Compliant media outlets and Christian right groupings within the European parliament are preparing their latest attack on Hugo Chavez and the government of Venezuela. The latest focus of the campaign is the decision of Venezuela’s broadcasting authorities not to renew the licence of the private television channel RCTV.

Washington’s outriders characterise the decision as an affront to freedom of speech, yet the facts speak in louder tones. More than 80 per cent of Venezuelan television and radio outlets are privately owned; this excludes a number of cable and satellite television networks that are widely available. Of this 80 per cent, significant sections are owned by corporate groups. Almost all Venezuelan newspapers remain in private hands. The press is free to report, and express opinions, without government interference. Most do so with considerable brio on a daily basis. No media outlet has encountered licensing problems for the expression of political views. No journalist has been imprisoned or punished for report or comment.

In RCTV’s case, the broadcaster failed to meet basic public-interest standards. The criterion for this assessment is similar to that used by the United States Federal Communications Commission. RCTV will still be free to broadcast via cable and satellite, which are available across the country. I would like to know if, in the UK, a TV channel aided an attempted coup against the government that resulted in civil unrest and even death, would anyone be supporting the renewal of its licence? As the coup failed and Venezuelans questioned Chavez’s “resignation”, RCTV prohibited airing these developments.

So what hope is there that representatives in the EU might withstand rightwing pressure and argue against a discriminatory move against Venezuela at a meeting in Strasbourg next week? If the UK Foreign Office’s public strategy document Latin America to 2020 is anything to go by, not very much.

Lord Triesman, the document’s main author and a UK Foreign Office minister, outlines an adherence to free-market liberalism and singularly defined democracy as the prerequisites for UK engagement in Latin America. The document shows the British government remains committed to the neoliberal model as a means of tackling the highest levels of social inequality. However, anyone interested in nations such as Venezuela or Bolivia can see that the “Washington consensus” trade and aid packages have failed the desperate people.

In the document, many Latin American leaders are congratulated, yet Chavez receives no recognition. The UK Foreign Office appears to ignore the reasons for the popularity of Chavez, Evo Morales in Bolivia and Rafael Correa in Ecuador: the failure of US-imposed neoliberal policies. It is not too late for a UK government in to engage with those who wish to achieve justice for their peoples. Events in Strasbourg next week provide an opportunity for the United Kingdom to show reason and goodwill. — The Guardian