|
Pro-Imperialist Right Suffers Defeat in Bolivian Election
by Gerry Foley / January 2006 issue of Socialist Action
newspaper
Evo Morales, the candidate of the Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS), a party based on the peasant coca growers, won a resounding victory in the Dec.18 Bolivian presidential elections.
Morales
came to prominence for his denunciations of U.S. imperialism, and in particular
its so-called drug war, and has identified himself with Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez
and with Fidel Castro. He visited Cuba within days of his election, where
he received a resounding welcome.
Thus,
his electoral victory has become a something of an international sensation,
especially in Latin America. There has been a lot of speculation about the portents
in the world press.
The
situation in Bolivia is of special interest to socialists, since this
country has been the most advanced point of the wave of revolts in Latin
America against the imperialist and capitalist offensive known as
neoliberalism. It has been the focus of attention of revolutionary movements
in the other countries of the region, especially Argentina.
In
a four-candidate race, Morales garnered more than 50 percent, assuring his
ascension to the presidency. (If he
had gotten less than 50 percent, the election would have gone to the
parliament.) In El Alto, the epicenter of the massive upsurges from
February to October 2003 and from January to June 2005 that toppled the two
previous presidents of the country, he got over 70 percent of the vote.
(Gonzalo Sanchez de Losada fled the country in October 2003 and his successor,
Carlos Mesa, resigned in June 2005.)
In
general, Morales got very high votes in all the Andean areas where the mass
upsurges of 2003 and 2005 were strongest and which are the historic
heartland of the left and workers’ movement in Bolivia—La Paz (63 per ent),
Cochabamba (60.1 percent), Oruro (61 percent), Potosi (53.2 percent). It is
clear that he rose to victory on the wave of revolt against the
imperialist
offensive and the mass uprisings. That largely explains the so far cautious
expressions of worry on the part of the U.S. government and world imperialism.
Moreover,
the MAS was built as a movement to oppose U.S. attempts to eradicate coca
growing in Bolivia, part of its so-called War on Drugs, which Washington has
used as a pretext for the deployment of American military forces all over
Latin America. Coca growing
has
been a refuge of Bolivian farmers ruined by the competition of U.S. government-backed
agribusiness and by miners massively laid off as a result of the privatization
of the mines.
The
coca leaf itself is a traditional stimulant and not much used to produce a
narcotic in Bolivia, although it provides the raw material for cocaine, one
of the principal products of the international drug trade. So, the U.S. attempt
to destroy the coca crop has come into conflict with a vast popular
movement in Bolivia. And U.S. officials are voicing fears that Morales will
obstruct their “War on Drugs” in Latin America.
Populist and leftist governments in region
More
broadly, the victory of the MAS was seen as a another shift to the left in
Latin American politics, after a series of reformist governments have come
into office in recent years on the back of a surge of rebellion against the
imperialist economic onslaught. Some
of the capitalist papers even referred to Morales’ victory as another step
toward “socialism” in the region. But so far, however much these regimes
may irritate the U.S. rulers and the local capitalists, none of them have
made any serious attack on imperialist-dominated capitalism, and some of
them have fallen prey to rapid disillusionment among the masses, such as
the Gutierrez government in Ecuador, and now the Lula government in Brazil.
In
general, so far, such governments have acted as buffers, shielding the
capitalists from the anger of the masses. But the mass revolt in Bolivia
has been more radicalized than anywhere else, and so local and international
big business is more nervous about its prospects. They have huge stakes in
the country. Bolivia has the second
largest natural gas reserves in
the
hemisphere and potentially very important sources of iron and manganese.
The
Bolivian presidential election was extremely polarized. The right rallied
around the candidacy of Tuto Quiroga, a former vice president of Hugo
Banzer, who had ruled the country initially as a military dictator. He
succeeded Banzer as president in August 2001, when the strongman’s health
forced him to resign, and held the presidency himself for a year. Quiroga got 31 percent of the vote. The
fact that the right chose such a figure as its standard bearer is
undoubtedly
indicative of the polarization.
Successionist movement in Santa Cruz
Although
the right was decisively defeated in the presidential election, it retained
important bulwarks. At this
writing, the final election results have not yet been announced, but it
seems clear that the right will get control of a majority of provincial governments
and probably a majority in the national parliament. As the national crisis
has deepened, the right has been campaigning for more autonomy for the provinces
in order to assure its regional strongholds.
The
most important of the strongholds of the right is the southeastern province
of Santa Cruz, which is dominated by reactionary landlords, many of whom
are actually refugees from the fall of Hitler’s empire or their
descendants.
This
province has been the breeding ground of Bolivia’s fascist movement and it
is also the location of the most important new discoveries of natural resources—oil,
natural gas, and iron. It borders on Paraguay, where the United States has
recently acquired a military base.
The
right in Santa Cruz has also long played with the idea of breaking off from
Bolivia altogether. The province has a different ethnic composition than
the Andean ones, which are dominated by two big indigenous nationalities,
with a long history of struggle. Santa Cruz is predominately white,
although there are different indigenous communities that sit on the top
of
the natural resources. (In this region, the Indian tribes did not develop
civilizations or become very numerous.)
Elections
are scheduled for July 2006 for a Constituent Assembly, which in theory
could change the country’s representative structure. Some representatives
of mass organizations have said that these are the elections they are
interested in. But for Bolivian
politics, six months is a long time, and it is impossible to predict what
the situation will be when the Constituent Assembly elections are held.
That depends fundamentally on the development of
social
mobilization in the country. Unless there is a major political advance by
the mass movement and the revolutionary left in the meantime, it is likely
that the Constituent Assembly elections will be just another bourgeois
parliamentary-type election.
Mass organizations take differing positions
The
mass organizations that led the uprisings of 2003 and 2005, the COB (the
trade-union confederation), FEDEJUVE (the federation of neighborhood
committees of El Alto), and the COR (the Regional Labor Confederation of El
Alto), did not support Morales and the MAS. They were formally pledged to
the project of building a national assembly of delegates based on the mass
movements and denounced the elections as a bourgeois trick. However, they
did not campaign for a boycott either. In fact, some of the leaders tried
to get spots on the MAS slate.
The
Australian Green Left Weekly had a correspondent in Bolivia at the time of
the election. In the Dec. 16 issue of his paper, he noted: “Faced with the
upcoming elections, El Alto’s organizations have taken differing positions.
Leaders of both the COR and FEDEJUVE initially flirted with the idea of
standing candidates under the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS)
banner,
as well as discussing the possibility of joining the center-left electoral
front proposed by a number of the current mayors of Bolivia’s major cities.”
The
attempt to get on the MAS slate was apparently frustrated by the sectarianism
of Morales’ party, which wanted all the spots for its own people and had neither
the will nor the ability to become the party of the entire mass movement.
“…discussions
between MAS and FEDEJUVE reached a point where it seemed that Abel Mamani
[leader of FEDEJUVE] could be the MAS candidate for La Paz governor. However, due to FEDEJUVE’s demands for
more positions than were on offer on the MAS ticket, and the fight put up
by MAS members to ensure that they got the positions they felt they
deserved for their years of militancy in the organisation, negotiations
broke down.”
The
head of the COB, Jaime Solares, was also invited to run in a party slate,
the slate of Felipe Quispe, a radical indigenous nationalist. In an
interview published on the International Viewpoint (Fourth International)
website, he explained why he rejected the offer: “What Felipe wanted was to
appropriate the name of the COB. He didn’t want me to come in my own name.
That was a kind of condition for my participation. Now, the COB cannot act
like a
political
party, it’s an instrument in the service of the workers, and we cannot
commit it as such. That’s why I refused.”
However,
Solares went on to say that both Morales’ and Quispe’s parties were not
workers parties but peasant parties. But it was not clear if he would have rejected
Quispe’s offer of the vice presidential spot on his slate if he had been
accepted as a candidate in his own name only.
Moreover,
his reasoning for rejecting the post appeared reformist. It is true that
trade unions are a kind of a united front based on the defending the interests
of all their members regardless of political differences. But in a
revolutionary crisis, trade unions cannot remain neutral. They have to
offer leadership to the class, and in such a situation that means political
leadership also. Trade-union leaders have to become revolutionary leaders.
Apparently,
Solares has no such intention. But he did say that the union could not give
support to any party that might betray the workers’ interests. His practical
conclusion was that the COB would observe the Morales government from the
outside. While he mentioned that the COB had decided to set up a “political
instrument,” he did not say what it was or
would
do.
Further
on in the interview, Solares said that it would be necessary to strengthen
the Indigenous Popular Assembly, which was formed in the June 2005 crisis
with the declared aim of setting up a type of soviet (workers-council)
government in opposition to any bourgeois parliament. The sentiment for
building such an alternative seems to be very widespread among the vanguard
of the struggle. That must be why it is given verbal support by the
leaderships of the mass organizations.
This
is the perspective pushed, for example, by the website Econoticias, which
seems to be representative of this vanguard. Econoticias has consistently denounced
Morales and the MAS as the last hope of capitalism in Bolivia. On the eve
of the election (Dec. 10), it published a new declaration for building a
government based directly on the working people, the Declaration of the First
Workers and People’s Summit.
However,
the perspective of the People’s Assembly since it was proclaimed six months
ago has remained an abstract one. And it appears that there was no campaign
for this concept during the elections. In this context, it is understandable
why a leader like Mamani would try to gain a place on the MAS slate.
Since
the election (Dec. 28), Econoticias has reported that Morales got the
applause of representatives of the Santa Cruz oligarchy in a speech given
in the headquarters of the Comite pro Santa Cruz when he promised to
respect private property and praised the Santa Cruz bosses for promoting
the concept of provincial autonomy. It also noted that one of his
first
decisions was to open up the way for private business to exploit the giant
iron and magnesium deposits in the southeastern province.
Some
groups that identify themselves as Trotskyist called for critical support
for Morales on the basis that he was seen by the masses as
anti-imperialist. Certainly, his victory
was hailed by the Cuban revolutionary leadership. And it is true that the governments
that have come into office on the wave of revolt against the imperialist
offensive do offer the Cuban Revolution a bit more breathing room in its conflict
with U.S. imperialism.
However,
it runs counter to raising the political consciousness of working people to
call for support for any pro-capitalist parliamentary party—even a left-talking
peasant-based one, like that of Evo Morales. This is true especially since
it is clear that the organizations that have led the struggle against the
imperialist-dominated governments in Bolivia are committed in principle to
creating a government directly based on the organizations of the masses and
that there is huge support for this idea. Popular illusions in Morales and
a party like MAS in the Bolivian situation can only be a step backward, and
have to be combated.
Thus,
two major Trotskyist organizations in Argentina, the Socialist Workers
Party (PTS) and the Argentine Movement Toward Socialism (MAS), opposed
calling for a vote for Morales. Socialist Action agrees with their position.
It
is true that the victory of Morales offers some support to Cuba in its
confrontation with U.S.
imperialism.
It is understandable that the Cuban revolutionary leadership welcomes this
and conversely that the U.S. is going to be antagonistic to the Morales
government no matter how many or how strong assurances it gives that it
will not attack capitalism or refuse completely to cooperate with the U.S.
war on drugs.
The
Morales government risks being subjected to more and more pressures from
the U.S. and its local imperialists, and it is the duty of all socialist, workers,
and democratic organizations to support it in resisting such pressures. But
in a relatively short time, unless there are new socialist revolutions in Latin
America and a new rise of the socialist movement
worldwide,
the Cuban Revolution will remain essentially isolated and threatened.
Thus,
it is essential for revolutionists to combat illusions in Morales and
similar parliamentary
solutions
and to support the fight to make a government directly representing the
working people a reality.
Statement of the Bolivian Workers and Peoples
Summit
On
the eve of the national and provincial elections … the workers and social
movements meeting in the city of El Alto, considered the headquarters of
the revolution in the 21st century, in the first Workers and People’s
Summit, declare the following:
1)
The workers and social movements of Bolivia today more than ever are convinced
that the national and provincial elections, which are being held to
sabotage the tenacious struggle of the exploited, will not solve the
problems that are stifling the Bolivians nor defend the sovereignty and
dignity of the nation. Poverty, hunger, and unemployment will continue to grow
worse.
2)
Conscious that the recent struggles have been characterized by their
assault on neoliberalism and their failure to take power, the workers and
the social movements of Bolivia has the elementary duty to construct and
consolidate the Indigenous National People’s Assembly as an organ of power.
The constituent assembly projected by the present government has no
objective except to rescue the interests of the transnationals.
At
this point, the workers and exploited of our country are certain that none
of the candidates with a chance to win power through the elections will
dare to recover our natural resources. For this reason, we have no other
road but to suspend the breathing space granted after the May-June days to
take up the struggle for the following objectives:
•
Nationalization of the hydrocarbons without compensation and recovery of
our natural resources.
•
Reinforcement of the Political Instrument of the Workers approved in the
national expanded plenum of the COB.
•
Repeal of Decree 21060, which opened the way for neoliberalism.
• A
minimum living wage with a sliding scale and job security.
•
Resist the annulment of the trade-union law by the successive governments.
•
Recovery of the public service institutions for the people.
•
Intransigent defense of the unity of the nation, a struggle against the
separatist maneuvers of the oligarchy in Santa Cruz and Tarija provinces
under the pretext of local autonomy.
•
Immediate extradition of the mass murderer Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada [a
former president now living in the U.S.] and his imprisonment along with
that of his cohorts in Chonchocoro [the maximum security prison].
4)
The exploited and the social movements realize that in order to achieve our
immediate objectives we will have to install a workers and peasants
government. We can rely only on the direct action of the masses and our own
instruments of struggle. For this reason, we have the elementary duty to
reinforce the COB, the CODs [Departmental Confederations], the CORs
[Regional Confederations], and the local unions and people’s organizations
identified with the struggle of the Bolivian people.
5)
The Bolivian workers declare that they are in a state of alert for any
attempt at intervention by imperialism or any clanking of sabers [threat of
a military coup].
6)
The workers and social movements appeal to the exploited throughout the
country to build Regional People’s Assemblies in March 2006. The
representatives of these organizations must form and reinforce the National
Indigenous People’s Assembly, which will meet on April 10 in the city of El
Alto.
In
this struggle, the exploited have nothing to lose but their chains of
exploitation and humiliation.
|
