GOV DAMAGE CONTROL OVERWHELMED BY BARRAGE OF

C O N F I D E N T I A L CARACAS 001011 SIPDIS NSC FOR CBARTON USCINCSO ALSO FOR POLAD STATE PASS USAID DCHA/OTI FOR RPORTER E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/19/2014 TAGS: PGOV PHUM KDEM VE SUBJECT: GOV DAMAGE CONTROL OVERWHELMED BY BARRAGE OF INTERNATIONAL CRITICISM REF: A. CARACAS 560 ¶B. CARACAS 634 Classified By: Abelardo A. Arias, Political Counselor, for reasons 1.4 (B) and (D) -------------- Summary -------------- ¶1. (C) The GOV attempted to supersede negative international media and NGO reports about alleged human rights violations by speaking directly to the international community in Caracas March 14 and 16. Among the efforts, President Hugo Chavez called together Ambassadors to Venezuela March 5 and then European Union Ambassadors March 18 to refute the human rights allegations and to criticize the opposition's signature drive to unseat him. International organizations and NGOs criticized the GOV's handling of a proposed presidential recall referendum before GOV security forces clashed with protesters from February 27 to March 5. Most recently, the differences aired with a letter from the OAS regarding National Electoral Council (CNE) assertions of international bias. Other criticism emanated from the EU and regional human rights organizations (see para 8). End Summary. -------------- GOV Counterattacks International Critics -------------- ¶2. (C) On March 16, the GOV responded to alleged &big lies8 of GOV human rights abuses and unfair manipulation of the presidential recall process with a briefing for the international community headed by Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel. "There is not one violation of human rights in this government,8 Rangel asserted. "We would be the first to denounce it (human rights abuses),not the hypocrites and liars who always violated human rights in the past," Rangel said. He blamed armed civilians for the deaths of nine (vice 12) protesters and claimed that the accounts of high casualties, missing protesters, and GOV torture are a media invention. The purpose of the meeting, Rangel asserted, was to counter alleged media and NGO misinformation because "we are certain one of our problems is how information is disseminated internationally." He later admitted the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights' (IACHR) &campaign against the government8 is having an effect on international opinion and blasted Human Rights Watch as clueless bureaucrats. ¶3. (C) Appearing with Rangel, National Assembly Deputy Luis Tascon explained the opposition's alleged &mega-fraud8 in the process to convoke a recall referendum on President Hugo Chavez. He claimed the pro-GOV observers were not allowed to do their jobs during the opposition's signature drive, resulting in large numbers of signatures being forged. He said the proof of fraud would &fill this room,8 but presented only a handful of examples. Rangel later assured the GOV would allow a recall, but not under conditions of opposition trickery or violence. Any attempt to overthrow Chavez &illegally8 would fail, he said, because the GOV is more powerful and organized than April 11, 2002, when Chavez was briefly deposed. ¶4. (U) During his weekly televised program, March 14, Chavez also denied that the government had abused human rights and accused members of the opposition for protest-related deaths. "There is no proof (of human rights violations),and if there was, you know that my government would investigate." Chavez said that his government "was forced to act to defend the Constitution, the law, and about all, public safety." -------------- Redirecting Blame to a Familiar Target: U.S. -------------- ¶5. (C) Chavez blamed the U.S. for Venezuela's problems during a March 5 address to the Diplomatic Corps, prompting DCM to walk out. The harangue was a repeat of his February 29 speech to a demonstration of his followers. In response to the March 11 EU Parliament resolution on Venezuela, Chavez summoned the European Union Ambassadors on March 18. A Dutch diplomat told PolCouns that President Chavez verbally attacked the Ambassadors. The diplomats thought they were going to have an opportunity to discuss the recent events with the President when Chavez dismissed the press a few minutes after the meeting began. Chavez, however, then began a multi-hour monologue, criticizing European attitudes as fascist and warning the Ambassadors that if their countries were going to behave like the U.S. they could expect similar treatment. One key element in both events was Chavez exhorting the ambassadors to tell their foreign ministries the truth, i.e. the Chavista version of events in Venezuela. ¶6. (U) Chavez had previously attacked domestic human rights NGOs during his February 15 weekly televised program. Chavez accused three prominent and respected Venezuelan human rights NGOs (Cofavic, Provea, and Red de Apoyo) of collaborating with the Washington-based Center for Justice and International Law to "threaten a legitimately established government." He claimed the NGOs received funds from the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED),which he accused of being a tool for USG meddling in Venezuelan politics. Cofavic and two other Venezuelan organizations denounced Chavez's statements as "a threat to the work of human rights organizations in Venezuela." Amnesty International agreed in its February 18 statement and demanded Chavez retract the allegations. -------------- International Criticism: Human Rights -------------- ¶7. (U) --The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) released a report March 18 that covers events up to October 2003. It identified a "clear weakness" in institutions, criminal impunity, and a growing concentration of power in the executive. --Human Rights Watch criticized the GOV's denial of human rights violations March 14, stating that testimony and evidence collected by group prove National Guardsmen are "unquestionably" guilty of torture, including electrocutions and burnings. Jose Miguel Vivanco also blamed "agents of the state" for nine deaths and warned the Chavez administration that it was "grave danger" of losing its democratic legitimacy. He added that the majority of the detained were set free and denied any knowledge of "forced disappearances." --On March 12 the Inter-American Press Association (IAPA) accused the GOV of systematic violations of freedom of expression and press and of attacking any media that "doesn't bend to his (Chavez's) conditions," which provokes attacks from Chavez supporters. It also denounced the GOV's noncompliance with a "constitutional, democratic and electoral solution" to Venezuela's political crisis and expressed concern about recent Supreme Court statements discounting the authority of international institutions and the "absolute right" of freedom of expression. --The IACHR included Venezuela in a list of five American countries with serious human rights concerns March 12. It reiterated concerns about protest related deaths, injuries, and detentions. --On March 8, Reporters Without Borders requested the government condemn attacks on journalists and order an investigation of 10 alleged attacks on journalists by GOV forces since February 27. --On March 6, the International Society for Human Rights and the Andrei Sakharov Foundation, two prominent European NGOs, issued a communique criticizing the GOV for "subterfuges and false arguments ... historically used by other despots that ended up killing millions of human being with the sole purpose of perpetuating themselves in power." The statement calls for international public opinion to "categorically reject" the GOV's human rights abuses. --Human Rights Watch March 5 urged "a thorough investigation into allegations that state security forces have beaten and abused detained protesters." The statement also raised concerns about opposition vandalism and violence and urged both sides to pursue peaceful avenues of reconciliation. --On March 3, Reporters Without Borders protested the failure of the GOV to prevent attacks on about a dozen journalists since February 27, implying that GOV security forces were to blame. "If the media take sides against President Chavez, on occasion outrageously, this can still never justify the use of force against their reports." --A March 4 statement from Amnesty International criticized the GOV for "excessive use of force and detentions." -------------- -------------- International Criticism: Recall Referendum -------------- -------------- ¶8. (U) --OAS Observer Mission Chief Fernando Jaramillo released a letter March 19 responding to March 18 comments from National Electoral Council (CNE) President Francisco Carrasquero criticizing the OAS and Carter Center electoral observers as biased toward the opposition. The letter outlined the OAS observer mission based on the May 29 agreement, the OAS's objective and successful history observing electoral processes, and the GOV's invitation to observe the petition campaign and the verification process. Jaramillo asked the CNE President to share proof of OAS bias and state that the OAS observation delegation would leave Venezuela if asked to do so by the CNE. (Note: On March 23 Jaramillo met with the CNE for a very tense two hours. The CNE majority said the OAS/TCC were biased by applying independent criteria to the verification process. They did not, however, ask the OAS/TCC observers to leave.) --On March 15, the Group of Friends of Venezuela released a communique to express its concern about delays in the recall process. They released a similar statement March 5. --The European Union March 4 lamented the protest violence and expressing solidarity with the OAS's March 2 opinion that the CNE was using technicalities to force signatures into a revalidation process. --The OAS and Carter Center released a joint statement March 2 expressing disagreement with the CNE's decision to send over 800,000 recall signatures to a revalidation process. --The European Union expressed its concern over the delay of the signature authentication process February 23. In a statement, the EU welcomed the CNE's February 28 deadline for completing the process and emphasized "the will of the signers must be respected." -------------- Conclusion -------------- ¶9. (C) The GOV is struggling to repair significant damage to its international human rights reputation. The GOV's wholesale denial of guilt amidst a plethora of charges makes it look ludicrous and disdainful. The occasional handful of "mega-fraud" examples thrown out by Chavez and Tascon are mega-insignificant and are often errors the opposition admits to and included in its internal audit. The GOV's blaming of the opposition for "attacking itself" and allegedly forging 870,000 signatures, only worked to unite a recently fractious network of domestic human rights NGOs. Complete text of many of the referenced statements from NGOs and international organizations can be found at the Caracas SIPRNet site: http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/caracas/index .cfm SHAPIRO NNNN 2004CARACA01011 - CONFIDENTIAL