The transition is beginning in Venezuela

By: Ricardo Israel - 29/07/2024

I have no doubt about the triumph of Edmundo González, and when the Chavista Electoral Council attributed the victory to Maduro with 51.2% of the votes, the opposition victory was reconfirmed, since everyone knows what happened, the defeat of the Chavista regime.

I believe María Corina Machado when she says that the opposition victory was overwhelming and there are copies of a number of minutes that can prove it. Since the opposition won, it must act as the winner. The only luxury you cannot afford is irrelevance.

Furthermore, I believe that it is the beginning of a process of transition to democracy, since this time fraud will not be accepted, neither inside nor outside the country, no matter how much a desperate maneuver is being attempted by sectors that are still in the denial, Venezuela has changed, so unlike in the past the threats ring hollow, for the simple reason that fear has been lost.

I believe that this desperate maneuver of the regime will fail, as well as an exit of force, if it were tried. I am convinced that having lost fear, a transition process has begun in practice, the transition to Venezuelan democracy.

What do we know about transitions, especially successful ones? That they are not all the same, but that sooner or later there will be some negotiation, which we do not have to be afraid of, as long as we are clear about what is both the main objective and the greatest prize, the defeat of the dictatorship.

It cost so much, it was so difficult to achieve it, that the main thing is to maintain the unity that allowed the victory that now badly wants to be modified by corrupt hands. What must be avoided at all costs is a division of the Democrats, which has occurred after other elections in the past. The objectives have not changed so there is no need to deviate, since the transitions are not only black and white processes, but admit multiple colors.

Political science recognizes at least three types of transitions. The disruptive, the negotiated and the institutionalized. Since Venezuela is hardly going to be one of a rupturist nature, where the dictatorial regime simply collapses, it is most likely that it will be a mixture of a negotiated transition like Spain and Uruguay were with an institutionalized one, that is, the transition begins with the scheme existing constitutional, as occurred in Brazil and Chile. In Venezuela, the objective of achieving a real democracy, without a surname, has not changed.

In the past, the regime has cheated, also not knowing the result. As bad as it was that democratic sectors accepted it, but today, it is simply unthinkable for this to happen, so that scenario simply should not occur, not only because fear has been lost, but there was also mobilization in the streets, which should not be missed, and where María Corina Machado stands out.

The Chavistas know that they were defeated, they know it in the Miraflores Palace and also abroad. Although on a smaller scale, the same process of loss of legitimacy that appeared in the former USSR and Eastern Europe in the eighth decade of the last century can be seen in the ruling elite, in the Chavista nomenklatura. In Venezuela, all that remains is the strength and corruption of the organized crime that supports them, whose power is manifested transnationally.

We must not lose focus on what is important, as questions begin to accumulate. If there is negotiation, with whom will it be negotiated? Will there be names banned, even if they are few? Will everything be open or will there be secrets? Will Maduro have a role? If so, which one? If agreements are reached that help democratization, will the armed force be requested to be guarantor of the agreements? If you do not want to give it a role that is inappropriate in democracy, will everyone's respect for the Constitution be enough? since, although it is a Chavista creation, it is the superior norm, no matter how much one wants to reform it, it is barely possible.

What is coming requires clarity in the leadership regarding decisions that require total opposition convergence. As an example, will there be topics and people who will not be recognized as valid interlocutors? Do you part waters with every functional opposition, which only has the name of the opposition, since its objective is to serve the regime and divide the democratic forces? Internationally, will there be a special role for the United States? Other countries? Which is it?

There are many questions, some unanswered, simply because we are witnessing the beginning of the transition to democracy. Maduro and Chavismo may be unaware of it, but it does not change the fact that the regime was and feels defeated, having lost the vital fire of a legitimacy that is no longer recognized. Like any transition, the regime can attempt a denialist adventure or at least one sector, but this cannot be sustained or prolonged beyond an increasingly shorter period, given the seemingly irreversible change that the country has undergone.

The first objective, which was to defeat Maduro, has already been achieved. The second is being built, which is to defeat the regime's fraud. The first was achieved with what had been absent in the past and without which it is virtually impossible to defeat a dictatorship, which is unity, whose maintenance and strengthening is a precondition for achieving the second victory, the defeat of the regime, the end of the dictatorship.

Transitions bring with them roses and, therefore, thorns that force difficult decisions, never only with black and white, but also with grays and yellows. In the election, not only at the polls, in the streets Maduro was also defeated, now we must respond to the trust of that vast majority who voted in conditions of repression as well as so many exiles who gathered with enthusiasm throughout the world , expressing his desire to return. We must not forget so many families who only want to be reunited with those who are absent, and who were a key element, both in the popular mobilization and in the loss of fear, all citizens who gave the victory that is now being ignored, done to both unpleasant and violent.

For this second objective of disappearing the dictatorial scheme, it is necessary to continue insisting on the truth that the election was won to prevent a false narrative from displacing the true one. This objective also needs to listen to those who are not part of the ruling elite, of the nomenklatura, but are part of the public administration as well as part of the Justice or the armed or police forces, sectors that in no case should be handed over to their totality to this dictatorship that wishes to perpetuate itself. What will be the attitude towards that business class that became rich with Chavismo, with strong elements of corruption? The truth is that there are no easy answers.

It has been learned from transition processes that due to their very characteristics they require addressing all fears and not just those of those who have suffered repression, since there are different types and characteristics. In their diversity, most of them must be taken into account for the process to be successful, to which we must add the fears of the many who in the past once supported the dictatorship, voting for Chávez in those elections that did. won.

The difficulties mentioned are real but surmountable, as long as there is a perspective of progress, slow or fast, but continuous, visible to everyone, or at least, to the majority, requiring patience and serenity, since not everything will be able to be undertaken at once. Same time.

For these purposes, a challenge is how to maintain the mobilization achieved. This is because of the special characteristic of any transition, even if it is in its beginnings, since the realm of politics predominates through the search for agreements and consensus that allow the construction of a majority.

From successful transitions we know the importance of acting seriously, without creating false illusions, as well as that when negotiating we must avoid falling into the transaction, in the “quid pro quo” in the something for something that does so much harm to the image of democracy, since all negotiations must be guided by ethics and principles, as a basic distinction between democrats and those who are not.

The conclusion is what María Corina Machado and Edmundo Gonzáles repeated on their electoral tour, that the dictatorship's time has come, which reflects years of struggle for democratic restoration and a history of overcoming difficulties, and, therefore, of learning, and therefore, maturity.

@israelzipper

Ph.D. in Political Science (U. of Essex), Bachelor of Laws (U. of Barcelona), Lawyer (U. of Chile), former presidential candidate (Chile, 2013)

«The opinions published herein are the sole responsibility of its author».