November 23, 2004
VENEZUELA: Political murder raises violence fears

Published by Oxford Analytica
Copyright 2004, Oxford Analytica Ltd. All rights reserved.

• Most have emanated from Miami, where a sizeable and virulently anti-Chávez group of Venezuelans now reside. One media outlet has calculated that since 2002 there have been 27 separate television and radio broadcasts calling for Chávez to be killed, or statements emphasising the 'benefits' that his assassination would bring for political stability.
• Former President Carlos Andrés Pérez, who also lives in Miami, called for a 'bullet' solution to the political conflict earlier this year.
• Cuban-Venezuelan 'commando' groups have also been training in Miami.
  Despite vocal objections from the Venezuelan government, neither federal nor state level authorities in the United States have responded, and the websites of these organisations continue to call for Chávez to be killed and for a 'guerrilla' assault on the Venezuelan government.
  
  Violent incidents. Clashes between pro- and anti-government groups have led to bloodshed over the past two and a half years. However, no public figure has been targeted. There is no history of assassinating politicians in the country's recent past, and no public official has been murdered since the transition to democracy in 1958. Venezuelans have long prided themselves on the sharp distinction between their own country and the political violence in neighbouring Colombia. It was precisely for this reason that the idea of an assassination attempt on Chávez was largely derided. That the government failed to provide ministers with effective security further discredited such claims.
  
  Anderson assassination. The notion of Venezuelan exceptionalism was shattered November 18, when 38-year-old Public Prosecutor Danilo Anderson was killed in a car bomb. Anderson was conducting the investigation into the events surrounding the April 2002 coup attempt. He was interviewing the 400 people who had been present at the presidential palace during the swearing in of Pedro Carmona, head of the private sector organisation Fedecamaras, who temporarily assumed power when Chávez was removed. Anderson was also investigating those who had signed the decree issued by Carmona dissolving all elective bodies and dismissing senior state officials appointed by Chávez. A number of those investigated were from groups which had received funding from the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED). US Congressman Tom Lantos has recently protested the prosecution of those groups by an "overzealous public prosecutor".
  
  Given persistent allegations of US involvement in Venezuela's domestic affairs and claims of US support for the 2002 coup attempt, that country is the centre of suspicion for many 'Chavistas'. Anderson's murder was highly professional, incurred no 'collateral damage' and could only have been carried out be experts in bomb-making. This means that suspects are likely to be linked to dissident groups within, or purged from the military, or domestic groups linked to Miami or Colombian based anti-Chávez organisations. Links are being drawn between this murder and the bombings of Spanish and Colombian diplomatic facilities last year.
  
  No group or individual has claimed responsibility for Anderson's murder. However, yesterday the former Caracas police inspector Ivan Simonovis was arrested as he tried to board a flight from Maracaibo to the United States. Simonovis, allegedly an explosives expert, had earlier been accused by pro-Chávez groups of possible involvement in the Anderson killing, although the authorities have indicated that he has been detained for interrogation rather than formally charged.
  
  Climate change. Anderson's work was controversial, but over recent weeks it was being conducted in a changed political environment. Following the success of Chávez in the August referendum and the sweeping victory of the pro-government alliance in regional elections on October 31, opposition groups had been engaging in negotiations with government representatives. Increasingly aware that constant conflict with the administration has been counter-productive, even recalcitrant sections of the opposition had begun to accept the need for a period of self-reflection:
• Fedecamaras has recently held talks with the Finance Ministry.
• Some opposition politicians attended the swearing in ceremony of Chavista officials in Caracas elected on October 31.
• For its part, the government has been reviewing its own line, in order to shift away from the aggressive format of Chávez's weekly 'Alo Presidente' television and radio programme.
  
  Anderson's murder therefore came amid hope of a political breakthrough and of an end to the impasse that has persisted since 2000. It also occurred when the government was feeling confident in the aftermath of its electoral victories. Clearly popular, and with a new mandate for its programme of radical reform, the administration had called together regional, local and legislative officials for a conference on November 13-14 to flesh out its medium term policy, ideological and organisational direction.
  
  Assassination impact. Anderson's assassination has stunned Venezuelans regardless of political orientation. While a small minority view his murder as justifiable given the 'authoritarian' nature of the government, the vast majority have been repulsed by this 'Colombianisation' of their political system. Leading anti-Chávez parties and organisations moved quickly to condemn the murder, although there are concerns of a government backlash. Anderson was an enormously popular individual among both the elite and the grassroots of the ruling alliance organisation. After an initial period of silence, Chávez has decreed that the Interior and Justice Ministry should begin drafting an emergency anti-terrorism law.
  
  Chávez has also made a significant distinction between the 'democratic' opposition and those elements responsible for the assassination. The polarisation that previously existed between government and opposition may thus be reduced by Anderson's murder, with the opposition forced to demonstrate their democratic credentials. In this context, further destabilising actions and demonstrations against the government would be counter-productive for the opposition, specifically as they would be easily construed as support for all forms of violence. Moreover, there are some within the opposition who fear that they could be targeted should this become a campaign rather than an individual atrocity. As such, this act has not been a rallying call for the opposition. On the contrary, it has further undermined them.
  
  Outlook. If this murder was intended to be of benefit to the anti-government movement, it was a miscalculation. Anderson's death will harden the commitment of Chavistas and Chávez himself to achieve their revolutionary project. The murder will also serve to increase external support and sympathy for Chávez: Chávez received a warm and amicable reception in Madrid from Spanish Prime Minister José Rodríguez Zapatero. No country has a vested interest in seeing Venezuela descend into violence, particularly given foreign investment in the oil, gas, financial, telecommunications and heavy industrial sectors.
  
  CONCLUSION: As relations between the government and the mainstream opposition become more conciliatory, Anderson's murder may point to greater radicalisation of some fringe sectors following electoral failure and increasing marginalisation. This may, paradoxically, reduce polarisation among majority sectors, although an upsurge in violence could have grave consequences for stability".

   

  previous news

  next news