Bolivia: ‘No excuses for killing Mother Earth’

Federico Fuentes, Cochabamba

Under the new constitution approved in January 2009, the state now controls all minerals, metals, precious and semi-precious stones in the country.

While respecting previously granted concessions to private companies, it has restricted new concessions to joint ventures with the state

In 2007, the Bolivian government returned 100% control of the Huanuni tin mine to the state-owned Comibol.

On May 3, the government nationalised the Glencore-owned antimony smelter, which has been out of operation for more than two years.

The decision was taken due to Glencore’s 10-year non-compliance with its investment commitments, instead choosing to begin dismantling the privatised smelter.

It follows on from the government’s 2007 decision to nationalise the Glencore-owned Vinto tin smelter.

However, Comibol is far from having recovered from two decades of disinvestment and privatisation by successive neoliberal governments.

Explaining the need for “strategic partners”, Bolivia’s mining minister Jose Pimentel told Green Left Weekly of the difficulty of accessing credit for industrialisation projects.

“Multilateral or commercial banks generally give loans for infrastructure, electricity, highways but not for industrialisation.

“This has been one of the factors why we have had to seek out strategic partners that can give us the necessary technology and invest capital, and guarantee markets for us.”

But, facing trouble with its “strategic partners”, the government has recently indicated that it may be willing to move ahead independently where possible.

One example is the announcement it will begin mining 50% of the Mutun iron ore deposits. To finance this, the government said it would use revenue from the sale of US$11 million worth of iron ore reserves that Comibol has in storage.

Pimentel also said that after five years of steady economic growth, Bolivia’s currency reserves “have reached $9 billion and I think that some of the projects we have in the pipeline could be directly financed from there”.

Bolivia is also discussing with Venezuela setting up a “grand-national” joint state mining company, within the framework of Bolivarian Alliance of the Americas (ALBA), an anti-imperialist trading bloc launched by Cuba and Venezuela in 2004.

“This is a space that we see as much more important, given that sovereign peoples are beginning to negotiate among themselves in order to replace the transnationals.”

Regarding environmental concerns, Pimentel said, “while we can demand the companies improve their environmental practices by carrying out a more rational and efficient exploitation, we can not ask the same of the workers in cooperatives who live directly from mining”.

“We believe we have to carry out a policy of supporting small producers to solve environmental problems by creating the mechanisms whereby they can carry out their activities without large economic costs.”

A new stricter mining code, combined with “stringently assuring that mining companies respect all environmental problems”, means there should “be no excuse for the mining industry damaging the environment and killing Mother Earth”, Pimentel said.

Call by Evo Morales for Peoples’ World Conference on Climate Change and Mother Earth’s Rights

Considering that climate change represents a real threat to the existence of humanity, of living beings and our Mother Earth as we know it today;

Noting the serious danger that exists to islands, coastal areas, glaciers in the Himalayas, the Andes and mountains of the world, poles of the Earth, warm regions like Africa, water sources, populations affected by increasing natural disasters, plants and animals, and ecosystems in general;

Making clear that those most affected by climate change will be the poorest in the world who will see their homes and their sources of survival destroyed, and who will be forced to migrate and seek refuge;Confirming that 75% of historical emissions of greenhouse gases originated in the countries of the North that followed a path of irrational industrialization;

Noting that climate change is a product of the capitalist system;

Regretting the failure of the Copenhagen Conference caused by countries called “developed”, that fail to recognize the climate debt they have with developing countries, future generations and Mother Earth;

Affirming that in order to ensure the full fulfillment of human rights in the twenty-first century, it is necessary to recognize and respect Mother Earth’s rights;

Reaffirming the need to fight for climate justice;

Recognizing the need to take urgent actions to avoid further damage and suffering to humanity, Mother Earth and to restore harmony with nature;

Confident that the peoples of the world, guided by the principles of solidarity, justice and respect for life, will be able to save humanity and Mother Earth, and

Celebrating the International Day of Mother Earth,

The Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia calls on the peoples of the world, social movements and Mother Earth’s defenders, and invites scientists, academics, lawyers and governments that want to work with their citizens to the Peoples’ World Conference on Climate Change and Mother Earth’s Rights to be held from 20th to 22nd April 2010 in Cochabamba, Bolivia.

The Peoples’ World Conference on Climate Change and Mother Earth’s Rights has as objectives:

1) To analyze the structural and systemic causes that drive climate change and to propose radical measures to ensure the well-being of all humanity in harmony with nature

2) To discuss and agree on the project of a Universal Declaration of Mother Earth Rights

3) To agree on proposals for new commitments to the Kyoto Protocol and projects for a COP Decision under the United Nations Framework for Climate Change that will guide future actions in those countries that are engaged with life during climate change negotiations and in all United Nations scenarios, related to:

- Climate debt
- Climate change migrants-refugees
- Emission reductions
- Adaptation
- Technology transfer
- Finance
- Forest and Climate Change
- Shared Vision
- Indigenous Peoples, and
- Others

4) To work on the organization of the Peoples’ World Referendum on Climate Change

5) To analyze and develop an action plan to advance the establishment of a Climate Justice Tribunal

6) To define strategies for action and mobilization to defend life from Climate Change and to defend Mother Earth’s Rights.

Bolivia, January 5th, 2010

Evo Morales Ayma
President of the
Plurinational State of Bolivia

More info: info@cmpcc.org

A Formal Summons to World States by Indigenous First Nations and Peoples

Chimoré, Cochabamba, Bolivia, October 12, 2007

From the heart of South America, on this 12^th day of October, 2007, the delegates of the indigenous first nations and peoples of the world, meeting in the World Encounter “For the Historic Victory of the Indigenous Peoples of the World”, to celebrate the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, hereby declare:

That, after 515 years of oppression and domination, here we stand; they have been unable to eliminate us. We have confronted and resisted the policies of ethnocide, genocide, colonization, destruction and plunder. The imposition of such economic systems as capitalism, characterized by interventionism, wars and socio-environmental disasters, a system that continues to threaten our ways of life as peoples.

That as a consequence of the neoliberal policy of domination of nature, the search for easy profits from the concentration of capital in a few hands and the irrational exploitation of natural resources, our Mother Earth is fatally injured, while the indigenous peoples are still being displaced from our territories. The planet is warming up. We are experiencing an unprecedented change in climate with ever-stronger and more frequent socio-environmental disasters, affecting all of us without exception.

That we are trapped in a great energy crisis, with the Age of Petroleum coming to an end, and without having found a clean alternative energy that can substitute for it in the necessary quantities to maintain that Western civilization that has made us totally dependent on hydrocarbons.

That this situation may be a threat that will leave us exposed to the danger that neoliberal and imperialist policies trigger wars for the last drops of the so-called black gold and blue gold, but may also give us the opportunity to make this new millennium a millennium of life, a millennium of balance and complementarity, without having to take advantage of energies that destroy Mother Earth.

That both the natural resources and the lands and territories we inhabit are ours for history, for birth, in law and for ever, and that the power to determine their use is fundamental to our ability to maintain our life, sciences, learning, spirituality, organization, medicines and food sovereignty.

That a new era is beginning, promoted by the original indigenous peoples, and bringing again times of change, times of Pachakuti,[1] in the times of the culmination of the Quinto Sol. [2]

That we welcome the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which is essential for the survival and well-being of the more than 370 million native peoples in some 70 countries of the world. After more than twenty years of struggle, it is responsive to our historical demand for self-determination of the peoples and recognition of ourselves and our collective rights.

The adopted Declaration contains a set of principles and norms that recognize and establish in the international regulatory system the fundamental rights of the Indigenous Peoples, those that must be the basis of the new relationship between the Indigenous Peoples, States, societies and cooperation throughout the world. In addition, therefore, to the other existing juridical instruments governing human rights, the Declaration is the new regulatory and practical basis for guaranteeing and protecting indigenous rights in various spheres and at various levels.

We call on the member countries of the United Nations and encourage the indigenous peoples to implement and comply with this important instrument of historical significance. We censure those governments that have voted in opposition to the Declaration on the Rights of the Indigenous Peoples, and condemn their double standards.

That we pledge to support the historical effort being led by our brother Evo Morales, President of the Indigenous Peoples of Abya Yala,[3] in the construction of a new plurinational State. We will be vigilant in the face of any threat, internal or external, to the process in Bolivia and we call on the peoples of the planet to lend their support and solidarity to this process, which ought to serve as an example so that the Peoples, Nations and States of the world continue along this path.

Accordingly, the Indigenous Peoples and Nations of the world demand that the States fulfill the following mandates:

1. To construct a world based on the Culture of Life, in the identity, philosophy, world view and age-old spirituality of the original indigenous peoples, applying the aboriginal knowledge and skills, strengthening the processes of interchange and brotherhood among the nations and respecting self-determination.

2. To make national and international decisions to save Mother Nature from the disasters that are being brought about by capitalism in its decline, as manifested in global warming and the ecological crisis; reaffirming that the original indigenous culture is the only alternative means of saving our planet earth.

3. To replace the present models of development based on capitalism, commodities, the irrational exploitation of humanity and natural resources, the squandering of energy, and consumerism, with models that establish life, complementarity, reciprocity, respect for cultural diversity and the sustainable use of natural resources as the principal priorities.

4. To implement national policies governing Food Sovereignty as a principal basis of National Sovereignty, in which the community guarantees respect for its own culture as appropriate spaces and modes of production, distribution and consumption consistent with the nature of healthy pollutant-free foods for the entire population, eliminating hunger, because food is a right to life.

5. To repudiate schemes and projects for the generation of energy such as biofuel, which destroy and deny food to the peoples. Likewise, we condemn the use of transgenic seeds because it replaces our ancient seeding process and makes us dependent on agro-industry.

6. To recognize and re-evaluate the role of the original indigenous woman as the vanguard of the emancipatory struggles of our peoples in accordance with the principles of duality, equality and equity of relationships between men and women.

7. To adopt the Culture of Peace and Life as a guide for resolving the world’s problems and conflicts, renouncing the arms race, and to initiate disarmament in order to guarantee the preservation of life on this planet.

8. To adopt the just legal transformations that are necessary for the construction of systems and means of communication and information based on our world view, spirituality and communal philosophy, in the wisdom of our ancestors. To guarantee recognition of the indigenous peoples’ right to communication and information.

9. To guarantee respect for and the right to life, health and bilingual intercultural education, incorporating policies of benefit to the indigenous first nations and peoples.

10. To declare water to be a human right, a vital element and social property of humanity and not a source of profit. Likewise, to encourage the use of alternative energies that do not threaten the life of the planet, thereby guaranteeing access to all basic services.

11. To solve cases of migration between countries in a mutually responsible way, adopting policies of free circulations of persons in order to guarantee a world without borders in which there is no discrimination, marginalization and exclusion.

12. To decolonize the United Nations, and move its headquarters to a territory that dignifies and expresses the just aspirations of the Peoples, Nations and States of the world.

13. Not to criminalize the struggles of the indigenous peoples, or demonize or accuse us of terrorism when we reclaim our rights and advance our ideas on how to save life and humanity.

14. To release immediately the indigenous leaders imprisoned in various parts of the world, and in the first place Leonard Peltier in the United States.

The struggle is unceasing, we will continue our resistance until our time comes. We proclaim the 12^th of October the “day of commencement of our struggles to save Mother Nature”.

From our families, homes, communities, peoples, whether in government or without, we ourselves are determining and directing our destinies, we ourselves are assuming the will and responsibility to live well that has been bequeathed to us by our ancestors, to expand, from the simplest and least complicated to the greatest and most complex, to construct horizontally and mutually, each and every one, the culture of patience, the culture of dialogue and fundamentally the Culture of Life.

By the dead, the heroes and martyrs that lend meaning to our lives through their utopias and longings, we strengthen our identity, our organizational processes and our struggles to build the unity of the peoples of the world and to restore the balance, saving life, humanity and the planet earth.

We confirm our support for the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to brother Evo Morales for his ongoing and unconditional dedication to the good of humanity, the peoples, the planet and world peace.

Translated from America Latina en Movimiento for Bolivia Rising by Richard Fidler. All notes added by the translator.

Notes

[1] “Pachakuti is a Quechua word with multiple meanings. Literally meaning turning or returning (kuti) of the earth (pacha), it is translated alternatively as ‘new beginning’, ‘reawakening’, ‘revolution’, or ‘renovation’. ... It has replaced Tupaj Katari as the key symbol of indigenous resistance in the Andes, as demonstrated by its use in indigenous political parties’ names in Ecuador (Movimiento Unido Pluricultural Pachakutik) and Peru (Partido Inka Pachacúteq), as well as Felipe Quispe’s Movimiento Indígena Pachakutik. Pachakuti is also the name of a prominent 15th-century Inca leader who ruled during a time of territorial expansion (personal communication, José Antonio Lucero, 4 Dec. 2002).” – Donna Lee Van Cott, “From Exclusion to Inclusion: Bolivia’s 2002 Elections”, J. Lat. Amer. Stud. 35, 751–775, p. 764n.

[2] Literally, the Fifth Sun. See http://www.mexconnect.com/mex_/mysfifthsun.html.

[3] “Continent of Life”. See http://abyayala.nativeweb.org/about.html.

Indigenous Struggle: The resistance continues

Amancay Colque, October 12, 2007

October 12th traditionally was celebrated as the anniversary of Columbus’ “discovery” of the Americas. For the indigenous peoples of the continent, this “discovery” meant hundreds of years of genocide and misery. Now the day has been reclaimed as the “Day of Indigenous Resistance” in Venezuela and Bolivia, two countries with presidents of indigenous descent who are refusing to toe Washington’s line.

Back in 1992, governments in Europe and the American continent were busy organizing the celebrations of the 500th anniversary of Columbus' arrival. In Bolivia the indigenous population, who at the same time were statistically the poorest in the country, were busy organising and resisting attacks from the neoliberal government.

In 1995 a new political party, MAS IPSP, was formed in response to the government of the time blindly following instructions from the IMF and World Bank. For instance, the policy for the eradication of the coca leaf came directly from the US government, and was a direct attack on the cocaleros, indigenous peasants who live in the most deprived areas of the country. Natural resources were privatised and state-owned companies sold off at ridiculously low prices. Trade unions, students and indigenous peasants resisted, but everything seemed to be in vain.

Indigenous people on the continent were aware that wealth would only attract trouble for the indigenous population. Humboldt wrote in his diary in 1910, during his expedition to Latin America, when speaking to an indigenous cacique in Cajamarca: "I asked him: you are poor, aren't you tempted to excavate this land to discover treasures? He answered calmly: 'We live in misery but we are tranquil. If we had trees and fruits of gold, we would be hated and persecuted.' I admired this indigenous moderation and my eyes filled up with tears."

For Europe, the new continent meant opportunities to accumulate wealth and expand territory, for the indigenous population it meant genocide and exploitation. The only resistance possible was survival. Our continent did not flourish and develop despite the natural wealth, wealth that is still yearned for.

In April 2000, after US engineering company Bechtel took over the state water company, water costs rose 300%, ending in a revolt now called the Water War, when city dwellers and indigenous people joined forces to reclaim the water. The unthinkable became reality, the poor, the underdeveloped, the powerless recovered their voice and their strength, because they had managed to unite. Their unity came under one single banner: "The water is ours".

This event changed the direction in which the continent was moving - if water can be recovered, why can’t we recover our natural resources? Why can’t we recover our own government? The 2002 elections should have brought the MAS party and Evo Morales to government, instead it was stolen by political rigging and given to Goni Sanchez de Lozada. Goni fled the country after mass mobilisations to oust him following the massacre of 67 people and the wounding of 400 in the city of El Alto in October 2003. He is currently hiding in the US.

In December 2005 Evo Morales-MAS won the elections with 54% of the vote. The demands of the people in October 2003 were the renationalisation of the hydrocarbons industry, a constituent assembly to re-write the constitution so as to reflect people’s wishes, such as land reform and education as well as the extradition and trial of Goni.

The implementation of these demands, which are demands of the people, has put the Evo Morales government in direct confrontation with the powerful establishment. Despite all the criticism, the nationalisation of the hydrocarbons industry took place in May 2006, much to the dismay of the business community, who claimed that Bolivia was making a huge mistake and all companies would rather leave than pay more for gas and oil. A year later and the companies are still there and are trying to sign more contracts.

Bolivia is not a developed country, for this reason most of our natural resources are exported, but we still have something to which Humboldt was referring when he said that we were “beggars sitting in a chair of gold”. He wasn’t just referring to natural resources, he was referring to our human resources, as Evo Morales put it in an interview: "I am convinced that indigenous people are the moral reserve of humanity."

Amancay Colque is an activist from La Paz, Bolivia, and is based in London. She is one of the founders of the Bolivia Solidarity Campaign in London.

First published in New Statesman

Bolivia: Joining the ‘axis of evil’

Antonio Peredo Leigue

Bolivia’s right-wing continues to wage its campaign of opposition to the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS) government, led by the country’s first indigenous President Evo Morales. With the right having succeeded in forcing the temporary closure of the Constituent Assembly, entrusted with the task of drafting a constitution to “refound” Bolivia, the country finds itself on the verge of the definitive closure of this historic space, conquered by the indigenous and campesino movements through years of struggle.

The latest round of attacks have been directed at moves by the government to establish relations with Iran, including a recent visit by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. This led to the furious reaction not only of the domestic opposition but of Washington, which warned of Bolivia’s growing shift towards the so-called “axis of evil”. In this article, MAS Senator Antonio Peredo Leigue explains what is behind the moves to increasingly portray Bolivia as a new “rogue” state and what is required for the MAS government to push forward in its process of change

***

We are joining the “axis of evil”; that is, if we are not already a part of it. That is how they have classified us in Washington. To make sure there is no doubt, the ambassador of this country has visited President Evo Morales, to warn him about US concern that has come about as a result of initiating relations with Iran. Immediately, commentators who lack any impartiality have expressed this exact same concern.

Many people can not conceive of the fact that in Bolivia real change is occurring; a change which necessarily supposes different interests and, as a consequence, different relations. Or did they hope that there would only be a facade of change? These are profound changes.

The ‘axis of evil’

The current and previous US governments, since Harry S. Truman, have an odd habit of classifying all the countries in the world as good or evil. They could be corrupt, inept, criminal — but they would be good as long as they responded to the policies of the White House. On some occasions, the “good” servants rebelled and therefore, passed over into the category of evil.

In the “axis of evil” are Cuba and Venezuela — how could they not be! On the other side of the world is Iran, as well as North Korea. They are evil countries, because they do not obey Uncle Sam. With some, the US carries out an overt war. With others, they have them under surveillance and warning.

Is there anything these countries have in common, apart from their reaction against the US government? Nothing, except the fact that they do not allow transnational corporations to take the lion’s share of their natural resources.

Of course, the White House cannot say that this is the reason. Instead it attacks using crude declarations: they talk about concerns over Iran’s nuclear program, a country they say has to submit itself to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. One has to ask if they themselves would allow such inspections if other countries, with more than enough justifiable reasons, demanded as such.

But why do they place Venezuela in the axis of evil? Does it have nuclear arms? Is it carrying out nuclear experiments? No. The reasons are different.

One newspaper found four analysts willing to say that the moves towards closer relations between the government of Bolivia and the countries that Washington classifies as part of the “axis of evil” would bring more problems than benefits. The question to them is simply: what were the benefits for Bolivia when it maintained only distant relations with these countries?

The only thing they demonstrate with this simplistic analysis is that there is a fear of change. A few days ago, another analyst wrote with disillusionment in relation to these events, concluding that, more than change, what we are witnessing in Bolivia is disorder, disorientation and discourse.

The reality of change

The social forces in Bolivia that threw themselves into the struggle for change, since 2000 and long before, are the forces that worked and work to create the wealth from which the business owners make themselves powerful. This is the same in the mines, in farming, in export cultivation and with hydrocarbons. Under the conditions that Bolivia’s elites accepted, more than 90% of this wealth left the country as transnationals’ profits. That is the reality which has to change.

To hope that men and women who have suffered — and still continue to suffer — from hunger and misery will act calmly is absurd. Of course these analysts can give themselves this luxury, because they have not suffered hunger, nor have they seen themselves obliged to abandon school in order to work. This is not about reproaching the impatience of the people. It is about reminding them that the viewpoint of those who suffer under these conditions is different.

In the midst of this impatience, which translates into marches, blockades and hunger strikes, the government must work to solve the urgent problems and project policies that make Bolivia a viable country. For each group of people, for each sector, the problem that has dragged on over decades needs to be resolved now, because they have already waited long enough and, with their vote, they made it possible for Morales to assume the presidency.

To this we can add the actions of Bolivia’s opposition parties that, defending the interests of the displaced elites, strongly resist change. Especially anything referring to relations with the US.

Our errors

It would be silly to say that we are advancing without any trip-ups. We have committed errors, many errors, the main one being having accepted not imposing the authority of the majority conquered in December 2005 [when Morales was elected] and ratified in July 2006 [elections for delegates to the Constituent Assembly]. We have conceded too many advances to a minority empowered by its experience in the management of a power that they corrupted.

These concessions have allowed the failures in the Constituent Assembly, and the validation of the demands of the business sector, including allowing them to raise demands of the popular sectors [demands like “democracy” and “autonomy” that have traditionally belonged to the left] and raising the profile of right-wing figures that had never before had a national stature.

We also have to recognise doubts in the application of the major plans of recuperation of our resources. Why have we not renationalised ENTEL [a national telecommunications company] until now? What impedes formulating a national railway policy? When will land be redistributed?

Hundreds of thousands of Bolivian men and women have left and continue leaving the country, in search of a solution to their family crisis. There are better conditions now, but we are not fully making use of them. We have to make investments; although it is true that there is more now than ever before, they are still insufficient. The government must be audacious. We should not worry about the adjectives they use to describe us, from within and outside the country. It is not with them that we have to commitment to; rather it is with the people who elected us.

Translated for Green Left Weekly by Bolivia Rising’s Federico Fuentes

Bolivia’s Evo Morales Wins Hearts and Minds in US

Deborah James and Medea Benjamin

While Iranian President Ahmedinejad stole the headlines during the United Nations meeting last week in New York, Bolivia’s President Evo Morales - a humble coca farmer, former llama herder and union organizer - stole the hearts of the American people. At public events and media appearances, Bolivia’s first-ever indigenous president reached out to the American people to dialogue directly on issues of democracy, environmental sustainability, and social and economic justice.

Morales appeared at a public event packed with representatives of New York’s Latino, labor, and other communities, speaking for 90 minutes - without notes - about how he came to power, and about his government’s efforts to de-colonize the nation, the poorest in South America. At first, he said, community organizations did not want to enter the cesspool of politics. But they realized that if they wanted the government to act in the interest of the poor Indigenous majority, they were going to have to make alliances with other social movements, win political representation democratically, and then transform the government.

Now having been elected to office, they have a clear mandate based on the urgent needs of the majority: to organize a Constitutional Assembly to rewrite the Constitution (controversial with the traditional elites, but well on its way), engage in a comprehensive program of land reform and decriminalize the production of coca for domestic use (in progress), and reclaim control over the oil and gas industries (mission accomplished.)

While other heads of state were meeting with bankers and billionaires, Morales asked his staff to set up a meeting with U.S. grassroots leaders so he could learn about our struggles and how we could work together. The meeting included high-ranking labor leaders, immigrant organizers, Indigenous leaders, peace activists and environmentalists. “I’ve lived in New York during a lot of UN meetings, and I’ve never seen a president reach out to the labor community like Evo did today,” remarked Ed Ott, Executive Director of the New York City Central Labor Council.

The President listened patiently while U.S. organizers talked about efforts to stop the war in Iraq, injustices in the prison system, organizing efforts of low-wage immigrant workers, struggles for Indigenous rights and the difficulties of getting the Bush administration to seriously address the crisis of climate change. “For a farmer to become President, that is a dream come true!” commented Niel Ritchie, president of the League of Rural Voters. “Listening to President Morales, it’s so easy to see how our current trade model has wreaked havoc on farmers in the U.S. as well as in Bolivia.”

His most widespread outreach, however, was on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart, who also seemed captivated by this Indigenous farmer-turned-president. Speaking through an interpreter, Morales told millions of Americans how his government’s policies have brought hundreds of millions of dollars for the nation’s poor - that would have gone to foreign corporate coffers - through the nationalization of oil and gas. Revenues from hydrocarbons, mostly natural gas, have increased from $440 million in 2004 to over $1.5 billion in 2006 - a significant amount in Bolivia’s economy, as it is an increase from 5 percent of GDP to over 13 percent of GDP. This year revenues will likely top $2 billion, he said. With a twinkle in his eye as he made a measured critique of the Bush administration’s policies, he said that in this new century, armies should save lives through humanitarian aid, not take lives.

Throughout Morales’ media appearances (including a lengthy segment on Democracy Now!), official speeches at the United Nations, and public meetings, he focused on three main points. The most salient was on the urgency of the need for comprehensive solutions to climate change while simultaneously improving the lives of the poor. “We have to be honest about the causes of this global warming. Overconsumption in the developed countries. Overpollution in the developed countries.” At the same time, he argued that the poor still need more access to energy: “Just like we fought to make water a human right, we need an international campaign to make access to energy a human right.”

These sentiments resonated with Brent Blackwelder, President of Friends of the Earth US, who participated in the meeting with Morales. “We need to find solutions that will reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the countries of the global north, while fighting for clean energy and poverty reduction in the global south.” Van Jones, Founder of Green for All agreed. “We’re fighting for social justice and climate solutions within the U.S., and we can join forces with and learn from our allies, like President Morales, with the same vision globally.”

Morales also emphasized the importance of the struggle for the right to life, which in Bolivia refers to the fight against corporate globalization and for access to water, food, education, and health care. Specifically, before Morales was elected, Bolivia suffered tremendously under two decades of programs of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, including the privatizations of water services and the hydrocarbon industry. Bolivia has now had much of its debt cancelled and is no longer bound by an IMF agreement, thanks to the anti-debt movement and a lot of help from Venezuela.

Although Bolivia is rich in natural resources, the Indigenous majority has rarely benefited from their exploitation, and the country remains vastly unequal and majority poor. The Bolivian government’s efforts to ensure a more fair distribution of the natural resource wealth has resulted in their being sued by foreign multinational corporations for “future expected profits” from their investments.

Under international trade and investment agreements, these cases are adjudicated - not in Bolivian national courts, as would be the case for national companies - but through the World Bank’s International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes, ICSID. (This is similar to the “rights” given to foreign investors to sue sovereign governments in bilateral and regional trade agreements, called “Chapter 11″ investor-to-state provisions in the North American Free Trade Agreement.) ICSID does not have the transparency, checks and balances, or openness of a real judicial system, yet its findings are binding.

This past May, the Bolivian government announced it would withdraw from ICSID. Although most Americans are unaware of ICSID, it is regularly used by U.S. and European corporations to counter efforts by developing countries to re-nationalize natural resources and the provision of public services like water, according to a major report by the Institute for Policy Studies and Food and Water Watch. During his talks, Morales called on the international community to support their efforts for “an ongoing global campaign against this type of investor rule.”

The third point highlighted by Morales relates to bilateral relations with the United States. The U.S. government, through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) currently operates an Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI) in Bolivia. (OTI offices are usually designed to help enable Washington-favored regime change; the only other one in Latin America is in Venezuela.) The Bolivian government has accused the United States of using USAID money to build opposition to the new government and its political party, the MAS, something the U.S. had done in the past. According to the Associated Press, “A declassified 2002 cable from the U.S. Embassy in La Paz described a USAID-sponsored ‘political party reform project’ to ‘help build moderate, pro-democracy political parties that can serve as a counterweight to the radical MAS or its successors.’”

But Evo’s main argument was regarding the former president, Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, commonly known as Goni. During the “gas wars” of 2003, troops fired on protesters, killing 67 and wounding over 300 people. Days later, Goni abdicated the presidency and flew to Washington, DC, where he now resides. The Bolivian Supreme Court is seeking extradition of Goni, and two of his former ministers, not for revenge, according to Evo, but “so that they can be held accountable for their crimes by standing trial in Bolivia.”

While it seems unlikely that the United States would consent to the extradition, considering their lack of cooperation with the Venezuelan government’s request for the extradition of terrorist Luis Posada Carriles, the recent agreement of the Chilean government to extradite former Peruvian president Alberto Fujimori to face trial in Peru does set a precedent that will be hard for the United States to ignore. The Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns has worked to educate the public about this issue, and the Center for Constitutional Rights just announced a new major lawsuit against Goni and former Minister of Defense Jose Carlos Sánchez Berzaín for compensatory and punitive damages under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) and the Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA) on behalf of families of the victims.

After decades of politicians who robbed the country’s coffers and left the people in poverty and despair, Bolivia now has a leader who is known to be honest, sincere and trustworthy. Bolivia also has a leader who inspires hope in the Indigenous population. This hope is now embodied, worldwide, in the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, a brand-new declaration approved in the United Nations this September, after a 25-year struggle. At the grassroots meeting with Morales, Tonya Gonella Frichner, President and Founder of the American Indian Law Alliance, highlighted Bolivia’s helpful role in the passage of the declaration, and both she and Morales agreed that “the next step is ensuring that the declaration is implemented.”

Morales, anxious to apply Indigenous wisdom to solve the global climate crisis, is calling for the United Nations to convene a world indigenous forum to “foster a new approach to economic relations based on an appreciation of natural resources and not their exploitation.”

The world has much to learn from the sustainable lifestyles of Indigenous people and from the grassroots movement that has come to power in Bolivia. At a time when our planet is crying out for leadership with vision and integrity, Evo Morales and the Bolivian example should give hope to us all.

Deborah James is the Director of International Programs at the Center for Economic and Policy Research. Medea Benjamin is a Co-Founder of Global Exchange and CodePink: Women for Peace.

First published at CommonDreams.org

"In order to live better sometimes you have to exploit, steal, discriminate, and plunder, but to live the good life is to live communally"

Central speech by the President of the Republic of Bolivia, Evo Morales Ayma, at the 62^nd Session of the United Nations (UN), addressing the environment. United Nations, 26 September, 2007

I would like to take this opportunity to express my extreme satisfaction over the election of the new General Secretary of the United Nations who will be leading this international organization for the good of humanity, and above all for the good of the abandoned and dispossessed.

That is why I wish to briefly comment about my country. For the first time in Bolivia’s history the most abandoned sectors, the most despised, scorned, and vilified in Bolivian history, the indigenous people, have assumed leadership of the country in order to transform our beloved Bolivia.

Political changes, economic changes and a commitment to recreate our country. We seek unity, respect for our diversity, and respect for our identity so that together we can solve our economic and social problems.

In this short time I have found that it will be difficult and we will have to struggle for equality and justice for all those living in the country.

But at the same time when the popular movement, the indigenous movement, intellectuals, even businessmen and professionals commit themselves with a great deal of effort to the earth and to their people, one is encouraged to continue working and transforming, democratically and peacefully to guarantee a cultural revolution in my country.

But recovering our natural resources has been the most important step. It pains me to say that in my country during the neo-liberal governments, natural resources and state companies were privatized. Under the pretext of capitalization they de-capitalized the country. They claimed that privatization was the solution for unemployment and corruption, but instead we have seen unemployment and corruption increase.

Just a few years ago Bolivia was considered the world’s champion of corruption, and now I am very pleased that international organizations have noted that corruption in Bolivia has dropped significantly. We would like to eradicate it.

I want you all to know that in 2005, before I became president of the Republic and the hydrocarbons, petroleum, and natural gas were in the hands of trans-nationals, Bolivia only received $300 million from hydrocarbons.

After modifying the hydrocarbon law, after recovering and nationalizing this extremely important natural resource, Bolivia received more than $2,000 million this year.

Therefore I would like to say from experience, to all presidents or nations where the natural resources have been privatized, it is important to recover these natural resources with the support of the people, for the benefit of the people and the nation.

I understand perfectly that the companies have the right to recover their investments and they have the right to profit. But not so much like before which amounted to the outright plunder of our natural resources.

What is most important about this short period is that we have begun to de-colonize Bolivia internally and externally. I say internally because in the past masters ruled our country. If we review our history we find that viceroy masters, religious groups, and the oligarchy have ruled. The people have never had any power.

Now we are establishing the people’s power, so that sovereignty belongs to the people instead of to a group of families and so that the people have the right to decide their own destiny. That is the best democracy we can implement.

It is not just a matter of simply opting for certain policies. When I say that we have begun to de-colonize externally I am not only talking about being subjugated to landlords o bosses in my country. I want you all to know right now that no ambassadors will change our ministers or name ministers in my country.

Regrettably in the past, the U.S. ambassadors changed and named our ministers. That is over. That is why we have begun to de-colonize our country.

In the past the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund imposed policies. That has also ended. I remember perfectly and I want you all to know a little bit of my country’s history.

In 2003, the World Bank and International Monetary Fund told the president of that time that either a spike in gas prices or a high tax had to be imposed in order to avoid a fiscal deficit. The government chose the tax. They taxed workers wages and in two days there were more than 15 Bolivians dead from internal clashes.

I want to inform you all that Bolivia enjoyed a fiscal surplus this year without taxes and without gasoline price spikes thanks to the recovery of our hydrocarbons, which are so important to my country. I want you all to know that we have already begun the external de-colonization.

Because we are interested in how to better gather the proposals and initiatives of our people, of organized people. These social forces, be they civic or labor, especially those with serious economic problems, they have the wisdom to propose initiatives and solutions from their communities, from their trade unions. That is my experience.

So I think it is important to develop the power of the people, thus giving social forces the power to make the decisions. I, as president, only rule in compliance with the people. In this way we will be able to solve our problems.

Yesterday, over the past few days and hours I have heard some very encouraging speeches, but also others that really disappointed me. For example global warming and climate change were addressed. I feel that many of our countries are victims of these phenomenon.

I still cannot understand why there are so many lives lost in floods, invasions, or wars. So many lives lost to hunger. I feel that there are economic models that cannot solve the problems of humanity. After having heard many of the statements made here and the experiences expressed by other presidents, I am even more convinced that the concentration of capital in a few hands is not the solution for humanity. Models that accumulate wealth in a few hands are not the solution for humankind, for life, and even less for the poor that inhabit this planet earth.

Global warming and melting icecaps were addressed but without mention of their cause. I am convinced that the cause is what is wrongly termed globalization, or selective globalization, a globalization that does not respect plurality or differences.

When talking about globalization we must first globalize the human being. Well, I don’t know how you all managed to make it to New York, United States, but my delegation had difficulties getting visas. Our parliamentarians, our congresspersons could not obtain visas to come to the U.S.

When I arrived here, my ministers, indigenous brothers, were held up in the airport and subjected to hours and hours of processing. Some from other countries arrived here only to be threatened by the head of the house, President Bush. If it is like that, if it is going to continue to be like that, I think we presidents, we nations, should think about changing the headquarters of the United Nations. I personally do not agree with being subjected to such investigations when coming here.

I feel that it is also time to de-colonize the United Nations. We should all be respected whether we are small or large, with problems or without.

The speeches I heard about polar melting did not reflect on the cause of this melting, this global warming. It is capitalism and the exaggerated and unlimited industrialization of some countries that generates these problems on the continent and around the globe.

But when we align ourselves with social movements in order to protest, to condemn these unsustainable policies, these economic models that do not solve our economic problems, then comes the interventions, military bases, and wars, the demonizing and accusations of terrorism, as if the people have no right to appeal for their needs, to claim their rights and to demand new approaches to rescuing life and humankind.

Therefore I believe it is important that we as presidents, as nations, as delegates sincerely speak the truth about these economic problems that are being faced not only by Bolivia, America, or South America. But when democratic changes take place in South America, liberating democracies not democracies subjugated to the empire, we hear more accusations and distortions, charges of cruelty and of dictators like those I heard President Bush directing towards the president and commander Cuba yesterday.

A salute to all revolutionaries. Especially to President Fidel for whom I have much respect, because Fidel has also sent troops to many countries. But these troops save lives, unlike those deployed by the U.S. president to take lives.

Therefore here, as presidents we should think of life, of humanity, about how to save the planet earth. The issue of global climate change is an ongoing debate.

Esteemed members, I am convinced that is not possible for basic services to continue being in the hands of private business. Fortunately, thanks to the foreign ministers of the Americas, water has been recognized as a human right. If water is a human right then it's now important that it become a public service and not a private business.

Is vital now, right here, to recognize energy as a human right also. Hopefully we can all agree that energy is a human right; and if it is a human right it should never be controlled by private business. Instead it must be a public service in order to meet the needs of the people.

I cannot understand their pretext of hegemony or the accumulation of capital in a few hands, which will only continue harming humanity, affecting the poor, marginalizing the needy.

I believe that that we are talking in order to change these economic policies that have caused and go on causing so much damage. These economic policies have caused genocide; and the genocide continues. I cannot understand why there are still countries involved in an arms race, I don’t agree with war. We are exploring how a large social, political movement, via a new constitution, can reject war.

I'm convinced that war is the industry of death, thus the arms race is just another industry that complements the industry and death. In this new millennium, how can countries and presidents still go on dealing with the interventions, arrogance, and authoritarianism of some countries towards other countries, without even considering humanity.

Esteemed presidents, I believe, that together we can work toward rescuing planet earth, which is the most important issue at the moment if we want to save life and humanity.

But yesterday I heard some speeches about Biofuel. I tried to understand what biofuel, or agrofuel is. I don't understand how we can give up our food to automobiles; I can't understand how the land can be given over to heaps of metal.

I think that food should be for human beings, the land for life. Because we lack gasoline, because we lack diesel we're going to divert land and food to automobiles?

For this reason I said two days ago that if we are really interested in life we would abandon luxury. It's imperative to abandon luxury. We cannot continue accumulating garbage, we cannot continue thinking only about a few families instead of thinking about humanity. I think that we have profound differences if we talk about these issues of life, especially the lives of our national majorities.

I wish to take this opportunity to acknowledge and thank you all for your support, with the exception of four governments, their presidents and their delegates, in approving the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples of the world. I'm very satisfied. The people of America have waited more than 500 years for their rights to be recognized. We are the culture of patience.

And I want to make clear that just because we have a declaration now doesn’t mean that the indigenous movement is going to become vengeful towards other sectors. The indigenous people do not have a vengeful character. The indigenous people are a culture of dialogue and we are fundamentally a culture of life.

I ask the United Nations to convene a world indigenous forum soon so that we can share our experiences. In Bolivia we are gathering and drawing from our experiences with a program called the good life. In order to live better sometimes you have to exploit, to live better sometimes you have to steal, to live better sometimes you have to discriminate, to live better sometimes you have to plunder, but to live the good life is to live communally, to live collectively.

And not only among human beings, but also to live the good life in harmony with mother earth. The earth for the indigenous movement is sacred; mother earth is our life. The Pachamama, as we say in our language, cannot be converted into merchandise. If we're talking about and protesting against global warming, well, first we must understand what mother earth is. If the earth gives us life we are obligated to change our policies and to also recognize the indigenous movement.

We have lived collectively, communally; those with experience are here debating. We argue for collectivity, communitarianism and against capitalism. Let us draw from those experiences in order to defend life and rescue humankind.

I also want to quickly take this moment to say that this new millennium must be the millennium of life, the millennium of equality, of justice that respects our identity and is committed to human dignity.

Therefore we're talking about changing the economic models that harm humanity. But if we want to change things from here, we must first change ourselves. We mustn’t be egoistic, individualistic, greedy, ambitious, or sectarian. We mustn’t place the interests of a few families above those of the great family of planet earth.

So, we're talking here about first changing ourselves as presidents, as representatives of our respective nations in order to change economic models and seek equality and justice.

And I tell you that in these past 20 months as president working with the people, listening to their needs, I have found that there are still some groups that don’t want to lose their privileges, ill-gotten privileges. Above all they are accustom to the State doing business for the benefit of just a few families instead of for the [Bolivian] family.

I learned in these 20 months as president how beautiful it is to work for the homeland and not for money, how wonderful it is to work for these abandoned people, and how much better it has been to work together with some people who are economically well off but who also love their homeland and are committed to solidarity.

I would like to mention, you all know that we have a historical problem with the sister Republic of Chile: the issue of the ocean. I want to say that so far we have felt a real sense of amity, people to people amity, government to government amity, president to president amity, under the diplomacy of the people.

And we want to pledge to resolve the historic issue but within the framework of complementarity. Because neighboring countries, Latin American countries, countries of the world need to complement one another if we want to solve the problems of our people and the problems of our nations.

The concept of complimentarity is so important and we continue working towards this for humankind. In closing I'd like to say (...sometimes the red light makes one nervous, but never mind...) I would like to say that these kinds of participatory event where we all learn and continue learning, are the best universities available. But we must speak with clarity, with sincerity and not falsify the truth by only speaking of the effects and not the causes or of humanity’s problems.

In this case I wish to tell you all that I believe it is vital to change those economic models and eradicate capitalism.

Thank you very much.

Translated from ABI by Dawn Gable

Garcia Linera: radical reforms are irreversible “with or without the Assembly”

This is the Right’s last chance for an agreement. He says that with or without the Constituent Assembly, there is no stopping radical changes to alter the country’s structures. The Assembly is withstanding the siege by the conservative, violent forces who are even prepared to promote a coup d’état.

La Paz/OPINIÓN — Vice-president Álvaro García, the host of the political summit beginning today in La Paz in an effort to find formulas that will allow the Constituent Assembly to resume its proceedings, has warned that this is the last chance the Right has to negotiate with the Government, because the radical reforms are irreversible “with or without the Assembly”.

These are the opinions of Vice-president García Linera, in an exclusive interview for OPINIÓN published on September 19.

OPINIÓN (O): Is the Constituent Assembly in danger?

Álvaro García Linera (AGL): The country’s Constituent Assembly has consistently been under attack from conservative forces who do not accept change and hope to maintain their privileges, conquered through decades of force and corruption.

For two years now they have been striving, and I expect in the months to come they will continue to make every effort to obstruct the Constituent Assembly, to attack it, to forestall its advance. So we can say that the Constituent Assembly has always been endangered, but there are honorable social forces in the country that can rise above these setbacks and manage to implement, in its major features, the structural transformation of our homeland.

O: What are the expectations for the meeting that begins today?

AGL: This initiative in bringing together the members of the Constituent Assembly, two or three members and one political leader per party, started with the work we have been doing in the National Congress, where we have made major advances to get closer to the opposition forces and work with the democratic opposition, while isolating the intransigent, radical and violent opposition that is unwilling to engage in any negotiations.

This initiative of the four forces that have a presence in the Congress has aroused great enthusiasm among other forces in the Constituent Assembly and we are adjourning for two days so that 16 political forces represented in the Constituent can attend in order to establish a procedure of a technical and political nature with the perspective of reaching a consensus, and achieving agreements and accords to make the Assembly viable.

O: What are the key items for the success of the Assembly?

AGL: At the bottom of everything is land, wealth, natural resources. The issue of the two-thirds majority last year, which blocked the Constituent Assembly for seven months, or the issue of the location of the capital, which has generated tensions in the city of Sucre, are secondary in comparison with the central issue.

The real issue that is fixating the country’s conservative elites is the issue of ownership of the land, the issue of the ownership of the forests, of the water, of the mineral and hydrocarbon resources.

The capital’s location is an issue of public interest, but it has been overblown nationally, while the issue of land ownership has been obscured. There are sectors who do not accept the elimination of unproductive latifundias, who do not accept that the State should recover lands wrongly acquired through the patronage and political corruption of recent decades.

This is the basic question that separates the Government and a democratic opposition from an intransigent radical opposition that is prepared, moreover, to use violence to defend its privileges. This is the substantive issue and this Wednesday we are going to put the cards on the table, put aside the secondary issues and propose to the Constituent Assembly members that we discuss the substantive issues and look for solutions and points of consensus.

Where no consensus is possible, we will proceed to a referendum and it will be the sovereign people who will decide the matter with their vote.

O: Could the re-election of the president be another controversial issue?

AGL: It is possible that some differences will arise over that issue. If so, there is no problem, it will be the sovereign authority, the people, voting in the referendum, who will say whether they agree with repeal or re-election of the leaders.

Our proposal is to sit down at the table and if there is no agreement proceed to a referendum because, with the law we have approved in the Congress, all the issues that do not obtain the two-thirds majority will go to a referendum in which the people will decide with their vote.

If the issue of ratification of the term of office or repeal does not get a consensus among the Constituent Assembly members, it will be the people who decide with their democratic vote which opinion is to be applied on this issue.

O: Is there a possibility that we will get a comprehensive national agreement?

AGL: I would prefer to be more cautious, let us say there is a political or technical meeting that is seeking to bring the parties closer together, to conduct an examination of the majority and minority proposals in democratic terms, while isolating the violent sectors of the conservative Right. If that strategy is productive, then we can expect any number of results, including a comprehensive agreement.

But we are not fostering too many expectations, because there are still forces that want to destroy the Constituent Assembly, and who still have the force, the media, the resources, so it is better to be cautious, to get the discussions going, and if we get some results we can put the corresponding number on it.

O: What is the significance of the outcome of the Constituent Assembly?

AGL: The Constituent Assembly has been a major popular demand of the most excluded sectors in Bolivia, the majority, for more than 15 years as a way to resolve democratically the differences and disagreements that have divided Bolivians for more than 200 years.

It was a lucid launch for the democratic process to try to bring the distinct sectors together around a new Magna Carta. This democratic proposal has run into the pitfalls that we have encountered and the setbacks in the Constituent Assembly have helped to highlight the just demands of the people and the politically and historically selfish — I would say miserable — attitude on the part of the old ruling elites who are unwilling to yield their ill-gotten privileges and to recognize the rights of the large majorities.

Moreover, it has highlighted the distinct agendas for the country that are at issue: a democratic, plural country with recognition of differences, with a sound and sovereign economy, and a privatizing, foreign-dominated agenda of subordination to outside powers and destruction of the labour force.

Thirdly, notwithstanding the conflicts, I remain quite optimistic. It is not a Constituent Assembly that is drawing up a text among five or ten people in a room. It is a popular plebeian way to bring us together, work through our disputes and reach agreements. It is a positive thing that trade-unionists, peasant leaders, productive sectors, including business people, are deliberating, because we are building in spite of the obstacles the possibility for a Constituent Assembly that is produced collectively, and not by a consulting firm or by four leaders.

I am still hopeful that the Constituent will go ahead, involving all the forces. However, come what may in the Assembly, no one ought to have the least doubt that the processes of change will continue.

Better with the Constituent, where we can reach agreement in the new constitutional document. If the Right wastes this opportunity that we are giving it as the government, as civil society, as social movements, the processes of change, in its radical content of equality and distribution of wealth, will continue. And it will be the Right that will have to come to us asking for agreements and dialogue.

There is a democratic Right with which we are talking, but there is also an undemocratic, subversive and coup-oriented Right. That Right, in its intransigence, is losing the opportunity of getting a hearing for its interests. And if they obstruct the Constituent Assembly the processes of change will continue in spite of that Right, and the distribution of wealth, the recognition of our rights through democratic channels will be steadily strengthened in our country.

Translated from Opinion by Richard Fidler

Bolivia needs our solidarity

Federico Fuentes, Caracas, 14 September

For Bolivia’s indigenous majority there is no going back. The election in 2005 of Bolivia’s first indigenous president, Evo Morales, marked a watershed — a before and after in Bolivia’s history — after more than 500 years of struggle against imperialism and colonialism. It marked a conscious step forward by Bolivia’s indigenous majority in its struggle for justice and equality.

As Morales pointed out in an August 22 interview with the BBC, right from the start Bolivia’s right wing “said this little Indian is only going to be president for three or four months. That day passed and now they say this little Indian is going to be here for a long time, we have to do something about it; and that means encouraging confusion or destabilisation.”

That is why today a resurgent right wing is determined to destabilise the country and government — even if it means plunging the country into civil war or provoking a violent military coup — to bring down Morales, and with him the hopes and dreams of millions of indigenous and non-indigenous people, not just in Bolivia, but throughout Latin America and the world.

Distribution of racist material inciting people to “bring down this Indian shit”, provoking violent confrontations, holding civic “stoppages” enforced by fascist youth groups, and smuggling arms into the country — these, and more, are ingredients in a conspiracy to overthrow Morales.

The public faces of the right wing, centred in the wealthy departments (states) of the east, are the opposition governors and the unelected, business-controlled civic committees — in Santa Cruz, Pando, Beni and Tarija — now openly joined by the civic committee of Cochabamba and Chuquisaca. Behind them stand the gas transnationals, large agribusiness and the US empire, all of whom benefited from ransacking Bolivia’s enormous natural wealth while pushing the country to the position of the poorest in South America. But their task will be far from easy.

The election of “this little Indian” came on the back of a wave of social rebellion, fuelled by an increasing rejection of neoliberalism and the emergence and growth of national and indigenous pride, based on the celebration of the country’s indigenous peoples and recuperation of its natural resources. It was also the result of a conscious decision more than 10 years ago by the indigenous, campesino and coca-growers’ movements to move “from resistance to power” and construct their own “Political Instrument for the Sovereignty of the People” — more commonly know by its electorally registered name, Movement Towards Socialism (MAS).

Gaining the support from an important section of the country’s middle class and intellectuals for its project, MAS was able to win the 2005 national elections, crushing the traditional politicians whose subservience to the US empire had almost led to the total suffocation of the country.

Today, the Bolivians who due to their skin colour were previously excluded from the plaza in front of the presidential palace, and who protested outside it to overthrow other governments, have begun to take over the positions of power. This act has been a powerful catalyst in rebuilding the self-esteem of the people, who now proclaim with pride their indigenous roots.

The central task entrusted to the MAS government was to convoke a constituent assembly in order to “refound” Bolivia, ending injustice and recognising the rights of the previously excluded indigenous majority.

However, more than a year since the assembly’s inauguration in Sucre in August 2006, it is yet to vote on a single article for the new constitution. The same political minority that ruled over the demise of the country today cries out in defence of “democracy” and “autonomy”, with the objective of protecting its political enclaves and economic power and mobilising sectors of the white and mestizo middle classes of the east and west against the government.

The stalling tactics and latest round of violent protests by the right wing, this time in Sucre, threatened the security of the assembly, forcing some indigenous delegates into hiding in order to avoid racist attacks. On September 7 the assembly directorate voted to suspend sessions for a month as it was unable to guarantee security.

On September 10, more than 10,000 campesinos and indigenous people marched through Sucre in a show of force to defend the constituent assembly and national unity. Unlike the scenes of violence over the previous weeks, the streets of Sucre were filled with a festive tone.

Later in the day, during the 10,000-15,000 strong Social Summit, the social organisations resolved to “defend, including with our lives, the constituent assembly and this process of irreversible profound change being driven forward by the historic forces of our peoples and the indigenous, originario and campesino nations, together with the popular organisations”.

Furthermore, the social movements declared themselves to be in a “state of emergency” and committed themselves to organising Committees in Defence of the Constituent Assembly, adding that, if necessary, they would undertake “other more radical measures”.

In its manifesto, the summit outlined 18 strategic points behind which the participants would mobilise to ensure they are enshrined in the new constitution. Among them are the creation of unitary, plurinational, communitarian and democratic state; nationalisation of natural resources; taxes on large fortunes; the expropriation without compensation of latifundios (large land-holdings) and the immediate distribution of their land; re-election and revoking of mandates of any elected authority; and the confiscation of all goods implicated in acts of corruption.

For now the situation in Sucre has calmed down; the opposition’s threats of further actions starting on September 10 were called off. A new round of dialogue has been convoked to see if it is possible to overcome the impasse.

But the tension remains, and one can only speculate how long the calm will last. The directorate of the assembly has signalled it will reject a court ruling overturning the assembly decision to remove the issue of the location of Bolivia’s capital from debate (the right-wing fuelled conflict over whether to locate it in La Paz, the current political capital, or Sucre, the current constitutional capital, helping trigger the latest confrontation). The future of the constituent assembly and Bolivia hang in the balance.

The indigenous and campesino mobilisation was an important step taken by the social and indigenous movements in defence of the constituent assembly. However, as Vice-President Alvaro Garcia Linera pointed out in the lead-up to the protest, “To wear down the old powers will cost a lot, it will be conflictive, the population needs to be conscious of this, and the best way to defend the continuity of the process of change is through democratic mobilisation to back this transformation and to put an end to the history of these old elites”.

Mass democratic mobilisations and the organisation of the people will be central to maintaining unity amongst the movements and avoiding provocations by the right wing. The right wing’s strategy depends on stirring up anger among the exploited and oppressed who refuse to ever go back to the old Bolivia, with the aims of triggering violent reactions and creating chaos.

The government and social movements need to demonstrate that they are the only ones able to provide real stability and change for all Bolivians. This is necessary in order to appeal to the middle classes sectors that, due to mistakes by MAS, now feel alienated from the government — something the government itself has acknowledged and that it has begun to remedy. It is also critical to maintaining support among the armed forces.

Internationally, it is vital for the governments and peoples of the world to voice their solidarity and make clear that they will reject any attempts to trigger a civil war, or an ensuing US/UN military occupation or illegitimate government.

Undoubtedly the US elite sees Bolivia as the weak link in the emerging Bolivia-Cuba-Venezuela “axis of hope” in Latin America. Moreover, Bolivia’s government and the indigenous revolution is helping stimulate indigenous struggles in the region — something Washington fears and will not tolerate.

On September 9, Venezuela’s socialist president Hugo Chavez, sitting next to Morales, warned on his Alo Preisdente TV program: “If US imperialism attacks our peoples, using their lackeys in Venezuela and Bolivia, they can be sure that we’re not going to wait with our arms crossed. If that occurs, we will shout with Che Guevara, and then one, two, three, four, five, or 10 Vietnams will have to be created in Latin America.”

To date, neither the governments of Argentina or Brazil have spoken out about the growing threat to Bolivia. A clear statement by these two and other South American countries rejecting a civil war, military coup or invasion of Bolivia, would be a strong blow against the US empire’s designs.

Now is the time for all intellectuals, union militants, solidarity activists, political parties and progressive minded individuals who believe in real justice and equality to raise their voices in defence of Bolivia and its government, which is leading an important process of change providing hope and inspiration to millions of indigenous and oppressed people around the world, to ensure that the US and its lackeys cannot get away with crushing this movement for social liberation.

First published in Green Left Weekly

Morales defends Bolivia changes

BBC News, August 22More than 18 months after being elected president of Bolivia, Evo Morales defends his record and tells the BBC's Lola Almudevar in La Paz that more change is to come.

When Bolivia's President Evo Morales addresses a crowd, it is as if he is punching the air with each sentence.

He makes no effort to hide his emotions.

The day we meet, he is pledging half of his monthly salary - $950 - to help Peru's earthquake victims.

Cynics will say this latest action is an attempt to divert attention away from political discord at home.

But Mr Morales, Bolivia's first indigenous president, says he is used to such attacks.

"The way I see it, it's impossible to change things without encountering resistance," he shrugs.

Reclaiming resources

Mr Morales is wearing a black wool jacket with a strip of traditional embroidery.

His thick, shiny fringe slumps over tired eyes.

We are in a long hall, furnished with gilded mirrors and lavish dressers, in the presidential palace.

Just over 18 months ago, he was on the outside shouting and blocking streets to get heard.

Now, he is hammering away at a controversial programme of social change from the inside.

Within months of his taking up office, he put the energy industry under state control - foreign firms were given six months to sell at least 51% of their holding and negotiate new contracts, or leave.

Nationalisation sent tremors through the energy sector, but Mr Morales insists it is making Bolivia richer.

"We are starting a process of decolonisation in Bolivia," he says. "All this is bringing about change and we will continue."

But for the country to profit from its rich oil and mineral reserves, it needs to attract foreign investment.

Analysts say poor infrastructure and Mr Morales's radical policies have deterred investors.

Even he admits the first year was disappointing, in terms of securing foreign investment, but he says Bolivia will have attracted more than $4bn of investment by the end of this year.

He is putting pressure on gas companies already operating in Bolivia to bring forward their investment plans.

"I am not saying we will expel a company from the country," he says.

"They may carry on working, but as the owners of the natural resources, we will have to recover what is needed to deliver the investment the company should have delivered."

Tackling drugs

Mr Morales is hardly your average politician, having spent years defending the traditional use of the coca leaf at a grass-roots level.

These days, he fights for coca on a diplomatic front, pushing for a change in international law so that Bolivia can export traditional coca products.

Mr Morales says Bolivia is eradicating its illegal coca plantations, but that the international community could do more in the fight against drugs.

"If the law is harsh on the coca leaf, why isn't it harsh on consumers of cocaine?" he asks.

"Governments must face up to the problem of secret banking," he says, hands outstretched.

"Secret bank accounts are for laundering dirty money. Heads of state at the UN should put an end them. That would be the best way of tracking down the drugs traffickers."

Regional relationships

When the president talks about Bolivia's relationship with Cuba and Venezuela, his face lights up. These are the friends, helping his country to develop.

"Cuba has installed 11 optometry centres in Bolivia, they have operated on more than 120,000 patients for free," he says leaning forward.

"What has Cuba asked of us; ownership of a mining centre, or partnership in oil? No, nothing."

When asked if he is his replacing what he calls "North American imperialism" with Venezuelan imperialism, Mr Morales retorts:

"Venezuela helps without imposing conditions. Our relationship is based on mutual respect between governments, countries and communities."

According to Mr Morales, this is what is lacking from the US.

"Right from the start, they said this little Indian is only going to be president for three or four months," he says.

"That day passed and now they say this little Indian is going to be here for a long time, we have to do something about it; and that means encouraging confusion or destabilisation."

'Honesty'

The destabilisation he refers to is a regional campaign to move the executive and legislative branches of power from La Paz to Sucre, making Sucre the sole capital.

The issue has caused gridlock in the assembly set up by Mr Morales to draft a new constitution.

There have been hunger strikes and mass demonstrations, and with eastern and southern regions now supporting the move to Sucre, the country seems more divided than ever.

Is the assembly in jeopardy? "I have a lot of hope for the Constituent Assembly," Mr Morales says.

"If it fails, if it closes, it will be exactly because of the people who do not want the rules changed, who do not want a cultural revolution, or to lose their privileges."

Bolivia's president has been sitting next to me for 45 minutes. Speaking in a soft voice, he has defended his record and criticised his opponents.

"When we get it wrong, we get it wrong. Who doesn't get it wrong?" he says.

"The issue is recognising our mistakes, and that is where we have a great advantage; above all it is in our honesty."

First published at BBC News