On Tuesday March 5, the Venezuelan government released the news of President Hugo Chávez’s death. Though many had surmised that his end was near, the news came as a surprise to Venezuelans and foreigners alike. Chávez had been diagnosed with cancer, and many believed that his death was inevitable, yet the government released almost no information on his condition, or even the type of cancer he had, making the date of his eventual death unknown. Chávez was a hugely important figure who will leave a long legacy in Venezuela’s history. In pursuit of his “Revolución bolivariana” (“Bolivarian Revolution”), he mobilized the poor and working class and provided public housing, healthcare, and jobs to many Venezuelans. Yet his government is also guilty of human rights abuses and free speech violations, and his nationalistic and socialist policies have alienated important sectors of Venezuelan society as well as much of the international community.
Chávez’s death leaves political instability and many questions about the future of Venezuela. The Constitution calls for elections within 30 days of a president’s death during the first four years of his or her term. Though the government is dominated by Chávez supporters, Venezuelan politics have been dominated by Chávez’s personality and decisions for fourteen years, and it is unclear if his self-appointed successor, Vice President Nicolás Maduro, will be able to maintain Chávez-level political support. The opposition movement is hoping the transition leads to greater political freedom, and it will most likely have recent presidential candidate Henrique Capriles Radonski run against Maduro. For now, the mandate for elections is all there is to guide Venezuela’s near future.
As a Venezuelan opposed to Chávez, I don’t mourn his death. However, I am concerned for the short and long-term future of Venezuela, which will be tumultuous at best. Chávez was such a dominant force in politics that his death leaves a huge political gap, and it is unclear if any politician currently in Venezuela can fill it. Furthermore, the potential for civil unrest is significant because of the large and emotional division between Chávez’s supporters and opponents. Yet I hope that Chávez’s death will lead to a better government and society. Chávez demonized and excluded those who did not support him; for example, anyone not registered to Chávez’s party had difficulty receiving public housing, jobs, and even medicine. Sometimes they were refused these resources altogether. Inequality in Venezuela also grew steadily during his rule, and, as illustrated by Caracas’ rank as more deadly than Baghdad in 2010, security worsened. These facts are not just political; they have translated into daily hardship, and I hope that Venezuela’s future includes a more inclusive government, respectful and cognizant of its citizens’ rights, that will make the effort to better the lives of all Venezuelans.