Comment is free: May 2008 Archives

Caught red-handed

It looks rather like Hugo Chávez has been caught with his hand in the diplomatic cookie-jar: last week Interpol announced that a trove of computer files linking the Venezuelan leader to Colombia's FARC rebels appeared to be genuine. I've given my take over at Comment is free:

... if some of the Colombian government's specific accusations are a little overblown, taken as a whole the computer files strongly suggest that the Venezuelan government offered, and perhaps provided, material support to the Farc in recent months. The question now becomes: how to respond?

One option, already floated by some hawks, would be for the US to declare Venezuela a state sponsor of terrorism and impose sanctions accordingly. That would be hugely premature. While the recovered laptops are highly suggestive, they are not enough to bundle Venezuela in with the likes of Syria, North Korea and Iran. It would also probably be counterproductive, destabilizing Venezuela ahead of key regional elections and allowing Chávez to rail against US aggression.

Fortunately, with oil prices already closing in on $4 a gallon it's unlikely that US policymakers will rush to turn Venezuela into a petro-pariah. A better option might be so-called "smart sanctions", which would impose travel restrictions and monitor the assets of senior Venezuelan officials without wreaking economic havoc on the rest of the country. Best of all, though, would be for Venezuela's neighbors to remove the need for American action: the Organization of American States should take up the case where Interpol left off, and conduct a formal, impartial and transparent investigation into Venezuela's apparent efforts to hurt its neighbour.

Read the rest here.

Speaking with the enemy

This week saw both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton put in appearances on Fox News. That's angered the netroots - but might win them brownie points with superdelegates, who're keen for the candidates to reach out to moderate and independent voters. I've jotted some thoughts for the Guardian's Comment is free site:

It's unclear quite what the candidates hoped to gain from their Fox interviews. In 2004, only 7% of Fox fans voted for John Kerry, making the network's audience a more reliably Republican constituency than gun owners, white evangelical Christians or even self-defined conservatives. Could it be that the candidates are taking a cue from Operation Chaos and hoping to pick up crossover votes from Republicans whose own party's nomination was wrapped up long ago?

More likely, perhaps, is that the candidates' Fox-fest was designed to send a message to the Democratic superdelegates. An appearance on Fox was bound to be taken as a snub by the netroots - and arguably that's no bad thing, if you're a left-leaning candidate desperate to stake out a claim to the centre ground. In an election that looks likely to be fought and won among independents and moderates, it's more important than ever for Obama and Clinton to convince superdelegates that they are ready and able to reach out to swing voters. Even if that means sleeping with the enemy.

More here.

Welcome to BenWhitford.com

Thanks for dropping by. This site is currently under reconstruction; thanks for your patience!

Places I write

Click the links for more info.

Mother Jones

Newsweek

Slate

The Guardian

Comment is free

Plenty Magazine

Political Climate

The Backyard Briefing

BBC News

Powered by Laughing Squid