The elected president of the people of Venezuela, "Hugo Chavez" [punctuation as published here and throughout], has once more taken up the reins of power at the presidential palace in Caracas. The rapid events and the changing of power in Venezuela indicate that the putschists did not enjoy a popular base and the Venezuelan people as well as the military in the country did not endorse the coup government of "Pedro Carmona" who was being supported by America. America was the only country that came to the support of the putschists immediately after they took power in Venezuela. Moreover, in its posturing with respect to this country, America declared that democracy had been victorious in Venezuela. America called the action of several military generals, who were supported by capitalist as well as bankers, as the victory of democracy in Venezuela under circumstances where Hugo Chavez had come to power in 1988 through a popular process. What is more, the promoting of a constitutional reform plan and carrying out of extensive economic reforms have led to his re-election in July 2000 as the president of Venezuela for a further six year term. A number of observers believe that the reasons behind America's opposition to Chavez and its support for Venezuela under the generals who carried out the coup against him go back to the domestic and foreign plans and policies of Chavez. Following a series of domestic reforms, especially in the agriculture, energy and banking sectors and describing communism and capitalism as futile, Chavez caused the business leaders, bankers and capitalist to distance themselves from him and thus paved the way for their opposition to his power. The new laws were described by leaders of the economy as deviant and unfair and these leaders organised and stage-managed street demonstrations against Chavez with the help of the biggest trade and commercial unions as well as a sector of the army. Outside the borders of Venezuela, Chavez faced America's hostility. This is something that the American officials have acknowledged on many occasions. They had been thinking about ways of ousting Chavez from the presidential palace in Caracas. Ever since he came to power, Chavez had refused to accept America's biding and had called on Washington on numerous occasions to stop intervening in his country. He also accused America of killing innocent children and people during the Afghan war, met with "Mo'ammar Qadhafi" and "Saddam Hoseyn", the presidents of Libya and Iraq and long-term enemies of Washington, and had a very close relationship with the Cuban leader "Fidel Castro". The combination of Chavez's performance and policies brought on the wrath of American President Bush to the extent that he failed to hide his anger during his visit to Peru. During his meetings with Peruvian officials, Bush spoke of America's dislike of Chavez. Moreover, the American Secretary of State "Powell" also has recently announced in his annual report to the American Congress that taking into account Hugo Chavez's closeness to countries that are not dependent on America, he is not considered to be a trustworthy pawn in the Latin American region. Powell had stressed that Venezuela is able to, as in the past, that is to say, the era of the military rule in that country, play an effective role in America's policies in Latin America. Besides these instances of American hostility towards Chavez, mention must be made of his oil policy within OPEC. In recent years, Chavez caused OPEC oil policies to be strengthened in the face of the positions adopted by oil consumers. He has managed to a great extent to adopt policies aligned with other oil producing states whenever oil crises have emerged that led to reduced oil prices in the market. That is to say, he adopted positions where supply of oil by OPEC would be reduced and oil prices supported. This is while before Chavez, Venezuela used to be called the "errant member" within OPEC, a member that would follow less the concerted decisions of OPEC and observe less its own quotas. This is why one cannot dismiss the effects of the intensification of the Middle East crisis, Iraq's initiative in using crude oil as a political weapon against Washington and the debate on an extensive oil embargo against the supporters of Israel on the events of the past few days in Venezuela as well as America's support for the putschists there. America was trying to guarantee the flow of Venezuelan crude oil to itself by overthrowing Chavez and the seizing of power in the Venezuelan presidential palace by the dependent generals. The people of Venezuela thwarted America in this. Finally, America prescribes liberal democracy for others yet fails itself to accord any value to democratic principles in the world. The Bush administration's support for the Venezuelan putschists is testament to this. Attachments: Image-1.gif Image-2.gif