Three cheers for Chávez

By George Galloway

I happened to be in Syria this week on the day Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez visited Damascus on the last leg of his world tour. Tehran was among the previous capitals he’d visited, and his presence in the Middle East was a physical symbol of the deeper connection being forged between the resurgent radical left in Latin America and the renewed popular spirit of resistance in the Arab and Muslim worlds.

Mention of the name Chávez elicited thunderous cheers and applause at the huge demonstration against Israel‘s invasion of Lebanon in London last month. In taking a stand by withdrawing his ambassador to Israel in protest at the assault, Chávez won the hearts of millions of Arabs and, in equal measure, exposed the craven capitulation of the vast majority of Arab leaders. His government has followed that up with a campaign to raise money through public donation to fund the reconstruction of Lebanon.

Lest anyone think these are mere gestures, Duncan Campbell reported in the Guardian this week that the US government is taking the Chávez government very seriously:

“Millions of dollars have been provided in a ‘pro-democracy programme’ that Chávez supporters claim is a covert attempt to bankroll an opposition to defeat the government. The money is being provided by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) through its Office of Transition Initiatives. The row follows the recent announcement that the US had made $80m (£42m) available for groups seeking to bring about change in Cuba, whose leader, Fidel Castro, is a close ally of Mr Chávez.”

There are echoes here of the aid provided for the so-called cedar revolution in Lebanon in March of last year. But, for the White House, isn’t that the rub? What happened to the cedar revolution, which was supposed to usher in a pro-US administration in Beirut and make Lebanon compliant with multinational corporations? Well, the answer lies in the tens of thousands of unexploded cluster-bomblets left by the Israelis. What we are witnessing are the limitations of US power. It would be light-minded in the extreme to imagine that that power has evaporated, certainly. But there can be little doubt – notwithstanding the odd rant posted under my previous comment – that the US and its close allies (essentially Israel and Blair’s government) are coming up against the cruel reality of a shifting balance of forces.

Alarm bells are already ringing in Washington. The US government accountability office recently warned the Senate foreign relations committee of the devastating consequences of Venezuela cutting oil exports to America.

It estimated it would hit US GDP by $23bn. And Chávez is very much looking to diversify Venezuela‘s trading arrangements. China has just agreed $5bn of investments in Venezuela‘s oil industry (having already cut a similar deal with Iran). In return, Chávez is re-equipping the Venezuelan armed forces with largely Chinese materiel.

I suggested this week that Israel‘s defeat in Lebanon (if anyone doubts it, read the Israeli press) might lead to a de Klerk moment. I say might, not will. It’s certainly what those who say they are supporters of Israel should advocate. But there is another possibility. The frustration of US interests in the Middle East and in its “own” hemisphere might well lead it, and Israel, to lash out even more desperately.

Yesterday Bush said there would be “consequences” for Iran refusing to give up its civil nuclear programme. Well, increasing numbers of people across the globe are realising that there are consequences for neo-conservative bombast. One is that what has been termed US “soft power” – broadly ideological support internationally – is at historic lows. The Chávez government, whose achievements will be celebrated in Trafalgar Square tonight, is a critical element in deflating it. I see that some liberal commentators who miss no opportunity to castigate Hizbullah and Hamas nevertheless regard Chávez as an honest, reforming social democrat. It is for those commentators to square away why Chávez has expressed unflinching solidarity with the Lebanese and Palestinian resistance forces.

It’s an alliance – an axis of good – which will be further cemented in two weeks’ time at the Non-Aligned Movement summit in Havana, and again at a proposed conference in Beirut later this year. The radical left in Britain and Europe should see itself as part of that alliance.

Similar Posts:

• Israeli Apartheid Week
• Egypt Shows Its True colours Again
• Advice through a vision of the future
• Shall We Respect Hizbullah or Not?
• Protest Lloyds TSB joining the war on the people of Gaza