Venezuela has recently received a flurry of global media attention. There are the usual tropes and narratives that reinforce the image fostered by the U.S. State Department that it is an authoritarian dictatorship.

The Washington Post, in an article entitled, As Maduro tramples democracy, Biden needs a new plan to confront him states there are “slim chances of a peaceful democratic transition in Venezuela, which desperately needs one after a decade of economic collapse, political repression and systematic corruption under (its president) Mr. Maduro.”

This follows a claim by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken which Reuters published that, “Caracas is not willing to hold free and fair elections next year”. Blinken followed this by issuing a statement on 5 July, Venezuela’s national Independence Day,

“Despite significant challenges, the people and the coalition of democratic actors in Venezuela continue their tireless efforts to achieve their dream of an independent and democratic future. With this year’s upcoming primaries in preparation for the 2024 presidential elections, the United States continues to provide unwavering support in the realisation of free and fair elections for the people of Venezuela.”

What is this “unwavering support” that the U.S. provides, and why the recent attention?

Venezuela’s 2024 Presidential Elections

As part of its many democratic processes, presidential elections are scheduled in Venezuela for 2024 to choose a president for a six-year term beginning on 10 January 2025. The office of president is elected in a single round of voting. The elections are overseen by the National Electoral Council (CNE) and international observers, with poll workers drafted via a lottery of registered voters.

Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter once stated: “As a matter of fact, of the 92 elections that we’ve monitored, I would say the election process in Venezuela is the best in the world”. His opinion was based on the experience amassed by the Carter Center, which observes and monitors elections worldwide. The Smartmatic voting system Venezuela uses is designed to ensure that votes are verified efficiently.

The U.S. has repeatedly made accusations against the transparency of Venezuela’s elections since Hugo Chavez was elected by a clear majority in 1998. Chávez’s presidency marked a significant shift in Venezuelan politics. Chavez’s socialist policies and focus on social welfare programs lifted most Venezuelans from abject poverty.

Since then, the U.S. and its allies have taken a confrontational approach towards Venezuela. Chavez was re-elected for additional terms in 2000, 2006, and 2012 and served as the President of Venezuela until his death, when he was 58 years old, on 5 March 2013.

The right-wing opposition in Venezuela alleges that there have been many irregularities, including restrictions on opposition candidates, limited media access and that the CNE is biased with concerns about the accuracy of voter registration, voter coercion and vote buying.

The U.S. declared the results of the 2018 election to be illegitimate and has refused to recognise the Maduro government. This was followed by a failed US backed coup attempt under the inept opposition leader Juan Guaidó in 2019.

The U.S. had already placed sanctions on Venezuela. In 2015, Obama signed an executive order declaring Venezuela a threat to national security. The executive order authorised sanctions against Venezuelan officials accused of human rights abuses and corruption. The sanctions regime was then tightened by the Trump White House, effectively cutting Venezuela out of international trade and finance and forcing US companies to end their Venezuelan operations or sales.

This crippled Venezuela’s oil industry at the same time as the US and UK moved to seize Venezuelan assets, such as its gold reserves in London and the US-based assets of Venezuelan state-owned company CITGO. CITGO ran a program between 2005-2009 of distributing free heating oil to low income US households across 13 states and to tribal communities.

Seizure of Venezuelan assets by imperialist states was justified under the pretext that the Guaidó not Maduro heads the legitimate government of Venezuela. Many U.S. allies have upheld sanctions on Venezuela. Today it is almost impossible to read anything about Venezuela in the mainstream media that doesn’t refer to it as an authoritarian dictatorship.

The recent attention given to Venezuela is mainly in response to the affirmation of a ban on three opposition candidates. The Office of the Comptroller General of Venezuela has ratified the disqualifications. Venezuela’s National Assembly appoints the Comptroller General for a seven-year term, and it has the full legal authority to investigate allegations of corruption.

The three opposition candidates, María Corina Machado, Enrique Capriles and Freddy Superlano, failed to meet the requirements to run in the presidential elections. Of the three, the far-right opposition leader Machado is touted by Western media outlets as the most likely candidate to beat Maduro.

María Corina Machado

Machado gained prominence within the Venezuelan opposition after George Bush invited her and other opposition figures to the White House in 2005 to discuss regime change through civil-society organisations.

In 2002 she backed the violent overthrow of the elected Venezuelan government including signing the so called “Carmona Decree” – the main act of the short lived coup government that held power in Caracas for two days in April 2002.

The decree dissolved Venezuela’s National Assembly and the Supreme Court, paving the way for a new military dictatorship and bloody repression of Venezuela’s poor majority. Machado claims that she inadvertently signed the decree, thinking it was a sign in sheet to enter the Presidential Palace – then the seat of coup Government.

The U.S. was quick to respond to the banning of Machado’s candidacy, issuing the following statement by State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller on Twitter: “Today’s decision to disqualify @MariaCorinaYA from participating in the electoral process deprives Venezuelans of basic rights, and we remain concerned by efforts to remake the National Electoral Council. Venezuelans deserve free and fair elections.”

The E.U. High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, also expressed “deep concern” over the decision.

In March 2014, Machado was appointed an alternate ambassador of Panama to the Organization of American States (OAS) where she used the platform to denounce the Venezuelan government. The OAS was later instrumental in the 2019 Guaidó-led coup attempt.

Article 191 of the Venezuelan Constitution prohibits Venezuelan public officials from accepting employment or honours from foreign governments without the authorisation of the National Assembly. The Supreme Court ruled to disqualify her from Presidential candidacy on that basis.

Machado has also called for further sanctions on Venezuela and endorsed foreign military intervention. She has a two-point policy platform: U.S. intervention and the privatisation of PDVSA, the state-owned oil company.

Her party, Vente, fashions itself as centre-right liberal, standing for “free-market” economic reforms and individual freedoms. If it were in power, it would dismantle all the social gains of Venezuela’s Bolivarian revolution and turn over the country’s vast natural resources to U.S. corporations.

The Other Banned Opposition Figures

Enrique Capriles is a prominent member of the Justice First party (Primero Justicia), obtaining different positions throughout his career to build his support base amongst middle-class Venezuelans.

In the April 2012 presidential election, Capriles united the opposition behind him but lost the election to Chavez by 11 percent. After Chavez’s death he again stood as the candidate of a united opposition in 2013 but lost to Nicolas Maduro, this time by just two percent. The US-supported loser then claimed the election was stolen.

In 2017, Capriles received a ban from holding office for 15 years. The government alleges he was involved in criminal activity and engaged in international agreements with, and received funding from, foreign agencies without the authorisation of the Venezuelan government when he was Governor of Miranda state.

The allegations of criminality also relate to school closures in Miranda during 2013 due to “budget constraints” despite Capriles’ budget being fully approved, given and even increased by the local legislative assembly. They also concern his right-hand man Juan Carlos Caldera who was caught receiving foreign donations in 2012 on behalf of Capriles.

The other candidate is Freddy Superlano, a former member of the National Assembly representing the state of Barinas and deputy of the Popular Will (Voluntad Popular) party of Juan Guaidó, who now resides in Miami.

According to the Orinoco Tribune, in November 2021, the Electoral Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ) noted irregularities linked to the gubernatorial elections in Barinas state. The candidacy of Freddy Superlano was invalidated by the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ), which also imposed a ban on his eligibility for public office.

Each of these candidates claim that they are persecuted. But according to the laws of Venezuela, their actions have invalidated their candidacy. Every country has laws and regulations governing elections and accepting money from foreign governments.

The laws in Venezuela aim to provide a framework for conducting elections in a fair, transparent, and inclusive manner – even though that is made more difficult by the corrupting influence of U.S. imperialism.

Free and Fair Elections

Since the election of Hugo Chavez in 1998, the U.S. has labelled every election a sham, except for those in which their chosen candidates have won – such as when the opposition won a majority of seats in the National Assembly in 2015 as well as some state and regional contests.

The U.S. has successfully created a narrative in the West that Venezuela is an authoritarian dictatorship. Yet, it has highly dynamic electoral processes, including communal councils and organs of workers’ power. The opposition’s disunity, inherent corruption and lack of a coherent program or aims beyond regime change have meant they have been unable to present a convincing challenge to the Bolivarian revolution – and so they cry foul.

Another factor that impacts the popularity of the opposition is U.S. sanctions. The public opinion firm Hinterlaces released a poll in August 2020 showing that 81% of Venezuelans oppose sanctions. However, the major Venezuelan opposition groups have either supported the sanctions of failed to consistently oppose them.

Since 2015, most of the opposition had boycotted Venezuelan elections preferring instead to urge for U.S. intervention and support various coup and subversion projects. The 2024 elections will no doubt serve as a staging ground for further meddling by the U.S. State Department and the “civil society” organisations that it has sponsored.

Despite the imperialist sanctions, the worst of Venezuela’s economic crisis has passed. Oil production, which declined rapidly from 2014-2020, has begun to stage a recovery. The Bolivarian government has fought hard to maintain stability and restore food security. It is on the front foot in helping to establish Latin American integration as a counter-power to the efforts of U.S. imperialism.