Here are some quick thoughts on yesterday’s important news that Dinorah Figuera, president of the 2015 National Assembly, met with Jorge Rodriquez, president of the current National Assembly, to initiate the discussion of a roadmap for a democratic transition. (See the U.S. State Department’s press release here, and the statement from the 2015 National Assembly here.)
While it is still taking shape, this can only be seen as a positive development. It shows that the Trump administration and the Rodriguez government are willing to negotiate issues beyond economic stabilization and security, and that the U.S. is willing to put forward a Venezuelan opposition leader for this task. How much independence the whole process will have from the Trump administration is yet to be seen. But this clearly moves in the right direction of making it led by Venezuelans.
This represents a new stage in the Trump administration’s clear preference to not work with María Corina Machado. This development in itself is not surprising—the opposition’s Panama Manifesto released in May saying that Machado needed to be at the center of any legitimate negotiation was a preemptive move by her team who sensed this could happen with Figuera or Enrique Marquez. Furthermore, since January, she and her team have made it clear that they are not simply going to become the partners the Trump administration seems to have in mind. They have largely stayed the course in their political discourse and alliances, while courting Trump to change his mind about them.
Part of the Trump administration’s decision is also likely the fact that, as anyone close to Chavismo will tell you, the Rodriguez government sees negotiations with María Corina Machado and an eventual Machado presidency as redlines. This may have an impact since, after all, the Trump administration still wants as smooth, and low cost of a transition as possible.
Nevertheless, what this means in the longer term for Machado and her coalition is not at all clear. Figuera is known to be a close ally of Julio Borges, who is strongly in Machado’s camp. Her team will undoubtedly seek to work this to their advantage. Furthermore, as we suggest in our report (see the section on the opposition), it is generally not recommended to have a presidential candidate leading a negotiation. The latter inevitably requires making some unpopular sacrifices which either means they don’t make them and the negotiation stagnates, or they make them and pay the consequences in public opinion. Having Figuera to blame for unpopular decisions could actually be a convenient development for Machado if she becomes a candidate (even if a Machado candidacy is a redline for Chavismo, there is no guarantee that they can prevent it in a real negotiation).
Nothing has been said about facilitators or mediators. It can be really tough for progress to be made between two sides with radically different positions without an expert third party facilitating. There is also no word on who the “technical team” is that will be supporting the process.
The missing issue in what has been said so far about the agenda is justice. The State Department statement and the press release from the 2015 National Assembly mention important issues: strengthening democratic institutions, reforming the CNE, and civil and political freedoms, but steer clear of justice. Leaving it out is often seen as political realism. But as we argue in our recent report (see the chapter on transitional justice), the push for justice should be attended to right from the beginning and can actually contribute to a transition process, as well as the quality of democracy in the longer term.
Whether this new negotiation effort is a turning point or a red herring is yet to be seen, but this is clearly the development to watch right now.
No posts
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.