Between demand and reward, a Transitional Government

By Luis Manuel Aguana

Versión en español

One of the most striking scenes of the extraordinary film “Darkest Hour” starring Gary Oldman in the role of Sir Winston Churchill, who tells the story of a crucial period in England during World War II, and the transcendental decisions that the Prime Minister had to make as the main leader of the war, is when he decides to declare that his country will not surrender, after having a meeting in the Metro with a group of civilians who convince him that the United Kingdom must face fascism and that they will fight until the end for his country. Ordinary people cleared Churchill’s doubts about whether or not to negotiate an armistice with the enemy, provoking his historic speech in the House of Commons.

Keeping historical distances, this is the same case that Venezuelan politicians have of the official opposition with the appointment of a Transitional Government from the National Assembly, only that these, unlike Churchill, are ignoring the people who shout to them that there can be no possible negotiation with the criminals who rule this country. That meeting in the Metro of the British leader with his people, hearing live and direct what the people thought gave him the fundamental support he needed to reste before his party and declare that only the dead would render the island. That is the size of the commitment of a political leadership that understands the gravity of its situation.

Contrary to the advice that says “don’t clarify because it gets dark” I will try to explain a Twitter message that sparked a controversy on the net, after Dr. Blanca Rosa Mármol de León published in her twitter account that “There is talk of an agreement with the regime negotiated by Deputies of AD and UNT guaranteeing AN control presided over by Guaidó so that NM is recognized by the AN and in August general elections would be held. In the first two months of the year would be named CNE. ANC and TSJ remain intact”. (see in Spanish

Note that Dr. Mármol was not making a statement that requires her to give any explanation or “make excuses” as some have indicated. In my opinion, he was making a warning by saying “there is a talk” because this was already on social networks with explicit indication of characters and place in the country where the negotiation had taken place. Immediately the politicians jumped to deny the species, to the point that at their request Dr. Mármol de León published the following message: “I received a call from Guaidó that I thank him, in which he assures me that in the exercise of his presidency in the National Assembly, Maduro will not be recognized as president of Venezuela. He also assures me that the agreement to which I referred in the previous tweet is false”. (see

To this last message from Dr. Mármol de León I replied with the following message: “They have said that they will not recognize Maduro. THAT’S NOT THE PROBLEM. The problem is that they tolerate him in exchange for elections and do not immediately fill the Power Void as is their constitutional obligation. Is Guaidó willing to fulfill the mandate of the 16J? That’s the problem!” (see

That response of mine aroused around 70,000 impressions on Twitter, with positions for and against the reality or falsehood of that negotiation. Personally, I do believe that they have negotiated even if they deny it. It’s enough that we have a history of saying something and then proving the opposite. But that’s the least of it. The important thing is whether or not they are going to comply with their Constitutional obligation to fill that Power Vacuum that is already firm after the conviction of Nicolás Maduro Moros for Own Corruption and Legitimation of Capitals. This was an obligation of the National Assembly from that very moment, with this one or with a future Directive. There is no need to wait until January 10, which has been set as the sublime date of something that they could have done well and should have done months ago, specifically since October 29, 2018, the date of the publication of Maduro’s sentence.

If the Directive that comes out on January 5, 2019 did not comply with this obligation, the following question is: will this new Directive be submitted to the consideration of the Deputies? Omar Barboza refused to do so, which is why Venezuelans think they have negotiated with the regime. That is a very valid presumption of those of us who voted on 16J-2017 for a change of public powers after the Agreement of Abandonment of Nicolás Maduro’s Office. Now it is MANDATORY, not only because January 1 must begin a new presidential term with a validly elected president, but because the current one should be locked up for being corrupt.

Now, I was told by twitter “Does Guaidó have an army at its disposal, real capacity or descent to instruct the FAN in order to “fulfill the mandate of the 16J”? Won’t that be the problem, continue wishing and asking for what is not possible?”. And really that is the perception of many Venezuelans, that deputies “can’t do anything”. And that is not true. The Magistrates who fled the country after being validly appointed by the National Assembly if they could do anything, followed a trial of Maduro and convicted him, and sentenced him to change the electoral system in Venezuela. The fact that these sentences have not yet materialized is not a reason why they have not been formulated. A government designated legitimately and constitutionally, even if it is not in office and dispatching in Miraflores, can do a great deal to remove these criminals from power (see

And that last one is actually the bottom line of this whole problem. And going back to the example of Independence, if the deputies of the 1811 Congress had said, “if we sign that Act there will be a war that we cannot endure and there will be deaths, many of whom are here” and it would have been true. But I deprive the sense of what had to be done in favor of a new country and the formation of a new Republic. They did what they had to do. They could have left that, but they didn’t do it. And that sense of history, no matter how hard I try, I don’t see it reflected in the current deputies. What you see is negotiation and politicking.

It was up to the 1811 deputies to do what they did and they did it. The war was fought by those who had to do it. They did it and won it, with the cost in lives of half the population. The pod is not hard, it is very hard, and when those responsible assume their historical commitment, the Nation progresses. That is the sense and the dimension of the oath they take when they assume the responsibility: “May God and the Fatherland reward you, and if not, may they demand it”….

And that’s what I’m modestly doing here, demanding it. If between now and January 10, 2019, with or without a new Directive, the Deputies do not assume their commitment to the country, we will deduce that they negotiated the permanence of the regime. Then other Venezuelans invested with authority in the Supreme Court of Legitimate Justice, according to Art. 333 of the Constitution, will have that responsibility accordingly. It will be to them that God and the Fatherland will reward.

Caracas, December 22, 2018