The Stringer

Hardcore duck-on-duck action

2008-04-27T17:51:00.004+01:00

I have just uploaded my first ever video to YouTube. It is completely out of kilter with the rest of this blog, but the raucous cacophony going on outside my study window drew my attention and my first instinct was to grab the camera. Dirty little blighters, those ducks. On a Sunday afternoon in full public gaze, I tell you. Honestly, what is the world coming to?

Pilger the anti-journalist

2008-04-27T00:20:00.003+01:00

Anti-US campaigner John Pilger has written yet another feature in the New Statesman on Latin America in which he presents his somewhat simplistic leftwing political opinions as fact. His stance is pretty predictable but being a staunch critic of US foreign policy, I feel like something of a Judas to criticise him too harshly. In essence Pilger is mostly right to criticise his chosen targets, but he doesn't seem to be fond of tackling complicated issues. I wonder what his opinion is of Robert Mugabe, for instance.

But what really gets my goat is not the nature of his opinions, but the fact that despite his shameless one-sidedness and blatant bias, he is still afforded the title of "journalist".

How can this be? He does not present fact, and does not even pretend to. He investigates areas in search of evidence to support his very blinkered opinions. I have not once read a balanced article of his and find his writing tiresome because he is so entrenched in the same dogmatic view, ie US/UK/Colombia/Israel/Bush/Blair/Uribe/white men = Bad, Palestine/Chavez/Morales/Ortega/indigenous/dark people = Good.

Close, but no pinot grigio

2008-04-24T21:58:00.004+01:00

My comments about Alice O'Keefe's latest New Statesman article were actually read by someone at the NS (amazing, I thought they had abandoned the forums after they began to fill with the hate and bile that random types feel compelled to leave there, especially whenever Venezuela is mentioned) and published in the print edition. Unfortunately they don't archive letters so you will just have to take my word for it.

They sent me an email asking for permission to use the comments and I agreed. When they found out I was one of their writers they replied that they couldn't use my comments (no reason given apart from it was "the rules") but then ended up using them anyway, without explaining why they had broken said rules. I'm guessing that they had had a disappointing mailbag that week and got desperate for copy. I'm just disappointed I didn't win the £25 wine voucher for Letter of the week.

The Stringer goes online

2008-04-15T23:04:00.002+01:00

Finally, the main site for which this blog is simply an adjunct has gone online. www.TheStringer.co.uk is now available to view worldwide. Please enjoy... it took a while!

The lttle-discussed left vs left result of Colombia's intractible civil war

2008-04-15T10:46:00.005+01:00

Alice O'Keefe has written an interesting piece in the New Statesman about Colombia. She argues that the FARC are strangling political debate in Colombia by de-legitimising the non-FARC aligned leftwing political movement. It's an easy card for Uribe's rightwing election machine to play, dismissing the opposition as being aligned to the cocaine rebels. The Colombian people don't want to know anything about leftwing politics as long as they have these corrupt hostage-taking drug peddlers running their rural areas by force.

The NS have asked for permission to use my forum comments in the print version of the magazine. It's nice to see them paying attention to the stuff that people write there. I'll put the edited version of my comments up here once they are published.

Lucio Vega

2008-02-23T12:29:00.007Z

My Venezuelan sculptor friend has moved to Buenos Aires and is continuing with his unique brand of symbiotic sculptures, which combine mechanical and organic elements. Some of his installations are kinetic, using springs and other moving elements. He was the most genuine and prolific artist to emerge from the Armando Reveron art school the year I was there, in my opinion.

Check out his blog here.

Christian Parenti on Iraq

2008-02-12T22:30:00.000Z

I just found this video of Christian Parenti, the subject of a profile piece I am writing for college, talking about the US failure in Iraq.

The most interesting bit is towards the end where he talks about the mind-boggling corruption and incompetence that characterise the invasion, and the impossible mission of defeating a well-armed and well-organised ex-Baathist army resistance. He proposes a pan-regional summit where hostilities are put on hold, where the US recognises its failure and pays reparations to Iraq, and where leaders from across the middle east engage in discussions over a practical way forward - recognising, of course, that this is never going to happen, even under a Clinton administration.

Imperial cocaine bandits

2008-02-11T15:17:00.000Z

Chávez has, apparently, accused the US of selling cocaine at "below-market prices" in the barrios of Caracas as a means of destabilising Venezuela. This accusation is bizarre as it gives the impression that the US is muscling in on his territory - as if Chávez wants to be the only coke-dealing big daddy in THIS neighbourhood!

Of all the extreme accusation he's come out with, this has to be one of the more unusual ones. It undermines the credibility of his rhetoric and means people are more willing to dismiss what he says, even when he is in fact right.

Just take the whole Farc issue. Chávez had a real opportunity to denounce the many human rights abuses of the Uribe administration by staying as neutral as possible and pressing for a peaceful solution, thus highlighting the failure of the Colombian government to resolve the country's problems.

But instead he has affiliated himself with the Farc rebels and opened himself up to criticism that he aids and abets terrorists. This in itself is an exaggerated claim from hysterical rightwingers but why give your opponents the opportunity to label you in this way if it can be so easily avoided?

As I have always said, Chávez is his own worst enemy.

Heating up...

2008-02-11T15:13:00.000Z

The debate is getting interesting following the publication of the New Statesman article. It hasn't stooped to name-calling (yet!) which is good, as people are engaging with some interesting issues. Check it out here.

Frontline Club

2008-02-10T16:37:00.000Z

This is an interesting discovery - a club for journalists, diplomats and policy makers to openly discuss current affairs. Channel 4 News' Jon Snow is a member (he features on the video) as do other established journos.

Free hugs

2008-02-10T10:57:00.000Z

I had never heard of this campaign until now, but it looks like it's been going a while. Free hugs - it helps that the girl is quite fit.

Mind you, the Scottish chap in this one gets plenty of hugs too, even from other blokes. Aah, heart-warming stuff, isn't it?

Uribe's commitment to peace

2008-02-10T00:50:00.000Z

Check out this article and this one about how the Colombian military attacked the convoy releasing the hostages from Farc imprisonment. It was clearly an attempt to undermine the release effort in order to humiliate Hugo Chávez, who brokered the deal.

As you will see from my articles I'm not a massive fan of Chávez and believe he deserves most of the criticism he receives, but it's stories like this that make me think that (US-backed) leaders who are just as dastardly as he is - if not moreso - aren't getting the media haranguing they deserve too.

$12 billion oil squabble - truth or dare?

2008-02-09T23:58:00.000Z

An interesting story is brewing in the hazy world of international business law.

Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA has, according to Exxon Mobil, been ordered to freeze $12 billion of its overseas assets by a UK court. The case arose last year, when president Chávez's nationalisation drive forced foreign oil operators in Venezuela to either hand over majority control of their operations or leave for good. All companies concerned came to an agreement except Exxon Mobil, which chose to pull out of Venezuela and sought recompense in the international courts.

Friday's ruling has been widely reported but I am yet to read a definitive explanation of what it means for PDVSA. Rafael Ramirez, the PDVSA boss and oil minister, has denied that any ruling has been made against PDVSA and has dismissed the whole episode as some sort of gringo PR conspiracy to destabilise the Venezuelan economy. (I know the Chávez government always comes out with this kind of reasoning, but part of me often thinks, "it's not totally out of the question...")

So was there a ruling or not? If there was, how can Ramirez credibly claim that there wasn't? And if there wasn't, what is Exxon making such a hullabaloo about?

Either way, the announcement has managed to undermine the value of PDVSA's bonds, which fell to an all-time low on Friday, which certainly establishes a clear motive for any Exxon-Bush destabilisation conspiracy.

But then again, could it be the Chávez government once again playing the "external forces" card to justify its own incompetence?

Watch this space.

Show of strength

2008-02-07T14:45:00.000Z

Martin Markovits and Sebastian Kennedy

Hugo Chávez says he wants to bring peace to the warring factions in Colombia's cocaine wars but his increasing militarism could destabilise the region.

Squinting into the glare of the late-afternoon Caribbean sun, hundreds of pleated khaki-dressed soldiers and military dignitaries form orderly rows facing their chief of staff and head of state, Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez.

Positioned on stage and flanked by a few lines of tanks and helicopters in a military training ground in the provincial city of Valencia, western Venezuela, President Chávez waits for the roaring fighter jets to pass overhead before addressing the assembly.

"From Colombia, Venezuela is threatened," Chávez says, dismissing as "inventions" widespread allegations that his government has colluded with drug trafficking and arms sales to Colombian guerrillas.

The speech is being delivered to mark the 16th anniversary of the attempted coup led by the then-young Lieutenant Colonel Chávez on 4 February 1992. Although it ended in failure and Chávez and his cohorts were imprisoned, many believe the event - now commonly referred to as 4F - paved the way for his eventual democratic election to the presidency in 1998.

But while the Venezuelan president was commemorating his failed putsch, over a million protesters took to the streets in neighbouring Colombia and in cities across the world to voice their opposition to Chávez's hostage-taking rebel allies, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc).

In an almost implausible coincidence, anti-Farc campaigners chose 4 February to mobilise a global protest against the Marxist insurgents. They maintain that the event was entirely apolitical and directed only at the rebel fighters, but in a statement on their website they denounce Chávez's "interventions in the internal matters of Colombia and, particularly, his declarations which seek to justify the Farc as a representation of the Colombian people".

Chávez's inflammatory comments about the threat from Colombia came two days after he declared that the Venezuelan armed forces were "on alert" against possible aggressions from the neighbouring country. In a televised broadcast, the president had warned: "We don't know how far it could go. We don't want to hurt anybody, but no one should make a mistake with us."

He added: "One day things will change in Colombia," referring to the cocaine-fuelled civil war that has raged across the border for almost 60 years. "Theirs is a war in which we cannot participate except as peacemakers."

His words have further aggravated the deepening diplomatic crisis with Bogotá. After successfully negotiating the release of two hostages held by the Farc, he requested that these narco-rebels be removed from lists of international terrorist organisations and expressed an ideological affinity with their insurgent cause.

"The Farc and [National Liberation Army] ELN are not terrorist bodies. They are real armies that occupy space in Colombia. That must be recognised. They are insurgent forces with a Bolivarian political project, which here we respect," Chávez said in his yearly address to the National Assembly on 11 January.

As the anti-Farc movement gathered global momentum through social networking sites such as Facebook, it was quickly seized upon by the Colombian government. On the day of protest, Colombian president Álvaro Uribe even delivered a message of thanks to marchers in the city of Valledupar. "Our gratitude goes to all Colombians who today expressed with dignity and strength their rejection of kidnapping and kidnappers," Reuters reported him as saying.

Back at the Valencia barracks, Venezuelan officials reacted truculently. Jesús González, the strat egic commander of the armed forces, rejected it as a "political ploy to try to identify 4 February with opposition to the Farc".

President Chávez reminded his army and onlookers of the history behind the day's celebrations. "The events of 4 February [1992] swept Venezuela into the 21st century. It was when the Bolivarian revolution truly began," he declared.

In recent years, the flamboyant Venezuelan president has used 4F to demonstrate his increasing regional influence and to launch stinging verbal attacks on his enemies.

While critics maintain that it is hypocritical for a democratic country to celebrate a coup, albeit a failed one, Chávez's supporters see it as the day that planted the seeds for Venezuela's ongoing socialist transformation. Chavistas call it the "Dawn of Hope" and regard it as a stepping-stone to true democracy for the poverty-stricken masses.

"It was the lightning bolt that illuminated the darkness," Chávez said in an interview with the Chilean author Marta Harnecker in 2005.

Continuing his speech to the military, the president maintains that 4F is not finished. "It reminds us we need to be even more revolutionary. My government is a child of 4F," he says.

After two years in prison, Chávez and his allies were released by presidential pardon in 1994 and began a new effort to take over the government, this time through democratic means.

"We realised that another military insurrection would have been crazy," Chávez said in 2005. "A large part of the population did not want violence, but rather they expected that we would organise a political movement structured to take the country on the right path." He came to believe, he has said, that the Bolivarian revolution had to be a peaceful one.

However, some scholars consider the Venez uelan government's decision to actively celebrate 4F a rewriting of history intended to indoctrinate the population.

Néstor Luis Luengo, a professor of sociology and head of research at the Andrés Bello Catholic University in south-west Caracas, believes commemorating the failed coup is a key element in Chávez's broader socialist agenda. "There is an ideological battle taking place in this country. If [the government is] going to push for more reforms, they have to change the ideology of the country and the historical events celebrated." It is in their interests, he says, to make 4 February a patriotic day.

Opposition leaders also criticise Chávez for using the commemoration of the failed coup as an attempt to politicise the military. "For us, the important thing is to have an armed force that is apolitical, modern and at the service of the Venezuelan people, and one that does not become a political party," said Julio Borges, leader of the opposition party Primero Justicia.

Other Chávez opponents are concerned at the militarism: "This government prefers to celebrate a day of violence. They should instead be celebrating the day he was democratically elected president," said Armando Briquet, secretary general of Primero Justicia.

A violent act

Chávez's supporters obviously disagree. Cruz Elena Peligrón, a civilian participant in the 1992 coup and friend and neighbour of Chávez in the 1990s, says: "We have always celebrated our independence day and that was a violent act. The US military commemorates wars like Vietnam and the Second World War. They say you have to fight for peace and unfortunately that's true."

Since Chávez took office in 1999, he has survived an attempted coup, oil strikes and referendums on his presidency. Last December, a package of proposed reforms to the constitution, which would have allowed him to stand for indefinite re-election, was defeated at the polls - his first political loss in nine years.
With Chávez's opponents invigorated by their poll success, this year's 4F festivities were notably restrained, taking place in a small pro vincial barracks instead of the grand military base at Fuerte Tiuna.

Venezuela's ambassador to the UN and former coup plotter, Francisco Javier Arias Cárdenas, said political priorities have changed: "We are no longer going to support unconditionally any segment of the Colombian military that has the objective of destroying either the Farc or the peace process in Colombia. Venezuela is just a third party in the civil war."

He concluded: "Of course we don't support guerrilla warfare, kidnapping or drug trafficking. But to end the war you don't necessarily need to end the Farc - just end the poverty, misery and violence that occur in Colombia every day. Both sides should go to the table and talk peace."

President Uribe maintains an unwavering zero-tolerance stance against the Marxist rebels and has shown much support for paramilitary forces that have been responsible for a catalogue of human rights abuses throughout Colombia's intractable civil war.

Meanwhile, Chávez's flamboyant militarism and allegiances with the Farc make dialogue between Colombia's warring factions seem less and less likely.

Christian Parenti

2008-02-06T20:57:00.000Z

I have just finished writing a 1,700 word profile piece on American journalist and author Christian Parenti. The guy is a genius, still young (39) given all he has achieved (three books, hundreds of articles) and bound to produce plenty more intelligent, engaging and independent reportage in the future.

Check him out at www.christianparenti.com.

I sniff news - do you?

2008-02-06T13:28:00.000Z

I have just discovered Newssniffer.co.uk - it monitors BBC feedback and comments and publishes all the stuff that's censored.

There is one particularly interesting thread about NHS reform in which, if I understand it right, a whopping 340 comments were censored and only ONE comment published! If you read the thread (here) you will see that many of the comments are not particularly extreme or prejudiced, they just oppose New Labour's intentions to reform (i.e. privatise) large chunks of the NHS.

One guy even writes:

"My comments have clearly been removed.

I have read the house rules and cannot see where I have contravened them.

So that I dont repeat my mistake, could a moderator please email me and explain what I am guilty of other, unlike the BBC of not being a new labour fan."

This speaks volumes about the BBC's subservience to the government. You wouldn't get such censorship on any large mainstream private media site... or would you?

Frozen Grand Central Station

2008-02-06T12:59:00.000Z

Cruising for a bruising

2008-02-05T18:05:00.000Z

There is no denying that the whole Venezuela/Chavez issue provokes heated debate, but the New Statesman's feedback forums on this topic often end up shamefully unreadable and nauseous. Just cast your eye over the comments following this article.

What do "contributors" achieve by engaging in this sort of mudslinging? And why doesn't the NS vet its forums more effectively? I've never seen it this bad on any other site, even when debating Venezuela.

Lets wait and see what kind of reaction my latest article on Mr. Chavez's hypocritical antagonism towards Colombia receives. I reckon I'm once again cruising for a bruising in the blogosphere.

US bipartisan politics

2008-02-04T22:23:00.000Z

Have a look at this blog. It sums up almost exactly how I feel about the US primaries - I couldn't have put it better myself. Hillary is a machine, Barack an unknown quantity (who I fear would turn a little hawkish in office), and the election of any of the Republican candidates - except perhaps Ron Paul - would probably hasten the end of humanity by a few hundred years (if you can say we have even that long left!).

Surely there is room in the American political landscape for a third party?

FARCing politics

2008-02-04T21:46:00.000Z

Today's anti-FARC march has sparked plenty of discussion in the Colombian media. The rally has been organised as a supposedly anti-political demonstration against the narco-terrorist outfit Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, but of course has been hijacked by the Colombian government as a pro-State media blitz.

At first it appears to be a fairly innocuous event which most right-(and left-?)minded people should support. But when you cast your eye over this Colombian site, you realise that by excluding any other forms of violence it becomes somehow complicit in crimes committed by other institutions - especially those of the State-backed renegade mercenary Colombian paramilitaries.

I emailed one of the organisers of the march, asking if the choice of date was significant. The reason I asked was that on February 4th 1992, Venezuela president Hugo Chávez led an unsuccessful coup attempt which ended with the imprisonment of the head-of-state-to-be and his cohorts. Since around 2005 Chávez has celebrated this day as the "Dawn of Hope" when, according to his "Bolivarian" rewriting of history, the Venezuelan people decided to stand up to the corrupt, incompetent and oppressive regime of Carlos Andrés Pérez.
I wondered, with Chávez's recent declaration of shared ideology with the FARC, whether holding an anti-FARC protest on this date was a sly way of undermining his attempts to steal the media limelight with another display of his military prowess.

The organiser responded that it was entirely coincidental and that they only realised a week into January when it was too late to do anything about it.

I'm not convinced. It does seem awfully convenient for Colombian president Uribe to outshine Chávez on a day like today.

It's the f*&^ing economy, stupid

2008-01-23T15:25:00.000Z

I have a radio alarm clock that pings on to Radio 4's Today program each morning. It's probably the least offensive way of being woken up (listening to Chris Moyles at 7am feels like some kind of blunt instrument invading my inner ear, and Radio 3 is so relaxing it fails to wake me) but the other morning the program editors cut off their Kenya correspondent after barely 90 seconds on air, in time for the hourly pips.

Nothing unusual in that, you might say. But the fact that they had spent the previous twenty minutes exploring the minutiae of implications of the previous day's stock market wobble made it clear where the Today program's editorial priorities lie. The possibility that a few city hedge fund managers may have to take a measly £10m bonus instead of their usual end-of-year £18m wedge is clearly deemed more important to listeners than the supposed "model African nation" descending into machete-wielding barbarity.

Is it because they is black?

Despite defeat at polls, Venezuela's Chavez holds all the cards

2007-12-10T12:09:00.000Z

Sebastian Kennedy and Martin Markovits

Caracas, Venezuela -- The political opposition's elation after Sunday's referendum that denied President Hugo Chavez the sweeping new powers he needed to accelerate his socialist revolution is evaporating quickly.

Despite a narrow victory that rejected 69 proposed constitutional reforms that would have allowed Chavez to stand for re-election indefinitely, create new forms of communal property, handpick local leaders under a redrawn political map and suspend civil liberties under extended states of emergency, those changes could still be implemented through a series of California-style voter propositions, Chavez noted this week.

"Prepare yourselves, because a new offensive is coming," Chavez told viewers of the state-run VTV television station Wednesday. "These reforms are not dead."Chavez then explained that although current law prohibits him from attempting another referendum to change the Constitution, he could still achieve his reforms via a series of "popular initiatives" by which each reform would be voted on by the Chavez-controlled congress after acquiring signatures of 15 percent of the electorate, or 2.4 million voters. If approved by the congress - known as the National Assembly - it would become law if passed by a majority of voters.

Analysts also say Chavez could push through many of the rejected reforms by presidential decree, which he can exercise for another six months as stipulated by a previous decree issued in January.

The political opposition had hoped to use the momentum of its marginal victory to galvanize popular support against Chavez. With 90 percent of the ballots counted, official figures stand at 50.7 percent against the reforms and 49.3 percent for the yes vote.

But Greg Wilpert, director of a left-leaning news Web site, Venezuelanalysis.com, predicts that not much will change. "The opposition is celebrating right now, but the fact is they are still as powerless as ever," he said. "They have no seats in the National Assembly, and they only have one governor. They will probably gain some seats in the gubernatorial elections in 2007, but that won't make much difference, because real power lies with the federal government. The next election for the National Assembly is in 2010, and that is still a long time away."

Jorge Perez, a member of a pro-Chavez political radio cooperative called First Free Black Radio, also points out that the opposition lacks credible leadership and policies to attract the masses."The opposition has yet to find a leader that can match Chavez's magnetic personality and charisma," Perez said. "They are united and energized only when they stand against him. They need to start developing their own policies and solutions to Venezuela's problems."

Any chance of increased cooperation between government and its political opposition appeared to disappear Wednesday when a defiant Chavez dismissed the "no" vote victory with several expletives. "You should administer your victory properly, but already you are covering it in s-. It's a s- victory, and ours - call it, defeat - is one of courage, of valor, of dignity," he said at a news conference at the presidential palace. "We haven't moved a millimeter, and we won't. ... They have nothing to celebrate, and we have lost nothing."

Some analysts have also described the proposed use of popular initiatives to achieve change after losing the referendum a violation of the Constitution that would eventually involve a Supreme Court decision. Even though the court is stacked with Chavez loyalists, it has occasionally shown a streak of independence. Popular initiatives "would be fraudulent," said constitutional lawyer Rafael Chavero.

Elenis Rodriguez, national secretary for the opposition party Justice First, says Chavez's insistence on pushing through his reforms reveals his true desire: to stay in power indefinitely."He doesn't really need a new Constitution to implement most of his socialist principles - he can do so using decree powers and the legislature," she said. "But the only way he can stand for re-election is to change the Constitution, and the only way to do that is to encourage his supporters to implement proposals of their own (popular) initiative. It's a very underhanded strategy."

On Thursday, Chavez's ex-wife said she will propose her own popular initiative to shorten presidential terms from six to four years and allow presidents one chance for re-election. Marisabel Rodriguez, who divorced Chavez in 2004, said her ex-husband, who assumed power in 1999, has been in office long enough.

This article appeared on page A - 15 of the San Francisco Chronicle on 7th December 2007

Chávez loses - for now

2007-12-06T12:22:00.000Z

Sebastian Kennedy and Martin Markovits

Caracas, Venezuela -- By a majority of just 150,000 votes, the Venezuelan electorate rejected a complex package of reforms to the constitution which would have allowed President Hugo Chávez to stand for indefinite re-election. The 2 December vote was Chávez's first setback, suggesting that some of his usual support peeled away.

A night of high drama saw the Venezuelan president concede victory by the slimmest of margins. The result means he will have to stand down when his term of office expires in January 2013.

It was the president's first defeat since he took office in 1998 and the first opposition election victory in 12 public votes. Until now, public support for the government has seemed insurmountable. Analysts believe that Chávez was partly let down by the high percentage (44 per cent) who chose to stay home rather than endorse or reject the wide-ranging reforms, but also say that moderate Chavistas had become alienated by their president's extreme rhetoric.

"Chávez waged a very confrontational campaign that turned off a lot of voters," says Elenis Rodríguez, national secretary for the opposition party Justice First. "He said if you do not vote for the reform, you are a traitor."

Rodríguez also believes that some people stayed home because they were worried about voter privacy. "Many did not agree with the reforms but were scared to vote for fear of losing their jobs." Jorge Pérez, a Chavista member of a political radio co-operative, notes that Chávez lost the media war: "The Chavistas did a very poor job of informing the public on the more positive aspects of the constitutional reform, like social security for the informal economy and the right for decent housing.

"The opposition did a very effective job of highlighting the most controversial articles, like indefinite re-election and the status of private property. If you read the proposed constitution you would see that the right to private property is guaranteed, but if you followed the media campaigns you would think that the government wanted to confiscate all property," he says.

The Chávez campaign focused on international disputes, a strategy that would have appealed only to dedicated supporters whose votes were already guaranteed. At his closing rally, the president declared that "a vote against these reforms is a vote for George W Bush" and threatened to cut off oil supplies to the US if it attempted to "destabilise" the country after the elections.

There were also threats that Spanish banks in Venezuela would be nationalised if the King of Spain did not apologise for telling Chávez to shut up, and that diplomatic relations with Colombia might be cut off after President Álvaro Uribe's interference in his mediations with Colombia's FARC guerrillas. "Many in the barrios are Colombian immigrants who felt that Chávez disrespected their entire country, not just its president," says Rodríguez.

But the main problem with the reforms, according to Luis Eduard Monsano, a student activist, was that they did not offer solutions to the pressing issues of crime and unemployment. "Our groups went to a lot of barrios and many people told us, 'Chávez yes, reform no.' We got the sense that a lot of these communities felt abandoned by him. They had supported him because of the social programmes he has implemented, but many were asking, 'What's next?'"

In fact, the reforms did include popular measures to guarantee housing rights for families and to implement a 36-hour working week, but the bulk of the 69 amendments consisted of wordy clauses on restructuring state power and administering finance - in such detail that they failed to strike a chord with the less ideologically orientated moderate Chavistas.

Many felt that instead of tackling the main problems of 21st-century Venezuela, where gun crime and corruption are rife, Chávez had attempted to enshrine socialism in the country's constitution. According to Monsano, the schism between the president and his core voters started to emerge back in May when he chose not to renew the broadcasting licence of the opposition-aligned channel Radio Caracas TV.

"Four million people in the barrios and shanty towns watched RCTV's news programmes and soap operas. In the aftermath of the closure, the student movement sprang up out of nowhere, demonstrating that the young were not with the revolution. This is significant because throughout history all successful revolutions depended on, or were led by, the young."

Although students had been involved in isolated incidents of violence in the run-up to Sunday's vote, their passion and determination appear to have electrified Chávez's floundering political opponents.

"The opposition up to that point was demoralised after repeated election defeats. But suddenly the students felt democracy slipping away and decided to take action," says Monsano. Out of the referendum is emerging a consensus between the government and opposition leaders that now is the time for reflection and the start of the long journey towards reconciliation. "Chávez has done a lot of good things. He has given the poor an outlet to express themselves. We need to recognise that and build on it," says Monsano.

Chávez conceded defeat magnanimously, congratulating the victors and admitting that it was too soon to introduce such radical reforms - though his message was more one of calm determination than humbled compromise. In 1992, the year of his failed coup attempt, he quipped on live television that he had only failed "por ahora" - for now. Last weekend he reassured his devastated supporters: "This is not a defeat, but another por ahora."

This article appeared in the 10th December 2007 edition of the New Statesman

Chávez and the students

2007-11-15T12:31:00.000Z

Sebastian Kennedy and Martin Markovits

Caracas, Venezuela -- Skirmishes in major Venezuelan cities in recent weeks have culminated in a shoot-out in Caracas at the Central University on 7 November, leaving nine people injured.

The violence follows a series of student-led protests, which have ranged from calm to brutally violent in the run-up to a referendum due to be held on 2 December on President Hugo Chávez's constitutional reforms. Under these, the president can stand for indefinite re-election.

Startling footage from the scene showed masked bikers wielding shotguns, students in gas masks hurling Molotov cocktails through clouds of tear-gas, and general chaos as terrified groups scattered at the piercing cracks of semi-automatic gunfire.

Fighting broke out after students returned from a peaceful march to the Supreme Court, where they had been calling for the referendum to be delayed to allow more time for discussion on the reforms. The courts are unlikely to grant that demand.

What happened next depends on whom you talk to - or which television station you watch.

Globovisión, the only public access channel to remain critical of the government after the forced closure of Radio Caracas TV in April this year, blamed pro-Chávez troublemakers for instigating the violence. It reported that a bus full of students was pulled over, emptied and then torched by "Bolivarian Circles" - Chavista loyalists, who the opposition has branded a "militia" armed by the government, a charge denied by the president.

Globovisión went on to report that the Bolivarians entered the campus on motorbikes and opened fire on students, who retaliated in "self-defence". Venezuelan newspapers, which are generally hostile towards Chávez, reported similar stories.

News channels sympathetic to the government, which now make up the majority of broadcasters, reported that "fascist" students attempted to "lynch" an innocent group of Chavista loyalists holed up in the social studies faculty - the only pro-government stronghold on a campus hostile to Chávez.

Zarida Seijar, a 25-year-old pro-Chávez student who was among those trapped inside the building, maintained that the anti-Chávez protesters were the aggressors. "They were shouting that all Chavistas were going to die; we were terrified. When we realised the police weren't going to come, we started texting our friends who came with guns to save us," she said.

Whatever the precise sequence, it is clear the student movement has become the most powerful and well-co-ordinated resistance group against President Chávez. Born during the closure of Radio Caracas TV and spurred on by the defection of the former defence minister Raú Baduel, the angry students have no single figurehead or well-defined agenda. But their increasing militancy and the strong-arm measures taken to quell them is taking their message of defiance to an international audience.

Speaking to Latin American leaders at a summit held in Chile two days after the protests, Chávez claimed that the students are part of a "fascist offensive" under direct control from Washington. "The United States organised the 2002 coup and now it is doing the same in Caracas, supported by the media and CNN," he said, which was denied by the US embassy in Caracas. Brandishing copies of newspapers portraying his supporters as the instigators of 7 November violence, Chávez insisted: "It's the other way round; it was the rich kids [who where responsible]."

By the time Chávez delivered these words, an eerie calm had descended amid the charred detritus around the campus. But feelings still run high. Those who oppose the reforms - which would grant yet more powers to the executive and president - see this as their final opportunity to thwart Chávez's ambitions before Venezuela undergoes irrevocable change.

"We don't know what we will do after this; it really could be our last chance. These reforms centralise all control," said 19-year-old Veronica Brito. "Universities have always been places where federal politics have been off the table. Under this new constitution, they would lose their autonomy."

Other controversial measures include granting the president direct control over the Central Bank, eliminating freedom of information in "exceptional" circumstances, and a loosening of the state's obligation to adhere to human-rights legislation. Intellectual property would be abolished, monopolies prohibited, and the president would assume the right to appoint regional vice-presidents, reducing elected governors to ceremonial positions. The military would be redefined as an "anti-imperialist popular entity", and the threshold number of signatures necessary to trigger further referenda or elections would be raised across the board.

But support for the proposals remains strong; around 60 per cent according to one newspaper survey - thanks mainly to grass-roots loyalty and the inclusion of popular measures such as a six-hour working day and more welfare support for workers. Significantly, 5 per cent of state revenues will be set aside for a new "popular power" fund to finance projects such as Chávez's much-vaunted communal councils. The councils, expected to total around 50,000 by the end of the year, have been hailed as an innovative mechanism for devolving state power and funding.

Even though the student movement is aiming to ratchet up the pressure with further rallies, Chávez still looks set to maintain his clean sheet of electoral victories. Only a nationwide outburst of mass opposition could interrupt Venezuela's inexorable socialist metamorphosis.

This article appeared in the 15th November 2007 edition of the New Statesman

Stephen Poliakoff season on BBC2

2007-11-10T23:44:00.001Z

I have just finished watching Stephen Poliakoff's TV drama Friends and Crocodiles. It charts the lives of an unlikely bunch of young people who are brought together by Paul (Damien Lewis), an immensely wealthy but careless property tycoon who made his millions in his early twenties. He employs the diligent typist Lizzie (Jodhi May, left) as his secretary, and in so doing initiates a life-long professional relationship that is as warming and touching as it is obsessive and destructive.

One of writer and director Poliakoff's many skills lies in his ability to chart the twists and turns of a disparate group in a rapidly changing period - from 1981 through to the dot com boom and bust of the late nineties. Like many of his dramas - which I am only just discovering in this excellent new season on BBC2 of old and new works - it spins a long, rambling yarn which promises the viewer ever greater revelations if you stick with it.

Whether it delivers on those promises is open to debate, and I expect depends a great deal on the viewe's predisposition for intriguing stories which are more verbal and anecdotal than visual or action-based.

That said, the repeated use of enormous old stately homes and sprawling mansion gardens provides ample space for what is clearly the director's soft spot for the visual splendour of the architecture of old wealth and class, and the history bound up there.

These cinematic shots are the perfect accompaniment to Poliakoff's choice of fresh, uplifting and inspiring compositions. Somehow they manage to simultaneously communicate both wonderful expectations for a spectacular future as well as a deeply nostalgic yearning for days gone by. And seeing as the narrative in Friends and Crocodiles jumps by up to eight years forward at a time, with old friends reuniting after such a long time, Poliakoff keeps piling on the nostalgia in heavy, sagging dollops. It's quite extraordinarily emotional viewing, without ever revealing why or how it is affecting you in the way it is.

I am looking forward to Monday's Capturing Mary, which promises all the beguiling miscomfort of its half-sister/semi-prequel Joe's Palace. Not for the impatient viewer, mind.

P.S. Jodhi May is fantastic, how come I've never heard of her before?

Black death descending on Bournemouth? - first draft

2007-11-07T12:51:00.000Z

The skeletal remains of thousands of plague victims are to undergo analysis by Bournemouth University’s school of conservation sciences under a new agreement with the crypt where the bones are housed.

The ossuary, which contains over 8,000 skeletons that are believed to be victims of Black Death, are currently stacked floor to ceiling in the cramped 30ft long crypt at St Leonard’s parish church in Hythe, Kent. It is considered by experts to be a unique collection of immeasurable research value, but there remain large gaps in scientists’ understanding of their history and provenance.

“The last cataloguing of the bones took place over seventy years ago, so they are yet to be analysed using modern technology,” said church archivist and curator John Roffy. “With DNA testing, radio isotope and X-ray scans we would hope to identify each and every one of the skulls from a historical perspective.”

This research would end the speculation that surrounds the story of the skulls. Black Death, or bubonic plague, arrived on British shores in 1348, although some date the remains well before this. “Visitors to the crypt are told that these were the victims of a 10th century Viking battle. They are more likely to be medieval, but there is only one way to find out,” said Ian Hansen, a forensic archaeology lecturer at Bournemouth University’s school of conservation sciences.

Hansen is part of the team that is planning to submit their research proposal to English Heritage for approval. The conservation school, which already houses a collection of several hundred human and animal bones, will be able to determine the best means of preserving the St Leonard’s set. “The first step is setting up equipment to measure the climatic conditions of the crypt, which seems very damp,” said Hansen.

With a plan of action now being drawn up, the possibility of bringing a selection of these morbid relics to the University is very much on the table. “In order to preserve them, they will have to be moved,” said Hansen, who envisages an arrangement whereby the school conducts research on a selection of the bones whilst they are not on public display in St Leonard’s.

The bones are open to the public over the summer months - admission is charged at the princely rate of 50p per adult, 10p per child. But these precious artefacts must be transported with great care, according to osteologist and senior lecturer in anthropology Linda O’Connell.

“Analysing these bones is a fantastic idea but it must be done professionally, ethically, and with the appropriate scientific support.” But Roffy, who also runs a business transporting museum pieces, is confident that he can provide safe conditions for moving the bones. “We are looking forward to developing a very healthy working relationship with Bournemouth University,” he said.

Although long overdue a scientific examination, the ossuary has had its fair share of media attention over recent years. Heritage programs such as Simon Schama’s History of Britain and BBC4’s Inside the Medieval Mind (to be aired next spring) have both filmed inside the crypt, as well as action puzzle show Treasure Hunt, presented by The Telegraph’s motoring columnist Suzi Perry.

“We had helicopters circling overhead and the final clue was hidden behind one of the skulls,” recalled Roffy – although Hansen and his team will be hoping to unveil further historical clues from these haunting relics.

The End of British Farming?

2007-11-02T19:00:00.001Z

As the autumn sun dips behind the nearby tree lined hill and with the evening chill setting in, Simon Peace props himself up against the gate leading into his field of cows to absorb the divine orchestra of twilight hues shifting gradually before him.

"It's marvellous on a day like today. Makes it all worth it," the cattle owner reflects. Happily married for twenty of his 56 years and with three adult children, farming has been a part of the Peace family for three generations. "My dad always kept cows, and his mother – my grandma – came from a family of stock farmers from the West Country. Of course, it's not like it was."

Simon's current herd of eight Devon and Normande cows have plodded over and now surround their owner as if to listen in on his ruminations, enveloping us both in a pungent cloud of bovine breath and urine vapour.

"Farmers are depressed, everyone's depressed. You go to market – I went today – and the look on everyone's faces says it all."

Livestock farmers like Simon are going through hard times. Still reeling from the devastation of the 2001 foot and mouth epidemic during which over 3 million cattle were exterminated and a Europe-wide ban on UK meat sales was imposed overnight, they are now having to deal with the outbreak of bluetongue disease, a non-contagious virus spread by midges. "It seems like it's just one damn thing after another in this game," Simon laments.

With bluetongue-affected areas growing by the day, the Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) has divided the country into protected and open-movement zones. Lincolnshire, Shropshire, Hampshire and Kent are currently the four corners of the protected zone, but the boundaries are shifting by the day as the virus spreads. Within the protected zone, areas where new cases have been discovered are subject to "control", "restriction" or "surveillance", depending on the severity of the local situation.

For Simon, this arrangement is unnecessarily complicated and is doing nothing to stop the spread of the disease.

"If I go to Salisbury market I can sell to buyers from within the protected zone, but not to those from further west beyond the zone boundary. Do you think that those midges can't cross from one zone into another? They might as well make the whole country a protected zone and let us get on with a bit of trading. It's going to end up that way anyway."

Nobody is quite sure where the bluetongue epidemic is going to end. But with Simon having recently made just £100 profit on a herd of six cows he kept since last winter, his children have not been drawn to follow in their father's footsteps.

"I can't blame them," he says shaking his head, "there's no money in it now."

So is this the end of British farming?

"I don't honestly know. But something's got to change. If not, this year will be remembered as the beginning of the end."

____

This piece was an assignment for Peter Jackson - a short context interview with an individual of our choosing. It received the following marks (out of 5 for each section):

Anecdotes: 0
Information: 4
Description: 1
Speech: 3

TOTAL: 8 / 20 (pretty damn poor!)

I think I was getting a bit confused between feature writing and news writing. It's a bit tricky to switch from one mindset to the next, and wrote this piece straight after a news writing lesson with Dan. Well that's my excuse, anyway. Watch this space for the forthcoming rewrite.

Unpopular populist?

2007-11-02T15:51:00.000Z

This article is the first draft of a news/feature piece co-written by me and a friend in Caracas concerning new taxes to be imposed by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. It was received by the The New Statesman's editorial but was not published as the constitution referendum issue (see above) took precedence.

Caracas, Venezuela -- Miguel Romero leans against his dented old station wagon and sparks up another Belmont, his hands black from handling newspapers and ink rollers. Standing outside having finished another shift at the newsprinters in north-eastern Caracas, he inhales deeply and lets out a thick cloud of smoke. "I don't how long these price hikes can last, you know, this is our way of life," he says, savouring the nicotine rush. "We come home from work and crack open a bottle, smoke cigarettes and drink."

Romero is referring to Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez's new tax proposals. The president intends to impose heavy taxes on imports such as yachts, hummers, second homes and private aircraft, but what worries many – including regular pro-Chávez Venezuelans like Romero – is the inclusion of cigarettes and alcohol – particularly whiskey – on the tax blacklist.

The unconventional president is aiming to kill two birds with one legislative stone. Not only will this raft of new taxes hit the super-rich for indulging in luxury pursuits such as sailing big yachts and driving sports cars; Chávez hopes to create the "new man" by "freeing" ordinary Venezuelans from harmful vices like drinking, smoking and the "capitalist values" of "excessive consumption". Chávez has said all Venezuelans should aspire to be like leftist revolutionary icon Ernesto "Ché" Guevara – a man whose fans to this day insist had few vices and a complete dedication to socialism.

Taxing the rich is unlikely to meet popular opposition, but it remains to be seen how the President will square this new moral drive with the favourite pastimes of many Venezuelans, both rich and poor: spending money.

Chávez's economic reforms and social programs have reduced poverty levels in recent years, and statistics reflect this: car sales have rocketed 50 percent in the last year, and it is now estimated that Venezuelan women spend 15 percent of their income on cosmetics. But his new war on consumer spending may end up upsetting his own constituency, the vast majority of whom live in Venezuela's numerous shanty towns.

"People in the barrio prefer whisky to rum. They drink loads of beer and smoke lots of cigarettes. They spend tons of money on cosmetics imported from the U.S – they are going to see this as an attack on their way of life," said Elizabeth Zamora, a professor of sociology at the Central University of Venezuela. "Historically, spending money has become engrained in the Venezuelan psyche. As a result of years of high inflation and a lack of confidence in the banking system, most people prefer to spend money on tangible goods that increase with value over time, rather than risk losing their money altogether."

But for President Chávez, a fierce critic of US economic and foreign policy, excessive consumerism is an export of U.S economic dominance in Latin America.

"American culture has taught us if you don't have the latest car or the latest gadget you are nothing. What Chavez is trying to do is to change that mindset," said Fernando Garcia, a senior official in the Caracas mayor's office and member of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV).

Opponents to the measures point out that taxing products out of the bargain end of the market simply denies the less well-off access to them. But official thinking is that in a country where alcoholism and heart disease are chronic problems, this could be an unpopular but necessary solution.

"You know it's funny when people attack these policies. We're not confiscating property, we're not prohibiting whisky. We are doing the same thing that Washington does to control excessive wealth," Garcia argued.

After winning two presidential elections, surviving a coup and weathering a series of crippling oil strikes, tackling excessive consumption might be Chavez's hardest goal yet. Whether he will be able to control consumer spending and change damaging habits remains to be seen, as he himself freely admits. "This society would benefit from socialist values", he says, "but it is very difficult to change our culture."

Editor's Profile: 2nd draft

2007-10-18T13:18:00.000+01:00

Stu Tarrant's route into journalism was unusual to say the least: he saw his fortunes unexpectedly transform after suffering a heartbreaking family tragedy.

"My cousin was a prominent DJ and record shop owner in Bournemouth, who unfortunately died at the age of 32," Stu recalled. "I was asked to write an obituary for him for the Bournemouth Advertiser to appear in the now defunct Nightlife Column. I was subsequently asked if I wanted to continue writing this column as they were impressed by my writing and knowledge."

Taking the opportunity, Stu later went on to take up a Sub Editor position at Paragon Publishing, where now works es Editor of Digital Camera Buyer magazine.

For Stu, a good journalist "always gets the facts straight." Conveying the right message, he maintains, is the journalist's no.1 priority.

Unmarried and childless at 37, Stu avoided disclosing his current salary, indicating simply that what he earns is "not nearly enough."

n.b. Stu now looks yellow because I turned his photo into a negative in Photoshop in order to compensate for the weird colour that Blogger is applying to the uploaded photos - but as you can see, it didn't work! Now he looks like a jaundiced cold blooded alien from Pluto. Sorry again, Stu..

Editor's Profile: 1st draft

2007-10-17T14:10:00.000+01:00

Stu Tarant is Editor of Digital Camera Buyer magazine, a position he has held for the last six years. His route into journalism was unusual to say the least: he saw his fortunes unexpectedly transform after suffering a heartbreaking family tragedy.

“My cousin was a prominent DJ and record shop owner in Bournemouth, who unfortunately died at the age of 32,” Stuart recalled. “I was asked to write an obituary for him for the Bournemouth Advertiser to appear in the now defunct Nightlife column. I was subsequently asked if I wanted to continue writing this column as they were impressed by my writing and knowledge.”

Taking the opportunity, Stuart later went on to take up a sub-editor position at Paragon Publishing (now Imagine Publishing), where he has worked as Editor of various other in-house titles including Practical Digital Video and Windows Made Easy.

For Stuart, a good journalist “always gets his facts straight.” Conveying the right message, he maintains, is the journalist’s no.1 priority.

Unmarried and without children, Stuart avoided disclosing his current salary, maintaining that what he is earning is “not nearly enough” – a not uncommon complaint among media professionals.

n.b. I have no idea why Blogger is putting the image in negative. I have uploaded it various times and poor Stu keeps appearing like a bizarre cold-blooded alien from Pluto. Sorry, Stu!

Oiling the wheels

2007-09-27T12:39:00.000+01:00

Sebastian Kennedy and Martin Markovits

Caracas, Venezuela -- President Hugo Chávez, who made diverting oil profits to the poor a hallmark of his administration, is faced with a series of corruption scandals that are threatening to undermine the state oil company Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA).

Earlier in September, PDVSA reported a 65 per cent loss in earnings over the previous year, prompting critics to declare the industry in crisis. They say that Venezuela, hugely dependent on oil sales, is producing less crude since Chávez expelled foreign oil companies from the country.

Government supporters, on the other hand, maintain that PDVSA is still recovering from the deeply damaging 2002 national strike organised by Chávez's opponents. Historically, the popularity of Venezuelan presidents has been determined by fluctuations in the oil prices. But it is the regularity of accusations of corruption and mismanagement that are chipping away at what would otherwise be a period of unrivalled prosperity for the country.

A few weeks ago, Venezuelan oil minister and PDVSA president Rafael Ramírez admitted that there were systematic financial irregularities dating back to 2005. One such irregularity is the ongoing scandal involving a Venezuelan-American who was caught smuggling a briefcase containing $800,000 through Argentine customs.

The businessman in question, Guido Antonini Wilson, had worked for PDVSA locating and contracting US drilling equipment for Venezuela, leading to accusations that he was attempting to launder kickbacks - an allegation his lawyer denies. Investigators have since submitted documents to the Venezuelan National Assembly amounting to what they called "a wheelbarrow of corruption charges" - 63 in total - against the state oil company.

Such accusations are not new for PDVSA, which operated with impunity throughout the 1970s and 1980s for the exclusive economic benefit of American and European multinational corporations operating there, and the Venezuelan political class. As economic disparities rocketed, resentment among Venezuela's poor majority reached a pitch that paved the way for the election of Chávez.

Chávez restructured the country's oil industry to invest profits in social programmes providing free education, health care, subsidised food and housing for the poor. Over his eight years in office, basic illiteracy has almost been eradicated, while poverty rates have declined (though the reliability of government statistics has been called into question).

This has been achieved by nationalising the abundant oil fields and massively increasing the taxes payable by multinational oil companies to operate there.

In August this year, Ramírez was fined over £4,000 for a controversial speech he made in the run-up to last December's presidential elections, in which he said that PDVSA is "revolutionary red", and that anybody who opposes the company's political alignment should quit their jobs and make way for those that support Chávez's "Bolivarian Revolution".

This statement was aimed at the dwindling minority of PDVSA workers who outwardly oppose the Chávez government. Most - over 20,000 of them, representing 30 per cent of the highly skilled workforce - were fired after the 2002 strike.

Accusations have continued to surface from inside PDVSA that those employees deemed to have a "politically unsuitable profile" are subject to discrimination and even outright dismissal.

One source who quit her position said that the political discrimination she was subjected to was "worse now than 30 years ago". She maintained that an "underhand war" is taking place between PDVSA executives and workers who express opposition to Venezuela's socialist government. Her aim now is to find work abroad, like many former PDVSA employees, whose cumulative knowledge and expertise represent a severe loss to the oil company.

Fortunately for President Chávez, the recent spike in international oil prices has provided a timely financial stop-gap for the Venezuelan economy, which is almost entirely dependent on crude exports.

With a barrel of oil selling at almost $80 on the international markets, the Chávez government can afford to paper over any cracks in the country's turbulent oil industry. But a significant fall in oil prices would reveal the depths of the difficulties afflicting PDVSA, and raise question about its ability to finance President Chávez's costly socialist revolution.

This article appeared in the 27th September 2007 edition of the New Statesman