“What happened is the result of the use of the media to incite violence,” said Venezuelan information minister Jesse Chacón about the attack on Conatel. He was referring to shrill calls by opposition politicians, publicized by the big-business media that day, for protests against the government of President Hugo Chávez in response to measures taken against one of the main opposition TV stations.

Earlier on October 3, Conatel technicians had seized seven transmission dishes and an antenna from the privately owned Globovisión TV station. The equipment was used by the station to broadcast live reports. The government said the measure was taken because Globovisión was broadcasting on a frequency it is not authorized to use and because it had repeatedly refused to comply with regulations.

Globovisión is one of four nationwide TV stations that the opposition coalition Coordinadora Democrática (Democratic Coordination) has been using to publicize its campaign against Chávez’s government. The opposition, led by the main employers’ association, Fedecámaras, has used these stations as part of several attempts to topple Chávez: promoting a short-lived military coup against Chávez in April 2002, a two-month bosses’ “strike” earlier this year to undermine the government, and more recently an effort to hold a referendum to recall the president. Each time, mass mobilizations by working people have pushed back the bosses’ efforts.

“This is the first step they are taking to shut down the channel,” Globovisión director Alberto Federico Ravell charged. Opposition politicians immediately got on the airwaves to call for protests against what they described as a new government attack on “freedom of the press.” Hundreds of people surrounded the Globovisión building in an angry demonstration as Conatel technicians were removing the equipment.

Meanwhile, the TV channel continued to broadcast much of its programming, using the signals of television stations sharing a similar political slant. A Globovisión spokesman interviewed on the evening news October 3 equated the Conatel seizure with government tolerance of land takeovers by the peasants. This is a sign of “democracy’s funeral,” he declared.

Chacón denied the charge that the government is moving to shut down the TV channel. He said Globovisión must apply for authorization to recover the confiscated equipment, which could be granted in 90 days, if the station meets its obligations under existing law to apply for a different frequency.

Later that day, National Guard troops used tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse a smaller action outside the Conatel building, after opposition-organized protesters started throwing bottles and cans of paint at the state telecommunications headquarters.

The U.S. embassy in Caracas issued a statement siding with the opposition. “We see as unacceptable any action by a government to coerce or silence any media for expressing opposition to government policies,” the communiqué said, according to the October 4 El Nacional. The U.S. State Department made a similar statement.  
 
Smears tie Chávez to ‘terrorists’
Five days earlier, U.S. News and World Report had published an article alleging that the Venezuelan government has ties both with “Arab terrorists” operating out of the country’s Margarita Island and with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), which has been waging guerrilla warfare against the Colombian government for four decades. The article, by Linda Robinson, cited unnamed U.S. government officials as sources for its assertions. On October 1 Chávez went on national television denouncing the claims by Robinson as “disgusting,” “cynical,” and “irresponsible.” He demanded that Washington clarify its stance on these charges by stating whether “they are true or false.”

Chávez has drawn the wrath of the U.S. government and its backers in the Venezuelan bourgeoisie for taking measures that cut into the prerogatives of big capital, including an agrarian reform law and a bill strengthening state control over the country’s oil, gas, and other mineral resources. Washington’s hostility has also been fueled by closer economic and political ties between Venezuela and Cuba, and by Chávez’s public criticisms of the U.S.-led wars and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.

After failing to overthrow Chávez through last year’s coup and the most recent bosses’ “strike,” the pro-imperialist opposition has focused again on organizing a referendum to recall the president. On September 12 the National Elections Council (CEN) rejected a petition by the Coordinadora Democrática for such a referendum on the grounds that the opposition collected signatures prior to the mid-point in the president’s term, an election law violation. The CEN then issued new, stricter rules for such referenda.

The Coordinadora Democrática filed a request October 1 with the elections board for a new petition campaign to hold a recall referendum. The same day, the governing Fifth Republic Movement, Chávez’s party, filed similar requests to petition for referenda to recall some 45 opposition politicians who are deputies in the National Assembly, state governors, and mayors. The CEN subsequently accepted all these requests. Most political forces now expect that these two competing referenda will take place by February.

“If he’s not cornered yet, then at least he’s in a blind alley where the only way out is through a referendum,” said opposition leader Antonio Ledezma, referring to Chávez.

Many working people here, however, see it differently. “This is not a battle between Chavistas and anti-Chavistas,” said Graciela Rojas, a peasant leader in Veroes, Yaracuy state, in northwestern Venezuela, in an October 2 interview there. “This is a battle between the workers and the bosses, between the rich and the poor. Remember, we have prevailed three times so far.”
 
 
Related articles:
Workers in Venezuela occupy plants  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home