The 16N was undoubtedly a defeat, especially symbolic and very strong, for the Guaidó leadership, who has been battered despite the damage control that began yesterday with positions of several spokespersons, such as Luis Vicente León. The government, for its part, in the face of a misplaced and aimless ultra-right, is resuming the initiative by announcing progress in the dialogue table established with minority opposition figures.
Although we are still far from concrete agreements in the negotiations on the formation of a new CNE, or for the habilitation of the National Assembly or for the definition of what type of elections would take place in 2020, it is important to continue working on that discourse and those actions that isolate the extreme right further, contribute to establish the relative political stability achieved so far and strengthen the most loyal Chavismo. Thanks to the will for peace of the majority of the Venezuelan people and to the government’s calls for dialogue, violent scenarios have receded, and the most radical sectors of the opposition have been isolated. That the central theme of the debate today is a peaceful, democratic and sovereign solution to the political conflict is a victory that must continue to be deepened.
The pro-American coup, moreover, did not succeed, in relation to Venezuela, in the sought-after domino effect of the bloody coup d’état in Bolivia against the legitimate president Evo Morales. On the contrary, the way the events are taking place in Bolivia, with a president imposed by the military, a display of the most brutal repression and violation of human rights, political persecution and hunting of individuals, open rascism and fascist retaliation, has become the most absolute antithesis of a democratic political transition like the one they wanted to sell and convince not only Venezuela but the entire world to accept: no matter how much a cloak of censorship may cover up and hide the crimes of the de facto government in Bolivia, the truth is ultimately coming to the surface and that illegitimate and illegal government is increasingly objectionable.
In the economic field, President Maduro, in a demonstration of political realism, accepted the positioning of the dollar as a means of exchange in the national market. This economic phenomenon is explained by several factors, including hyperinflation, but it is also leveraged by the commercial and financial blockade. Apart from the debate on monetary sovereignty, which is not a minor issue, the use of the dollar certainly becomes, as the president stated, an escape valve to the country’s economy, to circumvent both hyperinflation and the coercive and unilateral measures imposed by the United States.
However, it is extremely worrying that the phenomenon is occurring as something inertial, as an exclusive result of the dynamics of the laws of the market, and not as part of a strategy, with clear objectives on the part of the government, to influence the economic situation. As such, we run the risk of this inertial dollarization becoming irreversible and uncontrollable. A formal dollarization is impossible because of the blockade, as well as being unviable for the objectives of sovereignty and national liberation advanced by the Bolivarian revolution. But even worse is a dollarization without control, without a legal framework. This would be the purest laissez faire, laissez passer.
Therefore, revolutionary realism is required more than political realism. We need an economic plan that puts all these dynamics in order, with the emphasis on reaffirming the transforming objectives of the process. It is a question of the State exercising all its legal and economic mechanisms so that this inertial dollarization imposed by the blockade is controlled and conducted in favour of the country and the political project of the Bolivarian revolution. To ensure that this phenomenon does not have a negative impact on the social gains of our people, so that it does not have a negative influence, accentuating the effects that the crisis and the blockade have already generated, so that transparency and confidence in the country’s economic system are strengthened, it is central and determining to maintain the National Government’s piloting of resources and currencies, capacities and strategic orientation, and thus be able to move forward in the midst of a very complex context of strangulation and blockade.
The current scenario of economic siege by the United States forces us to be bold, to be able to forge our way through difficulties, to adopt unorthodox tactics. That is a fact. But it is also a fact that the objective must be to understand the phenomena and to know how to manoeuvre so that they ultimately contribute to the strategic course. Therein lies the key.