Andean
Paper
Bolivia’s Long and Winding Road
George Gray Molina
Bolivia has seen an escalation of social and
regional conflict over the past few months.
This situation reflects unresolved tensions
over natural resources, multicultural politics
and decentralization that date back years
or even decades.1 Although press and media
coverage tend to be polarizing, the interests
of social and political actors are far from
irreconcilable.2 It is a mistake to perceive the
Bolivian state as being on a slippery slope to
division. The level of social and regional tension
in recent months, however, does deserve
closer attention. A penchant for democratic
political negotiation and compromise, if not
consensus, is currently absent in government
and opposition leaders.
This paper focuses on the ingredients that
explain this democratic deficit. If Bolivian
history is any guide, the current battle for
political hegemony will not be resolved
Many thanks to Michael Shifter, Eduardo Gamarra and Dan
Joyce for comments and suggestions. Thanks to Rodrigo Arce
for research assistance. Comments and suggestions welcome at:
1 For an edited volume on unresolved tensions in Bolivian
politics with contributions from Eduardo Rodriguez, Xavier
Albo, Carlos Toranzo, Luis Tapia, Diego Zavaleta and Rossana
Barragan, among others, see John Crabtree, George Gray
Molina and Lawrence Whitehead, Tensiones Irresueltas: Bolivia
Pasado y Presente. La Paz: Plural, 2008.
2 A number of analysts have identified a broad array of overlapping
interests between government and opposition on the new
constitution and autonomy statutes. See Carlos Bohrt Irahola,
et al, Puentes para un diálogo democrático Proyectos de Constitución
y Estatutos: compatibilidades y diferencias. La Paz: FES, 2008;
Súbelas Barrios and Franz Xavier, “Hacia un Pacto territorial
en Bolivia Conflictos, Conceptos, Consensos en torno a las
autonomías,” working paper, La Paz: PAPEP-PNUD.
July 2008
neatly. A new period of political stability
will ensue only after leaders engage in pragmatic
negotiations on the rules of the game
for democratic dissensus. That “agreeing to
disagree” is the only thing that Bolivians
can unite around is extremely appropriate
in the current political setting. In the
end, President Morales has the possibility
of charting either a path of progressive
politics that includes dissenting views or a
path of social and regional polarization that
threatens the continuity of his social and
economic agenda.
The paper starts with an analysis of the
present standoff between President Morales
and the prefects from the east and southern
regions of the county. The second part
describes the political roadmap that led up
to polarization, including the impact of policy
decisions and international relations.
The final section outlines political scenarios
for the post-August 10th standoff and
examines some of the challenges for democratic
politics in the future.
1. The August 10th Standoff
On May 8, four days after a regional referendum
on autonomy in Santa Cruz de
la Sierra, President Morales announced he
would sign into law a bill that called for a
presidential, vice presidential and prefectural.
Foreword
The Inter-American Dialogue is delighted to publish this paper by one of Bolivia’s leading
social scientists, George Gray Molina, who has extensive policy experience and is currently an
academic fellow at the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of
Oxford. He disentangles the exceedingly complex situation in Bolivia by identifying the interests
and roles of the key actors involved. Gray sheds light on the sources of the political stalemate in
advance of the August 10 recall referendum and outlines three scenarios for Bolivian politics in
the period to follow.
This working paper is the sixteenth in a special series focused on the Andean countries of South
America. The Dialogue’s aim is to stimulate a broad and well-informed public debate on the
complex issues facing key analysts and decision makers concerned with Colombia, Venezuela,
Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia. We seek to offer diagnoses of the current situation as well as policy
prescriptions to deal more effectively with deep-seated problems.
The series is a byproduct of a working group project launched by the Dialogue in 2001. The
Andean working group is comprised of select and diverse analysts and policymakers from the
Andean region, other Latin American countries, Europe, Canada and the United States. Like
the working paper series itself, the group was launched with a particular focus on the Colombian
conflict but then naturally expanded to encompass all of the Andean countries.
The working group essentially serves as a “brain trust” or core group of advisors for the
Dialogue on the Andean region, a top priority for the organization. The goal of the group is
not necessarily to reach agreements or produce consensus documents. Rather, it is to generate
fresh interpretations of multiple Andean challenges, in order to shape thought and encourage
constructive responses.
To date, the papers have dealt with a wide range of topics, including the Colombian conflict,
drug trafficking, civil-military relations, human security and petropolitics. We are confident
this paper will contribute to a deeper understanding of a critical situation in the hemisphere.
Gray’s perspective does not necessarily reflect the views of the working group or the Inter-
American Dialogue.
We are pleased to recognize the assistance provided by the Ford Foundation for our work on the
Andean region. We are grateful to the Foundation Open Society Institute for supporting the
production of this report.
Michael Shifter
Vice President for Policy
2 Bolivia’s Long and Winding Road
Inter-American Dialogue
George Gray Molina Working Paper
3
tural recall referendum on August 10, 2008.3
The bill had been drafted in Congress in
December 2007 and took regional opposition
leaders by surprise, in what most analysts
conclude was a last-ditch attempt by the congressional
opposition party PODEMOS
(Poder Democrático y Social) to postpone a
national referendum on the new constitution
approved by the Constituent Assembly in
controversial sessions in Sucre and Oruro earlier
in the year.4
The recall referendum bill undermined the
political momentum of the departmental referenda
on regional autonomy, which kicked
off in Santa Cruz on May 4 with votes in Beni
and Pando on June 1 and in Tarija on June 22.
It also drove a wedge within the opposition,
pitting the congressional party PODEMOS
against civic committees and departmental
prefects, who faced the real prospect of
losing their posts. Finally, the recall referendum
is also likely to frame future negotiations
between the government and leaders of parties,
social movements and regional groups.5
Government and Opposition Forces
Who wins and who loses from the August
standoff? The recall referendum is more likely
to polarize the public as well as social and
regional leaders than it is to force or facilitate
a political compromise. The decision by
departmental prefects to call for a boycott of
the recall referendum adds to this impasse.6
The recall vote is also likely to postpone
meaningful political dialogue until the elec-
3 Article 6 and 7 of the Recall Referendum Law describe the
referendum questions. For the President and Vice President,
“¿Usted está de acuerdo con la continuidad del proceso de
cambio liderizado por el Presidente Evo Morales Ayma
y el Vicepresidente Álvaro García Linera?” For prefects,
the question is, “¿Usted está de acuerdo con la continuidad
de las políticas, las acciones y la gestión del Prefecto
del Departamento?”
4 Daniela Espinoza and Marco Zelaya, “Historia secreta del
Referéndum revocatorio,” Pulso 450, May 18, 2008.
5La Razón, May 22, 2008; La Prensa, May 22, 2008; El Deber,
May 22, 2008.
6 La Razon, June 25, 2008; La Prensa, June 25, 2008.
toral process defines who has a seat at the
table. There are, however, regional, social and
political particularities that are worth reviewing.
Chart 1 shows a birds-eye view of social
and political actors in the run-up to the
August referendum.
In the big picture, three issues are salient.
First, there is an “emptying” of the political
middle. While most policy issues have
accommodated a certain degree of consensus
building in the past, the current regional
and ethnic divide over autonomy and the
Constitution suggests there is no common
political arena. Second, although the political
momentum favors the opposition, congressional
and regional opposition groups are
politically fragmented. The civic committees
and prefects are at odds with the congressional
opposition led by PODEMOS. Third,
Chart 1 shows political positioning as things
stood before the recall referendum, but they
are likely to change in the month of August.
The incentives to negotiate before the vote
are very small, but they will likely grow once
the recall referendum is complete.
1.1 Government
President Morales
After the May 4 referendum on autonomy
statutes in Santa Cruz, the president was
facing a “domino effect” of growing legitimacy
for autonomy votes in four departments
between May and July. In this sense, the
recall referendum will provide political space
for the president, both before the referendum
(a truce) and after the referendum (a
renewed mandate). Most opinion polls suggest
the president is likely to win a recall
vote under the current rules.7 What is likely
to be more challenging is changing the balance
of power in renewed talks with prefects,
who will probably campaign vigorously and
become stronger politically in the run-up to
7 Pablo Ortiz, “Encuesta anticipa que Evo y Costas seguirán”,
El Deber, May 23, 2008.
(continued from page 1)
“The recall
referendum is more
likely to polarize the
public as well as social
and regional leaders
than it is to force or
facilitate a political
compromise.”
4 Bolivia’s Long and Winding Road
the August vote. The ongoing question of
who remains standing as the effective opposition
(regional or congressional) is also likely
to make future talks more difficult.
Vice President García Linera
The vice president has played an important
role as the negotiator of last resort between
political parties and with the regions. His
roundtable talks in February led to a tentative
“roadmap” that included amendments to
the constitution, changes to statutes and a legal
framework for regional and national referenda.
However, those talks broke down in March,
leading to the current impasse. The vice president
initiated a new round of talks in late May
that were postponed in June. Most observers
agree that little or no compromise is likely in
the run-up to the highly polarized recall vote.8
The vice president is likely to play a key role in
the period following the August referendum.
8 Jimena Costa, “¿A quien beneficia el diálogo,” La Razón, May
24, 2008.
The MAS Coalition
The Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS) is
likely to galvanize its political base in the runup
to the August referendum, causing two
cleavages within the party to resurface. The
first is the campesino-indigenous cleavage that
emerged in the Constituent Assembly, particularly
after the draft Constitution was
approved in February 2008. Some campesino
leaders, such as Roman Loayza from the
Confederación Sindical Única de Trabajadores
Campesinos de Bolivia (CSUTCB) are
unhappy with the president and vice president’s
initiative to open up talks on the
contents of the approved draft constitution.
The second cleavage is the regional MAS
constituency. The autonomy process in four
departments is radicalizing the die-hard MAS
constituency in rural areas of Santa Cruz,
Tarija and Pando, which will likely erode support
among more moderate and mostly urban
MAS supporters in the same regions.
“The autonomy
process in four
departments is
radicalizing the
die-hard MAS
constituency in rural
areas, which will likely
erode support among
more moderate and
mostly urban MAS
supporters in the
same regions.”
Chart 1: The Political Map for the Recall Referendum
Source: Own, based on PAPEP PNUD, 2007.
Social and Political Actors
Inter-American Dialogue
George Gray Molina Working Paper
5
1.2 Opposition
Prefects
On June 24, 2008, the prefects of Santa
Cruz, Tarija, Beni, Pando and Cochabamba,
those most at risk of being recalled, called
for an electoral boycott of the recall referendum.
The decision to hold a referendum took
most prefects by surprise and, in four departments,
distracted political energies from the
task of organizing autonomous departmental
governments. The strength of the prefects
varies by department. On the weak side, the
prefects of Cochabamba (Manfred Reyes
Villa), La Paz ( José Luis Paredes) and perhaps
Oruro (Alberto Padilla), are likely to
have an uphill battle to keep their seats.9 On
the strong side, the prefects of Santa Cruz
(Rubén Costas) and Beni (Ernesto Suarez)
are likely to emerge strengthened by renewed
legitimacy at the ballot box. The prefects of
Pando, Potosí and Tarija are likely to survive
the recall vote, but without as much
momentum as their colleagues in the east-
9 Pulso 451, May 25, 2008.
ern provinces. Overall, the recall vote is likely
to favor the MAS in the western part of the
country but strengthen the opposition in the
south and east.
Civic Committees
The process leading up to the recall vote
includes three departmental referenda on
autonomy statutes between June and July. The
domino effect expected by the opposition
is likely to be overshadowed by the national
recall vote, but will solidify the regional opposition
in time for political negotiations in
a post-referendum setting. Civic committees
have taken on a political aura similar to
social and indigenous movements five years
ago. They are perceived as being the new relevant
actors in the wake of weakened political
parties. Like social and indigenous social
movements, however, they suffer a chronic
democratic deficit on issues of representation:
Who represents the “people” and on what
terms? How are leaders elected? Who drafts
the statutes? Why should this process not be
transparent? Unlike social movements, however,
the civic committees—at least in the
“Civic committees
have taken on a
political aura similar to
social and indigenous
movements five
years ago.”
27
45
37
57
62
40
47
40
9
21
38 38
48
41 42 43
48 48 46 45
80
60
40
Percent
20
0
La Paz El Alto Coch. Oruro Sucre Potosi Cobija S. Cruz Tarija Trinidad
National Disapproval April 2008 12/18/2005 Election Results
Chart 2: Public Opinion Polls of Prefects
Election Results vs. Disapproval of Prefects
Source: CNE, IPSOS Apoyo, January 2008
6 Bolivia’s Long and Winding Road
course of the regional referenda—have agreed
to devolve power to future elected officials
(departmental councilors and governors.)
Political Parties (PODEMOS, UN and MNR)
With the recall referendum, PODEMOS
took what might be regarded as its last
opportunity to position itself as a key player
in the opposition. The party had been weakened
in the first months of 2008, during the
vice presidential negotiations with political
parties, and been overtaken by civic committee
leaders and prefects as the leaders
of the opposition. To the extent that procedural
agreements are likely to require
congressional approval, PODEMOS, led
by former president Jorge Quiroga, holds a
strong negotiating card because of its majority
in the senate. Weakened and split, it is
still likely to be a key player in the aftermath
of August 10th. The Unidad Nacional (UN)
and Movimiento Nacionalista Revolucionario
(MNR) had played a critical role in the
Constituent Assembly as negotiators between
the government and opposition, but have
increasingly lost relevance in the current
standoff. The leader of the UN has openly
opposed approval of the new constitution,
and the leader of the MNR has opposed the
recall referendum altogether. Both parties
position themselves as “third-way” alternatives
in the midst of crisis.
1.3 Observers and Potential Mediators
Catholic Church
The Catholic Church is perhaps the most
important player for future negotiations
between the government and the opposition.
The Church has a long track record of
political negotiations in Bolivia and is generally
regarded as the most impartial and
trustworthy arbiter. The recent talks held by
the Church with both sides present were not
aimed at slowing or postponing the regional
referenda, but rather at setting the stage for
future talks on substantive and procedural
issues. Despite recent government comments
to the effect that Cardinal Terrazas was “disqualified
from mediating” because he voted
in the Santa Cruz autonomy referendum, the
Church is likely to play an important role in
any potential political scenario in the future.
OAS and Group of Friends
The Organization of American States
Resolution supporting democratic institutions,
and calling for dialogue and peace in
Bolivia, signed May 3, a day before the Santa
Cruz referendum, was preceded by a number
of missions led by the Secretary General’s
Special Envoy Dante Caputo.10 The OAS
missions focused on the legal and political
consequences of the May 4 referendum
which had been called into question by both
the government and independent analysts
across the country. The OAS envoy called for
meetings between the government and the
opposition, but regional and congressional
resistance to the OAS mandate ratified the
existing stalemate. Besides the OAS, the delegates
representing three countries, the “Group
of Friends” (Brazil, Argentina and Colombia),
also held high-level meetings in the run-up
to the Santa Cruz referendum. The Group
of Friends has been requested to return to
Bolivia to help bring key stakeholders back
to the table and is included in the tentative
agreements released by Vice President García
Linera and three political parties on May 23.
2. How Did Bolivia Get Here?
Evo Morales’ landslide electoral victory in
December 2005 was based on a broad coalition
of campesino, indigenous and urban
middle-class voters. With 54 percent of the
popular vote, the Movimiento al Socialismo
transformed the social and political landscape.
The traditional political parties of the
1980s and 1990s—Movimiento Nacionalista
10 OAS Resolution, “Respaldo a la institucionalidad
democrática, al diálogo y La Paz de Bolivia.” CP/RES. 935
(1648/08), May 3, 2008.
“The Catholic
Church is perhaps the
most important player
for future negotiations
between the government
and the opposition.”
Inter-American Dialogue
George Gray Molina Working Paper
7
Revolucionario (MNR), Movimiento de la
Izquierda Revolucionaria (MIR) and Acción
Democrática Nacionalista (ADN)—as well
as offshoots of the traditional parties—Unidad
Nacional (UN) and Poder Democrático
y Social (PODEMOS)—earned less than a
third of all votes. With over 100 parliamentarians
out of a total of 157 and the support
of some of the most vocal social movements
in the country, the Morales administration
began its term with the highest level of
public support for any government in the
democratic era.
Despite a broad mandate for change, the past
two years have seen a return of social and
political polarization. Three factors frame
the current political impasse. The first has to
do with procedural and substantive disagreements
over the political rules of the game that
guided the Constituent Assembly, autonomy
votes and recall referenda. The second factor
has to do with the content and process
of public policy in the first two years of the
Morales administration. Key measures hinge
on the nationalization of hydrocarbons, use of
fiscal resources and intergovernmental relations,
all of which heightened polarization.
The third factor is international. Bolivia has
played an ambivalent role in the international
arena. On some issues, the Bolivian government
has aligned itself with political allies in
Venezuela or Ecuador, including membership
in UNASUR (Union of South American
Nations), Andean Community-European
Union negotiations, and OAS votes. On
others, however, particularly Chile-Bolivia
relations and gas negotiations with Argentina
and Brazil, Evo Morales has shown some
independence. Each of these factors is
reviewed in the following three sections.
2.1 Polarized Rules of the Game
The current standoff was preceded by a relatively
protracted social and political impasse
over the rules of the game guiding political
change in the country. The discrediting
of traditional political parties after the 2005
elections left the political system with a new
modus operandi, less reliant on democracia
pactada (a closed, prearranged democratic
system) and more dependent on a zerosum
game of political positioning. The new
approach has, as suggested by many observers,
relied on a peculiar mix of democratic institutions
and social and regional movements on
the streets.11 A typical political negotiation
is a three-act drama. First, there are shows of
strength from social and regional movements
on the streets, followed by forced negotiation
and then a continued postponement of substantive
agreements on the issues of the day
(land, autonomies, constitution, and intergovernmental
relations, among others). The
consequences of this process include both a
devaluation of democratic procedures and a
weakening of public debate on policy issues.
Chart 3 shows a political roadmap leading
up to the current stalemate. Perhaps the
most significant impasse on procedural issues
was the two-thirds majority rule for constitutional
approval. The two-thirds majority rule
was included in the compromise law of March
2006 that convoked the Constituent Assembly.
It was meant as a safeguard that would force
negotiations between all parties in the assembly
and deliver a majority report that could be
submitted to referendum approval at the end
of the process. As deadlines expired in June
and July 2007, opposition parties denounced
their exclusion from both majority and minority
reports in many commissions. A crisis over
the procedural rules ensued.
The two-thirds rule was interpreted by the
MAS as being relevant only for the final
constitutional text and not the commission
reports. Most legal analysts agreed that the
11 Fernando Calderón and Eduardo Gamarra, “Crisis Inflexión y
Reforma del Sistema de Partidos en Bolivia.” Cuaderno de Futuro,
Vol. 19, 2004, Informe Sobre Desarrollo Humano, PNUD (2004)
discusses this mix of mechanisms in the 2000-2003 crisis period.
“Despite a broad
mandate for change,
the past two years
have seen a return of
social and political
polarization.”
8 Bolivia’s Long and Winding Road
MAS interpretation was politically biased.12
As the August 6 deadline approached, both
sides decided to draft a new law extending
the Assembly’s mandate 90 days, until
December. The new law explicitly included
the two-thirds majority rule but also included
a two-step referendum rule that implicitly
made the majority rule moot. The entry referendum
would consider dissensus questions on
the final text, but that meant possibly submitting
an entire constitutional text (minority or
majority) for approval. The exit referendum
would ratify the whole text.
As the extension expired in December, conflict
erupted in Sucre over the issue of the
capital city, which drove a wedge within
the MAS but did not ultimately become a
national issue. As police clashed with university
students, leaving two dead on November
3, 2007, the Assembly approved a general
version of the constitutional text, which postponed
detailed treatment until February 2008
in the city of Oruro. Both approvals were
12 Rubens Barbery Knaudt, “¿Por que los 2/3?,” Los Tiempos,
December 8, 2006; Jorge V. Ordenes, “Los dos tercios,” Los
Tiempos, December 26, 2006.
done in the absence of the political opposition,
despite overtures by the UN and MNR
to sign a compromise text. The Oruro session
approved not only the draft text but also
a dissensus question for the entry referendum.
As things stand today, both the entry and exit
referendum are on hold.
The second impasse involved the referenda
for the approval of autonomous statutes for
Santa Cruz, Tarija, Beni and Pando, departments
that voted in favor of autonomy in July
2006. The autonomy question was initially
part of the Constituent Assembly debate.
The Commission on autonomies delivered
majority and minority reports that recognized
departmental autonomy, but also recognized
municipal, regional and indigenous autonomies.
The watering down of the Santa Cruz
proposal was perceived as threatening the
roadmap laid out in the cabildos (meetings) of
2006 and 2007. Various rounds of negotiations
led by President Morales in January and
by Vice President García Linera in February
failed to either bridge the gap between the
draft constitution and statutes or to pro-
“Various rounds
of negotiations led
by Morales and
García Linera failed
to either bridge the
gap between the
draft constitution and
statutes or to provide
a legal framework
that might deal with
both issues.”
Chart 3: President Morales’ Approval Ratings
Source: Author, based on Equipos Mori 2008
Polarization Roadmap
Inter-American Dialogue
George Gray Molina Working Paper
9
vide a legal framework that might deal with
both issues.
The regions called for departmental referenda
that would reposition their demands
on a national level. The first referendum vote
in Santa Cruz ratified the “yes” agenda with
85.4 percent of valid votes and a 37.9 percent
abstention rate, some 15 percentage points
above the average rates in past elections.13 The
referendum effort encountered resistance in
rural areas of Santa Cruz and poorer neighborhoods
in the city, including incidents of
violence and burning ballot boxes. On balance,
however, the Santa Cruz referendum shifted
the political momentum decisively towards the
regional agenda. Prefects and civic committees
were expected to sit down at a negotiation
table with the government only after the last
regional referenda was held in Tarija in July.
Most analysts agree that the departmental
referenda and the resulting statutes are
illegal under the current constitution.14 In
what has become a political battlefield for
electoral legitimacy, the National Electoral
Court refused to recognize the results in the
regions as official. The Santa Cruz Electoral
Court presided over the referendum, causing
a schism in the Court. The courts of
Beni, Pando and Tarija followed Santa Cruz
in defying the national court. The legality
of both the regional referenda and the
approval of the new constitutional text reveal
weaknesses in the constitutional and electoral
oversight institutions, which leads to the
appointments problem.
13 For an analysis of abstention rates in past Bolivian elections,
see Corte Departamental Electoral de Santa Cruz, http://www.
corteelectoralsc.com/computo2008/; Salvador Romero, Geografía
Electoral de Bolivia, 3rd Edition. La Paz: Fundemos, 2003.
14 Carlos Bohrt Irahola, et al. Puentes para un diálogo democrático
Proyectos de Constitución y Estatutos: compatibilidades y diferencias.
La Paz: FES, 2008; Súbelas Barrios and Franz Xavier, “Hacia
un Pacto territorial en Bolivia Conflictos, Conceptos, Consensos
en torno a las autonomías,” working paper, La Paz: PAPEPPNUD;
La Prensa, “Constitucionalistas observan el referéndum
de Santa Cruz,” February 14, 2008.
The third impasse involves a lack of agreement
on appointing judges and clerks to the
Constitutional Tribunal and the National
Electoral Court. The Constitutional Tribunal,
which plays a key role in a highly contested
political atmosphere, is currently paralyzed
due to a lack of judges. Congress must
appoint four new judges to complete a fivejudge
court. The Tribunal suspended work
months ago, closing 2,313 cases involving
15,438 people, so far. The key decisions, of
course, relate to the Constituent Assembly
and referenda. The Tribunal is only part of a
larger paralysis in judicial reform, which also
requires political compromise.15
Something similar is happening with the
National Electoral Court, which is working
even though it has only three officials
out of five, one of whom is the presidential
appointee. The impasse over Court appointments
and the accusations of partiality with
the government are likely to affect the August
referendum results.16 A decisive MAS victory
will see regional accusations against the
national court, while a decisive regional victory
will see accusations from the government
against the regional courts. This is especially
sensitive because the electoral schedule is the
only process currently agreed upon by government
and opposition.
2.2 An Eclectic Policy Agenda17
In addition to political procedures, policy substance
is also a wedge issue, despite the fact
that the democratic revolution proclaimed by
Evo Morales in his electoral campaign led to
a rather moderate policy agenda, described
in the National Development Plan (NDP)
15 Eduardo Rodríguez Veltzé, “Presupuesto Judicial y Justicia
de Paz,” La Razón, May 20, 2008; Tribunal Constitucional,
“Declaración del Tribunal Constitucional al pueblo de Bolivia,”
May 17, 2008.
16 Jorge Lazarte, “En duda imparcialidad de nueve vocales electorales,”
Los Tiempos, April 13, 2008.
17 This section is based on George Gray Molina, “The Post-
Neoliberal Challenge in Bolivia.” Paper presented at the
University of Texas-Austin, February 2008.
“Questions about
the legality of both the
regional referenda and
the approval of the
new constitutional text
reveal weaknesses in
Bolivia’s constitutional
and electoral oversight
institutions.”
10 Bolivia’s Long and Winding Road
in June 2006. The NDP was the first official
document to dissect policy design and implementation
issues, and propose a roadmap for
social, economic and political change. The
Ministry of Development Planning drafted
the document and coordinated discussions
within the government and with civil society
groups throughout 2006. Reactions to the document
were mixed. Opposition analysts from
the right described it as a “nostalgic return to
the past” and “ready for the garbage can of
good intentions.”18 Sympathetic analysts from
the left saw it is a “watered down development
program” tainted by the “continuation of failed
neoliberal policies of the past.”19
Two aspects of the NDP are worth underlining,
as they relate to decisions that were
eventually taken in the economic and social
policy arena. First, the NDP is a relatively
eclectic development plan, one that borrows
freely from dependency theory, indigenous
multiculturalism, social-democratic protection
policies and neoliberal monetary and
exchange rate policy. The plan underscores
the need to “change the primary-export
pattern of development” inherited from
a neocolonial and neoliberal past.20 The
policy record is described in terms of a relatively
coherent succession of development
stages, cushioned by the whims of international
donors and academic fashion. Social
protection initiatives emerged in the 1980s,
followed by human development policies in
the mid-1980s, extended to poverty reduction
targets in the 1990s, and complemented by
the Millennium Development Goals at the
dawn of the new century.
Second, the NDP focuses specifically on
hydrocarbons and anticipates the nationalization
policies of 2006. The role of natural gas
is strategic, perhaps the cornerstone of the
18 Milenio 2006 and Oporto 2006
19 CEDLA 2006 and Orellana 2006
20 Government of Bolivia, 2006.
new development agenda. Paradoxically, the
focus on gas and hydrocarbons runs against
the grain of “changing the primary-export
pattern of development.” The key imperative,
it would seem, is to diversify the sources of
exports and improve labor and environmental
standards to compete, not based on cheap
labor and plentiful natural resources, but on
high value-added, increased productivity and
fair livelihood conditions. In the course of
two years, one strategic objective (increasing
state participation in hydrocarbons) has
tended to overshadow the other, admittedly,
more important objective (changing the primary-
export pattern of development). The
implementation of the plan has revealed tensions
between “changing the model” and
“changing the pattern” of development.
Beyond the ins and outs of the NDP, an evaluation
of the sequence of policy decisions and
actions taken in the first two years of government
is important. Between 2006 and
2008, the Morales administration achieved
a number of the objectives described in the
government plan in a three-part sequence.
First, they increased government control
over hydrocarbon revenues in 2006. Second,
they increased public investment, both centralized
and decentralized, in 2007. Third,
they scaled up existing social transfer mechanisms
for children and the elderly (through
the Bono Juancito Pinto and Renta Dignidad
programs, respectively) in late 2007 and early
2008. The policy actions that were taken,
however, draw attention to the limitations
faced by the Morales administration, particularly
its weak administrative capacity and
need to show tangible results.
The Nationalization Agenda
The nationalization of Bolivian natural gas
was achieved in two different administrations,
with a law approved during the Mesa
administration in July 2005 (Law 3058) and
a decree passed by the Morales administration
in May 2006 (Decree 28701). Neither
“Social policy
programs draw attention
to the limitations
faced by the Morales
administration,
particularly its weak
administrative capacity
and need to show
tangible results.”
Inter-American Dialogue
George Gray Molina Working Paper
11
legal instrument nationalizes in the conventional
or historical sense—via expropriation
or changes in property rights. Both measures
increased the government take by an
order of magnitude—Law 3058 raised government
participation from 18 percent to 50
percent of production value while Decree
28701 bumped this to up to 82 percent—and
the nationalization decree included a renegotiation
of contracts with close to a dozen
multinational companies. Taken together,
however, they represent a pendulum swing
back to the past. This is the third time that
the Bolivian state nationalized hydrocarbons
over the past century. The two previous occasions
involved Standard Oil in 1937 and Gulf
Oil in 1969.
Two aspects of the nationalization process are
worth considering in closer detail. The first
is the new structure of government revenue.
Government participation in hydrocarbons
has four sources: the first is an 18 percent royalty
over the value of production; the second
is a 32 percent Direct Hydrocarbons Tax; the
third is a payment to YPFB (Bolivia’s national
hydrocarbon company) of recoverable costs,
negotiated on a contract-by-contract basis; and
the fourth is the distribution of the remainder
as shared utilities between YPFB and the
operator, based on a formula that accounts for
new and depreciated capital investments, the
price of natural gas and volumes of production.
21 Under the new contracts, government
take fluctuates between 67 percent of gross
production value (at $1 dollar per million
BTUs) and up to 75 percent of gross production
value (if prices reach $4.5 dollars per
million BTUs).22 Under the new contractual
terms, hydrocarbons operators pay a little more
than the 50 percent negotiated in Law 3058
and a little less than the 82 percent included in
Decree 28701.
21 Medinacelli 2007a
22 Medinacelli 2007b
The second aspect is the content of the new
contracts signed by multinational corporations
in April 2007, on a contract-by-contract basis.
The new agreements are hybrids that combine
elements of shared production and operational
contracts with YPFB.23 Government
participation conditions are similar to those
signed in Peru, whereby the government enters
once private companies recover their operational
costs and capital investments. This
provision has been seen as a loophole in the
nationalization process because it removes
risk from multinational companies in future
investment decisions.24
The increase in government involvement and
new contracts has had at least two positive
and three negative impacts over time. The
first positive effect is that due to extraordinary
increases in prices and better bilateral
negotiation prices with Argentina and Brazil,
Bolivian gross domestic product topped
the $10 billion mark in 2007, over $2 billion
of which came from the hydrocarbons
sector. The second positive effect is a significant
increase in government revenues from
the hydrocarbons sector, reaching $967 million
dollars in 2007, about twice the size of
total foreign aid (donations and credit) in
the country.
On the downside, the “price effect” of exports
weighs more heavily than the “production
effect” in explaining additional export revenues.
In 2006, average prices were 5.4 times
greater than prices eight years earlier and
three times greater than three years earlier.
Second, the gas sector in Bolivia has become
more uncertain with respect to new investments
in exploration and higher export
volumes. This has been evident in the 2008
negotiations with Brazil and Argentina
regarding Bolivia’s inability to fulfill existing
contracts. Third, to the extent that the global
gas market is expanding, Bolivia needs to look
23 Zaratti 2007
24 Medinacelli 2007b
“Bolivia needs
to look beyond the
regional gas market,
at the Pacific basin in
particular, as a way to
improve its leverage
over competitors in
Latin America.”
12 Bolivia’s Long and Winding Road
beyond the regional market, at the Pacific
basin in particular, as a way to improve its
leverage over competitors in Latin America.
Social Transfers and Public Investment
Additional revenues from hydrocarbons and
mining taxation finance two conditional
cash transfer programs to school-age children
( Juancito Pinto) and the elderly (Renta
Dignidad), which account for over $230
million, approximately 2 percent of gross
domestic product in 2007. The transfers reach
over 1,300,000 children and approximately
730,000 men and women over the age of 65.
While the Juancito Pinto program is modeled
after the Bono Escuela program of the
city of El Alto and similar programs in Brazil
called Bolsa Familia and in Mexico Progresa,
the Renta Dignidad is an expansion of the
Bonosol payment implemented with the capitalization
of public companies in Bolivia in
the 1990s. The difference with the Bonosol is
the source of payment. For nine years it was
funded by utilities from capitalized companies
and from internal debt but now is paid
for with hydrocarbons taxes and royalty payments
to the regions.
The Juancito Pinto payment, in place
since November 2006, has been designed
to increase school attendance and reduce
dropout rates. In 2007, 1,300,000 children
enrolled in public schools from first
through sixth grade, in addition to children
under 11 years of age in alternative or technical
education schools as well as children
and adolescents enrolled in special education
programs. Each child receives an annual
payment of 200 bolivianos (about $26), subject
to an annual confirmation that the child
is attending school. The sources of payment
are three: 53 percent is financed by YPFB,
33 percent by the Treasury and 13 percent
by COMIBOL (Bolivia’s state mining company).
The total annual cost of the Juancito
Pinto payment is $39 million.
The Renta Dignidad is an annual payment
to 600,000 Bolivians over the age of 65 and
who have no retirement income, plus an additional
130,000 Bolivians who do receive a
pension. The amount paid to those without
retirement income is 2,400 bolivianos (about
$320) while the amount paid to salaried retirees
is 1,800 bolivianos (about $240). The
source of the payments is highly disputed:
in 2008, it amounts to about $55.6 million
paid by the prefectures and $134.4 million
by the treasury, municipalities, universities
and capitalized enterprises. The deduction
of prefectural funds has been contested by
civic committees and prefects who argue it
amounts to a 38 percent reduction in their
IDH (direct hydrocarbon tax) transfers, about
8 percent of their total funds.
Beyond transfers, public investment has
increased significantly over the past two years,
rising from $629 million in 2005 to $1,103
million in 2007. Most of the new funds have
been spent on roads and other infrastructure,
totaling close to 60 percent of total
investments in 2007. Social investment has
decreased over this period to less than 30 percent
of total investments in 2007. While the
public investment boom has had a multiplier
effect on construction, services and transportation,
there is still a healthy debate over how
and where public investment projects increase
long-run competitiveness, human development
capabilities and create the conditions
for better jobs. Much of the decentralization
agenda focuses on this issue, at both the local
and departmental level.
A 2007 simulation by the United Nations
Development Program estimated the longterm
impact of the current distribution of
hydrocarbons taxes and royalties over time.
Given the uneven distribution of current
revenues (departments like Pando receive
on average seven times the per capita funding
of Oruro), the human development gap
between the richest and poorest departments
“The human
development gap
between the richest and
poorest departments
in Bolivia will increase
rather than decrease
until 2015.”
Inter-American Dialogue
George Gray Molina Working Paper
13
will increase rather than decrease until 2015.
This delay will push back the achievement
of the poverty, health, water and sanitation
Millennium Development Goals by close
to a decade. The inertia of past policies and
rent redistribution has not been overcome in
the current debate over decentralization and
fiscal revenues.
2.3 Ambiguous International Relations
Bolivian foreign policy has moved between
alignment positions with like-minded governments
in the region and pragmatic negotiations
with trading partners in the southern cone.
The alignment strategy has focused mainly on
US-Bolivian relations, the European Union-
Andean Community talks and most recently,
UNASUR. The pragmatic strategy has worked
in talks with Argentina and Brazil on natural
gas, and with Chile on an array of bilateral
agreements. This ambiguous stance has
strengthened the perception that foreign policy
is not particularly consistent. While international
relations in Bolivia are an occasional
battlefield for domestic politics, they are mostly
ignored in the current political standoff.
European Union—Andean Community
Trade Talks
The round of talks between the European
Union and the Andean Community ended
with an agreement to adopt “flexible” negotiations,
creating space for dissensus from
Ecuador and Bolivia. Both countries have
observed the need for a more open discussion
on intellectual property rights,
investment rules and environmental and
labor standards. The official Bolivian position
of not signing a free trade agreement
with the EU was again ratified at the Fifth
EU-CAN Summit in Lima.25 With the
expiration of the extension of Andean trade
preferences with the US later this year, both
countries will be hard pressed to develop
25 Peru 21, “Bolivia y Ecuador no irán a un TLC con la UE,”
May 19, 2008.
alternative markets and take advantage
of preferential tariff policies with the US
and EU. With the meager level of current
exports to the EU and to the US, Bolivia has
more to gain by expanding markets over the
next few months.
Gas Negotiations with Brazil and Argentina
Despite the failure to reach an agreement on
natural gas provision to Argentina and Brazil
in February 2008, the negotiations between
the three presidents were framed by a pragmatic
calculation on how to move volumes
of committed gas from Brazil to Argentina.
Bolivia currently exports between 27 and
29 million cubic meters a day to Brazil but
only about 3 million cubic meters a day to
Argentina. Both export levels are short of the
30 million pledged to Brazil and the 7 million
pledged to Argentina in the renegotiated contracts
of 2006.26 Despite an announcement of
$1.2 billion for 2008, private investment is at
its lowest level in over a decade.27 The most
recent figures for 2007 were $164 million
in total private investment, just a fraction of
which was made in the hydrocarbons sector.
Bilateral Talks with Chile
On May 17, Presidents Morales and Bachelet
met in Lima to discuss a 13-point agenda on
trade and other bilateral issues. The meeting
marked a high point between the two countries,
what President Morales described as “a
trust-building phase” in their bilateral relations.
28 What is significant about the bilateral
talks is a pragmatic turn in what in Bolivia
are regarded as the country’s most sensitive
diplomatic relations. This new phase contrasts
with past ups and downs that led to the
26 Reuters, “Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia Fail to Find Gas
Solution,” February 23, 2008.
27 Boletín YPFB, “YPFB logra millonaria inversión petrolera
para el 2008,” January 8, 2008.
28 Radio U de Chile, “Bachelet y Morales revisaron en privado
una agenda bilateral,” May 18, 2008.
“What is significant
about the bilateral
talks with Chile is
the pragmatic turn
in what are regarded
as Bolivia’s most
sensitive diplomatic
relations.”
14 Bolivia’s Long and Winding Road
removal of two Bolivian consuls in Santiago
over a 12-month period. In recent months,
the goodwill between Morales and Bachelet
has spilled over into closer relations between
the foreign services and armed forces of
the countries.
3. Three Political Scenarios
The “long and winding road” leading to
political agreement in Bolivia does not end
on August 10. The most realistic chance for
a compromise that addresses regional and
social conflict is only likely to happen after
the recall referendum. What kinds of political
scenarios are being discussed in Bolivia
today? Three would seem to dominate the
current discussion, each with a particular set
of assumptions, balances of power and consequences
for the future. The first is a “nothing
happens” scenario that simply postpones
critical procedural and substantive political
negotiations. The second is a “second wind”
scenario for President Morales, in which he
strengthens his presidential base and weakens
the regional balance of power at the same
time. Finally, a “disruption” scenario in which
the recall referendum either does not happen
for a lack of minimum political agreement, or
takes place in a situation of social and political
violence.
Scenario One: Nothing Happens
The “nothing happens” scenario is the current
favorite in the Bolivian press and among
political commentators.29 The key assumption
is that the recall referendum is aimed at
solving the wrong problem. The important
issues of the day have less to do with regional
or national legitimacy and more to do with
the capacity to strike a deal, a compromise
or a set of procedural rules that allow government
and opposition to agree to disagree.
29 Horst Grebe López, “Entre diálogos, urnas y movilizaciones,”
Nueva Crónica y Buen Gobierno, Vol. 16, La Paz: Prisma y Plural
Editores, 2008; Joan Prats, “Revocatoria de mandato, democracia
y autonomía.” Nueva Crónica y Buen Gobierno, Vol. 16, La
Paz: Prisma y Plural Editores, 2008.
Under this scenario, the recall referendum
favors neither the MAS nor the regional
opposition, with the odd exceptions being
Cochabamba and La Paz. The new balance of
power would maintain President Morales in
power, along with four of the current opposition
prefects, with no substantial changes
from the February 2008 meetings. There are,
however, two consequences of the nothing
happens scenario. The first is that mediators,
both internal and external, are likely to play a
crucial role in sitting the key stakeholders at
the table and hammering out an agreement
on procedures or substance. The absence of
a “tie-breaker” will simply deepen the current
political divide. The Catholic Church,
OAS or Group of Friends observers might
be called into play. The second consequence
is that under this scenario, the likely matter
of agreement will not be substantive but
procedural. This might include an agreement
on the legal way forward to make the draft
constitution and the statutes compatible, but
might fall short of that and focus on the rules
for approving the draft constitution and calling
for general elections over the 2009 to
2010 period. If the past is any guide, no substantive
agreement is likely to occur under the
existing regional and social balance of power.
Scenario Two: A Second Wind for
President Morales
The “second wind” scenario assumes both
that President Morales wins by more than
54 percent on August 10 (although he
is only required to win by 46 percent to
remain in office) and that the results in
Tarija, Cochabamba and La Paz, and perhaps
Pando, tip the regional balance towards
the MAS.30 In this scenario, a “new” balance
would threaten the unity of the media luna
(southern and eastern departments) and isolate
the autonomy supporters. This would be
a highly volatile setting for Santa Cruz, possibly
heightening tensions on land and regional
30 Pulso 451, May 25, 2008.
“If the past is any
guide, no substantive
agreement is likely to
occur under the existing
regional and social
balance of power.”
Inter-American Dialogue
George Gray Molina Working Paper
15
government issues. Two consequences also
follow from this scenario. The first is that a
MAS victory would likely alter the future
political roadmap. The MAS would be in a
position to push forward with a constitutional
ratification referendum, rather than negotiate
with the opposition on pending issues.
This is also likely to further polarize social
and regional actors. The second consequence
is that the leadership of the opposition would
likely shift back to Congress. A weakened
regional opposition would be undermined
by a resurgent PODEMOS, MNR and UN.
A congressional opposition would presumably
be more responsive to political negotiations
than a regional opposition.
Scenario Three: Disruption
In order for a “discruption” scenario to materialize,
certain conditions must be met.
The first is that the opposition succeeds in
fomenting a political crisis over the legality
of the recall referendum and the National
Electoral Court and Constitutional Tribunal
appointments before August. By questioning
the legitimacy of the Court, the opposition
would effectively force a new political
deadlock. The second assumption is that
social tensions rise, leading to violent conflict
en route to the recall referendum. The
violent confrontations between regional
and campesino movements on referendum
day in Santa Cruz (May 2008); among university
students, campesinos, the police and
military in Sucre (November 2007 and May
2008); and between campesinos and university
students in Cochabamba ( January 2007),
suggests a dangerous escalation of social and
political violence.
The possibility of not reaching the August referendum
puts a premium on domestic and
international mediation and observers. In the
past, the way out of a crisis situation has been
to agree on new general elections. This was the
case in 2005 and in 1985. Even in this unlikely
scenario, however, basic agreements on the
National Electoral Court and Constitutional
Tribunal are needed. This brings us back to the
nothing happens scenario.
4. Is There a Way Back to Legality?
Is there a way out of the current political
impasse in Bolivia? In 2005, Vice President
García Linera coined the term empate
catastrófico (catastrophic stalemate) to describe
the political scenario that was dividing the
country along regional and class lines. 31 The
difficulty of the current political situation is
compounded by a sense of fatigue with talks,
dialogues and negotiations that have not produced
results. Despite the sense of pessimism
among political actors, all is not lost. Social
and regional actors continue to communicate
with each other and are amazingly resilient
in spite of conflict, polarization and waning
public support.
I would like to end this essay by outlining
a way back to legality for the government
and opposition. Most political players realize
there is an urgent need to reach an accord,
even if this only involves agreeing to disagree.
Recent violence in Bolivia suggests that the
legality issue is no longer a matter of merely
“bending the rules.” It has become an obstacle
to advancing a progressive political agenda on
the left of the political spectrum and is beginning
to impede the observance of democratic
politics on the right.
From the government’s point of view, a
return to legality requires two things: first,
agreeing to impartial appointments to
the Constitutional Tribunal and National
Electoral Court. Without unbiased nominations,
no conceivable roadmap will hold,
either on legal or political grounds. The second
condition for a return to legality is
amending the new constitutional text to cor-
31 Pablo Stephanoni, “Empate catastrófico en Bolivia: sin
avances en la Asamblea Constituyente,” Le Monde Diplomatique,
October 24, 2007.
“Most political
players realize there is
an urgent need to reach
an accord, even if this
only involves agreeing
to disagree.”
16 Bolivia’s Long and Winding Road
rect the dubious procedures of Sucre and
Oruro and to legalize the “autonomy question.”
To avoid the messy issue of illegal
statutes and departmental referenda, the government
must explicitly insert a constitutional
clause that validates the hundreds of thousands
of legitimate but illegal votes cast in the
four departmental referenda.
This would likely involve an extraordinary
session of the Constituent Assembly or of
Congress that included the two-thirds quorum
rule and a broad agreement on the
constitutional referendum approval procedures.
From the government’s point of
view, this means taking two steps backward
to secure approval of a new—and widely
awaited—constitution. It also means not
conditioning all hopes for social progress on
commanding a hegemonic political majority.
Besides political power, there are dozens
of arenas of social and economic transformation
that can serve progressive change from
the left—including jobs policies, social protection,
affirmative action and other arenas
where action is badly needed.
From the opposition’s point of view, a move
towards legality also means taking two steps
backward. The first is to observe the binding
decisions of a new Constitutional Tribunal,
which would likely rule against the legality
of the departmental referenda and autonomy
statutes. This would allow enough breathing
room for more substantive talks on the
new constitutional text. The second step is
to recognize President Morales’s full democratic
term and work within the framework
of the Bolivian Constitution to reach future
agreements. Recent violence from irregular
groups (such as the Union Juvenil
Crucenista and other regional offshoots)
needs to be controlled and denounced by
the democratic opposition. From the opposition’s
point of view, these sacrifices could
lead to the greater good of a constitutional
route to a new regional autonomy arrangement
in Bolivia. This would be an unexpected
but very significant political gain from the
protracted conflict.
The current political players can broker a
return to legality. Most agree that a hegemonic
political solution is not possible in
Bolivia today. Most also concur that both the
indigenous rights and autonomy agendas are
here to stay. This certainly postpones a resolution
of many important issues but allows
the government and opposition to assess how
to make their case to the Bolivian people
on firmer ground. Fortunately, Bolivian history
suggests that reaching the abyss is often
just the starting point of a new period of
political compromise.
“Besides political
power, there are
dozens of arenas of
social and economic
transformation that
can serve progressive
change from
the left.”
Inter-American Dialogue
George Gray Molina Working Paper
17
References
Alarcón, Carlos. “Estatutos autonómicos en
levitación,” La Razón, February 26, 2008.
Barbery Knaudt, Rubens. “¿Por que los 2/3?.”
Los Tiempos, December 8, 2006.
Barrios Súbelas, Franz Xavier. “Hacia
un Pacto territorial en Bolivia Conflictos,
Conceptos, Consensos en torno a las autonomías.”
Documento de trabajo, La Paz: PAPEPPNUD.
Bohrt Irahola, Carlos et al. Puentes para un
diálogo democrático Proyectos de Constitución
y Estatutos: compatibilidades y diferencias. La
Paz: FES, 2008.
Corte Departamental Electoral de Santa
Cruz, 2008, “Computo finalizado.” http://
www.corteelectoralsc.com/computo2008/.
Costa, Jimena. “¿A quien beneficia el diálogo?,”
La Razón May 24, 2008.
Crabtree, John; Gray Molina, George; and
Whitehead, Lawrence. Tensiones irresueltas:
Bolivia Pasado y Presente. La Paz: Plural, 2008.
Calderon, Fernando and Eduardo Gamarra.
“Crisis Inflexión y Reforma del Sistema de
Partidos en Bolivia.” Cuaderno de Futuro
19, Informe Sobre Desarrollo Humano-
PNUD (2004).
Espinoza, Daniela and Marco Zelaya.
“Historia secreta del Referéndum revocatorio.”
Pulso Semanario, 450, 2008.
Gray Molina, George. “The Post-Neoliberal
Challenge in Bolivia.” Paper presented at the
University of Texas-Austin, February 2008.
Grebe López, Horst. “Entre diálogos, urnas
y movilizaciones,” Nueva Crónica y Buen
Gobierno 16, La Paz: Prisma y Plural editores,
2008.
Organization of American States. “Respaldo
a la institucionalidad democrática, al diálogo
y La Paz de Bolivia.” CP/RES. 935
(1648/08), May 3, 2008.
Prats, Joan. “Revocatoria de mandato, democracia
y autonomía.” Nueva Crónica y Buen
Gobierno 16, La Paz: Prisma y Plural editores,
2008.
Romero, Salvador. Geografía Electoral de
Bolivia, 3rd Edition. La Paz: Fundemos, 2003.
18 Bolivia’s Long and Winding Road
Working Paper Series
For other testimonies and articles on the Andean Region please visit the Dialogue’s web site:
Inter-American Dialogue Publications on Colombia and the Andean Region
Task Force Report
Toward Greater Peace and Security in
Colombia: Forging a Constructive U.S. Policy.
The Report of an Independent Task Force
Sponsored by the Council on Foreign
Relations and the Inter-American Dialogue.
Bob Graham and Brent Scowcroft,
Co-Chairs. October 2000.
Published Testimony
“Colombia’s Security Predicament and
Opportunities for Peace: Guidelines for U.S.
Policy,” by Michael Shifter. September 1998.
“Ending the Conflict with the FARC:
Time for a New Course,” by Antonio Navarro
Wolff. January 2007.
“Petropolitics in Latin America: A Review
of Energy Policy and Regional Relations,”
by Genaro Arriagada. December 2006.
“A New Uribe? Álvaro Uribe’s Second-Term
Challenges,” by Rodrigo Pardo. November
2006.
“The Military and Politics in the Andean
Region,” by Carlos Basombrío Iglesias.
April 2006.
“Towards Greater ‘Human Security’ and
Peace in Colombia,” by Michael Shifter.
July 2005.
“The Colombian Conflict and the Risk of a
Regional Human Rights and Humanitarian
Crisis,” by César Montúfar. July 2005.
“Europe and the Colombian Conflict,”
by Sabine Kurtenbach. June 2005.
“State, Drug Policy, and Democracy in the
Andes,” by Eduardo A. Gamarra. June 2005.
“Turning Point in Colombia? A Rapporteur’s
Report of the Colombia Working Group,”
by Vinay Jawahar. June 2004.
“Álvaro Uribe: Dissident,” by Fernando
Cepeda Ulloa. August 2003.
“A New Approach: Álvaro Uribe’s
Democratic Security Project,” by
Eduardo Pizarro Leongómez. July 2003.
“‘Doing Something’ in Colombia,”
by Eduardo Posada Carbó. August 2002.
“The Prospects for Peace in Colombia:
Lessons from Recent Experience,”
by Rafael Pardo Rueda. July 2002.
“Colombia: Negotiate, But What?”
by Joaquín Villalobos. June 2002.
“Reflections on the Colombian Conflict:
A Rapporteur’s Report of the Colombia
Working Group,” by Daniel Mack and
Victoria Wigodzky. June 2002.
Inter-American Dialogue
Board Of Directors
Carla A. Hills, Co-Chair, United States
Ricardo Lagos, Co-Chair, Chile
Peter D. Bell, Co-Vice Chair, United States
Enrique Iglesias, Co-Vice Chair, Uruguay
Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Brazil
David de Ferranti, United States
William L. Friend, United States
Francis Fukuyama, United States
L. Enrique García, Bolivia
Donna J. Hrinak, United States
Yolanda Kakabadse, Ecuador
Jim Kolbe, United States
Thomas J. Mackell, Jr., United States
Barbara J. McDougall, Canada
Thomas F. McLarty III, United States
M. Peter McPherson, United States
Billie Miller, Barbados
Sonia Picado, Costa Rica
Jorge Quiroga, Bolivia
Jesús Silva-Herzog, Mexico
Eduardo Stein, Guatemala
Elena Viyella de Paliza, Dominican Republic
Peter Hakim
President
The Inter-American Dialogue is the leading U.S. center for policy analysis, exchange,
and communication on issues in Western Hemisphere affairs. The Dialogue brings
together public and private leaders from across the Americas to address hemispheric
problems and opportunities. Together they seek to build cooperation among Western
Hemisphere nations and advance a regional agenda of democratic governance, social
equity, and economic growth.
The Dialogue’s select membership of 100 distinguished citizens from throughout
the Americas includes political, business, academic, media, and other nongovernmental
leaders. Twelve Dialogue members served as presidents of their countries and
more than two dozen have served at the cabinet level.
Dialogue activities are directed to generating new policy ideas and practical proposals
for action, and getting these ideas and proposals to government and private
decision makers. The Dialogue also offers diverse Latin American and Caribbean
voices access to U.S. policy debates and discussions. Based in Washington, the
Dialogue conducts its work throughout the hemisphere. A majority of our Board
of Directors are from Latin American and Caribbean nations, as are more than half
of the Dialogue’s members and participants in our other leadership networks and
task forces.
Since 1982—through successive Republican and Democratic administrations and
many changes of leadership elsewhere in the hemisphere—the Dialogue has helped
shape the agenda of issues and choices in inter-American relations.
1211 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 510
Washington, DC 20036
PHONE: 202-822-9002 n FAX: 202-822-9553
EMAIL: iad@thedialogue.org n WEB SITE: www.thedialogue.org
Inter-American Dialogue
Con nuestros votos imbéciles
JAVIER MARÍAS 06/07/2008
Uno de los mayores peligros de nuestro tiempo es el contagio, al que estamos expuestos más que nunca –en seguida sabemos lo que ocurre en cualquier parte del mundo y podemos copiarlo–, y en unas sociedades en las que, además, nadie tiene el menor reparo en incurrir en el mimetismo. Y a nadie, desde luego, le compensa ser original e imaginativo, porque resulta muy costoso ir contracorriente. Es el nuestro un tiempo pesado y totalitario y abrumador, al que cada vez se hace más difícil oponer resistencia. Y así, las llamadas “tendencias” se convierten a menudo en tiranías.
Una muestra reciente de esta rendición permanente ha sido la aprobación por aplastante mayoría, en el Parlamento Europeo, de la “directiva de retorno” para los inmigrantes ilegales. Es ésta una directiva repugnante, llena de cinismo y falta de escrúpulos, que a muchos europeos –pero ay, no a los bastantes– nos ha hecho sentir vergüenza de pertenecer a este continente. Como si se tratara de una parodia de Chaplin o Lubitsch, el ponente y promotor de dicha directiva ha sido un eurodiputado alemán del Partido Popular Europeo, Manfred Weber, que apareció en televisión muy ufano de su vileza y vestido de tirolés, cuan¬¬do a nadie se le oculta qué clase de gente se viste así, todavía, en su país y en Austria. A este individuo grotesco le han dado la razón y sus votos no sólo sus correligionarios franceses (a las órdenes de Sarkozy), italianos (a las de Berlusconi, Bossi y Fini, notorios e indisimulados racistas), polacos (a las de los nacional-católicos gemelos Kaczynski), españoles (a las de Rajoy y sus flamantes “moderados”) y demás, sino también un buen puñado de eurodiputados socialistas, incluidos dieciséis de los diecinueve que España tiene en la Cámara (a las órdenes de Zapatero). Yo no sé con qué cara se atreverán el Gobierno y el PSOE, a partir de ahora, a proclamarse justos y democráticos y humanitarios, puesto que con sus votos propugnan que se “retenga” durante año y medio –año y medio– a un inmigrante ilegal cuyo único delito haya sido entrar clandestinamente en un país europeo huyendo del hambre, la guerra y la desesperación. Y asimismo propugna que los menores puedan ser enviados sin garantías a cualquier país, aunque no sea el suyo de origen. Todos sabemos lo que espera a esos críos: en algún punto del trayecto, una red de traficantes que, con el visto bueno de los europeos, se los llevarán a donde les parezca para utilizarlos como les plazca: esclavos, objetos sexuales, combatientes, donantes involuntarios de órganos. Y esto se producirá mientras los gobernantes europeos, con la mayor hipocresía, dicen preocuparse cada vez más por los riesgos que acechan a nuestros menores.
Durante años se ha hecho la vista gorda con los inmigrantes ilegales. Se los ha explotado como mano de obra barata, casi gratuita, y se ha callado convenientemente que eran necesarios para nuestras economías y para que cubrieran los puestos de trabajo que los europeos –ya muy señoritos– se niegan a cubrir. Queremos que alguien recoja la basura y barra las calles, cuide de nuestros abuelos enfermos y de nuestros niños malcriados y consentidos, ponga los ladrillos de las cien mil construcciones vandálicas que han propiciado la corrupción de los alcaldes y la codicia de los promotores inmobiliarios, se ocupe de las faenas más duras del campo y limpie nuestras alcantarillas. Nosotros no estamos dispuestos a ensuciarnos las manos ni a deslomarnos. Que vengan esos negros, sudacas y moros a servirnos, esos rumanos que no tienen donde caerse muertos y que se prestarán a cualquier cosa, más les vale. Les daremos cuatro cuartos y asunto liquidado. Ahora, sin embargo, nos hemos hecho muy mirados con los cuatro cuartos, porque hay “crisis”. Hemos visto que algu¬nos de esos inmigrantes delinquen –como si no delinquieran algunos españoles, italianos, alemanes o franceses de pura cepa– y, contagiados por Berlusconi y sus compinches –los cuales nunca han delinquido, por cierto, no se entiende por qué tienen tantas causas abiertas que los incriminan–, empezamos a pensar que todos esos inmigrantes son unos criminales. Y, como lo pensamos, aprobamos una directiva que los convierta en tales por el mero hecho de existir y haber osado pisar suelo europeo. Se los detendrá hasta año y medio, y sin asistencia judicial, como si fueran presos de ese Guantánamo contra el que los europeos aún nos atrevemos a clamar. Mientras tanto, ese propio Parlamento, quizá en previsión de la próxima escasez de mano de obra foránea y barata, permite también que nuestra jornada laboral alcance las sesenta e incluso las sesenta y cinco horas semanales. Algo nunca visto ni tolerado desde 1917. Y añaden hipócritamente: “según el libre acuerdo entre contratadores y contratados”. ¿Libre acuerdo? Todos sabemos también lo que ocurrirá. El empleador le dirá al empleado: “Us¬¬ted trabajará sesenta horas. Si no le gusta, es libre de no aceptar, pero yo no voy a cambiar mis condiciones”. ¿Y qué creen que contestará el empleado, en una Europa en la que el empleo es precario y en la que se lleva decenios convenciendo a la gente de que se hipoteque de por vida para comprar un piso de mierda que habrán construido esos negros y sudacas a los que toca detener y expulsar? No me extrañaría que de aquí a poco los europeos tengan que envainarse su señoritismo y que volvamos a verlos barriendo calles, sólo que durante diez horas al día, seis días a la semana. Esta es la repugnante Europa que construimos, con nuestros votos imbéciles.
![]()
© Diario EL PAÍS S.L. - Miguel Yuste 40 – 28037 Madrid [España] - Tel. 91 337 8200
© Prisacom S.A. - Ribera del Sena, S/N – Edificio APOT – Madrid [España] – Tel. 91 353 7900