Chávez's 21st century socialism is hopeless
BY MARIFELI PEREZ-STABLE
Hugo Chávez doesn't want one, Evo Morales may disband his and Rafael Correa threatens to resign if he doesn't control it. ''Constituent assembly'' is the right answer, a crucial instrument in the political reconstitution of Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador.
Early on, Chávez marshaled the electorate for a new constitution, which he got via a constituent assembly. Today Chávez is whistling a different tune. In August, he unveiled proposals to reform his own constitution. If not numerically significant in that less than 10 percent of the articles are set to be modified -- these entail an even greater concentration of unchecked power than already exists in Venezuela.
Based on the numbers, Chavismo dismisses the need for a constituent assembly. The National Assembly -- 100 percent controlled by the government thanks to the opposition's abstention in the 2005 legislative elections -- is whizzing through the proposals. Murmurs of dissent have been shouted down as treason. By mid-October, the reforms should be approved and the amended constitution drafted. A referendum is likely in December.
The reforms would allow indefinite presidential reelection, eliminate the Central Bank's autonomy, create a ''patriotic and anti-imperialist'' military, designate social property and establish a ''new geometry of power'' over regional and local governments. These intend so dramatic a political restructuring that the opposition and even some Chavistas insist on a constituent assembly.
Luis Miquilena -- Chávez's first interior minister -- called the reforms a ''constitutional fraud.'' Vicente Díaz -- a judge on the National Electoral Council that the government long has controlled -- said the proposals carried such ''fundamental changes'' that a constituent assembly was in order. Manuel Rosales -- whom Chávez defeated in last year's election -- marked the reforms ''a constitutional coup'' and says his supporters are ready to garner the 15,000 signatures needed to petition a constituent assembly.
If the government has its way, a referendum would submit the reform package to the electorate for an up or down vote. And therein lies another problem: Chávez is also proposing to reduce the work day from eight to six hours. Some in the opposition and within Chavismo are asking the National Assembly to allow voters to decide by topic rather than as a block.
That's unlikely. A tiered vote would tender Chávez the ignominious defeat of his most cherished reform: his unbounded perpetuation in the presidency. So, an up or down vote with the six-hour day included buys insurance for approval. The government also needs high abstention rates from the 48 percent of the electorate tired of Chávez and the opposition. Incredibly, some opposition sectors are mulling the idea of boycotting the referendum.
Bolivia's constituent assembly had a rough time from the start. Procedural matters, regional autonomy, the proposal to make Sucre the capital, presidential reelection and other matters paralyzed the assembly. Suspended in August, it is now on the brink of extinction. In part, Morales is right when he blames the opposition: Bolivia's learned from the mistakes of the Venezuelan opposition.
On Sunday, Ecuadoreans go to polls to elect their constituent assembly. Correa is confident of controlling the assembly. Yet, surveys indicate a tight race, particularly given that about 50 percent of the electorate is undecided. Like Chávez and Morales, Correa wants to wield untethered power.
Twenty-first century socialism -- Chávez's siren song seconded by Morales and Correa -- is hopeless. Without separation of powers, democracy withers. All the same, we may well be on the cusp of worse things to come from Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador. Then again, the unexpected may just happen.
Marifeli Pérez-Stable is vice president for democratic governance at the Inter-American Dialogue in Washington, D.C., and a professor at Florida International University.
