Mainstream Apologias for the Venezuelan Coup

More exhausted, threadbare apologias for the coup are on display in today's New York Times. Both Max Fisher's "Who Is Venezuela’s Legitimate President? A Messy Dispute, Explained" and Ana Vanessa Herrero's "In Fight for Venezuela, Who Supports Maduro and Who Backs Guaidó?" boil down to this: "Maduro's May 2018 reelection was widely criticized."

That's it. That's the justification for multinational intervention in the domestic affairs of a sovereign nation. The same rationale could be provided as a justification for a multinational intervention in the United States.

And what is the substance of the criticism of Maduro's reelection last year? Herrero's story hyperlinks to an article she wrote last month, "Venezuela Is in Crisis. So How Did Maduro Secure a Second Term?":

Mr. Maduro’s re-election in May 2018 was widely criticized, with reports of coercion, fraud and electoral rigging.

He first came to power in a snap vote following Mr. Chávez’s death in 2013, after the former leader had anointed him as successor.

But by the 2018 election, Venezuela’s economy had plummeted to new lows as a result of mismanagement and corruption, and the country was in the midst of a crisis.

Despite that, election officials said Mr. Maduro won 68 percent of the vote. The chaotic state of the country and the desperation of poor voters may actually have contributed to Mr. Maduro’s ability to maintain control.

Representatives of Mr. Maduro’s party tracked those who voted by registering their “Fatherland Card” — or national benefits card — and promised aid and government subsidized food handouts if he was re-elected.

Independent international observers were not on hand, and a crackdown on critics left several of them unable to participate. Opposition leaders called for a boycott of the election, and that, combined with the disillusionment of many longtime government supporters, meant the turnout was exceptionally low. Less than half of the country’s voters cast ballots.

Mr. Maduro’s stifling of dissent and targeting of the opposition has been widely reported. Since 2014, Human Rights Watch says, it has documented hundreds of cases of mistreatment of government opponents, including at least 31 cases of torture.

Less than half the country's voters participated in the 1996 U.S. presidential election. Should this have allowed Saddam Hussein to call legitimately for the Joint Chiefs to oust Bill Clinton?

In any event, how many votes were cast for Guaidó? This is something that The Times assiduously avoids. Guaidó, based on his performance in the 2015 parliamentary elections, commands 26.01% of people casting ballots in the Venezuelan state of Vargas. Not really a mass popular base of support.

Here is the Alliance for Global Justice rebuttal of the whole "widely criticized" canard that, let us remember, is the principal mainstream justification for the Guaidó coup:

Was the Venezuela 2018 presidential election open to opposition candidates?

The Venezuelan government did not block opposition candidates from participating, but encouraged it, and even agreed to push up the election date to meet opposition demands (from December 2018 to May 20, 2018). Nicolas Maduro received the votes of 6.2 million people, about 31% of the eligible voters, slightly more than what recent U.S. presidents received (Obama received 31% in 2008 and 28% in 2012, while Trump received 26% in 2016). The opposition candidates were Henri Falcón (who received 21% of the vote) and Javier Bertucci (who received 11%). Venezuela has an electoral system that is impossible to tamper with. Jimmy Carter once called it “the best in the world.”

Was the Venezuela presidential election of 2018 in accord with international standards?

The International Electoral Accompaniment Mission of CEELA (Council of Electoral Experts of Latin America) issued a report on the May 20 Venezuelan presidential election. CEELA made these conclusions: 

The electoral process for the Presidential and State Legislative Council Elections 2018 complied with all international standards and national legislation, particularly in the fields of audit and electoral administration.

CEELA Mission is of the opinion that the process was successfully carried out and that the will of the citizens, freely expressed in ballot boxes, was respected. 

c. The results communicated yesterday night by the National Electoral Council reflect the will of the voters who decided to participate in the electoral process.Such results are duly certified through the citizen verification audit. 

e. The CEELA Electoral Accompaniment Mission upholds that the electoral process has consolidated and reaffirmed strengthening of the electoral institutionalism that supports the democratic system.

How do Venezuelans themselves feel about the US Sanctions and US military intervention?

The vast majority of Venezuelans oppose military intervention and US sanctions to try to remove President Nicolás Maduro from power, according to a very recent poll by the firm Hinterlaces. 

Do you agree or disagree with the US economic and financial sanctions that are currently applied against Venezuela to remove President Maduro from power?

81% disagree, 17% agree, 2% not sure

Would you agree or disagree if there were international intervention in Venezuela to remove President Maduro from power?

78% disagree, 20% agree, 2% not sure

Would you agree or disagree if there were international military intervention in Venezuela to remove President Maduro from power?

86% disagree, 12% agree, 2% not sure

In general do you agree or disagree with a dialogue being held between the national government and the opposition to resolve the current economic problems in the country?

84% agree, 15% disagree, 1% not sure

The United States and its puppet Guaidó are massively out of step with Venezuelan public opinion. Venezuelans don't want war and sanctions. They want negotiations. The mainstream media is complicit in fomenting a civil war.