Tuesday, August 21, 2007

More Chávez diplomacy

The mayor of London announced an agreement with the Venezuelan government to cut bus fares in half for the 250,000 least well-off Londoners.

The scheme follows an agreement signed earlier this year by the Mayor, Transport for London and Venezuelan Oil Company Petróleos de Venezuela Europa. This provided a 20 per cent reduction in the price of fuel for London's bus fleet, which will be passed on to cut fares for some of the least well off Londoners. At the same time, London will provide Venezuela with advice and technical expertise in fields of city management in which London is a world leader such as transport, town planning, tourism and the protection of the environment.

This particular type of diplomacy is ingenious, and has already been implemented in the U.S. First off, of course, it directly helps poor people, and by circumventing anti-Chávez governments (i.e. the U.S. and Britain) it goes to the local level, where people in need are more receptive. In that sense, it recalls Fidel going to stay in Harlem in 1960 and saying he was more comfortable there (no doubt he’s talked about that with Chávez). This also calls attention to the ways in which the poor are marginalized in “developed” countries, the message being that they require assistance that their own government refuses to give them. The policy is also almost impossible to deny—if the U.S. or British government finds a way to block it, then they will be directly hurting their own citizens who need help.

h/t New World

16 comments:

Anonymous,  9:36 AM  

The problem is that Venezuela will benefit very little if at all, an article yesterday pointed this out. Curiously, non-Chavez run areas of Caracas have created ways to alleviate traffic, address security, city management, and housing issues but Chavez and his government have ignored it and made the implementation diffficult. Again London will benefit but Caracas will not.

This is all about propaganda.

Greg Weeks 10:35 AM  

That raises the question of whether diplomacy requires immediate material benefit. If, for example, countries send humanitarian supplies to Peru, do they need to get something in return?

Anonymous,  10:46 AM  

I don't agree. This is pure pandering on the part of Chavez. He's only doing this to buy headlines. He cares about the poor in the UK?

By the way, the mayor of London, Ken Livingstone (aka Red Ken), is a Socialist as well.

Miguel Centellas 11:55 AM  

Actually, that is rather savvy diplomacy. Even if he's only trying to generate good will (one could make the same argument about Western donor aid), it may be effective at achieving that goal (even if not "effective" in other areas).

But it also speaks to the kind of questions I often raise to my comparative politics students: Are states still the central actors in world politics? I think more and more we're seeing local governments from one part of the world interacting directly w/ local (or national-level) governments, etc. Politics has become increasingly decentralized.

Ironically, politics has thus also become increasingly globalized. Venezuela is fighting the "empire" ... even while building partnerships w/ local communities w/in that "empire."

Justin Delacour 1:20 PM  

Ironically, politics has thus also become increasingly globalized. Venezuela is fighting the "empire" ... even while building partnerships w/ local communities w/in that "empire."

Indeed, but there's an important distinction to be made here. When Chavez refers to the empire, he's very explicit that he's not referring to the general population of the United States. He very explicitly states that his fight is with an American ruling class.

Media constantly refer to Chavez as "Anti-American," but he himself rejects the term and has been very explicit about it.

You see, the thing that virtually everyone outside of Venezuela fails to understand is that Chavez is surrounded by radical Marxist advisors who do not see the world in parochial nationalist terms. They see the world in terms of class conflict.

Anonymous,  6:38 PM  

Greg, I wouldn't put humanitarian aid (i.e. a la Peru) in the same catagory as cheap bus fairs for Londoners.

From your post:
" it directly helps poor people" - it helps the Londoners but it doesn't help Venezuelan poor.

I have a feeling we are making different areguments about this, your seeing it from a dipolmatic/political strategy angle. I'm seeing it from what benefit will be had by Venezuelans (cost/benefit - or any benefit at all). If this is the case than I would say we are both right.

Miguel Centellas 7:44 PM  

Justin:

I, too, hope Chavez (and chavistas) can make such distinctions.

But my main point there was simply that the world is increasingly globalized -- in the sense of increased interconnectedness. Ironically, the anti-globalization movement is often the most globalized movement. The days of isolationism are (thankfully) at an end.

Justin Delacour 12:07 PM  

I, too, hope Chavez (and chavistas) can make such distinctions.

You need not hope. Supporters of the Bolivarian Revolution make distinctions between parochial nationalism and internationalist class analysis every day.

Where parochial nationalism reigns is right here in the U.S. of A. Only here are we constantly inundated with absurdly illiberal and paroquial concepts like "Americanism" and "Anti-Americanism."

Miguel Centellas 12:45 PM  

Good. I'm glad chavistas focus on internationalist class analysis rather than on personal ad hominem attacks. That's good to know.

Justin Delacour 2:08 PM  

I'm glad chavistas focus on internationalist class analysis rather than on personal ad hominem attacks.

Trying to be smart, I see. Try harder.

Personal ad hominem attacks have nothing to with this discussion.

In saying that concepts like "Americanism" and "Anti-Americanism" are "absurdly illiberal and paroquial," I haven't personally attacked anyone.

Miguel Centellas 3:10 PM  

In saying that concepts like "Americanism" and "Anti-Americanism" are "absurdly illiberal and paroquial," I haven't personally attacked anyone.

I completely agree. On both counts.

Though I might also caution, however, that the use of labels (such as "imperialist" or "opressor" or "anti-poor" or whatever) are also flippantly used by many people. I find the use of such bullying as a mode of discourse distasteful as well.

And, no, Justin, I'm not currently attacking you (or anyone!) personally. I'm just making a blanket statement. I don't like discussions that hinge not on arguments but on labels applied to people or assumptions made about their person that aren't really relevant to a discussion at the abstract level.

Miguel Centellas 3:18 PM  

Personal ad hominem attacks have nothing to with this discussion.

Again, Justin, you're completey correct. But no discussion exists in a vacuum. The tone for most discussions is set by previous discussions. Both you and I have been personally attacked in the past. Those experiences no doubt carry over into present and futures discourses.

Greg Weeks 3:49 PM  

What precedent is there for a leader of one country to provide subsidies (i.e. not just cash to promote the opposition) to specific groups within a different country? Examining the ways in which groups are chosen and the political effects would be really interesting--there must be some good comparison to the current Venezuelan case.

Miguel Centellas 5:18 PM  

I think a lot of foreign donor aid might qualify. I'm most familiar w/ the German groups that are very active in Bolivia. These include;

FES (Friedrich Ebert Stiftung), which is the foreign aid arm of the SPD. They do a lot of work through ILDIS.

HSS (Hans Siedel Stiftung), which supports the Bolivian NGO FUNDEMOS (Foundation for Democracy)

There's also GTZ, which is operated by the German government. I suppose we should include USAID programs around the world.

Basically, Bolivia is often a posterboard for generating goodwill towards foreign governments. Many schools, hospitals, markets, and other public buildings cary signs "built by ..." and then the names of countries or organizations.

Even some parties are internationally connected. Through Fundación Millenio, the MNR has ties to the Konrad Adenaur Foundation of German's CDU. And through a special "Grupo de Apoyo al MAS-Scandinavia" (listed as website techincal support on the MAS website) several lefist parties there support MAS.

But I suppose these are rarely done openly. Sometimes they're even done semi-secretly. In Bolivia, much of the USAID work in rural health care is now done by PROCOSI, which is really just an arm of USAID.

Miguel Centellas 5:20 PM  

I should add that much of the foreign assistance aid is often specifically targeted. Such as with assistance to a specific indigenous community or to a particular neighborhood or local community.

Anonymous,  1:42 PM  

[url=http://firgonbares.net/][img]http://firgonbares.net/img-add/euro2.jpg[/img][/url]
[b]1 Mac Box Set, [url=http://firgonbares.net/]acdsee versus elements[/url]
[url=http://firgonbares.net/][/url] buy software packages maths educational software
acdsee pro 2 ebooks torrents [url=http://firgonbares.net/]coreldraw software[/url] buy photoshop 5.5
[url=http://firgonbares.net/]can i buy dreamweaver[/url] download adobe acrobat 9
[url=http://firgonbares.net/]how to price software[/url] academic software pricing
buy it now software [url=http://firgonbares.net/]can i get photoshop cs3 for a non intel mac[/b]

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP