn Lopez anyway in the belief that it will radicalize its base and bring out the vote. Or the violence.

Note to Obama and Santos: appeasing thugs NEVER works

The Venezuela-Colombian border crisis should have been a fantastic opportunity to put the Venezuelan narco-regime on notice. Instead it serves as show case on how the appeasement policies of Obama and Santos are sinking fast.

The crisis was an absolutely artificial creation of the Venezuelan regime, increasingly taxed by its faults. As polls plummet for the regime when crucial elections are scheduled for December 6, this one has done all what it can to sabotage them. One offensive was to go straight ahead and jail major opposition figures, bar from running other, gerrymander further the districts, increase censorship and try to bankrupt the scant remaining free press. Elections? Sure! Just try to campaign! However it was an uphill battle to regain the favor of its electors, the only real way to win elections. Since the economy has tanked there is only one option left to rekindle the love of the chavista voter: chauvinistic nationalism, redundancy intended.

First there was a renewed anti US anti Obama drive. This one floundered when Havana and Washington started real talks and petered out at the recent OAS general assembly when Maduro got to see Obama without cameras for a brief moment, long enough for Obama to talk him down.

It seems thus that the "millions" of anti Obama signatures "freely collected" and validated without scruples by the "electoral authorities" were not enough to raise polls for a durable hold. So Maduro sought a conflict with Guyana over maritime and territorial claims. The only result of that came with a further loss of the Venezuelan case; and that the supposedly meek supporters of Venezuela in CARICOM went Guyana way without batting an eyelash. Isolation is thy name, Maduro.

Having been defeated in the imaginary northern border with the US of A and the Eastern border of Guyana there were only two borders left. The one in the South with Brazil is far and dicey although it seems the regime will try something. But the Western border with Colombia was ripe with existing excuses, or fertile grounds to plant new ones.

There are all sorts of theories on how the pretext came about. Some say that it all started from a rivalry between two narco-gangs in Venezuela, the one of the "Soles" and the one of "Guajira", both pointed out as being at least partially controlled by different wings of the army. Others say that it was a mere rivalry between gangs controlling the heavy contraband system towards Colombia, courtesy of the artificially deflated prices of Venezuelan goods. Others advance that it was a way to get rid of Tachira governor rumored to be in talks with "transition" proposals. Some even go as far as saying the whole show is just to put pressure on Santos who may extradite to the US compromising witnesses of the narco-regime in Caracas. None of these pretexts exclude the others, by the way.

Clearly, something as crazed as that, with damning images of human rights abuses as Colombians in Venezuela are rudely expelled when not leaving in a hurry motu proprio, should have been a bonus, a golden opportunity for Colombian and US diplomacy to read a writ to Venezuela. Unfortunately the errors of Santos and Obama policies toward Venezuela's regime are now paid, most likely under Cuban direction. Which have been these mistakes?

Obama's mistakes come from opening to Cuba without proper reciprocity.  Thinking that making the first step toward a totalitarian regime will bring concessions is a mistake that the West should have learned once and for all in 1938 while drinking beer in Munich. Certainly I approved of Obama's initiatives since everything else tried before by the US has failed; more by lack of will than actual vices or virtues of any legislation. But one thing is to approve the initial gesture, another thing is to approve the mechanism chosen. The result is that as soon as Cuba realized that the big bucks were not coming fast the Castro's regime started increasing repression and moving its pieces elsewhere. Extortion is the natural state for these people and that Obama and Kerry thought it would be different this time around is simply bedeviling.

The second mistake was sending Shannon to discuss with Maduro and Cabello without anything in exchange. Or so it seems so far. True, it is supposed that the release of half a dozen of political prisoners would be a result of that, along the call for elections which was suspiciously delayed. But the released prisoners are under house arrest and suffer all sorts of impediments while elections can be cancelled even on election day. The real result of these "negotiations" is that thug in chief, Diosdado Cabello, pointed out by many as a drug capo, feels vindicated and now indispensable. So as any good thug would do he has increased his attacks on people who dare criticize him, has decided to bankrupt once and for all the remaining free newspapers, and more. So much for Shannon effectiveness.

Colombia's president, Santos, mistakes started 5 years ago when he "befriended Chavez".  It has been downhill since. Chavez under a reprieve as Uribe's parting shot was exposing all FARC training camp inside Venezuela, played nice and stroked Santos ego in that he could indeed bring the FARC to serious negotiations after having been the Uribe's defense minister in charge of blowing them out. Which he nearly did, by the way and may have been able to complete had he wanted to. Under the excuse that Venezuela's role was crucial to the eventual success of Havana's Santos-FARC talks, the Santos administration made all sorts of concessions to the Venezuelan regime, most despicably by handing over to Caracas drug kingpins and political exiles.

Sure enough the FARC is playing Santos through and though. Its first success was to force Santos into a difficult reelection. This conservative, liberal right president has had to ally himself to the fading left of Colombia to get reelected and thus he has unnecessarily promoted its recovery. After reelection the FARC has become even more belligerent, and now it is trying to use the border crisis offering itself as the best guarantor against contraband and the alleged paramilitary infiltration inside Venezuela, as if Venezuela was not the main promoter of paramilitary groups like the colectivos, pranes .....

How can Santos and his ever more idiotic looking foreign minister Holguin whose appeasing smiles and seduction to Maduro are now blowing up to her face have lost the political coup offered to them on a silver tray?

First, the delayed response. Uribe was promptly at the border with Venezuela while Holguin sought a "meeting" with the Venezuelan foreign minister, the insufferable hack sister of Caracas mayor and inventor of all electoral frauds. While Holguin was giving Rodriguez a propaganda platform to accuse Colombia in its own country, the images of Colombians wading the river Tachira with their scarce belongings made front pages.

Santos waited for a week to go to the border and this late in the game he had to go populist and offer all sorts of goodies to calm down the natives. But it was too late, Colombian public opinion was united, and not around Santos. Even ex president Gaviria questioned the participation of Colombia to fakes like UNASUR who clearly do not wish to offend whatsoever the susceptibility of Maduro and co.  To add insult to injury Maduro kept giving fake handouts in Venezuela, declared falsely that scarcity was over thanks to his policies in Tachira, threatened to push the border blockade all along the Venezuelan border and flew to Vietnam. Cabello on his own decided to stir a little bit of trouble with the Brazil border attacking garimpeiros as if did not know they  had been creating ecological devastation since Chavez came to office!

I think that we are assisting to the undoing of Obama and Santos foreign schemes. I, for one, dearly hope that this is all part of a master plan to muzzle once and for all the rogue regimes of Havana and Caracas. But I am not holding my breath whatsoever.

Luckily for Santos and Obama, they do not have to worry about reelection anymore. Others will sort out the debris.

And it all came to that

Almost as a rule the end of revolutions and their ersatz is equally appalling. True revolutions like the French one (9 Thermidor) or the Russian one (Kulak starvation) have a moment that mark the end of ideal and the bloody start of a very long path to stability. Ersatz are lucky if they have a semi grand moment but as a rule end up in ridicule if they are lucky (Peron). But some end up in infamy, betraying any possible justification they had at their start. This is the case of this fakest of all revolutions, the bolivarian of Chavez which is slowly petering its way to infamy.

Closed border, people in check. Why?

I suppose some would make a case for April 2002 as "the grand moment". But it was not, a mere failed coup and a failed Restoration which yielded a shit faced Chavez that decided to surrender to the Castros in Cuba to get what he really wanted: life presidency. It worked, he died in office.

That first farcical but how damaging moment of April 2002 got a pricey oil enhanced stint which led to the 2007 referendum failure. For me it was the end, no revolution can survive when its idealistic and creative base deserts it, or rather turns against it as Venezuelan campus were never fervent Chavez supporters, even in his first couple of years.

Student and his bookcase?

From 2007 on it was all predictable: the pseudo revolution morphed into an autocratic regime that added insult to injury by becoming a narco state and henceforth the most corrupt and violent country in the Americas. By far.

I thought that we had seen it all, that we had accepted the fact that under Maduro we entered the outright dictatorship phase of the regime. A cross between Peron, sans Evita, with the Burma never ending military thuggery. Heck, with Leopoldo Lopez and Maria Corina Machado we are even getting a bi-cephalic version of Aung San Suu Kyi.

But no, we had to go into such infamy as creating a refugee crisis worse than the one in Europe right now, worse because even if much smaller it is absolutely unjustified, absolutely unnecessary, invented in full by dark conspiracies and likely drug war cartels fighting for turf control. These dark forces have had no qualm to use a state conflict to solve their own internal problems, harking back to imperial models of having the natives fight it ought for the honor of being directly under the toe of the colonial master. Chavismo there cannot even match the epic of Tlaxcala or the complexity of Plassey.

That is not all. There are no people drowning in the Mediterranean but poor Colombians wading in a shallow river with the lone bag they were allowed to carry. No real fences like in Hungary but a mere cattle guard here and there.

Even in infamy chavismo is so tacky, so venial, so corrupt that it cannot create a moment of epic or even true outrage. The word is taking its time in condemning the regime abuses on the Colombians it unjustly expels because they are mesmerized by the fact the regime is seriously wanting them to believe that these scared house wives wading dirty water are the cause of all of Venezuela trouble.

But one thing is not missing, fascism. In addition of all sort of promoted tweet support the regime has even produced Colombians supporting the abuse. A tropical Nazi paradise cannot be that far away.

Refugee camp and a meager army to push them away, not even
allowing them to go the next bridge...

And so it all came up to that. A revolution that claimed to unite a whole continent for the liberation of all of its people against real or imaginary empires ends up in a whimper, ostracizing, jewing up a population that cannot be distinguished at all from the one across the border or from the one they have been living among since there is historical memory.

Apartheid worse, R on houses that have been "revised" searched.
Some have a D for scheduled demolition.

Chavismo is now, like its founder, a corpse. We just need to find an undertaker.

------------------------------------
First video Maduro says horrors about Colombians and states that Colombians come to Venezuelan Bolivarian Paradise just like from Africa migrants go to Europe. Pathetic, the more so he is from Cucuta so we have there his subconscious betraying him in not wanting to be Colombian, like some kid in Austria, you know.



In this one the goebbelian frau Rodriguez says that all is an invention, that nothing is going on at the border, that the scenes are invented. Both videos promptly posted by the people of Maria Corina Machado apparently FROM international footage of news. Footage that is of course not shown on Venezuelan TV.

Dreams of constitutional repression

That ever self serving pseudo panacea of our sub continent, calling for a constitutional assembly to solve problems that politicians have no resolve to deal with directly, is being invoked all around. After all, the brilliant example of Chavez who called for a constitutional assembly to solve Venezuelan problems is there for all: not only he did not solve any of his country problems, but he made them worse, and he certainly did solve the financial future of his relatives and friends, ending himself as a president for life.

These weeks we heard from different points a call for some form of constitutional assembly, and in all cases it comes from a group of people that are unable of unwilling to have their way and thus want to use the mechanism.  Let's not be afraid of words here, what they all want really is a soft, legal repression, that will silence down those that are not allowing them to get their way.

Let's start with Brazil of Dilma Rousseff who has never being characterized by her creativity nor her own political following. She is calling for a constitutional revision process as the only way she can come up to quiet down the brewing revolt in her cities. That in ten years of PT rule through her and Lula they have not being able, or willing, to face the problems of Brazilian politics, even trying to benefit from them as the corruption "mensalao" case under Lula shows, is not something that she is very intent to apologize for. In fact, her latest deal, praised as democratic by many people who should know better, maybe be supported by a PT who finds in it a way to stop ruling as a coalition, something that, well, hindered some of the most extreme proposals that rest in their filing cabinets.

Less obvious but still along the lines is coming from the Bachelet campaign team who wants her back in office. They are trying to have people forget about the poor readiness of her administration in the earthquake that happened a few days before she left office. They think that a constitutional proposal is a good scheme. Hopefully in Chile there are a few minds that understand that even though the constitution is a legacy of Pinochet, changing it brutally is not necessarily the solution: one smart wit calls it a "lyrical coup".

In Colombia of course we have the other naked extreme: the FARC that uses a constitutional assembly as a way to pressure Santos to cave in their demands. This has little chance to fly because Colombia has changed her constitution not that long before Venezuela and the change has worked much better, no comparison, than the one in Venezuela. But the FARC knows that right now, as they are in a defensive position, not to call it cornered, their only chance to obtain an amnesty is by silencing those seeking redress for the crimes committed by the FARC. They thus put forward outrageous demands to have Santos cave in. They are of course pushed by Cuba and Venezuela who desperately need that second corner stone of an anti US league, next door to Panama. As such a constitutional assembly in Colombia would be nothing more than a repression of those intent on punishing the FARC for its crimes, just as the Venezuelan constitution of 1999 was a way to "forgive" the coup-mongers of 1992 who went from a life of violence to a life of obscene corruption.

Which brings us to Venezuela where election-stolen Capriles has finally admitted that going for a constitutional assembly may be the only way to get rid of the hyper corrupt regime issued of 1999. In fact, some even are suggesting that we could ask outright to a simple return to the 1961 constitution through a referendum.

Besides the many legal and electoral obstacles that such a proposal has in a Venezuela dominated by the mob, and worthy of several post of their own, this proposal of Capriles sounds like a little bit too little and too late. What he is doing, in part, is using the idea to silence (repress?)  in his own camp those who demand more action from his part.  Let's not forget that Diego Arria had made a new constitution his main, if only, plank for the 2012 primaries. Just as it was in 1999, a constitutional change is not going to solve the problems of the country who know include a wealthy mob that will sabotage any, ANY, regime that does not oblige them.

To all of these characters, and not wanting to sound pro US, I will remind them that the US has had the same Constitution in effect since 1789, duly amended through extensive processes that required quite a lot of discussion and compromise between the parties involved. The UK still does not have a constitution. France, for all of its apparent historical instability, had no constitution between 1870 and 1946 and the current one is effective since 1958. What is common among them (and other such countries)? That any constitution, or lack thereof, is only as good as the people who apply it.

That is why the current LatAm examples described above are simply ways for a political group to distract from the real work required in each and every country, in each and every reality. They are dreams of legal repression of the antagonistic sides (though in Venezuela at least Capriles has some valid points as he is dealing with the mob).

NATO nattering nags Brazil

I could have never wished for a post to be validated so fast, a week later.  Last Saturday I was wondering about what part of the Capriles visit in Bogota may have been linked to Colombia sending a message to UNASUR, and Brazil its puppeteer. This week Colombia added more, much more, by its renewed desire to associate itself with the North Atlantic defense organization, NATO.  This of course sent the Venezuelan regime in an uproar and its associate in Bolivia to call for a UNASUR meeting against the danger of NATO invading our subcontinent I presume. When in fact all of this is further proof of a very deficient Brazilian foreign policy.


But let's start with the thuggish incoherence and down silliness of the Venezuelan regime on this respect.  Of course it should be afraid. When it says that the NATO invades countries it forgets to mention that it does not  invade democratic ones. So implicitly we have a subconscious admission of the regime that it is not a democracy and that at some point it may have to pay for it. Look no further than foreign minister Jaua stupidly grinning at Secretary of State John Kerry for granting him a few minutes of his time. And yet, a few breaths away Jaua who wants respect from all, including the US and the OAS wants again the Inter American Court for Human Rights to be downgraded because, well, Venezuela is denounced as a regime on the way of pariah status.

But the true aim of Bogota is not to reveal the nature of Caracas regime, we all know that even if some of us look elsewhere.  Bogota is also, among other things, implying that South American institutions lack seriousness and thus it prefers to look elsewhere for countries that may not love Colombia but at least will deal with Colombia on a serious basis. If you ask me, being a mere associate of the NATO group is definitely more reassuring than being a member of UNASUR where the only thing that matters is what Brazil says. The US of A may be the driving force of the NATO but it has been quite clear that in the last decade and a half its country members participate or not at will in NATO actions though the general aim is respected: democracy and freedom from tyranny. That the means may not be the best for the aims is another discussion.

Thus we are watching ALBA countries twist in horror at any NATO link with Colombia but Brazil rather silent. Interesting, no?  Dilma Rousseff got the message and even if she formally will at some point make an opposing comment, she knows that Colombia has sent her an ultimatum: deal with Mercosur and UNASUR seriously or watch us say good bye.

Capriles in Bogota, or yet more evidence of a failed Brazilian imperialist policy

There is no need to expand on the diplomatic fiasco that Maduro's "new" team has suffered from Bogota this week. What is more interesting to note is that were Brazilian foreign policy a success, it probably would have never happened. True, there is always some small room left to suspect that the whole thing was a Machiavellian manipulation of Itamaraty to have Santos do the deed, but how unlikely an explanation....

First, a short summary of the events.

For some reason Capriles was received by Colombia's president Santos this week.  Capriles and the Venezuelan opposition keep their impressive campaign to educate the continent about the electoral fraud that allowed Maduro to retain Venezuela's presidency. A double fraud if you remember that Maduro promised a real electoral audit at UNASUR Lima's meeting to ensure their attending at his swearing in. As soon as he was sworn, the regime simply performed instead an absolutely useless audit and started a ferocious campaign to silence the opposition and place the world in front of the fait accompli of his fraudulent election. 

At first it seemed that Maduro would succeed when in his own international campaign he was received by Dilma Roussef, president of Brazil and faithful follower of Lula policy to forgive any abuse of chavismo, though if truth be told she is less enthusiastic than Lula on this regard.  She offered Maduro help for the food crisis of Venezuela and listened patiently to his explanation of Capriles being a less than nothing, thus implying that Brazil was willing to accept the fraudulent electoral outcome in exchange for the preservation of its 5 billion plus dollar trade surplus. That also means a further dependency of Venezuela from MERCOSUR increasingly lorded over by Brazil as its sphere of interest, or private backyard if you will.

The implication of all of this in Brazilian minds is that no matter what UNASUR decides at its meetings, the last word is the Brazil one (in this case forgetting about the promised electoral audit agreed at Lima).  UNASUR, allow me to remind the reader, includes strictly South American countries in an association that supposedly ensures the solution of internal conflicts and an alliance of sorts against outside interventions.  Chavez always dreaming that he would lead UNASUR when in fact he was the pawn of Lula in that scheme, an extension of Brazilian ancestral imperialist pulsions to control all of South America.

When UNASUR was proposed it was at the height of Chavez petrodiplomacy (meaning, using Venezuelan money for his dreams of grandeur). It was also at the height of Lula, when he ruined the proposed free exchange of the Americas proposed by the US, unable to support it as it should as the US was too involved in Iraq and the like.  Thus, with Brazil pushing along Venezuela and Mercosur all countries had to join UNASUR, which did not mean for a second that they all liked the idea.

Times have changed. Dilma in Brazil has failed to live to her promises of more attention to human rights (except for the distancing with Iran, the least she could do). Instead Brazil seems embarked in some form of protectionist adventure where its economical elite seems more interested in securing a safe zone/perimeter rather than confront globalization. As such the indecent hurry to exclude Paraguay from Mercosur last year on silly pretexts, removing the last block to include Venezuela in Mercosur. Venezuela, by the way, who routinely does more constitutional violations than Paraguay politicians ever did. And there is also Chavez death, just about when the petro check book also died.

Some country observed these sequence of events that proved to them once and again that not only Brazil had no good or serious intentions, but that Mercosur was not a really good club to join in. So they did the only thing that they could do, join their more market and trade oriented economy to the Pacific rim ones. And Mexico as the lone possible counterweight to Brazil economy. Thus after many preliminary summits the Pacific Alliance was formally installed in June 2012, sending Itamaraty in a panic and probably accounting a lot for the messed up Paraguay crisis.  It is worth quoting the Wikipedia entry on this regard, to prove to you that anyone can notice this gigantic chess game that Brazil seems to be losing so far (my emphasis):

The Pacific Alliance (Spanish: Alianza del Pacífico) is a Latin American bloc formally launched on 6 June 2012 in Chile's Paranal Observatory at the organization's fourth summit. It groups Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru. The four nations of the Pacific Alliance represent about 36% of Latin America GDP, and if counted as a single country they would be the ninth largest economy in the world with a nominal GDP of more than $2 trillion USD, surpassing India. According to information from the World Trade Organization (WTO), the countries of the Pacific Alliance together exported about U.S.$ 445 billion in 2010, almost 60% more than Mercosur (the main economic bloc in Latin America) exported in the same year.

In short, the Pacific Alliance is an open trading block, of the maritime kind, the most effective; whereas Mercosur looks everyday more like a protectionist block centered around Brazil.

It is in this context that we are more likely to understand why Santos faced a more than likely crisis with Venezuela by receiving Capriles a few days ago. Sure enough, it started with the vile outbreak of Diosdado Cabello declaring BEFORE Maduro or his foreign minster and singlehandedly turning an incident into a crisis. If there was a surprise it was not that the Venezuelan regime would be upset but by the virulence of the crisis at a time when, simply put, Venezuela has no means to put pressure on Colombia. That is, in the middle of a food crisis, where we do not even have toilet paper to wipe ourselves, the regime antagonizes the lone country that could help us the fastest. In fact a Colombian minister was prompt to add that Colombia would only help Venezuela if it offered guarantees as to paying its new bills towards Colombia, driving the point. Needless to say that this week end the regime is backpedaling already, understanding that they are not Chavez to weather such self inflicted storm, and that they were done in by Santos.

The point of this text is not to go into the motivations of Santos into running deliberately into a crisis (at the very least he certainly scored a point against Uribe while proving how toothless Venezuela has become). Nor is the point to discuss why the regime allowed National Assembly chair Cabello to play lone ranger. The point here is that Capriles highlighted clearly the limits of UNASUR by reviving the electoral fraud question of Venezuela that Brazil clearly hoped was put behind.  And a possible visit of Capriles to Peru could make things worse for Brazil who undercut Peru's president Humala efforts last April when he called for that conciliation meeting that was in the end flouted by Maduro (and Brazil by extension). This eventually led to the resignation of Humala's foreign minister.....

Brazil is bound to lose a lot if it does not correct quickly its wrong headed all out support for Maduro. If Humala also receives Capriles it would be only a matter of days for the whole Pacific Alliance to side with the Venezuelan opposition in appearance, if not formally. The North South cleavage of the subcontinent would then be growing fast while to Colombia, Chile and Peru would be added soon Costa Rica, Panama and maybe even Canada, amen of Mexico already in and sympathetic to the Venezuelan opposition cause. Uruguay even is interested in that Pacific Alliance which hints at the coming irrelevance of Mercosur if things keep going the way they are.

But Brazil can lose even more. Let's remind the reader still reading that Capriles espoused the Brazilian model of Lula for the 2012 election. Little good did it do to him. In addition of the siding of Roussef with Maduro, it did not stop a shameful interference of Brazil in April's election when Lula bluntly endorsed Maduro. As the regime collapses does anyone still think that a Capriles administration will be pro Brazil?

And it is not all. Brazil in recent years had a campaign to gain a permanent seat in the security council of the United Nations. All the efforts have been lost, I dare say with the recent fiascoes. How can a country aspire to such a rank when it is unable to protect democracy in its area of influence, and furthermore generates deep divisions as it may happen soon between Mercosur and the Pacific Alliance?  Clearly Itamaraty hopes of world leadership are seriously compromised as its actors are revealed to be mere grocery shop managers, more worried about Venezuela paying its bills to them than the long term perspective. Or mere amoral operatives if you prefer. Let's say it: Brazil is not ready for the major leagues, Colombia is.

----------------
PS: let's also remark that Brazil does not understand that Colombia is not amused by its diffidence on chavismo: when things will get bad, it is Colombia which will suffer the most from a repressive Venezuelan regime.  That Itamaraty is not aware of that speaks volumes about the ideological view it has adopted under Lula.