The Venezuelan strongman is attempting to steal the country’s presidential election and daring the people to stop him. But even if military leaders are backing him, Maduro is already weaker than he appears.
July 2024
The polls closed in Venezuela at 6 p.m. on Sunday, July 28. But it was not until early Monday that the winner of the presidential election was declared. After a lengthy delay, the regime-controlled National Electoral Council announced that the country’s authoritarian leader, Nicolás Maduro, had won another term with 51.2 percent of the vote, surpassing rival Edmundo González, who received 44 percent. The outcome contradicted most credible preelection polls, which had shown González leading by more than 20 points. The Democratic Unitary Platform, the coalition of opposition parties led by banned candidate María Corina Machado (González competed as her stand-in), immediately denounced the result as fraudulent.
The situation has rapidly escalated since the announcement. The United States and many Latin American governments have questioned the election results, with some refusing to recognize Maduro’s victory. Anti-Maduro protests have spread across the country, including in areas where the regime was once popular. About fifteen people have died and more than seven hundred have been detained since the demonstrations began.
So far, the military has firmly supported Maduro and defended the election results. But Venezuela’s strongman might be weaker than he appears. The scale of fraud is so massive that what recently seemed inconceivable — a transition of power — has suddenly become a possibility.
To fully grasp Maduro’s precarious situation, it’s crucial to understand how Venezuela’s electoral system works and the boldness of his attempt to subvert it. According to Venezuelan law, all votes must be recorded in tallies — paper counts printed at each polling station. These printouts show the votes for every candidate. Once a tally is signed by witnesses from all parties and copies are distributed, the information is sent electronically to a tabulation center, which then publishes it online. The digital tallies should match the paper counts available to the witnesses.
The regime’s attempt to undermine this verification system was blatant. The CNE declared Maduro the winner without uploading the results from each polling station to the website. Furthermore, officials at some voting centers refused to provide printed tallies to the opposition witnesses stationed at each site. By all appearances, the government chose to fabricate the election result while obstructing the opposition’s ability to contest it by withholding polling-station data and denying access to some paper counts. To make matters worse, another opposition candidate, Enrique Márquez, claims that the CNE bulletin announcing Maduro’s victory was not printed in the tabulation center in the presence of party representatives, as required by the law. It came from another location.
A Fraud by Any Other Name
Some argue that these actions make it impossible to prove that the vote was manipulated. They’re wrong: Undermining the ability to verify the vote constitutes fraud. However, Maduro probably underestimated the opposition’s ability to gather evidence of his deceit. On Monday, María Corina Machado announced that, despite being denied access to the printed tallies in some voting centers, the opposition managed to obtain more than 70 percent of them and posted the data online for all to see. The coalition argues that this is a sufficient share to demonstrate that González won the election.
The United States and many Latin American governments, including longtime leftist allies such as Brazil and Colombia, as well as the European Union and international electoral observers from the Carter Center and the UN, are urging the Venezuelan government to publish the results. Maduro has promised to do so. Because releasing the actual data would amount to admitting fraud, however, it’s unclear what he will ultimately provide.
This situation is unprecedented. In 25 years of Chavismo, Venezuela has seen the regime employ an array of electoral tricks to tilt the playing field in its favor. The list of abuses is extensive and includes vote suppression, assisted voting, banning candidates, restricting media access, coopting opposition parties, and using massive public funds for campaigning. Maduro did many of these things this year too. Yet this is the first time the regime has ever stolen a presidential election that it had been expected to lose badly, fabricating numbers out of thin air without any supporting evidence. The fraud has never been so large, conspicuous, and difficult to deny.
Now Maduro faces a number of significant challenges. First, given the magnitude of the fraud, it is unlikely he will manage to convince the United States and his Latin American neighbors that he legitimately won the vote. Maduro’s reluctance to publish the results is practically a confession of wrongdoing. In the short term, international pressure and isolation will likely increase, especially if he engages in large-scale repression as he has in the past. He has already expelled diplomats from Latin American countries that have questioned the credibility of his reelection.
Second, Maduro must also address the growing discontent and unrest within his country. Millions of outraged Venezuelans will pressure him to recognize his loss and step aside. Protests are unlikely to subside soon since they are driven not only by political repression but also the economic hardship that has afflicted the country under Maduro’s rule.
Third, with Maduro’s claim to leadership being based on such a brazen lie, it will be harder to maintain unity within the regime. His allies and supporters know that he had to resort to fraud because he is so deeply unpopular. As his legitimacy is increasingly questioned, a growing number in his coalition may find it hard to keep supporting him. At a certain point, it becomes risky to stand by someone who is widely rejected.
A Turning Point?
How will the armed forces react if protests persist? The military is a black box: It’s difficult to know what’s happening inside. And even if you could see, predicting how alliances might shift under pressure would still be challenging.
Yet we do know some things. For years, the military has been an entrenched part of Chavismo, with generals holding key positions in the government and the national oil company. Many members are involved in a range of lucrative criminal activities, including drug trafficking, illegal mining, and smuggling. In the past, they’ve participated in large-scale repression alongside other security forces, and there is substantial evidence that they have committed gross human-rights violations — including torture and extrajudicial killings. One retired general recently told the Associated Press that the National Guard has been importing antiriot gear and refurbishing armored vehicles, presumably to prepare for postelection unrest.
We also know that Maduro and his security apparatus closely monitor signs of dissent within the armed forces. According to the human-rights organization Foro Penal, approximately half the political prisoners in Venezuela are from the military. Earlier this year, a former lieutenant in the Venezuelan army named Ronald Ojeda, who had plotted to kill Maduro, was abducted and killed in Chile. Authorities there believe that the culprits, who belong to Venezuela’s largest criminal organization, may have been working for Maduro.
At the same time, high desertion rates suggest discontent among the lower ranks. Like the rest of the country, they have suffered the collapse of the Venezuelan economy over the last decade while witnessing the widespread corruption that benefits a small elite, including their superiors. The case of Ojeda not only illuminates the dictatorship’s ruthlessness in suppressing dissent but also the deep-seated resentment within the military.
The big question is whether this resentment will outweigh the fear of retribution when Maduro orders the armed forces to turn against their compatriots. Should they rebel or simply refuse to follow orders, the regime could lose control of a volatile situation. It is also possible that key figures in the top brass might decide to betray Maduro and align with the majority. These are the nightmare scenarios that may be keeping the regime’s leaders awake at night. A small miscalculation could mark their downfall and the beginning of a return to democracy in Venezuela.
Alejandro Tarre is a Venezuelan writer and journalist.
Copyright © 2024 National Endowment for Democracy
Image credit: FEDERICO PARRA/AFP via Getty Images
|
FURTHER READING |
||
Why This Time Is Different for VenezuelaFor years, the Venezuelan opposition has fought hard against a corrupt regime — and come up short. But this time, with four key ingredients in place, we are on the cusp of a historic victory. |
How Maduro SurvivedThe Venezuelan dictator defied sanctions, international isolation, and massive protests. He appears to have a firmer footing than he’s had in years. Now what? |
Authoritarian Survival: Why Maduro Hasn’t FallenHis regime has hung onto power despite setbacks that would have toppled most democratic governments. Besides pure repression, Maduro has developed new autocratic tools that have kept Venezuela’s authoritarian state afloat. |