CARACAS.— “And your lie, even if it is repeated a thousand times, will never be true,“ reads the second sentence of a message sent last week by Luis Almagro, Secretary General of the Organization of American States (OAS), to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
The open letter was the irate response, dressed up as reason, of the former Uruguayan foreign minister following Maduro’s accusation that Almagro was a CIA agent and was conspiring with the Venezuelan right wing to subject the country to sanctions and the resulting regional isolation, on invoking the Inter-American Democratic Charter of the OAS.
Immediately replicated by the media, from The New York Times to local newspapers, in their coordinated uproar aimed at ousting the Maduro government, the message is a tirade written in short, direct sentences; an epistolary style that traditionally served to launch the defense of irrefutable truths, underpinned by the dramatic tone of vindication that comes with a statement in the first person.
If we ignore for a moment the accusations against Maduro, the glossy résumé brandished by the OAS Secretary General – in which he refers to himself as a champion of “the principles of freedom, honesty, decency, public integrity,…democracy and human rights” – presents us with a revolutionary Almagro, begging the question as to how, with such a record, he managed to become the head of the most anti-democratic multinational organization on the continent.
Dispensing blessings to dictatorships and coups, the model architect of the best manuals on interference, diplomatic snares, mercenarism and instigation, the OAS has undertaken to defend, based on its history, the fact that the institution is headquartered in Washington. What better place to run what has been deemed the “Ministry of Colonies”?
The burden of history weighs heavy, and actions lay bare the real intentions that this message intends to mask. Evidence abounds of the warm relations between Almagro and those he defines in the letter as “my people;” a privileged circle that includes the likes of former Colombian President Álvaro Uribe and several Venezuelan deputies, although the ideas of these “may not be yours nor mine,” he notes in a show of impartiality in his message to the Venezuelan president.
In the letter, he prefers not to mention names, while he generalizes his outcry for the release of so-called political prisoners; this although a photo of him happily posing with Leopoldo López, the instigator of the renowned guarimbas (violent street demonstrations), which led to the deaths of 43 people, has been widely circulated.
As one who throws up a smokescreen, he considers it would be a “folly” for anyone to carry out a coup d’état against Maduro, while his office regularly receives Venezuelan deputies who call for foreign military intervention in their own country, demand regional isolation by invoking the Inter-American Democratic Charter and seek to force Maduro out of office, before the time limits established by law.
“You have an obligation to public decency to hold the recall referendum in 2016,” orders Almagro, knowing full well that if the referendum is held after the year is out, and they manage to oust Maduro – which remains to be seen –chavismo would remain in power as the Vice President would take over and serve out the last two years of his term.
Ultimately, the truths according to the Uruguayan appear to be the only realities, absolute and irrefutable. He has repeated them so often that no doubt he believes them, with no room for others.
From now on, all the claims of those supported by the secretary, and the “exemplary” organization he represents, will be the only truths, the democratic, and just ones, those which his revolutionary OAS will give its blessing to. It does not matter how these are put, or what the facts show. The important thing is that these “truths” are spoken.
It is true, for example, that on Wednesday, May 18, in Caracas, there was a peaceful march by the opposition. Henrique Capriles said so, and this was echoed that same day by Ramos Allup: “No one shall separate us from the peaceful and democratic path.”
The brutal beating of a young policewoman by violent youths, images of which were shown around the world, was staged by government infiltrators. This was what members of the opposition Democratic Unity Roundtable (MUD), and Capriles himself, rushed to say.
What an arrangement the government must have had with “its agents,” as they have all already been arrested and stated that they were paid by President of the National Assembly (AN), Ramos Allup’s head bodyguard.
Coromoto Rodríguez, alias “Commissioner Coromoto”, came to fame during the dictatorship of Carlos Andrés Pérez, also serving as his head bodyguard at the time. He was an exemplary disciple of another “commissioner” – Basilio – the alias of Luis Posada Carriles during his time spent as a torturer in Venezuela, from whom Coromoto learnt the bloodiest persuasive techniques.
This head bodyguard of the “peaceful and democratic” president of the National Assembly, paid for the premeditated beating to be public; but that’s what the government says, and not the others. Who is telling the truth? Apparently you should ask the OAS.
Of course, there are too many coincidences. Jorge Rodríguez, leader of the revolutionary United Socialist Party of Venezuela and mayor of the Caracas municipality of Libertador, had repeated many times that Coromoto was guilty of the torture of his father, assassinated in 1976, and was the first to reach the Livia Gouverneur university residence, ravaged by violent opposition groups that same Wednesday when the policewoman and four other officers were beaten.
Livia Gouverneur, after whom the residence is named, was a student who died in 1961, at the hands of people of the ilk of that same torturer.
But judging by the repetition of arguments in the effort to fabricate truths, whatever they are, in the eyes of the OAS the opposition's demands are fair. The recall referendum process must be accelerated, over and above any law.
That’s why they collected “three million signatures,” as Capriles first claimed on television; “two million six hundred thousand,” as he later said; before finally stating “we handed in one million 800 thousand signatures to the National Electoral Council because we did not have time to audit them all.”
“These we audited well, name by name, signature by signature,” he added to this absolute truth, so “convincing” that not even the names of the deceased, minors, foreigners, and the missing or defective fingerprints that have already appeared among the signatories, can damage it.
It is in this context that the truth is debated, stretched on all sides. But the mainstream media, which rents its services to the international right wing, conscious of its strength, knows well Goebbels’ principle and assumes its reactionary and forceful role against the Bolivarian Revolution.
On Venezuela at least, the local and foreign right wing should establish some kind of balance, to ensure they stretch the truth just on one side; they wouldn’t want for so many pulls, so many contradictions, to mean the truth becomes too twisted and ends up appearing a string of barefaced lies that are of no use to them, nor to Almagro himself, in his “new and savior” vision of the decayed and unsalvageable OAS.