Chairs:     Dalila Mujagic,  Allison Voglesong, Royal Oak MUN

Special Political Committee (SPOL)

Corruption in Venezuela

             Only fourteen years after unsuccessfully attempting to topple then-president Andrés Pérez’s oppressive regime, Venezuela’s current populist president Hugo Chávez leads the world’s fifth leading producer of oil, where 75 percent of the population lives below the poverty line. Many argue that since his election in 1999, Chávez has brought Venezuela prosperity by using its oil wealth to spend $20 billion in the past three years to provide food, education and health care to the overwhelming number of destitute in the country. Others decry Chávez as a manipulating despot who relies on Venezuela’s oil wealth to fund half-hearted humanitarian projects which veil the siphoning of government power into his hands. Much can be said for the latter argument, as supported by the 2002 oil crisis, in which middle class workers of the state-owned Petróleos de Venezuela – PDVSA – staged a two-month strike that sent the Venezuelan economy reeling, briefly eliminating funding for the very welfare programs that popularized Chávez. Nevertheless, human rights violations, arbitrary law enforcement and bribery of government officials are problems rampant in the Venezuelan government today.

            Beginning with Simón Bolívar’s leadership, Venezuela, as a part of the Republic of Gran Colombia, gained freedom from Spain in 1819, and was an independent nation by 1830. The discovery of oil in the 1920’s introduced a new source of income for Venezuela, which ushered in an era of constantly-shifting authoritarian rulers. A constitution was drafted in 1947, but by the 1960’s, presidential elections were limited to two political parties the AD party and the Christian Democratic (COPEI). These exclusionary parties, however, were both deeply corrupt and failed to represent and serve the needs of the people. Under the rule of these unpopular factions Venezuela crumbled; in the 1980’s its GDP fell nearly 40%. But the corruption in Venezuela only continued to worsen. On February 27, 1989, President Andrés Pérez suspended the constitutional rights of Venezuelan citizens. The series of riots that ensued, known as Caracazo, resulted in thousands of civilian deaths because Pérez’s suspension of rights allowed for government armed forces to meet the protesters and rioters with violent means.

            Before, and even after February 4, 1992, the Venezuelan government was a self-serving institution whose corruption, fed by the booming oil industry, made the richer rich and the overwhelming number of poor even more disadvantaged. Lieutenant colonel Hugo Chávez witnessed the way his nation’s “democratic” system failed to provide any aid to the poor during his military service. Thus February 4, 1992 stands as a turning point in Venezuelan history, the day that Chávez and his allies attempted a coup d’état. Although the coup was unsuccessful, Chávez’s message rang throughout Venezuela, rallying the support of the lower classes, and put Chávez into the spotlight as a national symbol. His message was one that vowed to end corruption in Venezuela’s government, that under his jurisdiction Venezuela’s poor would rise up out of the oppression they experienced under Pérez. Although his coup failed and he imprisoned, the idea that under Chávez the poor would be given opportunity was one that gave rise to his popularity. In 1998, Chávez, out of prison, was democratically elected President of Venezuela, his platform of staunch anti-corruption, socialism and neopopulism attributed to his success.

            Once in office, Chávez commenced constructing a constitution that dissolved the Congress in order to make way for the new National Constituent Assembly. The new constitution allowed for consecutive reelection of the president, as well as created a fourth branch of government, the Electoral Council. The council members, however, are appointed by the Supreme Court of Justice, the judicial body that was voted on by the National Assembly to expand in number from 20 to 32 members. The Supreme Court of Justice now also holds a pro-government (also known as Chavista) majority, with new members including current National Assembly members, pro-government Congressmen, and the Armed Forces’ former General Prosecutor. In 2000, the “Chávismo” (pro-Chávez) majority of the Assembly passed the “Enabling Law” that bestowed legislative authority upon the President.

            Despite his initial anti-corruption platform, the edifice Chávez has built has yet to be torn down. Some Supreme Court magistrates are members of Chávez’s populist party, meaning that any kind of government employee embezzling money has yet to be prosecuted. Reports of arbitrary arrest, police brutality, bribery of government officials, all are leafs left unturned, seeing as the Public Prosecutor of the Republic, Isaias Rodriguez, is a Chavista Senator that was appointed to his position by the National Assembly.

            This manipulation hasn’t stopped Chávez from maintaining more than a 50% favor at the polls. His new socialist structure of Venezuela, although leaving the middle and upper classes outraged, reaches the innumerable population living at or below the poverty line. Misiónes, funded by Venezuela’s extravagant oil income, have successfully reached out to some of the poorest communities, providing food, education opportunities, and outreach programs. Under Chávez, inflation, unemployment and interest rates have all decreased, while microcredit, construction, and consumer confidence are all on the rise. Additionally, a 15.2 percent decrease in annual payments for foreign debt resulted from Venezuela paying off $4.7 billion of international debt. A steady influx of oil money is used not just to pay off debt, but also to get weapons, for the so-called imminent threat the U. S. poses, that are purchased from Russia and Spain.

            What happens when the oil money is taken away? The 2002 worker strike at state-owned oil company PDVSA almost totally constricted the flow of oil out of Venezuela, and consequently the flow of money into Venezuela. Not only were diplomatic relations between the United States and Venezuela tense through the ordeal, but the outreach programs that popularized Chávez, including the one that brings in thousands of Cuban doctors, would have been terminated if the strike lasted any longer. Without the government’s exploitation of oil wealth, the Venezuelan population would be without any sort of health care, food subsidies, or land grants.

            Although Chávez has implemented “Citizen Power,” an anti-corruption branch of government, the $3 million- embezzlement scandal of army officer William Farinas has yet to be prosecuted, and despite interaction between Venezuela and Transparency International for Latin America (TILAC), kidnapping and organized crime are still rampant in the nation.

Committee Mission: Construct a resolution that deals with corruption of government as it affects the human rights of the nation’s people and their rights, while respecting the nation’s sovereignty. Look to international standards rather than exclusively the nation at hand.

Questions for Consideration:

Where does my nation stand on corruption?

What measures has my nation already taken to fight it in my own country?

How are human rights affected by corruption in my nation, surrounding nations, or Venezuela?

How can the issues of arbitrary arrest, police brutality, or the failure to prosecute government officials in matters of embezzlement, violation of human rights or privacy rules, be dealt with, while respecting the nation’s sovereignty?

Sources:

The Situation in Nagorno-Karabakh

Chairs: Allison Vogelsong and Dalila Mujagic

Nagorno-Karabakh is a region in south western Azerbaijan though predominantly populated by ethnic Armenians. Historically, the region has been populated by Armenian and Turkic herdsmen and farmers. These people were Christian while over a millennia ago, Islam was introduced. It is here that the first signs of rivalry began; the crux of the conflict lies in the clashing of ethnic Christian Armenians and Muslim Azeris.

In the 19^th century, Karabakh became a part of the Russian empire, although when the Bolshevik revolution came about, the region was broken up and borders were carved. The Soviets created the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region that was populated by Armenians (94% Armenian) within Azerbaijan in 1924. .                                                                      

By the 1980s, tension escalated into furious violence at the rising of Armenian discontent of their situation. As the violence grew, the populations almost completely separated as Azeris fled Nagorno-Karabakh while Armenians fled Azerbaijan. On the heels of the USSR’s breakup, Nagorno-Karabakh unilaterally proclaimed itself as an independent republic. To this day, the status of Karabakh as independent land remains unrecognized.

In spite of the absence of a formal declaration of war, fighting remained and eventually the Armenians carved a path into Azerbaijan bridging the gap between Karabakh and Armenia, aquring 20% of Azerbaijan’s territory in the process, resulting in the displacement of 1 million Azeris and bloodshed. 

The conflict has since then evolved into a more complex matter; the clashes between nationalism and religion have given way to a clash between regional political interests. Turkey has placed an embargo on Armenia and Armenia remains behind the region in economic progress due to it being landlocked and closed borders from Turkey and Azerbaijan. Russia mediated a cease-fire in May of 1994 with the support of the United States and France, although there are sporadic breaches of the ceasefire. These breaches have killed 20 to 30 thousand soldiers.

Relationships between Russia and Azerbaijan were strained when it became known that Russia had shipped over $1 billion of arms to Armenia from 1993 to 1995. In the meantime, Armenia and Russia signed an updated friendship treaty at the end of the summer, as well as a deal to create a joint venture with a Russian company to supply Armenia with natural gas. Armenia's fuel supplies had been held back by the Azeri blockade that followed the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. After the establishment of the blockade, the United States passed section 907 of the Freedom Support Act in late 1992 which said that the US will not give aid to Azerbaijan until they take steps to alleviate the blockade and offensive movements.

Azerbaijan still produces oil and its major export partners are Italy, Turkey, Russia, Georgia, and Iran. There have been attempts to establish an oil pipe through Armenia to Turkey and Europe, but all have been foiled due to Azerbaijan’s demands for land and the absence of political power for Nagorno-Karabakh.

To this day, there are over 800,000 internally displaced persons in the region and the two countries have yet to reach common ground on the efforts for peace and resolution while Nagorno-Karabakh remains unrecognized with its population hanging in the balance.

Questions to think about:

-         How is your country related to Armenia? Azerbaijan? Are there strong economic connections pertaining to oil or natural gas?

-         Is your country a part of The Minsk Group of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), currently co-chaired by France, Russia and the U.S.?

-         What can be done beside bilateral talks to resolve the situation?

-         What are the benefits/repercussions of allowing ethnic, religious, or linguistic groups call for statehood?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/country_profiles/3658938.stm

http://www.worldpress.org/specials/pp/azerbaijan.htm

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/nagorno-karabakh.htm