History, the Revocatorio, and a political climax in Bolivia

Living in the Historical Present

I am back in La Paz for my final week, after several weeks of being in and out of Bolivia. After Paraguay, I spent a week in Peru being a tourist. The city of Cuzco is beautiful, if crowded with tourists, and evokes colonial Spain as well as the lost majesty of the Incan empire centered there. In visits to the Sacred Valley of the Incas, and to the awe-inspiring ruins of Macchu Picchu, it was impossible not to feel wonder and respect for the ancient cultures that flourished all over South America, as well as regret that they were so completely obliterated by the Spanish conquest and colonialization that transformed the course of history on this continent.

Again and again, I have felt a strong sense that the political atmosphere and developments of contemporary Latin America, and Bolivia in particular, represent the culmination of an era of history that has seen cycles of oppressive, exploitative, and violent governments and societies that operated without any consideration for the people who called this place home for millennia before Europe imposed its religious, economic, and social structures on this hemisphere. The past decades, and especially the past few years, have revealed that this cycle has taken on a new character, a potential break with these long-established social norms.

History here is not something to be studied as a subject. It remains unresolved, and its processes and legacies are defining the conflicted and dynamic present in Bolivia as well as elsewhere in South America. In Peru, which has a similar ethnic composition to Bolivia, the richness of the pre-Colombian cultures has been celebrated as a point of national pride for much longer than in Bolivia (thanks in no small part to the tourism industry). Only recently, here, have social movements representing indigenous cultural pride taken on a political role and demanded to be part of the national identity.

Evo Morales remains the symbol of this transformation, and his political party MAS claims to be the political instrument of the social, worker, and indigenous movements. The “cultural revolution” that accompanies their “democratic revolution” really is changing the social and political landscape of Bolivia. It is these very tangible and visible changes, which are re-defining the nature of politics and society, which have brought such fierce resistance in the form of the capital plena and autonomy movements. As a editorial I read today put it, everyone was willing to accept an Indian president as a sign of progress in the country, as long as he didn’t change anything. Well, he is changing things; the entire system of institutions and processes that govern the country, in fact.

Revocatorio Shuffle

As expected, the lead-up to the Revocatorio has not proceeded simply. Increasingly sharp polarization has characterized the political atmosphere of the past weeks in Bolivia. In an attempt to reach a compromise that would allow the vote to proceed with minimal controversy, the National Electoral Court (CNE) proposed a change to the voting rules. Constitutionally, only the Congress can legislate a change to the law that instituted the recall referendum. However, the CNE, joined by 7 of the 9 departmental courts, made a somewhat iffy claim for legality by saying that it was only clarifying the technicalities of vote interpretation, rather than altering the text of the law.

The court declared that a 50% +1 majority would be necessary to remove the departmental prefects from office, contrary to the original scheme, which required only a “No” percentage greater than their original election mandate. The decision, interpreted by many as a cave-in to the opposition-laden departmental courts, is sympathetic to criticisms that the original percentage rules favored President Morales and Vice President Garcia Linares, who still require a “No” vote greater than their 54% electoral mandate to be removed.

It remains uncertain whether the CNE´s decision will be implemented, but the government has hinted it might accept the new interpretation rules. The constitutional ambiguity and lack of legal clarity is certain to make the vote, and the interpretation of the results, tumultuous at best.

Meanwhile, the lone judge on the Constitutional Tribunal issued another call for suspending the vote until its constitutionality can be determined. This was in response to a claim submitted by the Cochabamba Prefect, Manfred Reyes Villa, who has remained the most vocal critic of the referendum and still refuses to participate. This, following the judge´s first declaration, is the latest of what Evo´s Vice President has called “an anti-democratic soap opera,” orchestrated by the opposition and the oligarchic media.

This “telenovela antidemocratica” began with criticisms of the law establishing the vote (which was approved by a bipartisan majority) and continued with questions about the National Electoral Court´s capabilities. The discovery of ID voter card fraud became a spectacle in the press, where headlines questioning the legitimacy of newly registered voters dominated newspapers for more than a week. The voter fraud, drastically overstated by the reports, is unlikely to have any impact whatsoever on the vote results, but the sensationalized headlines give a different impression.

In fact, newspaper headlines are one of the single greatest sources of misinformation and over-generalization, because most people here just glance at the front page of the papers sitting on the newsstands, and interpret the news accordingly. From my observation of newspaper headlines and story patterns, there does seem to be a steady push to put in doubt the institutions, processes, and political players involved in the referendum. Evo, of course, answers all this by saying that his critics are afraid of democracy, and afraid of the Bolivian citizens.

Rising Tensions and Violence

August 6, Bolivia´s Independence Day, provided a stark picture of the national political scene. In the face of opposition-organized protests and security concerns, Evo was forced to cancel the traditional Presidential visit to Sucre to participate in the constitutional ceremony. Instead, the conservative opposition celebrated in Sucre, behind threats of violent demonstration, while Evo spoke during proceedings in La Paz. He highlighted economic progress during his 2 ½ years in office, noting that during his presidency Bolivia has eliminated its fiscal deficit, generated a budget surplus, multiplied export revenues, increased resource redistribution to regions, municipalities, and universities, and established itself as a sovereign nation with dignity and credibility in the international community. All of his points are supported by economic statistics and analysis I have seen.

Bolivians seem not to be wavering in their support of the indigenous president, as the press here has been suggesting for weeks. International polling institutions recently showed Evo´s approval rating at 59%, one of the highest in Latin America. So, it seems that Evo will win, and win well, in the recall vote, but also that his support will regionally limited. Most expect him to get high “No” percentages in the media luna, while receiving an overwhelming vote of support in the western altiplano departments. While Evo hopes to use his renewed mandate to secure his constitutional reforms, the autonomy seekers are most likely going to dig their heels in even further. Absent an unexpected power shift or collapse, the revocatorio results are probably only going to further polarize and alienate the Bolivian population between the opposing factions, as the campaigns and controversies leading up to the vote already have.

Another well-publicized case of violence took place in the media luna region of Tarija. Protesters (from rightist youth groups) there attempted to take over an airport, preventing Venezuela´s Hugo Chavez and Argentina´s Fernandez de Kirchner from attending a planned energy policy meeting with Morales. Both leaders cancelled their trips because of security concerns. The President of Tarija´s Civic Committee, one of the groups spearheading the autonomy efforts, declared that “protests (aka violence and threats) would continue so that the President never sets foot on Tarijeño soil.” It is ironic that this is coming from the regions who claim to be neglected and ignored by the central government. I might also add that the protestors explained that they wouldn’t permit the meeting to occur because they considered the act to be “just political.” People are so easily inflamed in their “passion for democracy”, violence has become accepted by some as a just response to political maneuvering. As Bolivia´s recent history shows, political violence is especially explosive at pivotal moments, such as national votes. The Police and Armed Forces, however, have guaranteed that Sunday´s vote will proceed securely.

Meanwhile, miners involved in a typical protest bloqueo of a major road had a violent confrontation with police. Two died, and several were wounded. Headlines declared that a shadow was cast over the Morales government on Independence Day. More roadblocks, strikes, and protests are likely in the coming days, but whether they will escalate into violence remains to be seen.

In other news, Prefects and Civic Committee officials from several media luna departments are on a hunger strike. They are protesting the revocatorio, and also demanding the return of the IDH (Direct Tax on Hydrocarbons) revenues that are funding the new national pension (discussed in the last post). It strikes me as ironic that some of the most affluent people in Bolivia are going hungry by choice to demand the return of funds that are being used to help keep the poorest and oldest Bolivians from going hungry in poverty.

August on Fire

The vote date of August 10 marches closer, with no sign of peaceful resolution or lowering tensions before or after. Political propaganda and advertisements are ubiquitous. Television commercials show ballot boxes being checked “Yes” or “No” for the President and prefects, with sound bites and images supporting the respective choices. Political graffiti is everywhere, to the same effect.

Neither side is willing to compromise. The autonomy advocates, should they remain in office, will claim the people´s support and the principle of democracy in pushing for more independence and resource control. They have economic strength, well-connected information engines, and resource richness on their side. Also, the autonomy departments have the (mostly covert) support of the United States. Along with anti-narcotics funding, the largest amount of US diplomatic aid goes to “regional development,” which translates into funding for the prefects and civic committees of the media luna. The US, with its pro-neoliberalism diplomacy and protection of multinational interests, is a strong ally for the Bolivian players who seek economic privatization. These factors help explain why these leaders are so confident in their technically illegal, nationally unpopular, and ethically questionable push for separation from the central government.

Evo, on the other hand, is even less likely to compromise. And from his perspective, why should he? He had the legitimacy of the constitution (whose legitimacy has been tarnished by both sides, it is true) at his back. He has a solid democratic majority that is politically active and mobile. He has control of the national police and the Armed Forces of Bolivia. He has strong allies throughout Latin America (where only US-supported Peru and Colombia lack left-leaning reformist leaders). And most importantly, he has the pride and responsibility of being Latin America´s first indigenous president. He stands for so much in the eyes of his supporters that any compromise is a let down. These people are looking for rectification of centuries of injustice, and that is as strong of a political motivation as exists anywhere.

So, we shall see how this political drama unfolds in the next few days. How much is likely to change with the vote results, as I have gathered from conversations of all type, is completely unclear. One month from now, Bolivian politics may be entirely different. A year from now, the situation might be basically the same. The only certainty is that this country is at a boiling point, and almost everyone is hoping that it does not boil over. I will be back with the results of the vote, and a concluding summary, although the international press will probably take enough interest to at least publish the numbers. I have less than a week remaining in Bolivia, and it is sure to be interesting.