Seven Questions: The End of the Bolivarian Dream?

JUAN BARRETO/AFP/Getty ImagesDown, but not out: Chvez is a man who rarely takes no for an answer.

Foreign Policy: Why do you think Venezuelans rejected Hugo Chvezs proposed changes to the constitution?

Andres Oppenheimer: Conflict fatigue. About 40 percent of the Venezuelan population was opposing Chvez to begin with, and many of the others who supported Chvez were tired of his habit of picking fightsdailywith anybody who came across him. If it wasnt the Catholic Church, it was the businesspeople; if it wasnt the businesspeople, it was the students; if it wasnt the students, it was the United States; if it wasnt the United States, it was the king of Spain; if it wasnt the king of Spain, it was the president of Colombia. And the Chvez supporters just got fed up with this polarization.

FP: How much of a factor was his failure to make good on his promises to cut poverty?

AO: Theres no question that many Venezuelans thought it a bit of a contradiction for Chvez to be talking about creating a socialist state when there were shortages of basics foodstuffs such as milk in Venezuelan stores. And there was also a lot of resentment among Chvez supporters for him to be spending billions of dollars helping what he calls alternative Bolivarian movements throughout Latin America. A lot of people sent him a message saying, Why dont you focus on your own country?

FP: In your book, Saving the Americas: The Dangerous Decline of Latin America . . . and What the U.S. Must Do, you describe how and why Latin America, including Venezuela, has been so unsuccessful at fighting poverty. What was Chvezs response to your argument?

AO: I wrote the book to find out why poverty has been reduced by half across the world during the past 25 years and why this phenomenon has happened almost everywhere but Latin America. Thats why I went to China, to India, to Ireland, to the Czech Republic, to Poland, among other places. One of the main things I discovered is that [economic development] doesnt have anything to do with ideology. The real difference between countries today is not how Chvez would like us to believe that there are Right countries and Left countries, but rather between countries that are drawing investments and countries that are scaring investments away. And the country that is attracting the most investment in the developing world is a communist country, China. That drove [Chavistas] crazy. Thats why Chvez spent one of his speeches lashing out against me.

In Beijing, they are putting out a red carpet for foreign investors, whereas in Latin America, many presidents are going out to the balcony and yelling against foreign investors. [In my book], I tell the story of when I arrived in China, and the first thing I read in the [local] paper was that the entire Chinese government was celebrating the arrival of the board of directors of McDonalds, who were there to announce the opening of 400 restaurants in China. I had just come from Venezuela, where the Chvez government had just suspended McDonalds restaurants for three days for some phony tax investigation and the government was taking pride in teaching foreign capitalists a lesson.

FP: Do you think this rejection at the polls will harm his reputation and popularity in the region?

AO: Chvezs reputation in the region has never been very high. In the region when hes polled, he scores at the very bottom of the list, alongside President Bush, and only second-to-last before Fidel Castro. He has strong support among very vocal, radical, leftist support groups, but his base is not widespread. I think it will embolden opposition forces in Nicaragua, Ecuador, and Bolivia who will now feel that theres nothing irreversible about radical leftist leaders who win democratic elections and try to erode democracy from within.

Chvez is down, but not out by any means. He still controls the presidency, Congress, the military, 20 of 22 governorships, and much of the media. If this is a boxing match, he lost the round but by no means did he lose the match itself.

FP: Youve spent a good deal of time comparing Latin America to the rest of the world. One easy comparison I see is between Chvez and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Both are semiauthoritarians who are ruling petrostates; both are hostile to the United States. Yet on the same day, they had very different electoral results. What do you make of this?

AO: Well Chvezs concession was not a trial of his democratic instincts, although one has to be happy that he conceded. He delayed the announcement for about seven hours in Venezuela, and according to a government-sanctioned monitoring group, the opposition victory was larger than officially reported. Venezuelan press reports today are talking about the fact the military high command told Chvez to accept his defeat. So we shouldnt rush to celebrate Chvezs sudden conversion into a Jeffersonian democrat.

In Putins case, he uses the same methods Chvez uses in Venezuela: massive uses of public resources; control of much of the media. Theres not such a huge difference. [But] Putin may be focusing more on Russia and the Russian people than Chvez is focusing on the Venezuelan people. A lot of Chvez supporters resented the fact that he spends most of his time in Saudi Arabia and Iran, talking about the world revolution when they want bread and butter.

FP: Youve written about the much-discussed wave of neopopulism in Latin America and said it is misunderstood. What do you think an election result like this says about this so-called populist wave, if anything?

AO: Well, thats the key question. Of course Im worried about Chvez, and Nicaraguas Daniel Ortega, and Bolivias Evo Morales, and Ecuadors Rafael Correa scaring away investments and making the countries poor, but thats not the key issue in Latin America; because if you put all these countries togetherVenezuela, Cuba, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Nicaraguathey barely amount to 8 or 9 percent of Latin Americas GDP. U.S. officials and we in the press love to write about Chvez because he screams and yells and is colorful and insults everybody and he makes great copy. But the real story of Latin America is being written elsewhere: in Mexico; in Brazil; in Colombia; in Chile.

What really worries me about Latin Americas future is that were falling behind in education, science, technology, and research and development. If you look at all the international standardized tests for kids, Latin America has among the lowest scores in the world. When you look at the London Timess ranking of the worlds 200 best universities, this year only three Latin American universities are among the worlds [top] 200 and theyre all between 195 and 200. This is scandalous. And its because, when the rest of the developing world is moving rapidly to create more skilled workforces, Latin America is talking ideology. Look at Chvez. He speaks to the nation every day in front of a huge painting of Simn Bolvar. He changed the country to name it after Simn Bolvar. In every speech, he cites Bolvar as inspiration for every single measure he takes. The trouble is that Bolvar died in 1830four years before the invention of the telephone and 150 years before the invention of the Internet.

FP: Do you think then that a lot of people who are agitating for democratic ideals would be better off if they channeled all of their anger and resentment toward Chvez and people like him into issues like education?

AO: When it comes to his opponents in the United States, I think Washington should bypass Chvez. Instead of focusing on Chvez and responding to him, Washington should build bridges with Brazil, with Mexico, with Colombia, with Chile, with Peru and simply ignore Chvez. If Washington is really serious and really worried about Chvez, the thing it should do is be serious about reducing Americas dependence on imported oil. The United States is financing Chvez. We buy $34 billion a year worth of Venezuelan oil. Thats what keeps Chvez alive. Ironically, the United States is financing Chvezs Bolivarian revolution.

Andrs Oppenheimer is the author of The Oppenheimer Report, a prize-winning column on Latin American affairs in the Miami Herald, and Saving the Americas: The Dangerous Decline of Latin America . . . and What the U.S. Must Do (New York: Random House, 2007).

For other timely interviews with leading world figures and expert analysts, visit FP’s complete Seven Questions Archive.