Hugo Chávez has certainly not lacked for either grand plans or the resources to carry them out in his nine years as president of Venezuela. So far, he has also deftly deflected criticism and overcome opposition. With his newest initiatives, however, he may be overreaching—threatening to stall his project both domestically
and internationally.
WHO’S AFRAID OF HUGO CHÁVEZ?
But for now, Chávez’s influence will probably continue. And countering that influence would require recognizing that it originates not only in Chávez’s ability to shape Venezuela’s and the region’s agenda, but also in the failure of other governments to do so. His legitimate and well-expressed concern for social questions strikes a chord in Latin America, especially in view of the rather dismal condition of education and healthcare in many countries in the region. Against such a backdrop of unattended needs, Chávez’s appeal is hardly a mystery.
Offsetting Chávez’s influence would require confronting the acute social problems that Chávez has shed light on. His diagnosis of social ills may be on the mark, and his intentions may be sincere. But the recipe he is offering is little more than snake oil. Chávez has been unable to devise a sustainable model to address social problems effectively. Even if some of Venezuela’s poorest citizens are better off today, Chávez’s record has been disappointing given the opportunity presented by the oil windfall.
Washington should not refrain from discree tly registering its opposition to some of Chávez’s more blatant violations of the rule of law and the democratic process. If completely unchecked, Chávez’s program will have damaging results both domestically and regionally. But the United States has little leverage in shaping
Venezuela’s internal political dynamics—and, given the Bush administration’s lack of popularity in the region as a whole, little ability to “confront” Chávez directly. Instead, a US strategy must be built around efforts to rally the support of other Latin American governments to address the conditions that gave rise to Chávez in the first place. Rather than expending so much energy denouncing the presence of Cuban doctors and teachers in Venezuelan slums—a popular program that, although not a transferable model, brings benefits to some of Venezuela’s poor—Washington should start proving that it has better ideas.
This article originally appeared in the May/June 2006 issue of Foreign Affairs and as a November 7, 2006, update on www.foreignaffairs.org. It was further updated for Chronogram by the author in November 2007. Copyright 2007 Council on Foreign Relations, publisher of Foreign Affairs. All rights reserved. Distributed by
Tribune Media Services.