Diego Arria (Caracas, 1938) is the author of the books Venezuela: the moment of truth (Cyngular, 2012) and War and terrorism in the heart of Europe (EJV International Editions, 2022). He was president of the UN Security Council. The formula that bears his name allows the members of the aforementioned organization, according to the United Nations website, to “exchange impressions in a frank and confidential manner” with people to whom “it would be interesting to listen to or to whom they might wish to convey a message.” . There he broadened his vision, rethought the meaning of what was important and learned that, in this crazy world, interest outweighs solidarity.

By Jesús Fernández Úbeda in Zenda

It saves the detours in Zenda: “I never saw anyone sad when they killed in Rwanda, in Somalia or in Yugoslavia. No, I never saw distressed people.”

Arria studied Economics and Political Science at the University of Michigan, worked at the Inter-American Development Bank in Washington, was Governor of Caracas, Minister of Information and Tourism, Venezuelan ambassador to the UN, advisor to Kofi Annan…Their etcetera is long. He denounced Hugo Chavez before the International Criminal Court in 2011; He immediately returned it to him by stealing/expropriating two farms, “La Carolina” and “Los Azahares”, and pushing him into exile, “the worst penalty that can be imposed on one.” We interviewed the diplomat in his house in Madrid, an apartment with the vocation of a contemporary art museum, a few steps from the Retiro.

Mr. Arria, between the myth of the noble savage and the Homo homini lupusWhat are you left with?

—With the noble savage. I know him better. I think that, in the end, you can try to manage it, change it; to the other, no.

—Is war the mother of all things?

—Not about everything, but about big things, very important things. Collateral to war is the development of technologies. Large countries, to defend themselves or to attack, have developed technologies that have not only served in the military field. For example, the nanotechnology used in satellites has been used in clinics.

—What did you learn about human beings by presiding over the UN Security Council?

—The lack of solidarity. He imagined that solidarity was something automatic in human beings. And it is not, not at all. Solidarity is a function of interests. Above all, from the large countries, which are the ones with the most strength to make decisions. The lack of solidarity in the face of the tragedies that I experienced or saw, the lack of solidarity in the face of a situation of desperation or anguish… I never saw anyone saddened when they killed in Rwanda, in Somalia or in Yugoslavia. No, I never saw distressed people.

—And what did he learn about himself?

—I began to see problems with a very different perspective. He came from being governor of Caracas. The problems of the cities are serious, but not as serious as when you sit and see that they are killing 400,000 people in Rwanda or 200,000 in Bosnia. Or in Nagorno Karabakh. Or in Somalia. One’s vision of the world grows in an extraordinary way. What one thought was important is diminished. And that new dimension becomes the most transcendent, the most important. Deep down, it shapes you and prepares you to see the world in a different way.

—If I tell you Ukraine vs. Russia, you tell me…

-An atrocity. Deep down, the most serious thing is that, in 2014, when Russia invaded Crimea, the world’s reaction was very lukewarm. Even a few months later, the Olympic Winter Games were held in Russia. What happened now was forewarned. Putin He took the temperature of the international community, saw that it did nothing and, for that reason, the West is partly to blame. Above all, European countries: Russia and Ukraine are in Europe, not North America. Europe has long been dependent on what Americans do or do not do. I think that, to a certain extent, weakened European action. Now, with the issue of Ukraine, Europeans have raised their gaze and are strengthening their role in the world. (Think) Ukrainians are putting the blood; the rest of the world, money, weapons and such. But the one who puts the blood to stop something that can have very serious consequences for Humanity is the Ukrainian people. The credit goes to the Ukrainians.

—And if I tell you Israel vs. Palestine…

—I confess to having great admiration for the Israeli people; not necessarily by their governments. I had the opportunity to meet Shimon Peres, for whom he had great respect. The world has a short memory for certain things and a very long memory for others. I never saw, for example, with Saddam Hussein, in the streets of Paris or Madrid, people protesting when the Kurds were killed. Not even when it happened in Rwanda: I didn’t see people protesting against the Hutus. Last night, by chance, I saw Hiroshima mon amour. 200,000 people died there and hundreds of thousands were affected. The world did not march protesting against that. Perhaps, the most monumental operation to destroy a city in which there was not a single barracks. They were all civilians. And I think international public opinion is always against Israel. It has always been, and I don’t know why, the object of criticism, sanction, and condemnation. Looking back, it would be necessary to review the actions of the United Kingdom or France when the division of that area of ​​Palestine began, and not that of the Jews. And, today, people have forgotten what happened on October 7, when so many parents, elderly people and children were killed. That is surpassed by the bombings in Gaza. And I understand it. Public opinion is against Israel. It will become the counterholocaust of the Israelites.

—Does defending yourself get bad press?

—The truth is usually not enough. For example: if the Israelites do not make a film of what they did on October 7, if they do not make it in color, no one will believe them. They will think they are criminals, as someone has said: South Africa has taken Israel to the International Court of Justice.

—What do you think of goodism?

—I completely reject that philosophy or that way of being. It reflects the lack of knowledge and the lack of solidarity. Ultimately, no country is interested in what is happening in another country. You grab a person now and ask them what’s going on in Somalia, and people have no idea and don’t care. Because? Because all countries have their own problems and, in the end, we have been educated within our borders. Curiously, I now notice in young people, in general, that they see the world in a different way, that they see that there are other dimensions. Because they have had to go to study or work, because they have family away… These phenomena have changed the vision. Going back to goodism: it’s terrible. It indicates tremendous ignorance and, second, complicity in any evil act.

—Is the good guy an accomplice?

—He is the main accomplice, the one who facilitates the actions that they are describing as good and that have very bad consequences. They are the main accomplices. And when they adorn themselves with an apparently virtuous, sanctified cloak, they are even more dangerous and more complicit.

-

—Is the West complicit with Chavismo?

-Yeah. While we had democracy in Venezuela, there was not a single country in Latin America that we had not helped with the rescue of its freedoms or the defense of its rights. Neither in the Caribbean nor in Latin America. However, when we lost our freedom, no one lifted a finger for us. We were victims of international complicity, bought with barrels of oil from Mr. Chavez. He bought votes, countries, presidents.

—Chávez expropriated two properties, accusing him of being an “old oligarch and thief.”

—They didn’t expropriate them from me: they invaded them, looted them and kept them. They never prosecuted me because they didn’t have the elements. This has a precedent: I denounced Chávez before the International Criminal Court at a time when no one messed with him.

-In 2011.

-Yeah. November 22, I think. On the 24th I was back in Venezuela and gave a press conference. Shortly after, it invades my farm.

—Mr. Arria, what does exile taste like?

—I was in the Dominican Republic, where I have a house, spending about two weeks. The afternoon I returned to Caracas, the Government leaked the news that there was an arrest warrant against me. Why did they leak it? Catching me in Caracas was an international scandal. Obviously, I wasn’t going to go and get arrested, and that’s what happened. That’s going to be ten years ago. It is the worst penalty that can be imposed on one. Exile is a permanent absence. You feel permanently absent. I am here, but I am always in Venezuela. It is the absence, the prohibition of something that is essential to you and is denied to you. It’s more painful than people imagine. I have a real love for my country and a real love for my people. I will never disassociate myself or detach myself from them. I had letters from Bolivar in the library on my farm, and I said: “The day I take something out, it will mean that I am giving up.” I didn’t get anything out. And, of course, they were taken away from me.

—Do you see yourself stepping on Venezuelan soil again?

—All the time I think I’m going to step on it. Look: my farm was like Venezuela. It was a model farm, the university used it as an experimentation center, I was proud of that… Venezuela, in many areas, was also a model country. These, just as they have destroyed my farm, they have destroyed the country. But I haven’t lost hope.

—You were a witness at Milosevic’s trial.

—I was the only political witness against Milosevic.

—And do you see Nicolás Maduro on the bench? Do you see Nicolás Maduro in the trullo?

-No, I do not see it. At the time of Milosevic, the Russians still did not object to the creation of the Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia. If we had taken six months to create that court, Milosevic would be walking around Madrid. Nobody would have tried those criminals. The makeup of the international community would make it impossible to judge Maduro: when you have China and Russia, who are on the Security Council, who are the ones who manage, in the end, these types of actions, there is no way to take him. At the same time, you see that the US puts a reward of 15 million dollars on him and then negotiates with him, you realize that not even the biggest allies that we would have are willing to carry out, in any way, something that could harm the Ripe.

—We’re finishing up, Mr. Arria. What does reading prevent, if anything?

—History books don’t teach you the future, but they teach you experience. They are, for me, a very great contribution. Once, an Oxford professor told me: “The problem with you, Latin Americans, is that you don’t know your History.” And, to a large extent, they are right.

—It also happens to us Spaniards.

—The black legend, which did so much damage to Spain, was promoted by the Spaniards themselves. It’s something tragic.

—Have you found any fundamental truth in books?

—Reading contributes to making a magnificent cocktail of experiences, knowledge, etc. Not just a book gives it: the Martini is made by mixing vodka or gin with vermouth.

—And, finally: is a man who reads better than one who doesn’t?

—I wouldn’t say it’s better or worse, but very different. I feel sorry for anyone who doesn’t read, he misses extraordinary things, but since he doesn’t know it, it doesn’t affect him.