Venezuela is experiencing intense tension due to suspected fraud in the presidential elections held on Sunday. The Venezuelan electoral authority or CNE (Consejo Nacional Electoral), controlled by the ruling party the PSUV (Partido Socialista Unido de Venezuela), declared a decisive victory for the current president, Nicolás Maduro, early Monday morning. However, the lack of transparency throughout the process has alarmed the international community. Exactly like all of President Maduro’s elections.
Sunday’s elections were crucial for the continuation of 25 years of Bolivarian revolution. The opposition, organized around María Corina Machado, posed a significant threat to Maduro’s hold on power, particularly given the economic crisis that has forced a quarter of the population to emigrate and ongoing accusations of human rights violations. Machado, disqualified from running by courts also controlled by PSUV, handed her candidacy to Edmundo González Urrutia, a retired and initially reluctant diplomat. Despite a short campaign period of just 21 days, González gained nationwide recognition and began leading in reliable polls against Maduro.
Nevertheless, for the opposition, it was going to be an uphill battle. The PSUV and Maduro controls all state apparatuses, including the CNE, which oversees elections. However, Machado believed her lead was too significant for Maduro to conceal, both domestically and internationally, especially with the ongoing negotiations with the White House over economic sanctions and international recognition of Maduro’s government. Additionally, there was a push for Maduro to initiate a democratic transition, supported by Washington, Colombia, Brazil, and Chile, aiming for free and transparent elections. That aspiration fizzled quickly, or so it seemed.
Seemingly out of a diplomatic novel, presidential elections were secretly arranged between the United States and Maduro in Qatar, aimed at steering the country towards democratic normalcy. In exchange for lifting sanctions and freeing some prisoners, Maduro agreed to organize free and competitive elections. The pact, later confirmed in Barbados with opposition participation, aimed for a clear and legitimate winner recognized internationally. Venezuelans turned out in large numbers for what seemed to be a historic election. People flocked to polling stations early, with some waiting overnight. The atmosphere was tense but peaceful. Despite minor incidents, the day was largely uneventful.
Despite calls from both sides to respect the result, some worrying signs started to appear throughout the day, as PSUV media began publishing dubious polls predicting a ten-point victory for Maduro, using newly created or suspicious polling companies, that Maduro’s advisers promptly circulated through social media.
Initial reactions to the results have been of confusion. The CNE announced that with supposedly 80% of the votes counted, Maduro received 51.2% compared to González Urrutia’s 44.2%. Neither González Urrutia nor Machado accepted the results. The opposition campaign team reported that the CNE had only shown 40% of the votes, and they had stopped printing and transmitting the rest. This raised immediate concerns among opposition circles and international figures. Maduro’s political operators, Jorge Rodríguez and Diosdado Cabello even publicly hinted at their victory even before the counting had significantly progressed. In his victory speech Maduro conveniently cited “a hacking attempt on the CNE system as the cause of delayed results”, a claim echoed by the CNE president without further clarification, that only heightens suspicions.
Machado declared González the legitimate winner, asserting he received 70% of the vote compared to Maduro’s 30%. She announced plans to defend this outcome, emphasizing the overwhelming support González received across all Venezuelan states. Out on the streets, thousands of Venezuelans have started protesting the results, with most of the international community asking for a “fair and transparent recount”
The election suspiciously echoes those of 2013 and 2018. Let’s look back.
In 2013 the country was reeling from El Comandante Hugo Chavez’s death in the middle of his term. During his tenure as leader, he had transformed the country. Using record-high oil revenues of the 2000s, his government nationalized key industries, created participatory democratic Communal Councils, and implemented social programs known as the Bolivarian missions to expand access to food, housing, healthcare, and education. Chávez declared an “economic war” on Venezuela’s upper classes due to shortages, setting the stage for the future crisis in Venezuela. By the end of Chávez’s presidency in the early 2010s, deficit spending and price controls, proved to be unsustainable, with Venezuela’s economy flatlining, with increasing shortages, rampant inflation, and poverty. His successor, Nicolas Maduro (50.61%), ran under a continuity platform, which beat the opposition leader Enrique Capriles (49.12%) by 1,49% of the votes and less than 250.000 votes. Unfortunately, during the elections paramilitary pro-Maduro organizations known as the colectivos allegedly interfered with the results. Reuters described the colectivos as “a key factor in the government’s electoral machine,” noting that they “helped influence results and are sometimes considered by critics as thugs who intimidate rivals.” The Carter Center, specialized in mediation, reported that during the elections, polling stations had an “intimidating environment” when “groups of motorcyclists associated with the ruling party” were seen around the centers. Protests against the elections followed, with 9 deaths.
5 years of Maduro in the Palace of Miraflores followed. During this time, scarcity and poverty increased in Venezuela, protests erupted nationwide, rapidly decreasing Maduro’s popularity. This decline was solidified with the opposition’s victory in the 2015 parliamentary elections and the initiation of a process to revoke Maduro’s mandate via a referendum. However, these efforts were thwarted as Maduro consolidated power through officialist-controlled institutions. Another erosion of democratic liberties followed in 2017 when the Supreme Court assumed the National Assembly’s (The Venezuelan Parliament) functions, an act deemed a “rupture of the constitutional order” and even a self-coup by the Assembly and the Attorney General.
On May 20, 2018, premature presidential elections were held with the opposition boycotting the election, and Maduro was re-elected for another six-year term with 67.84% of the vote. Remaining opposition leaders were jailed, exiled, or barred from participating, there was no international observation, and coercive tactics suggested voters might lose jobs or social benefits if they did not vote for Maduro. International organizations such as the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, the European Union, the Organization of American States, and several countries rejected the elections due to their lack of transparency and electoral guarantees. On the other hand, Maduro-friendly countries like Russia, China, Turkey, North Korea, Iran, Bolivia, Cuba, El Salvador, and Nicaragua expressed their support for the re-elected Maduro. Unsurprisingly, this election saw the highest abstention rate in the history of presidential elections in Venezuela since the advent of democracy in 1958.
As with 2013 and 2018, in 2024 the international community questioned the transparency of an election who was undoubtedly fairer than the previous two but as U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken expressed, there were “serious concerns” that the results might not reflect the will of the Venezuelan people. Gabriel Boric called the results “hard to believe” and demanded total transparency and verification from independent international observers. Josep Borrell, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs, stressed the importance of a detailed vote count and access to the electoral records.
Even as diplomatic and domestic pressure mounts, Maduro and his party celebrate a return of the status quo. Even with the failure of rejoining the international community and lifting the myriad of sanctions, Maduro assures another 5 years in power with which to continue modeling the country to his image, (with a tight control of the army, the courts, and the police, as well as still a sizable base of supporters) and take advantage of Venezuela’s slight economic rebound of 4,2% of GDP in 2024. The opposition is left as it was in 2013 and 2018, reeling from an election they think they won and were cheated out. Appeals to the international community will follow, but unless a drastic action is taken or the popular support is so overwhelming as they claim and they can force a change of government, the possibility of the Chavismo leaving power after 25-30 years is equally as likely as it was in 2013 or 2018. Which is to say not a lot.
