What the transition consists of:
In its etymological sense, transition is the action and effect of moving from one state to another, and when the transition is political, it refers to successive stages experienced in a country during the change from one system to another. The historical reference of a transition towards democracy is presented with the end of a dictatorial regime, initiating a government system with democratic life.
Taking into account the structural approach to transitions, the relationship with the regime of origin and the resulting regime is analyzed, classifying them into transitions towards democracy and transitions from democracy. In the Venezuelan case, it applies the transitions towards democracy that have as a precedent the existence of a totalitarian regime or an authoritarian regime that have similar characteristics due to the presence of marked elements that divorce it from the principles on which democracy rests.
A democratic transition:
For political science, a democratic transition or transition to democracy is described as a complex political and institutional process through which a political system transitions from an autocratic regime to the establishment of a democratic regime.
A first point of analysis is to pay attention to the political-institutional regime that serves as the starting point of the transition, and in the experience of Latin America during the decades of the eighties and nineties, these were authoritarian regimes of bureaucratic-military dictatorships. , while in the countries of Eastern Europe they were totalitarian regimes of communist inspiration.
A second element for the analysis is the process of the transition itself, that is, the legal and extralegal modality of transfer of the fundamental organs of power from the previous dictatorship to the new democratic government and even the degrees of social and political violence implicit in said process.
How a transition is triggered:
The triggering event of the transition itself is the nuclear element of the process, this being the event that determines the form and trajectory of the rest of the process. Here we must start from the inability of the regime that has been dominant to continue governing, and the perception of the majority of citizens who do not accept to continue living in an autocratic system, and who demand a change or a transition towards the well-being that democracy represents; It is at this point where the oppressive regime meets the resistance of the citizens.
When the transition is promoted by the oppressive regime itself or is a product of social pressure, the result is different, each time, since in the first case it implies that the institutions controlled by the dictatorship enter into an institutionalized process of transition, and when the The triggering fact is the social and political pressure of citizens tends to collapse the institutions of the dictatorship, to form a process of replacing the previous institutions and legal rules of the dictatorship with the new democratic institutions and norms.
Venezuela and Cuba:
The Venezuelan case increasingly resembles the Cuban case, because the regime is not accepted by the people, who beyond the usual violations of their primary rights are tired of an unsustainable life, full of calamities and without a promising future; However, protests occur only over issues of public services, but not demanding Democracy and the Rule of Law. In the end, these regimes are sitting on a time bomb that could detonate at any moment, and it is the moment when the people decide to exercise their right of resistance to escape oppression.
The political nature of the transition process:
Forced transitions come from citizen social pressure or some triggering event outside the system, which forces the ruling regime to modify and accelerate its itinerary and the transfer; here there is generally the collapse of the dictatorship.
On the other hand, agreed transitions are those in which the general political scenario has changed as a result of a triggering event, forcing the regime to change its itinerary or maintain it, but in a context in which the transfer of power is agreed between the forces. existing policies, in order to prevent or stop the possibility of an institutional breakdown or with the purpose that the regime in power manages to preserve the fundamental institutions of the system. In this aspect, some maintain that we are leaving the dictator, but not the dictatorship.
The context of reality in Venezuela:
A sector of the opposition visualizes an agreed transition, when they affirm that they will defeat Maduro in elections, and then they will have to agree with the other powers of the State in the hands of Chavismo-Madurismo, that is, the legislative power, the judicial power, the Comptroller General’s Office. of the Republic, the Attorney General’s Office of the Republic and almost nothing, the National Armed Forces.
In Myself opinion, This is unlikely, firstly because there is no prior pact between the actors managing the conflict, and also because the political cost of Chavismo-Madurismo is very great, given that in all the scenarios that are presented today the current regime is to maintain control of the powers of the State, even in the hypothetical event that they lose executive power.
Let us remember that corruption cases are extreme, and always have a transnational nature that can increasingly move international justice. In addition, cases of serious human rights violations and crimes against humanity will always be pending, which must have some final response.
The icing on the cake:
The arrival point of any transition can be a new political system, resulting from a deep previous crisis, or a new political system, resulting from a new correlation of forces. In both cases, the essential thing is that the new articulation of powers and institutions that obeys a new political climate and a new scenario in which the acting forces are guided by different interests, although coinciding in the fundamental purpose of achieving the stability of the new system.
The point of arrival of the transition is not an end point, it is not a moment chronologically located in the trajectory of the process, but rather it is manifested in the fact that all the acting political actors – or the majority of them – recognize more or less explicitly that The new system or the installed political regime sufficiently satisfies their interests, expectations and demands.
The Venezuelan case, in my opinion, is not resolved with an election process, especially when there is evident advantage and control of the entire electoral process. On this point, it would be interesting to review the electoral roll, with new electoral centers in controlled sites that involve millions of votes, the assisted voting of millions of officials, the relocations of voters, the increase in the percentage of abstention, millions of Venezuelans who are within and outside the country who will not be able to exercise the right to vote, among other situations that tip the balance.
The electoral roll was cut in half, and along the way, the lack of a true unity of purpose of the electoral candidates trying to beat Maduro, plus everything that is to come, where the electoral rights of citizens will become null and void. , are circumstances that we have to review as citizens.
That is why saying that a transition has begun is not true, because there are still too many obstacles to overcome, and although all the circumstances are in place to work on the real arrival of a transition, this can only happen if a triggering event is worked on that places the balance towards the side of freedom and democracy.
Fear: Miguel Angel Martin Tortabu
@miguelmartint_
