Reply #20: Yes, but... [View All]

The statement is riddled with ambiguity.

I have reservations about the situation in Venezuela. Did the opposition gain momentum because of covert US intervention? If so, then it is hard to blame Chavez for being somewhat repressive, because he would only be trying to maintain the stability of his government by clamping down on the enemies of his state in the face of being overthrown from within by insidious foreign interests. If the referendum is the result of the actions of these hostile foreign interests, (and Chavez knows this), then the referendum is bogus and there is no legitimate reason for him to acquiesce to the sponsors of the referendum, because the referendum was initiated by hostile outside forces bent on overthrowing his democratically elected administration.

I don't know if this is what is actually happening in Venezuela, but unfortunately republican administrations have a well documented history of sponsoring this type of covert activity in Latin American nations. So I am very skeptical about the democratic validity of the opposition movement in Venezuela, and don't know if Kerry is morally justified in stating that Chavez should acquiesce to the opposition and their referendum.