Video: Venezuela May 2018 – opposition campaign chief accepts presidential election result

Julio Cesar, opposition campaign chief in the 2018 Venezuelan elections

The attacks on the Venezuelan government and attempts by the US and other countries to legitimise self-appointed ‘interim president’ Juan Guaido have continued as US motivations have become explicit, with open talk among Trump-friendly commentators of US control of Venezuelan oil reserves, which are the largest in the world.

The attempts rest, at least for PR purposes, on the supposed rigging of last May’s presidential election, won by Maduro. Media coverage of such claims has ignored the fact that Venezuela operates a world-leading election ballot system, which has been described as unriggable by election observers – and even by a Venezuelan journalist who set out to try to discredit election results in the country.

Cesar addressing international election observers last May

According to right-wing commentators, the election result was never valid. So news that Venezuelan opposition campaign chief Julio Cesar, as results came in, confirmed that the opposition would accept the result as legitimate would be inconvenient to the MSM’s narrative, to say the least.

And that news is fact – as this audio of Cesar’s response to a question from a UK journalist, who also served as an international observer during the ballot, shows:

Journalist Calvin Tucker, who can be heard posing the question, also testified to the security and tamper-proofing of the voting system – as did a Sinn Fein MP also in Venezuela as an observer. They were not alone:

International observers for the election came from 86 countries, and included two former presidents, the head of the South African electoral council, mayors from the US, politicians from all over the world, the ambassador for the African Union, the Caribbean electoral observer mission, judges, ambassadors, lawyers, and journalists.

SKWAWKBOX comment:

As governments including the UK’s rush to recognise a self-appointed, right-wing president – whose violent faction just happens to favour giving increased access and control over Venezuela’s huge oil reserves to US and other foreign companies – public awareness in all these countries of the real situation surrounding is essential.

Venezuela’s electoral system is considerably more advanced, robust and rig-proof than the systems used elsewhere – including in the UK. The propaganda saying otherwise deserves to be exposed for the pantomime it is.

Whatever the faults of Venezuela’s president or ruling assembly, challenges to their democratic legitimacy do not stand up.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here for a monthly donation via GoCardless. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. I found this on Tory MP Sarah Wollaston’s website:

    Nonetheless, I hope the following information on this topic from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office is reassuring:

    “President-elect Bolsonaro received a mandate from the Brazilian people. It is not for the UK Government to interfere in the democratic processes of another country.”


  2. Oh dearie me Skwarky you are once again – whether you realise it or not – peddling your Left-Liberal idée fixe assumption that Venezuela has to prove that it is democratic in order not to be invaded or otherwise meddled in, by the USA. This is the third article you have penned about the squeaky-cleanness of the country’s democracy.

    This misses the point. Military intervention may sometimes be legitimate if one state attacks another state. But the idea that the USA (or any other country) should intervene in other countries because of a lack of democracy is ludicrous.

    Is Saudi Arabia a democracy? Is the People’s Republic of China a glowing example of multi-party democracy? Should we invade those countries due to their lack of democracy?

    Were Iraq and Afghanistan democratic? Was it OK to invade Iraq and Afghanistan because they were undemocratic?

    As Radha D’Souza argues in her book “What’s Wrong with Rights?” (Pluto, 2018), “Why do powerful imperialist states like the US wish to legalise and institutionalise International Election Monitoring (IEM) and the ‘right of free and fair elections’ in the international order? The most obvious reason is of course that IEMs remove political power from the citizens and transfer at least part of it to the International Organisations where imperialist powers wield special status and influence. The ‘right of free and fair elections’ in international law legitimises interference in the internal affairs of the State.” She notes that in the real world as opposed to the ‘thought world’ IEM reforms ALWAYS go hand in hand with Liberalisation-Privatisation-Globalisation reforms.

    1. Actually, invading Saudi Arabia is a damn good idea. I can’t think why, in view of its oil reserves (not to mention its human rights abuses and the fact that it’s full of brown people), the US hasn’t tried it already.

      Or is there something about a monarchy that stays their hand…?

    2. Danny, it’s true that this argument shouldn’t even need making – but the fraudulent and dangerous case for outside interference in Venezuela’s governance is being built specifically on claims of democratic deficit – so it’s precisely those headlined lies that have to be exposed if a hard-of-thinking MSM audience is to be convinced.

    3. “Left-Liberal idée fixe assumption that Venezuela has to prove that it is democratic”

      You’re conflating two different issues in your rush for seeming ideological purity and rectitude..

      The general issue of the super-ordinate principle of non-interference in sovereign states is separate from the issue of the credibility of democratic process.

      Both are important to the question of when (think Rwanda) international involvement may be appropriate when the democratic process in a country has broken down or been eliminated. Most practical situations that raise these questions are both conflicted and confused.

      .. unless you adopt the idea that human rights and democratic principles can go to hell as long as any tin pot dictator can claim to be ‘sovereign’.

      In the case of Venezuela, the fakery of the US-corporate propaganda can be blown out of the water by proper internal democratic process.

  3. Good point, Danny. And anyone in any remaining doubt about the ghastly Guardian’s total adherence to the interests of US imperialism – just hold your nose and read today’s utterly disgraceful tissue of lies and obfuscation in this dire article from that slimy purveyor of neoliberalism, dressed up in a self righteous coating of socially liberal platitudes. It describes the Venezuelan US puppet for their rolling coup, Juan Guaido, without any qualification as the “interim President” FFS !


  4. These verified facts about the Venezuelan voting system are vital to countering the claims of US and its backers.Thoug, I do find it annoying that even the SKWAWKBOX feels they it has to use the ‘Whatever the faults of’, (usually Corbyn, but this example Maduro) and goes along with the assumption of US hegemonic superiority.

  5. How about the USA deciding to recognise Vince Cable as PM of the UK? Same thing. They should keep their bullying big noses out of other countries businesses except in extreme emergencies, and this ain’t one!

    1. Yeah, at least our conscience is clear on the bullying other countries thing… 🙂

  6. Yes I am afraid there are daily does of US Right Wing Propaganda against Venezeula being trotted out and regurgitated uncritcally by the BBC and the Guardian as well as the usual Right Wing media.
    So much for holding truth to power.
    A Labour spokesperson was good saying that there should be no foreign interventions and it was up to the people of Venezuela to decide things for themselves.
    Having just read the excellent Derek Regan’s book on the Balfour Declaration perhaps the USSR in its beginning before it all went wrong did the World a service.
    It first declared for the notion of self-determination for nation states then published the secret deals of Western Govts on how they usually operated – this was probably then the equivalent of the Wiki Leaks from a few years ago.
    Self-determination is the principle we need to uphold.
    SB is perhaps trying to counter the Right’s propaganda to support the socialist Govt there as many of us offer support too try to expose the hypocracy of the USA.
    Perhaps political support for Venezeula and political counter attacks on the Right Wing US Neo-Liberals is the best approach – defence (the Right are trying to CON the public) and counter attack.
    One Venezeulan analyst argues that what we are witnessing is an attempt by US predatory capital to get its hands on their oil.

  7. Worrying piece in Morning Star (on-line) 29/1 about Bolt the Barbarian (US Sec) holding a paper with “5,000 troops for Columbian Border” on it (although this may have been deliberately provovative) and part of the Right Wing Neo – Liberal US propaganda war and perhaps if the US intervenes via Colunbia, leader there, Trump and Bolton should be hauled through The Hague but as I understand the US has opted out of this International Criminal Court – so the Right Wing Neo-Liberal US Bullies think they can do what they want.
    Wouldn’t if be great if diverse working people around the World had a Day of Action to Stand for Little Socialist Venezuela against the Right Wing US Big Bully or we could even dream of a Global General strike by working people?
    Victory 4 V!

  8. The largest oil reserves in the world. Why is democracy in Venezuela so important to USA & why does EU support Trump’s sanctions against Venezuelan people?

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: