1674664519 Why did President Maduro cancel his participation in the VII

Why did President Maduro cancel his participation in the VII CELAC Summit?

The lack of resolve in the face of threats surrounding the Chavista ruler prompted Venezuela to replace Foreign Minister Yván Gil’s presence in Buenos Aires with the presidential delegation.

  • Session of the VII CELAC Summit.
    Session of the VII CELAC Summit.

It came as a complete surprise to many that President Nicolás Maduro did not travel to Buenos Aires to attend the VII CELAC Summit. It is an important event and this unity has been promoted mainly by Venezuela from its inception until today, so representing the government in the context of regional integration challenges is essential.

The context in which the trip was canceled must be understood as information that a plan of aggression against the Venezuelan delegation is taking shape.

For a few weeks now, a negative campaign against the Venezuelan President has been underway in Argentina among leading political and legal figures, all from the opposition linked to the mutation of the “Interim” now dubbed the “Commission of Delegates” (supported by of the United States) and macrismo, mainly. Anti-Chavismo from there and here took the reins of the maneuver, arguing how it was possible for a “dictator” to touch the sacred ground of liberal democracy in the continent’s far south. Political opinion once again showed itself in all its misery about this topic, which had been hackneyed for years.

Added to this was the intention to follow the figure of Maduro on Argentine soil should he land in Ezeiza. Two lawsuits have been filed in the Buenos Aires judiciary and Patricia Bullrich, President of the Republican Proposal (PRO), said a few days ago that “if Nicolás Maduro comes to Argentina, he must be arrested immediately for committing crimes against humanity has”.

That a personality like Bullrich, who no longer holds government posts and therefore has no power to make her judicial dreams come true, condones political pressure and is capable of violating the context of the Venezuelan President’s presence at the VII CELAC Summit, aside of Fernández’s agreement to participate, as the host of a summit of continental importance, he speaks clearly of his contradictory nature as head of government and state and shows himself weak compared to his peers.

In a note recently published on this forum, it was suggested that Alberto Fernández’s government’s position on the harassment of the Venezuelan President was ambiguous and that it also lacked an adequate security framework for internal jurisdictions for a head of state that has one FBI arrest warrant from the Donald Trump administration years. The lack of resolve in the face of threats surrounding the Chavista ruler prompted Venezuela to replace Foreign Minister Yván Gil’s presence in Buenos Aires with the presidential delegation.

Given the events of the past few weeks, a number of contingencies were to be expected that could undermine the President’s attendance, given that the Fernández administration has had a difficult history of providing the necessary security.

Take the Emtrasur aircraft and its crew as an example, a paradigmatic case of recent data; the first was kidnapped with FBI permission, in utter defiance of unlawful sanctions and consistent with the image of asphyxiation that right-wing governments would be proud of; adding that the crew members were prosecuted without any evidence, unless the rumors of “terrorism” by Israeli and American Zionism are deemed illegal.

Also, the Fernández government could have vetoed the events of the Emtrasur case under Argentina’s constitutional jurisdiction, so there was a negligence component to the matter, but US will and the sewer offensive were stronger from Buenos Aires than national sovereignty. There was no reparation for what happened, and yet the Venezuelan government maintains stable relations with Argentina.

Add to that the fact that they could not offer Cristina Fernández, Vice President and supreme leader of Kirchnerism, the necessary reassurance when they tried to assassinate her in September 2022. and later too, while continuing to greet her followers near her abode.

A state that cannot guarantee a minimum security framework to protect a ruler of its own country in the face of the constant threats that Cristina Fernández has long experienced, let alone support a criminalized president like Nicolás Maduro.

Argentina’s sovereignty is violated and its state offers no security guarantees even to high-ranking politicians, both nationally and internationally, with human rights being one of the most expensive issues in Alberto Fernández’s official rhetoric; The fact that the Venezuelan President was unable to attend the VII CELAC Summit is a clear sign of this.