Tuesday, August 29, 2006


By Adolfo R. Taylhardat

The present document is intended to offer some considerations aimed at demonstrating that the endorsement of Venezuela’s candidacy to the Security Council for the biennium 2007-2008 would have very adverse consequences for the efficient functioning of that important organ.

1.- The conditions to be elect non-permanent member of the Security Council.
Article 23.1 of the Charter of the United Nations establishes that, when choosing non-permanent members of the Security Council, the General Assembly will consider three conditions: 1) the contribution to the maintenance of international peace and security, 2) the contribution to the other purposes of the organization, and 3) the preservation of an equitable geographic distribution.
2.- The contribution to international La Paz and the security
The Venezuelan regime has publicly adopted positions diametrically disparate to the efforts of the Security Council to solve some of the more critical issues currently under its consideration. If Venezuela is elected, it will undoubtedly maintain the same positions on those issues, thus preventing the formation of consensus to solve them. Some examples are enough:
The present Venezuelan government has publicly declared his support to the Iranian uranium enrichment program and voted in the Board of Governors of the International of Atomic Energy Agency against the decision of submitting the issue to the UN Security Council.
The present Venezuelan government has supported North Korea in his challenge to the international community with his program to produce and test medium and long range missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons.
The present Venezuelan government has publicly assumed a partisan position and pronounced his support to Hezbolá and Hamas in the recent conflicting situations in the Middle East.
The present Venezuelan government develops a policy of manifest militarism and arms build up. It can be easily anticipated that it will oppose in the Council any measure that could affect or limit such policy.
The policy of exporting the “bolivarian revolution” and of meddling in the internal affairs of other nations followed by president Chávez has been the object of numerous rejections and serious denunciations on the part of high officials of several governments and political personalities in various countries of Latin America It has also originated serious impasses with some governments, specifically with Mexico and Peru. In this latter case it cannot be discarded that the existing conflict with the government of Peru would have adverse consequences in the functioning of the Security Council as result of the presence of both countries in that organ.
3.- The contribution to the other objectives of the organization.
Contribution to the protection and the respect of human rights and the fundamental liberties, without distinctions by reasons of race, sex, language, religion or any other consideration, constitute fundamental values of the United Nations. Currently Venezuela faces one of the most difficult times of its contemporary political history. President Chavez’s continuously commits serious violations against the individual liberties and incurs and infringes human rights and civil freedoms pushing the country towards a totalitarian regime
President Chávez has imposed in Venezuela an autocratic regime. He has kidnapped and subjugated all the public powers - the National Assembly, the Supreme Court of Justice, the General Comptroller, the Attorney General, the Ombudsman, and the National Electoral Council - turning them into unconditional instruments of his political project. He has created the “bolivarian circles”, armed assault groups formed to attack anyone who manifests his dissent with the regime. He has created an army of reservists under his direct command that he aspires to level up to a total of one million militiamen. Additionally he is organizing the “Francisco de Miranda Front” a militarized brigade composed of young people that will be armed with the kalashnikov rifles recently bought to the Russian Federation.
Even though the Venezuelan National Constitution and numerous international instruments condemn any type or form of discrimination, president Chávez has polarized Venezuela dividing its population into those who support him and those who adverse him, to the extreme of applying an authentic policy of apartheid consisting of excluding his foes from positions in the public administration, preventing them from the accomplishing proceedings before the organs of the public administration, excluding them from business and contracts with the State and, in general, frightening and threatening citizens who voted affirmatively in the recall referendum held in 2004 or thos who somehow have showed their dissent with the chavista political project. The government has elaborated a data base consisting of the lists of the citizens indicating whether they voted yes or no in the recall referendum. This list has served to create a class of defenseless sub-citizens permanently exposed to the abuses of the regime.
4.- The equitable geographic distribution
The candidacy of Guatemala was presented long before that of Venezuela. Since 1998, when Costa Rica occupied a non-permanent position (1997-98), no other country of the Central the America sub-region has seated in the Security Council
Since year 2001 South America has occupied both positions of nonpermanent member in the Security Council allotted to Latin America and the Caribbean (Colombia 2001-02, Chile 2003-04, Brazil 2004-05, Argentina 2005-06, and Peru 2006-07)
Venezuela has four times been a non-permanent member of the Security Council (1962-63/1977-78/1986-87/1992/93). Since the creation of the United Nations Guatemala has never seated in that important organ.
If the principle of the equitable geographic distribution is to be applied, the seat that Argentina is to leave vacant should have to be occupied by a country of another sub-region, as it is the case of Guatemala, a Central American country.
5.- Other considerations
There is an evident and manifest contradiction between the aspiration of the Venezuelan government to occupy a position in the Security Council and the insulting expressions that President Chávez has used when he challenged the consensus reached on the Millennium 2005 Final Declaration claiming that such decision was “null and void, null and illegal” because, according to him, it was product of a “dictatorial hammer blow” of the President of the Assembly. According to President Chávez, “the United Nations are far away from the peoples” and “needs a shake off, it needs an internal revolution”. “!This is finished!, !It is exhausted!. This indicates that the UN system is in terminal crisis, the system, that turns now 60 years, suffers of terminal cancer. !The UN is a dictatorship!”
It cannot be discarded that if Venezuela is elected member of the Security Council, President Chávez, breaking the protocol, the traditions and the proceedings of that organ will appear personally in its meetings to use that position as a platform to propound his political project of the “socialism of the XXI century” and use it as a tribune to intensify his anti-imperialist, anti-USA and anti-neoliberalism rhetoric.
The essential principles of democracy and the commitment of governments with the defense and protection of the fundamental rights of the Venezuelans should prevail above any pragmatic interest or circumstantial benefits that could be derived from the policy of alleged international altruism displayed by president Chávez when he travels around the world distributing, without any control whatsoever, the revenues resulting from conjunctural high prices of petroleum, while the Venezuelan people continue facing immense problems and suffering needs of all type.
Caracas, August 2006