By Farruco Sesto – Sep 28, 2026Regarding Venezuela’s position presented by President Delcy Rodríguez at the UN, I want to offer some reflections addressed to the readers of this Galician newspaper because of the many things we share and precisely for that reason. These are only a few personal reflections on a reality that is so complex to interpret and understand, which I allow myself to express in the loud voice of writing.I begin by admitting that Venezuela, in the circumstances in which it lives, decided not to immolate itself as a people but, on the contrary, to try to advance along an unexpected and unprecedented path. We prepared for years to endure a long resistance to aggression while suffering a hybrid war that devastated us materially, demolished our oil economy, and inflicted immense harm on our people. A war, by the way, that has not ended. Now, subjected to scenarios of extreme ferocity, including the unusual presidential kidnapping, we had to sit at the table with our enemy (with whom else?) to negotiate the construction of peace.Does that mean we surrendered? No. It in no way means a capitulation. Does that search for peace in an asymmetric and forced negotiation shame us? It does not shame us. Like almost all peoples of the world, we aspire to live in a dignified peace. And that is precisely what this complicated, risky, and difficult path of negotiation is about, with the most powerful, ambitious, amoral, and cruel empire the world has known, whose word, moreover, we learned not to ‘trust even the slightest bit.’ A dignified peace in tremendously adverse conditions. That is the path we chose, because we did not think that the collective immolation of an entire country would have been the best way out on that terrible January 3.I have reflected on this and firmly believe that, among all the scenarios for which we were prepared, the one that would have made possible a long resistance based on a people’s war had not even the slightest chance. Such were the facts, the threats, and the effectiveness of our military response capacity dependent on external technological support that we lack.A lasting peaceLet me remind the Galician left that has accompanied us so far that “the concrete analysis of the concrete situation is the living soul of Marxism,” since “there is no abstract truth; truth is always concrete,” as we learned and practiced in our militancies. It is on that concrete reality experienced by us intimately in all its aspects, and not on preconceived ideas, that our people chose this complicated path of dialogue with the enemy and of internal reconstruction, safeguarding our sovereignty.Did we have to swallow dust? Yes, in effect: we had to swallow dust. Does that mean renouncing the Bolivarian project and the legacy of Hugo Chávez? Impossible for the Chavista people, for that legacy constitutes the oxygen of our collective political life. Are we traitors, perhaps? We do not consider ourselves so. Personally I believe I knew Chávez quite well: I was part of his government team, I was his friend, I followed him and studied him closely, and I do not consider myself a traitor to his legacy. Let those who think otherwise do their own revolution and see whether it is so easy. For, as Fidel said—and we also understand this—”the duty of a revolutionary is to make the revolution.” To that end. And I wish them much success, sincerely, in the attempt.Meanwhile, we try to do politics, participating, moreover, in the strange geopolitical tectonics of the present time, as friends of all peoples and with the human cause as our standard, in an era in which monsters roam free like never before. The words of our acting President at the UN reflect this with utmost clarity, with her “attachment to peace and rejection of violence” and her firm belief “in the power of dialogue and understanding,” affirming, “without ambiguities, that peace, a just, lasting peace with dignity for all parties, is not an ingenuous aspiration, but the only truly humane way out.” This is essentially what exists beyond the kaleidoscopic game of diplomatic mirrors, impossible to interpret through calculated silences and some images.Rehearsal for an Afternoon in the Future: Augusto Boal in a Caracas CommuneTo conclude these notes, I make my own the words of Jorge Arreaza, our dear deputy and rector of the University of Communes: “It is easy to rush to point at Venezuela from the right or the left. Keyboards and networks tolerate everything. What is difficult is to keep peace in such complex circumstances and to recover the economy after years of aggression, to redistribute wealth among the most vulnerable.”Farruco Sesto is a former Minister of Culture of the Venezuelan government and member of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV). (Nos Diario)Translation Orinoco TribuneOT/JRE/CD