Venezuela: Maduro’s inauguration ushers in new cycle of class struggle (plus Constitutional reform: ‘New economy’, same objectives)
Published in Spanish at Aporrea. Translation by Federico Fuentes for LINKS International Journal of Socialist Renewal.
Nicolás Maduro was sworn in as Venezuela’s president on January 10 before the National Assembly, in accordance with Article 231 of the constitution. This marked the start of his third consecutive term in office, amid intense disputes over the legitimacy of the election result. Foreign organisations and governments have been pushing for a vote recount to guarantee transparency and verification. However, the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ) ratified Maduro’s victory and dismissed appeals by [left-wing constitutional lawyer] María Alejandra Díaz and Enrique Márquez, a former presidential candidate. The only presidents to attend the inauguration ceremony were Miguel Díaz-Canel (Cuba) and Daniel Ortega (Nicaragua). With this, the election cycle came to an end.
The opposition, which opted against resorting to the constitutional mechanisms available to it, ultimately saw its strategy of provoking a fracture within the armed forces fizzle out, with no such split materialised. As such, we are now in a new cycle of class struggle and the historic evolution of the political project known as chavismo [in reference to the political movement built up by former president Hugo Chávez].
Maduro’s inauguration ceremony took place amid a notable deployment of police and military forces, alongside [armed pro-government] collectives and militia groups. There were also mobilisations by the PSUV [United Socialist Party of Venezuela] and arbitrary arrests and police harassment of political leaders and human rights organisation representatives. Among those arrested was Enrique Márquez, from the Centrados party and a former vice-president of the National Electoral Council (CNE). Former metropolitan mayor of Caracas Juan Barreto and constitutional lawyer Díaz were also subject to harassment by security forces, who established a significant military presence outside their homes. Moreover, it was reported that relatives of theirs were arrested.
Social media networks were abuzz with expectations of confrontations on the streets that would led to a military pronouncement, civil rebellion and the suspension of Maduro’s inauguration, along with the abrupt arrival of [right-wing opposition candidate] Edmundo González [from exile], with the support of the pro-imperialist right in the region, former presidents in the Democratic Initiative of Spain and the Americas Group (IDEA) and the crass meddling intentions of the United States and European Union. The opposition’s failed mobilisation on January 9 and mock arrest of María Corina Machado represent yet another defeat for the extremist right.
The Biden administration condemned Maduro’s inauguration and increased the reward that the US is offering for his capture. Sanctions were imposed on eight senior Venezuelan officials with leadership roles in economic and security agencies. However, the US government has refrained from revoking licences that allow certain oil companies to operate in the country. Even so, Venezuela continues to await what Donald Trump’s policy towards the Maduro government will be.
Amid this political crisis, imperialism is exerting pressure through economic sanctions imposed by the US and European nations. Maduro’s new economic model has become extremely neoliberal and seeks to open up the economy, through dollarisation, suppressing wages and tax exemptions for the most privileged economic and transnational sectors. Furthermore, a secret transfer of assets has been carried under the protection of the Anti-Blockade Law, which allowed for changes in the shareholding structure of mixed-owned hydrocarbon companies. This has led to private companies becoming majority “partners” or even direct owners, which goes against the Organic Law of Hydrocarbons, as part of the privatisation process taking place in the oil sector. Millions of workers and popular sectors have seen their living conditions destroyed, plunging them into the most precarious conditions they have endured in 25 years of the Bolivarian government.
A new cycle
Maduro used his inauguration to launch a political counteroffensive. In his speech, he addressed the upcoming elections for mayors, governors and parliament.
Regarding his proposed constitutional reform, which seeks to bring the constitution inline with the “new economy” and promote the “democratisation of the state”, Maduro signed a decree appointing a national commission for constitutional reform. It will be chaired by Attorney General Tarek William Saab and includes Vice President Delcy Rodríguez and National Assembly deputies Herman Escarrá and Cilia Flores.
As it stands, the Bolivarian constitution represents a constraint for Maduro. By reforming it, the government is seeking to establish a new “social pact”, which would include various actors such as business owners and political opponents. The aim is to provide a constitutional framework for the rollbacks initiated by Maduro. The focus is on revising the Organic Labour Law [LOTTT], with the aim of adjusting it to the demands of business, which has requested its modification as a requirement for wage rises.
Maduro’s strategy for democratic state reform seems focused on limiting political participation while attempting to consolidate the “communal state” as a means to control and coopt the popular movement. This reform could lead to the creation of a one-party regime, characterised by a supposedly direct popular democracy in which only Madurismo and its allies have access to political power, thus restricting the fundamental freedoms of liberal democracy.
As the Coordinadora Nacional Autónomo Independiente De Trabajadores (National Independent Autonomous Workers’ Coordinating Committee, CAIT), we have emphasised the importance of respecting the constitution and laws in order to safeguard the democratic freedoms achieved through the Bolivarian constitution. The rights to assembly, strike, protest and electoral participation are intrinsically linked to the demands of the working class. It is vital to prepare for this new cycle that began on January 10, taking into consideration that a significant change in the national situation has occurred amid what is a complicated global context. The priority must be the struggle for an independent pole of resistance and the creation of a political reference that defends workers’ interests.
Maduro’s constitutional reform: ‘New economy’, same objectives
Salvador De León
Published in Spanish at Aporrea. Translation by Federico Fuentes for LINKS International Journal of Socialist Renewal.
Putting the cart before the horse is an apt expression for the tendency to stick to strictly circumstantial analyses of reality. The smoke left behind by the polarisation between Nicolás Maduro and María Corina Machado has distracted from a much-needed analysis of the real dynamics of power and social agreements within Venezuelan society today.
The fact that bosses’ organisations abstained from supporting Edmundo González’s inauguration and the distant stance of the United States and “right-wing” governments in the region mark a new precedent in the government-opposition confrontation of the past 27 years. On one hand, bosses' organisations are focused on maximising benefits from their agreements with the government (tax incentives and de facto weakening of worker’s protections). Trump’s soft stance simply reflects the agreements that exist between the Venezuelan state and the oil lobby, and his strategic need for cheaper oil prices. Economics drags politics with it, not the other way around. We are dealing with a balance of forces involving social as well as economic actors with social expressions.
Amid this new co-existence, Maduro assumed the presidency for a third term on January 10. Pursuing a strategy of legitimation, his government’s plan is focused on a new constitutional reform, calling for a debate among different social actors. The axis of the reform is principally centred on consolidating “popular democracy” and designing a “new economy”. We will need to see how these social forces participate in this national debate, which necessarily requires recognising all the various expressions of collective interests. Under no circumstances can we talk about a participatory democracy if the means for participation and axis of discussion are imposed and controlled by institutional bodies and economic actors that have reached prior agreements.
The reality in 2025 is very different to that of 2013, when Maduro started his first term. Back then, the opposition attempted an institutional coup using the National Assembly elected in 2015. In parallel, bosses' organisations exercised their social force to twist the arm of the government and successfully weaken protections for the great majority. Its main strategy was to use practices such as speculation, hoarding, lockouts, among others.
Statements by these sectors during those years focused on petitioning for policies that gave more guarantees to capital, on requesting that the Organic Labour Law (LOTTT) be reformed, on protesting against the retroactivity of social benefits and job security, and on asking for exemptions and benefits to “resist” the crisis. Thousands of workers were sacked from companies such as Polar, Regional, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Cargill, among others. Labour conflicts reached unprecedented levels, with disobedience and contempt for decisions made by bodies such as the Labour Inspectorate common practice.
The so-called economic war involved socio-economic crimes and fraudulent practices that went largely unpunished, in part due to a lack of political will but primarily because there was no legal framework within which to punish and regulate the economic criminals. Not even the National Constituent Assembly of 2017 passed legislation on this. As such, shareholders are protected by corporate veils while, on the other hand, legal persons are not regulated (there are no procedures for imposing penalties and economic sanctions).
Furthermore, through their belligerent actions, these economic groups were able to forge agreements of co-existence with the state after 2018. Under a policy of “turning a blind eye”, the state in practice facilitated a reconfiguration of the private sector based on diminished costs of labour via closures and mass layoffs. The so-called economic recovery is largely due to the end of hoarding (allowing goods to circulate and be bought with US dollars) and the “incentives for investment”. The foundations of the so-called “new economy” have therefore already been laid. Given this, can we say the political will exists to regulate and restrict the chaos and anarchy of the market? Or, on the contrary, is the aim to simply consolidate policies that promote further marketisation and deregulation?
By now, it would be childish to believe that the polarisation in Venezuela is between left and right, between Machado and Maduro. In reality, behind this exists the market’s need to guarantee conditions for investment via further flexibilisation and deregulation. The LOTTT is extremely uncomfortable for bosses, even if it is only applied discretionary by the state that continues with its policy of allowing others to do as they please. Everything points in the direction of a labour counter-reform that is more convenient for economic groups.
But to achieve this will require reforming the constitution to annul certain constitutional principles when it comes to labour issues. Legitimising the reform on the basis of strengthening “popular democracy” seems like a convenient means to achieve this. It would certainly help divert the attention of different social forces towards a dead-end discussion. Or are we to genuinely think that the “new economy” will include a popular economy operating outside the market?