Venezuelan Ambassador’s Narrative “Hugo Chavez’s Standpoint about Church and Ties with the US”

Since 1967 when the embassy of Venezuela was first opened in Tehran and hosted the country’s first ambassador to Iran, the two countries have politically been on an agreeable path. Once Hugo Chavez won the power and became the first President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in 1998, a new chapter was written in the ties between them and as the two countries’ political stances stood closer to each other on the international scene, more bilateral relations and cooperation came to exist on more dynamic, versatile levels, and with Ahmadinejad winning the office, they reached a peak. Apart from the political relations between the two countries, Ahmadinejad’s interpretation of Mr. Chavez’s political and religious standpoints and what came up as a result thereof turned into a controversial subject among the Iranian media. Following the end of Ahmadinejad’s terms, we found an opportune moment to hold a frank interview with the Ambassador of Venezuela to Tehran regarding Mr. Chavez’s viewpoints as well as what is at conflict in Latin America.

AVA Diplomatic’s Exclusive Interview with

Amenhotep Zambrano, Venezuela’s Ambassador in Iran

Interview by Mohammadreza Nazari

 Over the past years, you have held a key role in ALBA, and during your stint in Tehran as the Ambassador of Venezuela, you have constantly been working on the alliance among the ALBA ambassadors here. Why is that?

Mr. Chavez always considered me for revolutionary duties, and that is why I’m in constant contact with ALBA. Working in countries which have revolutionary spirits is very easy, for they share similar circumstances, ways of thinking and values.

How will the JCPOA affect the ties between Iran and Venezuela?

I’m very appreciative of the place Venezuela has in the view of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran. He clearly stated his opinion about negotiating with the US. However, after the talks, he firmly stressed the place and role of Iran as continuing like the past in the future and that the talks have no influence on Iran’s political approach. Such a right attitude inspires people, just like what Mr. Chavez taught us.

Is it foreseeable for Venezuela to follow Iran’s pattern in negotiations and initiate talks with the US?

Absolutely. Our path is what Mr. Chavez trod on. Now, Mr. Maduro thought it best if those countries which caused instability in Venezuela were identified and reacted to in Mr. Chavez’s way.

However, those who supported Mr. Chavez then are now backing up Mr. Maduro. Those who did not like Mr. Chavez to be in the political circle are now waiting for Venezuela’s ties to be cut with those states which advocate it.

I should remind you that when Mr. Maduro was a minister, he was a disciple to this revolution and this country and that is why he completely understands the words of the Leader of Iran.

Mr. Maduro always advises us that we observe the stability and role of Iran in the Middle East and learn from it.

Considering the fact that Venezuelan officials try to stay revolutionary, will negotiating with the US and a probable agreement with it harm the revolutionary values of the country? Is being against the US part of the Venezuelan Revolution?

Mr. Chavez always said that we are never against the countries of North America, but we are against capitalists and superpowers. They think they can run the world on their own!

Things have happened in Latin American countries and perhaps countries like the US don’t yet have a fine understanding of them. I don’t know if such a lack of comprehension is random or part of their policies. This issue doesn’t merely concern the countries of South America and Latin America and is noticeable even while it comes to the Middle East. In fact, the cognition they claim to possess is simply verbal, not a real one.

Venezuela is, by no means, a threat to the US. The only thing we want from the US is to respect us and our rights. In Venezuela, we pursue Mr. Chavez’s directives the way they were and will continue aiding the South American countries in need. The democracy we have and recognize in Venezuela, of course, can be different from that in North America, but that’s Venezuela’s democracy and we’ll proceed with it.

Based on what you referred to, in fact, Venezuela is not against ties with the US as long as there is mutual respect between the two countries.

First, I must emphasize that in Venezuela, there is no spirit and basis for threatening any country, not even the US and there will never be any. I should say, though, that we do not permit any country to interfere with Venezuela’s internal affairs. We defend our country wholeheartedly. What we want is normalized relations, but as long as the US does not conclude that it has to let go of interfering with Venezuela’s affairs and threatening the country, we can have that.

Venezuela does not allow a single US soldier to step on its soil, just like Iran. We do not let any country’s embassy like that of the US provoke the dissidents to act against the official government of Venezuela. We do not allow any organization with such manners to enter Venezuela and stimulate the oppositions.

Is that why the staff of the US embassy was sent out of Venezuela?

That is perfectly right. They did things which were totally unrelated to the job description of an ambassador or a diplomat.

Is there any documented evidence on the interference of the US embassy with Venezuela’s internal affairs?

Yes, there was evidence like pictures and sound files which indicated their connections with opposition factions to the government with the purpose of provocation and holding rallies against the official regime. That was quite similar to what they did to the former President of Chile. They intended to influence the economic power of the country, and are currently attempting to do so with Venezuela. They interfered indirectly and sought to say that the government of Venezuela imprisons and tortures those who peacefully demonstrate and does not respect the human rights.

The US officially invites the opposition leader to the White House, though our government does not see him eligible, and hold meetings with him. The top opposition figures simply go to the US Congress and are warmly welcomed, whereas the relations should be between governments and ministries. That approach is indicative of unfriendly relations of the US.

In your words, you pointed back to the protests after the 2014 Presidential election in Venezuela. The opposition groups believed that the election was rigged. Did they have any proof for their claims? Why did they basically bring that up?

Those measures were a plan they intended to execute against the government in the media and public. Of course, those who cast a vote do recognize the election and love their officials. The officials seek to help the poor, support the elderly, ease up ways of education for thousands of students, develop health services and aid those in need to provide for their families.

Nonetheless, apart from incapability of doing the foresaid, the opposition groups are not even able to be in contact with neighboring states and control or confront those countries which intend to attack Venezuela or cause unrest in it. These and a number of other points are not things that the opposition groups can become capable of doing. We learned to run such missions from Mr. Chavez and we see the same capabilities in Mr. Maduro, and that is why we voted to him in the election.

The economy is becoming very complicated in Venezuela. When will the economic reformations begin?

I have a question for you. Which country is now without financial problems? Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal and even the US, itself, are having financial difficulties.

Can Venezuela easily bring its financial problems under control?

That is right. We do not have major economic problems like European countries. What we are involved in now is a sentimental attack against our economy. That is what brings people’s emotions into the play. Before that, more people would go to shops. For example, there used to be a single store where people could get every commodity they needed, while, now, they want to get their shopping carts full for months, which is not necessary.

That is what the Americans are doing in Venezuela, for they control this issue logistically. This way, they try to affect the economic mainstreams in Venezuela. This crisis suddenly came to exist in a month and has lasted for two years. How could the people survive if they could not buy what they needed? A mafia system controls that, in fact. Even smugglers, in the form of a large mafia band, get foods and send to neighboring countries.

Iran, too, experienced a similar situation in the former government when the price of goods was increasing on a daily basis and people were torrentially moving into shops, for they worried if they had to buy the same item twice as expensive come the following month. That trend led to an increment in demands in ratio to supplies and we saw how prices rocketed. Under such circumstances, stores were established for direct sale of goods. Is such system of distribution considered in Venezuela?

It has been several years now that the Venezuelan government established this system, which is, of course, highly important. A number of foreign investors from Italy, France, Portugal and Spain bought part of the network and it has been some thirty to forty years they are doing this.

The topic you mentioned is true when there is one economy with normal circumstances. As an economic activist, I put forward three different theories in college that include bank operations, macroeconomics and political economy.

I invite you to a challenge, and that is to say, in your medium or any other, that “pistachio” is going to be available in the country for only a week. Be rest assured that there would be a tremendous crisis in Iran. As a point of fact, when public media change their paths and all of a sudden write against the mainstream, something like that happens.

Let me give you an example about Tehran. Tea, rice, lamb and pistachio are fundamental commodities in Iran. Imagine that a channel is created in the country to hoard these items; the presumed hoarding, of course, would extracted from the US theory to provoke people and have them rally against President Rouhani. Apart from that, I admit that regarding the developments in Venezuela, we have had managerial mistakes, but we are trying to fix them.

Why does the government not take action to eliminate the middlemen?

That is what we are doing now, but there is growing fear among people that lack of commodities can be an issue.

Why is this fear not among other Latin American people?

Venezuela is targeted in this case because of the Bolivarian Revolution, just like Iran and its nuclear energy case. In Ecuador, they are using this strategy to show that people do not want the government and so, this way they will take Mr. Rafael Correa down from power.

The ongoing financial challenge in Venezuela is quite serious. It has worried us and we will do our best to get over it. Gasoline smuggling is another serious issue, too. In fact, mafia is collecting the gasoline from all over the country and transfer it out of Venezuela.

How much has the low price of gas in Venezuela eased the circumstances for smuggling?

We have kept the price low, because it belongs to people. We do not intend to walk smugglers through this way. Politically and economically, this is the way we want to follow and what mafia and smugglers do is abuse. They have ventured billions of dollars out of the country. Currently, we are in search of a solution to work out this problem with it leaving the least impact on the people of Venezuela.

Is Venezuela after removing subsidies on gasoline, like Iran?

All options are being studied by Mr. Maduro and other experts. We want to clarify the prices, which is to Venezuelans’ advantage, just like what occurred in Iran while smugglers smuggled gasoline and petroleum.

I should point to this fact that countries like Iran, Venezuela or whichever that is after economic justice is entitled to intervene in the market to stabilize the prices. The government intends to pay the subsidy and life commodity subsidies to the people, in which no one can be involved and foreign interferences and neighboring countries are being widely resisted. Another issue that is bothering Venezuela is the price of dollar.

Speaking of the increase in the price of dollar in Venezuela, why has the value of bolivar noticeably dropped compared to dollar over the past 2 years?

That the value of bolivar sees a 900-percent drop in 2 years isn’t usual. There is this website that publishes an unfounded rate every two or three days; a rate which is put out there by economic experts of North America. Circumstances have become such in the country that this simple chair in front of you is worth more than my car in Venezuela which is widely outlandish.

Is the jump of inflation rate in Venezuela a reason for the drop of the value of bolivar?

The inflation in Venezuela is about 60% which is surely high. But it is coming under control. Yet the 900-percent drop in the value of bolivar in less than two years is not normal. We are working on it. Websites and social networks can even control the economy of a country, since these people want something and they get it at the cheapest possible price, just like what they did to Argentina.

Also to Iran…I am guessing because they could not stop your country, they will swing a bat in the oil revenues and all the money that is bound to come to Tehran. They will do the same to Iran and then will impact its economy doing a few attacks thereat.

In reality, you are right, and there are problems which should be decided upon. In the country, agreements have been signed in this regard. The first step is to iron out a plan to stop the drastic fall of the oil price. The next would be to create jobs and curb unemployment. Then we will go after flourishing production in our country to control inflation. Finally actualizing the price of gasoline will become executed.

In a country where the free rate of dollar is several times more than the governmental one, how can the economy be controlled?

The difference is actually a hundred times more. We are dazzled by that. That is a war to affect the public opinion.

Is this hundredfold difference between the free and governmental prices of dollar is because of the currency shortage in the country?

95% percent of the currency into the country is brought by the government and is a fruit of selling oil and the rest 5% comes from different sources which want to cause instability.

As a matter of fact, the PDVSA brings the dollars. Why is the price difference here, while a governmental company is bringing the money and the government has supervision? We can conclude that it is an economic war through influencing the remaining 5% that can cause instability.

Venezuela seems to not tend to implement austerity measures.

26 years ago when austerity measures were first discussed in Venezuela and the then President agreed to them, it caused the death of many people. Only in a short period of time, five thousand people died in Caracas and everybody was looking for food. But Mr. Chavez managed to move everything back to normality through three years of armed conflicts.

After that, Venezuela made sure not to ever agree with austerity measures again. Controlling the economy is something which is solved not by imposition of measures, but through a mutual cooperation between the government and the people and we shall never do what we did in the past.

How much have the results of austerity measures in Venezuela ushered in Mr. Maduro calling in his words the Spanish PM and other European leaders who forced Greece into austerity measures “killer”?

That is so. The government of Greece has to defend the rights of its people. All the expenditures for the elderly, health services, insurance and so on must be taken from the people and spent for them.

One must question what happened to the money they loaned Greece. With that amount of money, there could have been huge economic developments, whereas it is all gone and what remains is debt. Therefore there is no development in industry, nanotechnology and agriculture at the end of the day.

They did that for the sake of the interests of banks and now it is the banks’ turn to make a tidal wave to Greece and annex its lands and factories and interfere with the government’s decisions. Greece must pay ten times as much money as it was loaned and it cannot do it now, obviously.

Iran is a country that can be viewed as a model; a country which does need the international financial system as a result of its developments and cleverness. Resultantly, others cannot lend money to Iran to make it in debt and then ambush it from behind.

Imagine they lend you money to develop yourself. Then what does happen that instead of development, you get on your knees and are indebted? And this does stop in Greece. World banks give you some money without any supervision and as a result, the money would be spent where it is not supposed to be and yields nothing but debt. This way, they intend to rob countries piece after piece and achieve their eventual objective which is to annex it all.

Let’s get to the ties of Venezuela with the US. In his words amongst the Venezuelan Parliamentarians, Mr. Maduro mentioned Mr. Obama as a brave individual in search of ways to be in contact with Venezuela, and that was exactly when Mr. Obama had ruled out relations with Venezuela. Would you explain that?

If we take a cursory glance at the past four months, back then the US had announced that Venezuela was a threat to the national security of the country. After that, at the summit of the American Heads of States in Panama, the officials met and Mr. Obama left the session while Mr. Maduro was giving his speech.

In that speech, Mr. Maduro recaps every single fact about Latin America, such as the massacre of thousands of Panamanian citizens inside the country, the sanctions against Cuba, avoiding independence for Puerto Rico, the embarrassing story of Guantanamo, the military base in Columbia, the violence against Venezuelan girls that happens in Columbia and attempts to break stability in Venezuela. Yet at the end, he only asks one question, “who is the threat now? Venezuela?” and that is where Mr. Obama left the place.

A while ago, the Venezuelan FM clearly stated the country’s stances about the border conflicts with Guyana and underlined that they are afraid of the stability and understanding that South American countries share. That is why they try to destabilize the region by inflicting border conflicts.

I want to say that the US has recently come to understand that its attitude and policies toward Venezuela have been inappropriate and intends to modify them and improve the relations.

Can Mr. Obama’s last year of Presidency bring the hope of improvement of ties between Venezuela and the US?

Venezuela is deemed as a power and has most of the reserves it needs in the future preserved. That is what causes Mr. Obama to not make all the shots about enhancing the ties. Venezuela, of course, has a clear and straight path drawn by Mr. Chavez and that is to not let any country interfere with its interior affairs.

We hope for the ties to be revived, but there are important factors to be considered, for the US has not learned yet to hear the voice of Latin America. Obama or others who are behind the curtains of the US foreign policy do not comprehend the Latin American developments yet. If Venezuela senses mutual respect, it has no problem with negotiation. In fact, we do not care about the threats against us.

However, the two-faced approach of the US in talks with Iran and other similar cases tell us that Venezuela must not jump into negotiations without proper support and fearlessly.

Mr. Maduro went to New York unannounced and met Mr. Ban Ki Mon, Secretary General of the UN to ask him for help in solving the border conflicts with the Republic of Guyana. Do you think that dispute would be resolved with the UN intervention?

Venezuela thinks the UN has the key to this lock, since it was for the UN intervention in 1966 that an agreement was signed between Venezuela, the Co-operative Republic of Guyana and the US.

Presently, Venezuela wants nothing more than that agreement and its sole request is for Guyana to be faithful to the 1966 agreement. But strangely enough, Guyana does not want to fulfill what it committed to.

Was it clarified in the agreement that no foreign oil company is permitted to discover and extract oil in the conflicted region?

As long as the problem between Venezuela and Guyana does not go away, none of the oil companies have the rights to work there.

About the conflicted area of Skibo, the Co-operative Republic of Guyana has clearly claimed that Venezuela is after changing the identity of the people there. Is that right?

The people of that land want to belong to the Venezuelan soil. That is pretty much obvious. There is a land named Guyana and one named Venezuela. But Guyana seeks to add the remaining land to its soil, whereas the people there are from Venezuela.

You should also pay attention to the fact that Guyana’s present soil used to be Holland’s colony and then Britain conquered it and eventually Guyana won its independence. Just like Venezuela which used to be Spain’s colony and Simon Bolivar freed it. We are not after winning even one centimeter of Guyana’s soil now.

The Co-operative Republic of Guyana has a population of 700 thousand. Do you know how many people live in the conflicted region?

I don’t know exactly. I’m not sure, but it must be around one hundred thousand, because it is a small land. The conflicted area has never belonged to the Netherlands and we do not want to invade Guyana’s now border which used to be once a Holland colony. When the UK freed this region, all these conflicts came to existence and we are trying to diplomatically work out these problems.

I want to get to Iran-Venezuela bilateral ties now. Some projects such as building houses in Venezuela were stopped as the financial circulation was not sufficient. Please tell us about that.

We have paid off the finished projects, but we cannot pay for those that have remained unfinished. There are some projects which should be done by Iranian contractors so that we could pay their money.

Is there any new agreement signed between Iran and Venezuela?

We intend to expand our commercial ties with Iran and have signed agreements in realms of agriculture, nanotechnology and industry. And as the two countries know one another better by and by, more agreements will come to play.

What can Venezuela export to Iran apart from oil?

There is a list of 100 items drafted by Venezuela which includes cocoa, coffee, aluminum, sesame, rice and leather.

During Ahmadinejad’s terms, the ties between the two countries were politically at a peak. Why did trade volumes not reach a peak, too?

You are right. If we don’t use the existing opportunities properly, they will be wasted. Back then, Venezuela was busy receiving the currency it earned from selling its oil, and that led us to ignore the chances for economic developments.

The relations between the two countries picked up at Mr. Khatami’s time and reached a climax at Ahmadinejad’s. Then, it was possible for the Iranian market to be filled with Venezuelan products and vice versa. Now can be that time, too, and I promise in this regard that soon enough, you will see more dynamicity in the economic relations between the two countries.

As the news has it, there is supposed to be a credit line between the two countries worth half a billion dollars. In which areas is that going to be used?

In areas such as medical, food, agricultural materials, automobile and cooperation in terms of nanotechnology. I should point out that amidst the climactic phase of sanctions against it, Iran made substantial progress in nanotechnology and its related products. Although these products were not specific to any particular use, they could be made use of in different daily contexts.

Considering the changes in the foreign policies of the Rouhani administration comparing to those of Ahmadinejad’s, is the extension of ties with South American countries a priority in his policies?

Every time Mr. Nematzadeh visited to Venezuela, he was warmly welcomed. It was almost 7 months ago that Mr. Maduro had a trip to Iran and held fairly fruitful meetings here. In fact, the only true ally Venezuela has in the Middle East is Iran and I am frankly saying that Iran, too, knows the only real ally it has in South America is Venezuela.

We know that what countries do should benefit them bilaterally, and there are bright horizons ahead of the relations of the two countries; horizons drawn during the time of Ayatollah Khomeini and Simon Bolivar and became tangible at the time of Mr. Ahmadinejad and Hugo Chavez. If we had not depicted bright futures and close ties between us, we would not definitely have had any relations now.

Mr. Chavez and Mr. Ahmadinejad played the most highlighted roles in fighting imperialism in their own time. Mr. Maduro and Mr. Rouhani have their own things to do, too, but they are fighting imperialism, as well. Every day of our lives is a battle.

There are volatile discussions about Mr. Chavez’s character and beliefs. Words have it that Mr. Chavez believed in the 12^th Shia Imam, Imam Mehdi. Given your closeness to him, can you verify that?

What I personally know and have heard before is that Mr. Chavez has always held invincible and clear beliefs about Jesus. He may have felt things when he became closer to the Iranian culture and mindsets, but that is personal, and I have not heard anything in this regard directly from him and so, I cannot verify that.

In a message he published on the day of Mr. Chavez’s death, Mr. Ahmadinejad mentioned that Mr. Chavez will return alongside with Jesus. What do you think about this?

Just like Mr. Ahmadinejad, we believe one day, the dead will be awakened. Taking into account what Mr. Chavez did, maybe he will return with Jesus one day.

What religious offshoot did Mr. Chavez believe in?

He told us he had studied at a catholic school, but I think he was a Christian, without any offshoot. He was not that good with Catholics, for many of them intended to kill him, partly because the Catholic leader of Venezuela did not want him to be the country’s president anymore. Mr. Chavez was simply a Christian and had said many times that Christianity is a revolutionary path.

Isn’t Mr. Maduro’s meeting with the Pope, the World’s Catholic Leader, derailing from Mr. Chavez’s path?

The Pope is the leader of a country. I guess Mr. Chavez had met with the Pope once, too. Mr. Chavez met many figures, but what he opposed was that the Church should not take control over a city, region or a country.

Does that mean Mr. Chavez was against religious administration?

That is quite right. That is one of the reasons he was against the Church, too, for religion-wise, we should help the poor, which is what Mr. Chavez never saw from the Church in a period and then fought it.

When will your diplomatic mission in Iran end and what are your plans for then?

In 2016. If I am to leave Iran one day, I would love to take what I saw and learned in Iran to Venezuela. I like to continue nanotechnology in my own country and drive Venezuela to the point it deserves to stand at, and if that happens, I will surely tell others that Venezuela owes its position to Iran.

I will try my best to tell the world about Iran’s economic models and potentials as an independent speaker so that all would know what Iran is for what it really is, not what the media spread.

Thank you for all the time you ascribed to this interview.

That was one thorough interview and I would like to thank you for that.