Dear Sticky Wicket,
Why is there such a close relationship between Cuba and Venezuela? Is it because they are both under the rule of communist dictators?
~Geopolitical Watcher from Georgia
Dear Geopolitical Watcher,
Before answering, we must clarify the question. Cuba has been a totalitarian communist state since 1959 when Fidel Castro took power from Dictator Fulgencio Batista. Venezuela is a not a communist country. It's a federal republic, with a multiparty democratic political system. Originally elected to a six-year term in 1999, President Hugo Chávez, won a second term in 2006, and is now campaigning for a third term in 2012. Chávez is, however, a left-wing socialist, whose revolutionary radicalism and efforts to establish a socialist-inspired state have steadily weakened Venezuelan democracy and stifled dissent. The partnership between Castro and Chávez has everything to do with Venezuela's autocratic reforms and waning freedom.
The mutually beneficial relationship between the two nations took shape in 1999, after Chávez became president. Characterized as ideological soul mates that foster a master-disciple relationship, Castro and Chávez's alliance is also a vigorous political and strategic partnership. With the demise of the Soviet Union in the 1990s, the Cuban regime lost its sole economic sponsor, and since has struggled to avoid financial collapse. When Chávez came to power and gained control of Venezuela's vast oil reserves, Castro seized the opportunity to regain a backer. They brokered the "Integral Cooperation Accord," whereby Venezuela supplies Cuba with 100,000 barrels of subsidized oil per day. Cuba, in turn, exports close to 40 percent of the fuel it acquires, bolstering its deteriorated economy.
In exchange, Venezuela has received an estimated 40,000 Cuban technical experts, including doctors, nurses, sports instructors, teachers, military advisers, and intelligence personnel — an influx that's penetrated Venezuelan society and undermined its democracy. Concerned Venezuelans see it as the Cubanization of Venezuela. For Chávez, it’s the greatest asset that the accord bestows: the procurement of an anti-capitalist ally to support his plan for a socialist revolution, as well as his determination to centralize and amass political power to rule by decree. In June, a New York Times article written by Simon Romero detailed the gravity of Cuban infiltration. The "quiet expansion of Cuba’s military role here has raised a particular concern among critics of Mr. Chávez, who maintain that the military is being retooled — with Cuba’s help — into an institution that can be used to quell any domestic challenge to the president."
This military build-up is cause for alarm given the announcement in July that Chávez has cancer and may be too enfeebled to manage his regime. Unlike Cuba, where Castro, because of illness entrusted governmental control to his brother, Raúl, Venezuela has no immediate successor to Chávez, eliciting fear that his government will perish with him. According to Carlos Alberto Montaner, a Venezuelan exile and political activist, Chávez's brother, Adán, has said that "election is not the only means of doing revolution [and he] is preparing [for the eventuality] of taking office forcefully."
It's unmistakable that the departure of Chávez would be catastrophic for Cuba. As cited in The Washington Post by reporters Juan Forero and Adam Liebendorfer, "For the Cubans, this is not just an ideological friend and ally — he’s a lifeline for the island economy,” said Moises Naim, a Venezuelan who is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington. “It’s a matter of regime survival to ensure that a Cuban-friendly government is in power in Venezuela.”
Comments
Of course not, Chavez is not a dictator.
Many people think very quickly that the relationship between Venezuela and Cuba has fallen into a “cubanisation” of Venezuela, while in fact the result is a moderation of Cuba. It is Cuba who seems walking a steadily movement into a more open society, the politics of Venezuela are far more effective in allowing Cuban live the life of their choice, and not the business imposition of US. The commercial embargo endure against Cuba for more than 50 years is a complete failure, and in less than 10 years Venezuela and Hugo Chavez has achieve more than all the American presidents together. Cuba will find their way into a globalised world in their own dignified terms.
Hugo Chavez may be an authoritarian president, but is not more authoritarian than other democratically elected presidents, and the effectiveness of his judgment will be in the balance at the end of his terms. Chavez has a long trend of good asserted political decisions, especially if you take into account that his political movement is dealing with a very vicious and violent opposition that has reached several highs of irrationality, that for me speaks volume of the good driving skills of Chavez in front of the government. If the Venezuelan opposition are well known by its corrupt behaviour and incompetence to rule a wealthy country, as they had demonstrated over and over until Chavez came into power. If the opposition has lost total gravity and political credibility in the eyes of Venezuelan people and international community, then is not Chavez to be blame for that. How can somebody in their own conciseness choose a political opponent when Chavez is 1000 times better. Chavez, so far has delivered what he has promised and committed himself to do, the Venezuelan opposition is far away to share similar options, and the US embassy in Caracas knows that and regret it. The level of unethical subsidies of the American government to the opposition in Venezuela has been unsatisfactory due to continuous frauds and incompetence of its leadership and so call "representatives".