The End of Bolivian Democracy
Elections scheduled for December 6 will mark the official end of the Bolivian democracy.
By MARY ANASTASIA O'GRADY
A dictatorship that fosters the production and distribution of cocaine is not apt to enjoy a positive international image. But when that same government cloaks itself in the language of social justice, with a special emphasis on the enfranchisement of indigenous people, it wins world-wide acclaim.
This is Bolivia, which in two weeks will hold elections for president and both houses of congress. The government of President Evo Morales will spin the event as a great moment in South American democracy. In fact, it will mark the official end of what's left of Bolivian liberty after four years of Morales rule.
While the U.S. and the Organization of American States have been obsessing over Honduras's legal removal of an undemocratic president, Mr. Morales has been fortifying his narco-dictatorship. He's also made friends with Iranian dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who will make another visit to La Paz tomorrow.
Mr. Morales is expected to win re-election easily, in part because in many areas that he controls voters will be escorted into polling booths to make sure they choose correctly. His party, Movement for Socialism (aka MAS for its Spanish initials), is almost certain to retain control of the lower house of congress and is likely to win the senate, which until now has been controlled by the opposition.
If this happens, Mr. Morales's rule will be almost impossible to challenge. But this should not be interpreted as a national embrace of his politics. He will pull off his power grab thanks to a policy of terror against his adversaries.
Recall that in 2003, Bolivia had an elected president in Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada. Hard-left radicals didn't like it when Mr. Sánchez de Lozada proposed the export of liquefied natural gas via Chile. They launched violent protests and blocked the nation's highways. Their objectives to bring down the government coincided with the goals of the coca growers' movement, which was led by Mr. Morales. It joined in the uprising.
When the president decided to use the army to escort supply trucks, clashes ensued. Mr. Sánchez de Lozada decided to leave the country as a way of defusing the violence, and the U.S. State Department told him that if he did not resign before doing so, it would cut off foreign aid. The president complied, providing, under duress, a legal patina for an illegal coup.
The terrorism had worked and there was nary a peep of protest from the international community. So it was used again to force the resignation of Mr. Sánchez de Lozada's successor and the president of the senate. That meant new elections had to be called. Mr. Morales ran and won.
Upon taking office in 2006, Mr. Morales began using his office to persecute officials of previous governments. Some were jailed, others fled. He made sweeping changes to the judiciary and the electoral council. Any time there was an opposition challenge, his street thugs or his judges put a stop to it.
A cons uent assembly was elected to rewrite the cons ution, but MAS failed to win two-thirds of the delegate seats. Thus the assembly refused to adopt a text filled with antidemocratic articles and a re-election provision for the president. Again MAS, backed by the government, used force. In November 2007 it called the assembly to a military garrison, locked out opposition members, and won the vote. Three protestors were killed. A second vote required to ratify each article again excluded opposition members.
When it came to getting the do ent ratified by the senate, Mr. Morales called on the mobs once more. In March they surrounded the parliament building and threatened members. Opposition congressmen eventually gave in but claimed they had managed to salvage a few remnants of democratic capitalism, like property rights and private education. Yet those gains may well be transitory.
Besides the presidential "re-election" provision, the do ent also contains two other articles that are likely to devastate the democracy. One creates a special class of people deemed to have pure Indian blood, granting them special privileges including designated seats in the legislature. This gives Mr. Morales enormous political control. A second article allows him to call for a new cons uent assembly to write a new cons ution. And it says that it can be approved by two-thirds of "members present." In other words, if he again fails to get the two-thirds vote he needs to ratify his plan, he will only need to repeat the practice of surrounding the meeting place and blocking his opponents from getting to the vote.
Mr. Morales is South America's latest dictator, but he is not the ideological communist that many fear. He's more akin to a mob boss, having risen to power by promising to protect the coca business. Now he has the capacity to do it.
Under his rule, coca cultivation is legal and he collects a licensing fee from all farmers, whose harvests are sold through a centralized market. MAS officials also regulate cocaine production and trafficking which now reaches down to the household level.
The booming business has made Mr. Morales popular. He may hate the U.S. and freedom but one thing is for sure: He understands markets.
argentina, bolivia, brazil, chile, ecuador, paraguay, and venezuela are demonstrating that the days of U.S.-backed coups, gunship diplomacy, and neoliberalism may very well be over for South America. this is not monroe's latin america.
the wording here is clearly biased, implicitly stating that morales has made cocaine legal. what morales did was remove the ban on the the coca leaf as a crop. the article also completely ignores the centuries old use of coca amongst the indigenous population of the region. the plant is used for medicinal purposes as well as a remedy for hunger. also, the DEA was expelled from bolivia for what reason? the author makes no reference to the constant abuses of the DEA in not just ecuador but in bolivia and colombia as well. the US has often backed miltaries which aid and abet military organizations. bush sr.'s andean strategy resulted in abusive uses of herbicide in the region and exponentially greater violence committed by paramilitary organizations which often support drug traffickers. the U.S. State Department estimates that paramilitary forces are responsible for more than 70% of colombia’s human rights abuses.this caused the european parliament to pass a resolution which noted that "stepping up military involvement in the fight against drugs involves the risk of sparking off an escalation of the conflict in the region, and that military solutions cannot bring about lasting peace."
international cases have even been made against the US in several instances. one example is:
Arias, et al. v. DynCorp, et al., Case No. 01-01908(D.D.C. filed Sept. 11, 2001)
Summary: Plaintiffs in this class action claimed that, in connection with a U.S. government contract, DynCorp sprayed toxic herbicides over the area in which plaintiffs live in Ecuador in order to kill cocaine and heroin crops believed to be growing there. The plaintiffs alleged that the spraying caused a variety of medical problems, some resulting in death, as well as lost crops and livestock. Plaintiffs claimed that defendants are directly responsible under the ATP for torture, crimes against humanity, and cultural genocide, and under the TVPA for extrajudicial killing, torture, and various other domestic torts.
morales relationship with ahmadinejad is certainly questionable but not any less so than any number of questionable relationships the US has had any continued to have with rogue states or despotic governments. morales, in his 2005 election, august 2008 recall referendum and recent cons utional vote, received significantly more support from the population than obama did in the 2008
excellent summary! Looks like the Neo-Cons policy opened up a larger can of worms then they could chew back up. Oh dear, not in my own backyard, time to moan and about it in the media. On another side note France is negotiating a sale of their latest Naval Technology to Russia, and the clowns in their Green Beret jersey from Georgia is still left out to dry by their backers, the french has been doing some naughty things behind Nato and the American backs recently including a secret negotiation of a new world currency, i guess payback for the time they had their national food made a mockery of by Bush, and his Neo-Cons cronies.
I agree that the article does show a clear bias.
Nonetheless, Morales is certainly a person more interested in personal power than the well-being of his nation. Not unlike other leaders in the region, including the US backed Colombian government.
Brasil is also host to the Iranian president right now, but I don't see many writeups about it.
i guess payback for the time they had their national food made a mockery of by Bush, and his Neo-Cons cronies.
which country is expected to have the fastest economic growth in the Americas this year? bolivia.
and that cons utional vote: passed with 61.97% support from some 3.8 million voters. 36.52% of voters voted against the cons ution, and 1.51% cast blank and null votes. the departments where the cons ution passed included la paz, cochabamba, oruro, potosí, tarija, and pando. it was rejected in santa cruz, beni, and chuquisaca. the cons ution grants unprecedented rights to bolivia's indigenous majority, establishes broader access to basic services, education and healthcare and expands the role of the state in the management of natural resources and the economy
,,,Morales didn't put the Corpor-crisy in charge in Bolivia, so he is a socialist and must be destroyed...
Evo popularity stems from him being the leader of coca producers. And he looks like a rebel because he gave the middle finger to the international community and went back to producing coca. But if you really think there's a true democracy in the region, you would be sorely mistaken. Electoral fraud is rampant, not just on Bolivia, but also countries like Argentina, Ecuador, Venezuela, etc. All these guys love to cheat to perpetuate themselves in power, which is a direct affront to any kind of democratic system.
What's hypocritical is to single out Bolivia and don't mention US backed presidents like Uribe in Colombia, who spent more time battling to change the cons ution to afford himself a 3rd consecutive mandate than actually working towards a better country for their cons uents.
the key question to ask here is how less bloody are some of these nations as well as how much more better off economically than they were before operating under US appointed despots who bent over to foreign investment and neoliberal policies.
morales is not perfect by any means but he is a vast improvement from the genocidal maniacs that served as mere puppets for corporate interest. when was the last time cons utions implemented agrarian reform for indigenous populations?
the contribution of revenue from coca is exaggerated. bolivia's re-nationalization and increased royalties on hydrocarbons has given the government billions of dollars of additional revenue
Is there a communist leader you cheerleaders are not willing to defend?
Don't disagree with you on that at all. But a less 'bad' is still a bad.
A lot of these countries did learn how bad military dictatorships are after thousands of deaths, and many of them are not going back to them. But the 'new' dictatorship is to rule using populist mobs, some of them handsomely paid for. A lot of these countries don't even have a true two or more parties system anymore.
Bolivia’s most lucrative agricultural product continues to be coca, of which Bolivia is currently the world’s third largest cultivator (after Colombia and Peru), with an estimated 29,500 hectares under cultivation in 2007, increased slightly when compared to 2006. Bolivia is the third largest producer of cocaine, estimated at 120 metric tons potential pure cocaine in 2007 and a transit country for Peruvian and Colombian cocaine destined for Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, and Europe.
They did make good money exporting natural gas when the price of oil was super high. But not right now.
Unlike you, at least rjv seems to be informed about the situation in the region.
Aren't you tired of merely repeating talking points without actually knowing jack about the situation?
i think what we will see here is a gradual evolution in latin america towards a more democratic society and a less european or american infatuated one. technocrats can only go so far and are as responsible for the drug trade as any one else. just see mexico as an example of what happens to a "democratic" latin american nation with more than one party when the leaderes continue to bow to the IMF and foreign capital. but one does not repair centuries of regimes overnight.
spursncowboys seems to be the product of the century. the google based intellect that knows nothing beyond the art of the copy and paste and rehasing of the favored talking heads' colloquialisms.
rjv is repeating the same thing, it's just not on tv. Why does he seem to be informed. He's stated no facts. It is his opinion. Because his opinion sounds closer to your world view, it must be well informed. Or is it because it is not talked about as much that it holds more credibility.
You seem to be the product of ultra leftist professors using Postmodernism to push marxist views.
Last edited by spursncowboys; 11-23-2009 at 03:10 PM.
I bet that is why he removed the ban. For the cultural use of the leaves. Not the multi-billion dollar business that grows, stores, processes and ships cocaine.
Any links? ANything beside your commie newsletter? ANything compared to the gang deaths? I doubt it. DEA helps far more than they hurt. compared to drug lords, gangs and communist workers. Columbia is a better example of this.also, the DEA was expelled from bolivia for what reason? the author makes no reference to the constant abuses of the DEA in not just ecuador but in bolivia and colombia as well.
Saddam got 100 percent of the vote. Fidel Castro won his free election too.morales relationship with ahmadinejad is certainly questionable but not any less so than any number of questionable relationships the US has had any continued to have with rogue states or despotic governments. morales, in his 2005 election, august 2008 recall referendum and recent cons utional vote, received significantly more support from the population than obama did in the 2008
rjv, where are you from?
Didn't you forget Karzai in Afghanistan?Saddam got 100 percent of the vote. Fidel Castro won his free election too.
actually a true postmodernist professor would never push any marxist doctine at all since the basic underpinning of postmodernism is that there are no absolutes are certainties.
again, perhaps you should actually read up on some deconstructionalism or postmodernism. i'd love to see your google based takes on derrida or garcia marquez.
born in philadelphia and raised in san antonio but my dad was born in querataro and his parents were from colombia and peru.
mia madre e italiana.
This is a fact, not opinion, that he presented:
passed with 61.97% support from some 3.8 million voters. 36.52% of voters voted against the cons ution, and 1.51% cast blank and null votes. the departments where the cons ution passed included la paz, cochabamba, oruro, potosí, tarija, and pando. it was rejected in santa cruz, beni, and chuquisaca.
The funny part is that you probably missed completely the fact that I am actually criticizing Morales, and not the other way around.
FWIW, I came back from the region 2 months ago, so while it might not be talked about too much here in the US, doesn't mean it's not talked about in the region itself.
Io sono Italiano, anche no parlo niente!
perhaps the irony here is that spursncowboys is the postmodernist, regarding fact as a manipulation of language and historical do entation and preferring instead to honor subtexts as the only meaningful elements of discourse.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
