From Caracas
Thursday in Caracas, sun, threat of downpour, latest analysis of Sunday’s elections. In the east of the city you can see freshly planted palm trees, imported goods stores and new restaurants and expensive car dealerships. The crisis in this part of the Venezuelan capital seems far away, although it is close, a few meters below, in the subway, state and free, with few escalators in operation and a multiplication of street vendors selling candy, worn clothes and shoes.
Caracas is a series of heterogeneous, uneven photographs. His election result on Sunday also shows that diversity: in the west, in the capital district, Carmen Meléndez, from the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (Psuv) won, and in the east, three opposition mayors grouped in Fuerza Vecinal and one from Psuv were elected again. A result that reflects continuity in the metropolitan area, within the framework of a contest marked by what is perceived as a change of stage in the political conflict and, in part, in the economic scenario.
The numbers thrown by the polls were read in various ways these days. The opposition emphasized that the total number of votes obtained by the different opposition lists was higher than those obtained by Chavismo: 4,675,740 against 4,046,748. Thus, according to their analysis, they could have won about ten governorates instead of the three that they finally conquered, and have been left with more than the 117 mayoralties achieved out of the total of 335. The calculation, in a mathematical sum that in politics does not usually occur, it tried to be shown as an oppositional incentive to indicate that there is a window of opportunity to win the next electoral victory that, at this time, has the horizon in the presidential elections of 2024.
Simultaneously with this narrative, disputes were triggered within the opposition currents. Henrique capriles radonski, who began his public reappearance in September 2020 advocating for electoral participation, stated: “within the relaunch and reorganization of the opposition there is one thing that must be said, today nobody owns the opposition, nobody, nor does it have a monopoly, here An internal process of exploration is urgently needed, because the people on Sunday gave a clear message in that line, today nobody owns the opposition”. His message, with a question to Juan Guaidó, was given in a context of cross accusations: some point to others as collaborators and scorpions, and, in turn, others accuse those who participated in the elections of being accomplices of the government. “We do not have an opposition meter to see who is an opponent and who is not an opponent,” Capriles said about that dispute.
The anti-election and pro-overthrow line, reduced in its figures and proposals, also tried to open that dispute. Maria Corina Machado, enshrined under that speech, accused those who participated of being a “false opposition”, and raised the need to build a “new political leadership” opposition through “a great popular election to choose the leadership.”
The government’s speech, for its part, highlighted the victory obtained in most states and mayors, a result that once again showed the mostly red Venezuelan map. God given hair, deputy, vice president of the Psuv, with a central role in the mobilization and organization of the party, pointed out that the numbers obtained were the result of a political strategy: “the strategy is very clear to us, we are not going to tell you right now, but there there are the results ”. The Psuv, during the war, once again showed the ability to structure its hard core through the partisan work carried out in most of the popular neighborhoods of the country.
The triumphalism in the Chavista narrative was in turn marked by the data of the new decrease in its solid base that, from 2020 to 2021, fell by about 300 thousand votes. The number obtained by Chavismo can be read in several ways: compared to the regionals in 2017, the voting base decreased by almost 1,800,000 votes, although, compared to the regionals in 2012, it decreased by 800,000 votes. The numbers of the contest occurred in turn in one of the minimum participation percentages, with 42.22 percent, an abstention that some analyzes indicate as part of a majority political disaffiliation.
The readings and different presentations on Sunday are important for what I can follow. On the side of the oppositions, there is a debate, at the moment without clarity in the public, about whether to initiate in 2022 an attempt on the way to the recall referendum, for which they would need more than the 6,245,862 thousand votes obtained by Nicolás Maduro in 2018. On the other hand, the opposition dispute may have a translation in the dialogues of Mexico, for the moment suspended: “there is another opposition photo, when they come to talk to us about the dialogue process, the need to look for some kind of elements In order to exchange ideas and proposals, those political forces that received support must necessarily join, ”said Jorge Rodríguez, president of the Legislative branch.
The evolution of the dialogue process in Mexico will in turn be related to what Washington decides, which, for the moment, declared that the elections “do not reflect the will of the Venezuelan people” and maintained its recognition of Guaidó as “interim president.” His statement, without surprise, is part of a set of international messages, such as that of the European Union Observation Mission that presented its report on Tuesday, highlighting the positive role of the electoral power, which he described as “the most balanced electoral administration of the last twenty years ”, while making a series of questions related, for example, to the Judiciary, the disqualification of candidates or the unequal use of public resources in the campaign.
There are many variables at stake in a conflict that looks at an electoral key, except for a recall attempt, towards 2024. What will Washington do with a Guaidó reduced to virtuality? Will there be a resumption of dialogue with the horizon of easing the economic blockade? At the moment, Sunday showed different images of a country with new consumption islands in the capital, an interior where water, electricity, gas, gasoline, dollars are often scarce, and a map of politics with reconfigurations .
.