The Mouth That Roars Is Testing U.S. Patience

Hugo Chavez is at it again. First, the charismatic and outspoken president of Venezuela caused a diplomatic rift with Washington when, during a national television address, he likened the accidental U.S. bombing of Afghan civilians to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, calling the airstrikes a “slaughter of innocents.”

In response, the U.S. called its ambassador, Donna J. Hrinak, home for consultation. But Chavez, a left-wing nationalist who has called for the need to understand terrorism’s causes, wasn’t chagrined. Instead, he simply left it to Vice President Adina Bastidas to spout the anti-American rhetoric.

Speaking at a United Nations-sponsored forum in Caracas last month, Bastidas took a cue from Chavez’s speech. “[There is] terrorism of the oppressed,” she declared, “because there is also terrorism of the oppressors.”

“[Terrorism] is a perverse sub-product of WASP [White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant] domination,” she added, explaining that such domination “becomes intolerable to the more radical and violent of the oppressed and leads them to desperate, destructive and murderous outbursts.”

While his vice president so distinguished herself, Chavez spent his time at the forum hobnobbing with former Algerian president and independence hero Ahmed Ben Bella, who has called the U.S. bombing of Afghanistan a “crime against an impoverished people.” This, apparently, was before CNN broadcast scenes of Afghans cheering Northern Alliance troops as they entered Kabul, protected by U.S. air cover.

Since Chavez was elected in late 1999 on an anti-establishment platform, he has repeatedly baited the United States. A self-proclaimed “revolutionary,” Chavez regularly rails against “savage capitalism” and globalization. He has called for a “multipolar” world to counter U.S. economic and military hegemony, which he deeply resents. On a visit to Cuba to see his close friend Fidel Castro, he proclaimed that Venezuela would sail in the same “sea of happiness” as the communist island. In China, he declared himself a “Maoist.” Chavez also has irritated Washington by making friendly visits to Iraq’s Saddam Hussein and Libya’s Moammar Kadafi.

Mindful of Venezuela’s role as a top U.S. oil supplier, Washington has up to now worked to avoid a row with Chavez, noting that he was elected democratically in a country with a long history of corruption.

Sept. 11 has altered the stakes. We now live in a world in which words do matter. Ultimately, Chavez’s own words and bizarre conduct may be his undoing.

In a poll conducted after Chavez made his remarks on the U.S. bombing of Afghanistan, some 67% of Venezuelans surveyed said they disagreed with his statements. Anti-Chavez demonstrations have increased in size and intensity recently, spurring rumors of an imminent coup.

But Chavez seems oblivious to the effects of his actions. Despite pledging support for the U.S. war on terrorism, Chavez recently visited Paris, where he expressed concern about the well-being of Venezuelan-born terrorist Ilich Ramirez Sanchez, better known as Carlos the Jackal, who is being held in a French jail.

Chavez has a strange relationship with Ramirez Sanchez. In the past, he’s exchanged friendly letters with the infamous terrorist, whom he apparently regards as a fellow “revolutionary.” Ramirez Sanchez, who expressed “relief” at the Sept. 11 attacks, has admitted killing 83 people, three of whom died in a 1975 attack against the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries’ Vienna headquarters.

Chavez, too, has blood on his hands. As an army lieutenant colonel in 1992, he led a bloody and disorganized coup attempt against a democratically elected government. More than 70 soldiers and civilians were killed during the failed coup, which spurred capital flight that further impoverished the South American nation. He has no apparent remorse for his actions.

Nor has Chavez ever expressed public concern over Colombia’s murderous Marxist narco-guerrillas--and their frequent massacres of unarmed peasants. Instead, Chavez has expressed veiled sympathy for the guerrillas’ vision of a Marxist utopia, which has alarmed his Colombian neighbors.

It’s hard to argue with Chavez’s calls for wealthy nations to do more to help the Third World. But coming from Chavez, such statements are comical: Nearly two years ago, he turned back U.S. military engineers on their way to help Venezuelan victims of a mudslide disaster, which killed thousands and left tens of thousands more homeless. Venezuela’s defense ministry had requested the engineers and their heavy equipment. But Chavez, during an impromptu press conference, announced that U.S. military personnel were not welcome on Venezuelan soil. Even today, many Venezuelans, especially those living in the mudslide area, despise Chavez for that bit of nationalistic bluster.

So, what should the U.S. do about Chavez?

First, we have to remember his macho, swaggering ego. He would like nothing better than to become a Third World martyr to U.S. imperialism. Thus, any action that isolates Chavez could easily backfire, doing for him what the U.S. trade embargo against Cuba did for Castro: allow him to cast himself as an oppressed hero who took on the mighty United States.

Still, while we need to proceed cautiously, we can’t condone Chavez-style equivocation on terrorism. The Bush administration might consider expanding its system that classifies nations as supporting terrorism. It could create something below its “watch list” to punish nations like Venezuela, which, even if not supporting terrorists directly, are flirting with them and with terrorist nations.

The Bush administration also might explore the possibility of mild economic sanctions. One idea would be a limited moratorium on new investment in Venezuela by U.S. energy companies. There’s little chance that Chavez would retaliate by reducing oil sales to the United States. With oil prices at their lowest in two years, Venezuela could not afford to cut off its No.1 customer.

Such mild U.S. actions could encourage Chavez to mend his ways or encourage Venezuelans to vote him out of office. Whatever Washington does, it can’t allow its policies to create another Castro in this hemisphere, especially not in Venezuela. Nor can it allow another Saudi Arabia--a country that has pretended to be our ally, while nurturing fanatical elements within its own society.

*

David Paulin is a journalist who was based in Venezuela during the years that Chavez rose to power.