"BOLIVARIAN REVOLUTION" CARRIES ON

While the U.S. presidential contenders Obama and M.Romney are "slugging it out" in the election TV debates and attempt to rally more supporters, one of the most outspoken critics of Washington's foreign policy and eccentric political leaders in the world, head of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez celebrates his another victory in the presidential election. The very next day after the election, on 8 October, President of the National Council of the country T.Lusena said that Chavez, who received around 54% of the vote and has overcome the opposition of his main opponent Enrique Capriles, was re-elected for a new six-year term. According to the report of the electoral council, the presidential election in which turnout was one of the highest (81%) over the past few decades, not only passed without major incident, but was "easy and fun."

Over his 14-year rule it was Chavez's first encounter with such a powerful challenge from a consolidated united opposition front. Besides the election situation was exacerbated by the fact that last year the 58-year-old leader of the Bolivarian Republic was diagnosed with cancer. However, during the race, according to Chavez himself, he fully regained his health, which was very useful in the difficult situation before the next presidential election. Formally, all the 56 political parties registered with the National Electoral Council of Venezuela have the right to nominate candidates for president. But they can also form coalitions and nominate a common candidate, which is what happened. Hugo Chavez, who proposed the ruling United Socialist Party of Venezuela, has been named a candidate by ten parties, including the Communists and the revolutionary movement "Tupamaros". His main opponent was Kapriles, approved by 22 political parties from the Democratic Unity block as their candidate. It should be noted that, despite his youth, 40-year-old Kapriles has behind him a rich political experience. In the past, the youngest President of the Chamber of Deputies of the National Assembly, the governor of Miranda State, he was the only politician over the tenure of Chavez in office capable of throwing him a serious challenge. 

Overall, seven candidates vied for the highest office. But only the current president and Kapriles had the highest and almost equal chances of winning. And voters were asked to choose between a charismatic leader Chavez and a supporter of pragmatism, acting on behalf of a unified opposition. By and large, the battle between the favorites of the presidential elections in Venezuela had an obvious ideological character. Chavez represents the socialist regime, which, by the way, he has been building in the country in the last 14 years. Pragmatic Kapriles is a symbol of capitalism, but rather, the vehicle of the ideas of neoliberalism. According to Chavez, the course of economic development espoused by him and his colleagues is the only sure way in which the implementation of socialist reforms has led to a significant reduction in poverty and misery, and will later allow to do away completely with this legacy of the capitalist past. Chavez claims credit for achievements in the field of housing (particularly in social housing), education, and initiatives in the health sector. However, he admits that he needs to do more in the fight against crime and the state bureaucracy. Chavez nationalized key sectors of the economy and, in general, describes his activity as a socialist revolution. According to him, he needs another term in office to complete the "Bolivarian revolution" that will lead the country to the final victory of socialism. In this matter, the most compelling financial backing comes from the superprofits received by Venezuela from oil exports.

The 40-year-old E.Kaprilesa and other opponents of Chavez are armed with the standard set of claims that have recently become a popular tool in the hands of the opposition in almost all countries. The opposition accuses Chavez of authoritarianism, putting pressure on the courts and restricting freedom of speech. According to opponents of Chavez, his real revolution has led to increased bureaucracy, reduced efficiency of the economy and the deficit. Kapriles also argues that the lack of investment in the oil sector that is vital for the country has led to a decline in the level of oil production. Having made his main campaign promise to restore economic growth, Kapriles promised not to stop the social programs that Chavez implements, as well as to deal with the widely sprawling public sector corruption. The main opposition leader, who describes himself as center-left, makes no secret of his sympathy for the Brazilian economic model. Kapriles strongly disagree with the government's performance, high level of crime and corruption, frequent power cuts and poor infrastructure. His election staff mainly focused his criticism on these points. Kapriles argues that only private enterprise can bring Venezuela to the highway of progress, while the current economic model of the country is a dead-end path of development. Unlike Chavez, in foreign policy, he wants to demonstrate a pragmatic approach and not to subsidize other countries, as the current president does. With regard to contracts with Russia, Cuba, China and Iran, some of them need to be reviewed in terms of their compliance with the national interests of Venezuela. These were the political platforms the main contenders used at the finish line.

Ultimately, voters preferred Chavez, though Kapriles was very close to victory. To the credit of both candidates, they called on their supporters to remain calm, to not give in to emotions, to avoid excesses and not to resort to violence. Despite the fact that 140,000 troops were involved to protect polling stations and ensure peace, civic responsibility shown by the voters was exemplary. After the results were announced Kapriles conceded defeat and congratulated Chavez with another victory in the presidential election. He said that now he will fight for national unity. And Chavez, who said on the day of elections that the problems cannot wait and that they will have to be tackled starting tomorrow accepted congratulations and went back to his everyday duties.

Latin America - a stronghold of anti-Americanism

The presidential elections in Venezuela caused abroad a much wider resonance. In particular, the heads of several Latin American countries rejoiced at Chavez victory as if it was their own.

Almost all Latin American countries congratulated Venezuelans with democratic elections and openly expressed their support for the victory of Chavez, who was often criticized by the US and its allies. This consolidated position of Latin American countries shows that now in these countries policies that gravitate toward the official course of Washington are doomed to failure.

The US has traditionally paid considerable attention to Latin America but since 1991 shifted its resources to other regions of the world and overlooked Latin American countries. According to many experts, Latin America is a continent living a life of its own and continues to be a center of alternative ideology of a world free of US hegemony. In this regard, Chavez, who is not a fan of Washington, is to some extent a unifying figure in the region, which, in the figurative expression of some experts, is searching for its place in the world. In their view, the region every year consistently improves its international geopolitical ranking by constantly increasing its strategic reserves of resources, and is the second Middle East. As their awareness of the importance of the region grows the leaders in Latin America are increasingly inclined to independence in geopolitical processes, without regard for Washington. Most of them are more than confident that under the slogans of human rights and democratic principles the United States actually engages in the overthrow of unwanted leaders and political regimes. After that, at the Washington's directives, the power in these countries is handed over to political forces which fully meet the interests of the US and do the bidding of the White House. This question is even more relevant in the region rich in natural resources. 

The influence of "recalcitrant" Chavez on Latin American leftist countries causes severe irritation of the US, which is the largest trading partner of Venezuela. The country is the fourth-largest oil exporter to the US. Despite close economic relations, it is absolutely impossible to name these countries allied. The normalization of Washington - Caracas ties is even further prevented by the alliance of Chavez with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, his backing of former Libyan leader Gaddafi, as well as proposals to support the head of Syria, Bashar al-Assad. In the same context, the White House is irritated by Chavez's friendly relations with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Alexander Lukashenka of Belarus. Washington doubts Chavez landslide victory in the presidential election. A member of the Republican Party I.Ros-Lehtinen, head of the foreign affairs committee in the lower house of Congress, said that Chavez did not allow international observers to the elections, at the last moment amended ballots, took control of the judicial system, subjected to harassment independent media and consolidated power to manipulate votes. It should be noted that the worsening of relations between the US and Venezuela was to a great extent facilitated by Washington's support for coup attempts in Venezuela in 2002 against President Chavez. But the failure of the coup not only strengthened his position and greatly weakened the opposition, but also sparked a shift in Hugo Chavez's active anti-American policies on the scale that goes beyond Latin America. It is noteworthy that the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who shares the concerns of Washington, has expressed his deep concern about the re-election of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. 

By the way, the fact that countries in South America, Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru and Venezuela, over the past ten years have opted for closer trade ties with China is no small concern to Washington. All the above facts show that the US positions in Latin America do not look quite so strong. It is quite obvious that the White House, using the tactics of "soft pressure", is trying to rectify the situation. However, Washington, which usually does not avoid the most severe measures, including the direct military action against the countries and political regimes it dislikes in other parts of the world, avoids a similar action to punish the "recalcitrant" in the Americas. This behavior is explained by the fact that the US firmly holds the main principle of the Monroe Doctrine, which states: "America for the Americans" and tries to avoid any military conflict in the Americas, where outside forces may intervene to any extent. It is likely that it is the understanding of these realities that allows many eccentric Latin American leaders to feel confident and accept congratulations after winning the next presidential election.