Chavez Offers Millions in Latin America

Agallah005

Star
Registered
By NATALIE OBIKO PEARSON and IAN JAMES, Associated Press Writers
Sun Aug 26, 1:51 PM ET

Laid-off Brazilian factory workers have their jobs back, Nicaraguan farmers are getting low-interest loans and Bolivian mayors can afford new health clinics, all thanks to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Bolstered by windfall oil profits, Chavez's government is now offering more direct state funding to Latin America and the Caribbean than the United States. A tally by The Associated Press shows Venezuela has pledged more than $8.8 billion in aid, financing and energy funding so far this year.

While the most recent figures available from Washington show $3 billion in U.S. grants and loans reached the region in 2005, it isn't known how much of the Venezuelan money has actually been delivered. And Chavez's spending abroad doesn't come close to the overall volume of U.S. private investment and trade in Latin America.

But in terms of direct government funding, the scale of Venezuela's commitments is unprecedented for a Latin American country.

Chavez's largesse tends to benefit left-leaning nations that support his vision of a Latin America with greater independence from the United States. But he denies the two countries are in a competition.

"We don't want to compete with anyone. I wish the United States were 100 times above us," Chavez told the AP in a recent interview. "But no, the U.S. government views the region in a marginal way. What they offer is a pittance sometimes, and with unacceptable pressures that at times countries can't accept."

U.S. aid tends to be low-profile, constrained by strict guidelines and often distributed through other institutions so that recipients may not know it's from the U.S. government. Venezuela offers money with few strings attached and a personal Chavez touch that aid experts say generates more good will dollar for dollar.

Clay Lowery, the U.S. Treasury Department's acting undersecretary for international affairs, argues that the U.S. plays a larger role than reflected in its aid figures. The United States, for instance, drove Inter-American Development Bank and World Bank debt relief deals totaling $7.5 billion over the past three years in Latin America, he said.

"Who is the biggest financier of the IDB? The United States. Who is the biggest financier of the World Bank? The United States is. We don't count those," Lowery said. "We're basically engaged on a multilevel, multi-prong approach."

Still, as the Chavez effect gains ground, there are signs the U.S. is responding to the challenge.

The U.S. Navy medical ship Comfort is on a four-month, 12-country voyage to Latin American ports, and has already treated more than 80,000 patients with free vaccinations, eye care, dental checkups and surgeries aboard the converted oil tanker.

U.S. officials are taking their cue from the free eye surgeries and medical training that Chavez offers, says Adam Isacson of the Washington-based Center for International Policy, which tracks American aid and advocates international cooperation.

"They're trying to do things that are aimed in a small way at countering what Chavez is doing — Chavez's much larger aid programs," he said.

His group calculates that nearly half of U.S. aid to the region goes to military and police programs. However, U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson also has pointed to the U.S. government's work with the IDB to mobilize up to $200 million through private lenders to support small business loans.

Chavez's aid isn't limited to his region. Low-income Americans get cheap heating oil, while the former Soviet republic of Belarus is counting on Chavez to help pay off a $460 million gas bill to Russia. But most of the funding goes to Latin America.

When a Brazilian plastics factory was shuttered in 2003 by its indebted owners, hundreds of workers formed a cooperative. They appealed for help in a private meeting with Chavez, who offered subsidized raw materials in exchange for the technology to produce plastic homes in Venezuela. The factory soon hummed back to life.

"I know there are people out there criticizing Chavez for helping us. They say he is interfering with the internal affairs of Brazil," said Salviano Jose da Silva, a security guard at the Flasko factory near Sao Paulo. "But all he's doing is helping to guarantee our livelihood — something the government should be doing but isn't."

When floods hit Bolivia this year, the U.S. provided $1.5 million in a planeload of supplies and cash. Chavez promised 10 times more and sent in teams that helped victims for weeks. In all, Chavez's pledges to Bolivia total over $800 million, more than six times the U.S. commitment this year.

He also offered money for new garbage trucks in Haiti and an Argentine dairy cooperative.

Opponents say Chavez is spending haphazardly on "giveaways" abroad at a time when more than a quarter of Venezuelans still live on less than $3 a day. They question how long he can sustain it since government revenues are highly dependent on fluctuating oil prices.

While Venezuelan asphalt paves streets in Bolivia's capital, a sign recently protruded from one of Caracas' potholes reading: "Why for Bolivia yes and for me no?"

Chavez argues much of the funding brings benefits back to Venezuela, including oil-related investments and other cooperative exchanges. He says billions more are being spent within Venezuela, and cites social programs credited with helping to reduce poverty.

His recent commitments in the region exceed those of the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank. Each lent nearly $6 billion in 2006, but their influence has declined as nations repay their outstanding loans. Regional International Monetary Fund debts dropped from $49 billion in 2003 to just $694 million this year, largely due to early repayments, some of them financed by Chavez.

Chavez offers funds in unconventional, sometimes spontaneous ways. Summing it up is difficult due to a lack of transparent accounting, so the AP tally is based on public pledges rather than what has actually been spent. Some of the money is expected to be paid over multiple years. The tally also cannot cover undisclosed spending, such as aid to Cuba or Venezuela's share in building a $5 billion oil refinery in Ecuador.

Venezuela's funding differs from U.S. aid because it includes investments that in the U.S. would come from the private sector and purchases of bonds that are later resold.

Most of the funding — $6.3 billion — involves energy projects, some of which directly benefit Venezuela's oil industry, such as a $3.5 billion refinery to be built in Nicaragua. That also includes funding for electricity plants in Haiti and Bolivia, and an estimated $1.6 billion in fuel financing to at least 17 nations.

Venezuela has pledged $772 million in development aid, including AIDS treatment in Nicaragua, housing in Dominica and Cuban doctors in Haiti.

In Bolivia, $20 million went directly to mayors selected by leftist President Evo Morales for projects including health clinics and schools. Mayor Miguel Avila gratefully accepted a $427,000 check for his town of San Lorenzo to build a new farmers' market.

Critics warn that scant oversight leads to waste and corruption.

"You don't do things well by just giving money away," said Liliana Rojas-Suarez, a former IMF economist at the Washington-based Center for Global Development. "If you give money without any conditions attached, without any expectations, without anything, what are the incentives?"

But Mark Weisbrot of the Center for Economic Policy Research says Chavez has succeeded in providing more financing options and breaking up a "creditors' cartel" of Washington-based lenders whose economic prescriptions failed to improve the lives of the poor.

Chavez helped Argentina pay off its IMF debt by buying some $5.1 billion in Argentine bonds in recent years, and now proposes a "Bank of the South" that would use billions from Venezuela's international reserves as seed money.

Meanwhile, Venezuela's state development bank, Bandes, is expanding into Bolivia, Uruguay, Honduras, Guatemala and Haiti. In Nicaragua, it is offering loans at just 5 percent interest, compared to 35 percent by some private banks.

Nicaraguan farmer Juan Vicente Castillo, whose cooperative plans to grow black beans to pay off part of a $750,000 Bandes loan, says: "We are very grateful to President Chavez's government for this loan that the commercial banks wouldn't give."

___

Contributing to this report were AP correspondents Stan Lehman and Alan Clendenning in Sao Paulo, Brazil; Dan Keane in San Lorenzo, Bolivia; Filadelfo Aleman in Managua, Nicaragua; Nestor Ikeda in Washington, D.C.; and Diego Mendez and Luis Romero on board the USNS Comfort.




-*-*-*-*-*

Now, some of ya'll might laugh at this, but this could mean something big. America is slowly losing it's grip of power as we speak.

I guess they'll try to assassinate him like they've been trying to do Fidel, huh?
 
Chavez has a finite supply of oil and his economic model of socialism will fail once his supply of oil dries up. We have lived with Castro for over fifty years and we can live with Chavez for the next fifty years. Remembers every American president can envoke the Manifest Destiny, whenever Chavez poses a "clear and present danger" to the stability of the western hemisphere.
 
Sounds good to me. Now, can we cut back at least a billion or two that would have gone to Latin America and invest in programs to assist poor whites (because they always benefit when my next category benefits) and minorities (legal only) with business enterprise opportunities and/or raise the salary of teachers (high school and below), especially in underprivileged districts and districts with low performance numbers ???

Chavez will be OK so long as he doesn't team up with terrorist or sponsors of terrorism that threatens U.S. security or he doesn't start to think he's taller than he really is and try denying the oil supply. If he's going to spend Venezuela's wealth on the rest of Latin America, hell, let him, ultimately, Venezuelans will have to deal with it.

Its a good thing that a country in that region can step up and help the others. If Chavez' brand of socialism works for them, more power to them. The more they develop the more there will be an opportunity, somehow/someway, that corporate America will have its opportunities . . . and, hopefully, less American public funds going in that direction that are sorely needed, right here.

QueEx
 
lostbuck said:
Chavez has a finite supply of oil and his economic model of socialism will fail once his supply of oil dries up. We have lived with Castro for over fifty years and we can live with Chavez for the next fifty years. Remembers every American president can envoke the Manifest Destiny, whenever Chavez poses a "clear and present danger" to the stability of the western hemisphere.

See. that's the thing....I don't think people see the big picture. Chavez is rouding his boys up so that they can practically attack america economically. yes, it can take fifty years, but how do you know that he won't fuck around and conquer more land in the mean time. Hell, America has conquered more in less than fifty(look at the early 1900's) so why can't chavez. I think America will have a rude awakening and you my friend may think that he's got a finite supply, but as his supply dwindles, America stills goes to CITGO in droves becuase they particularly don't go to the Arabs, that's why he's getting so fucking bloated.

I think some people dont' understand that the Byzantine Empire did fall, why do you not think that the American Empire won't?

Do You actually think that America can actually sustain itself any longer? I'm just saying that America's days are numbered, it IS Darwin's Survival of the Fittest and the other countries are pretty damn pissed off at America taking all of the cake in the party. Chavez is rounding up his troops and then some. it's only a matter or months or years before he strikes up a deal with Mexico and CANADA and then EU and Korea, then we're pretty much done. Korea doesn't need us because they don't need our oil.

You can be the bully in the yard for only so long. The kids will grow up and they will develop ways of whipping your ass, sir.
 
Agallah005,

Your comments in favor of Chavez notwithstanding, are there any other countries, in your estimation, that look out for their SELF INTEREST: i.e., China and Russia; or is the U.S. (and its allies) the only bullies ???

QueEx
 



Bumped From the Archives -- The Best of Hugo Chavez --


220px-Chavez141610.jpg


July 28, 1954 - March 5, 2013




Seven days of mourning after president dies in Caracas - The Guardian


The Passing of a Political Tsunami - Fox News


Death Comes for el Comandante: Hugo Chávez (1954–2013) - TIME


Obituary: Hugo Chavez - socialist showman who transformed Venezuela - REUTERS



 
source: Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting

His independence, help for Venezuela's poor will not be forgiven

chavez-300x204.jpg


Venezuela's left-wing populist president Hugo Chávez died on Tuesday, March 5, after a two-year battle with cancer. If world leaders were judged by the sheer volume of corporate media vitriol and misinformation about their policies, Chávez would be in a class of his own.

Shortly after Chávez won his first election in 1998, the U.S. government deemed him a threat to U.S. interests--an image U.S. media eagerly played up. When a coup engineered by Venezuelan business and media elites removed Chávez from power, many leading U.S outlets praised the move (Extra!, 6/02). The New York Times (4/13/02), calling it a "resignation," declared that "Venezuelan democracy is no longer threatened by a would-be dictator." The Chicago Tribune (4/14/02) cheered the removal of a leader who had been "praising Osama bin Laden"--an absurdly false charge.

But that kind of reckless rhetoric was evidently permissible in media discussions about Chávez. Seven years later, CNN (1/15/09) hosted a discussion of Chávez with Democratic strategist Doug Schoen, where he and host John Roberts discussed whether or not Chávez was worse than Osama bin Laden. As Schoen put it, "He's given Al-Qaeda and Hamas an open invitation to come to Caracas."

There were almost no limits to overheated media rhetoric about Chávez. In a single news article, Newsweek (11/2/09) managed to compare him to Mussolini, Hitler and Stalin. (Chávez had built a movie studio, which is the sort of thing dictators apparently do.) ABC (World News, 10/7/12) called him a "fierce enemy of the United States," the Washington Post (10/16/06) an “autocratic demagogue." Fox News (12/5/05) said that his government was "really Communism"--despite the fact he was repeatedly returned to office in internationally certified elections (Extra!, 11-12/06) that Jimmy Carter deemed "the best in the world" (Guardian, 10/3/12).

Apart from the overheated claims about terrorism and his growing military threat to the region (FAIR Blog, 4/1/07), media often tried to make a simpler case: Chávez wasn't good for Venezuelans. The supposed economic ruin in Venezuela was a staple of the coverage. The Washington Post editorial page (1/5/13) complained of "the economic pain caused by Mr. Chávez," the man who has "wrecked their once-prosperous country." And a recent New York Times piece (12/13/12) tallied some of the hassles of daily life, declaring that such

frustrations are typical in Venezuela, for rich and poor alike, and yet President Hugo Chávez has managed to stay in office for nearly 14 years, winning over a significant majority of the public with his outsize personality, his free-spending of state resources and his ability to convince Venezuelans that the Socialist revolution he envisions will make their lives better.

Of course, Venezuelans might feel that Chávez already had improved their lives (FAIR Blog, 12/13/12), with poverty cut in half, increased availability of food and healthcare, expanded educational opportunities and a real effort to build grassroots democratic institutions. (For more of this, read Greg Grandin's piece in the Nation--3/5/13.)

Those facts of Venezuelan life were not entirely unacknowledged by U.S. media. But these policies, reflecting new national priorities about who should benefit from the country's oil wealth, were treated as an unscrupulous ploy of Chávez's to curry favor with the poor. As the Washington Post (2/24/13) sneered, Chávez won "unconditional support from the poverty-stricken masses" by "doling out jobs to supporters and showering the poor with gifts." NPR's All Things Considered (3/5/13) told listeners that "millions of Venezuelans loved him because he showered the poor with social programs."

Buying the support of your own citizens is one thing; harboring negative feelings about the United States is something else entirely. As CBS Evening News (1/8/13) recently put it, "Chávez has made a career out of bashing the United States." But one wonders how friendly any U.S. political leaders would be toward a government that had supported their overthrow.

Though this is often treated as another Chávez conspiracy theory--"A central ideological pillar of Chávez's rule over 14 years has been to oppose Republican and Democratic administrations in Washington, which he accuses of trying to destabilize his government," the Washington Post (1/10/13) reported--the record of U.S. support for the coup leaders is clear.

As a State Department report (FAIR Blog, 1/11/13) acknowledged, various U.S. agencies had "provided training, institution building and other support to individuals and organizations understood to be actively involved in the brief ouster of the Chávez government." The Bush administration declared its support for the short-lived coup regime, saying Chávez was "responsible for his fate" (Guardian, 4/21/09).

Of course, as with any country, there are aspects of Chávez's government that could be criticized. U.S. media attention to Venezuela's flaws, however, was obviously in service to an official agenda--as documented by FAIR's study (Extra!, 2/09) of editorials on human rights, which showed Venezuela getting much harsher criticism than the violent repression of the opposition in U.S.-allied Colombia.

Time-chavez.jpg


In reporting Chávez's death, little had changed. "Venezuela Bully Chávez Is Dead," read the New York Post's front page (3/6/13); "Death of a Demogogue" was on Time's home page (3/6/13). CNN host Anderson Cooper (3/5/13) declared it was "the death of a world leader who made America see red, as in Fidel Castro red, Venezuela's socialist president, Hugo Chávez."

"The words 'Venezuelan strongman' so often preceded his name, and for good reason," declared NBC Nightly News host Brian Williams (3/5/13); on ABC World News (3/5/13), viewers were told that "many Americans viewed him as a dictator." That would be especially true if those Americans consumed corporate media.

The fact that U.S. elite interests are an overarching concern is not exactly hidden. Many reports on Chávez's passing were quick to note the country's oil wealth. NBC's Williams asserted, "All this matters a lot to the U.S., since Venezuela sits on top of a lot of oil and that's how this now gets interesting for the United States." MSNBC's Rachel Maddow (3/5/13) concurred: "I mean, Venezuela is a serious country in the world stage. It is sitting on the world's largest proven oil reserves."

And CNN's Barbara Starr (3/5/13) reported: "You're going to see a lot of U.S. businesses keep a very close eye on this transition in Venezuela. They're going to want to know that their investments are secure and that this is a stable country to invest in." Those U.S. businesses would seem to include its media corporations.
 
Back
Top