November 15, 2019 "Information
Clearing House" -On November 10, Bolivia’s President
Evo Morales Ayma was
removed from office.
Technically Morales resigned, but the conditions for
his resignation had been set by the Bolivian
oligarchy (egged on for thirteen years by the United
States government, as Noam Chomsky and I indicated
in this
statement the day before
the coup). Having won re-election for the fourth
time, Morales faced an open insurrection from his
opponent – former president Carlos Mesa – who lost
the election
conclusively. A team
from the openly hostile Organisation of American
States (OAS) arrived and provided legitimacy for the
coup with a report on the elections that was long on
accusations and short on facts. Using this OAS
report – fully backed by the United States – as
justification, the police mutinied, and then the
army (which had remained neutral) told Morales he
had to resign. There was no choice.
A coup is a curious thing. Those who
make the coup never admit that they have made the
coup. They claim that they are restoring democracy
or that they are taking extraordinary means to
establish the conditions – eventually – for
democracy. This is precisely why the definition of
the events are so fraught. But all coups are not the
same. There are at least two types of military coups
– the General’s Coup and the Colonel’s
Coup.
It has been a long time since we have
seen a classic Colonel’s Coup, perhaps the last
major successful one being in Upper Volta (later
Burkina Faso) in 1983 when Captain Thomas Sankara
took office. These coups, from that of Egypt in 1952
onwards, are driven by non-commissioned officers who
have a close fealty to the working-class, the
peasantry, and the urban poor; their coup is often
against the oligarchy and in favour of some variety
of socialism (the Bolivian National Revolution of
1952 falls into this category).
The General’s Coup, on the other hand,
is conducted by commissioned officers who come from
the oligarchy or whose interests are closely
associated with the oligarchy. These
counter-revolutionary coups are the most commonplace
(and have been very common in Bolivia – 1964, 1970,
1980, and 2019). General Williams Kaliman, who
called on Morales to resign and who was trained by
the United States at its notorious Schools of the
Americas, has effectively led a General’s Coup
against the government of the Movement for Socialism
(MAS).
Vijay Prashad on Hybrid Wars, October 2019.
Such events as a coup are merely
events of a longer-term structure, a long struggle
between the forces of imperialism and of
decolonisation. In 1941, the US-based Council on
Foreign Relations produced a key document for the US
State Department – Methods of Economic
Collaboration: The Role of the Grand Area in
American Economic Policy. The Council defined
the ‘Grand Area’ as encompassing the entire Western
hemisphere, large parts of Europe, the British
Empire, the Dutch East Indies, and the Pacific Rim
(including China and Japan). The countries of the
Western hemisphere, which included all of the
Caribbean and Latin America, would be a ‘source of
raw materials and a market for manufacturers’; this
was the 20th century version of the 1823
Monroe Doctrine.
Are You Tired Of
The Lies And
Non-Stop Propaganda?
A few years later, the US State
Department affirmed that ‘To seek less than
preponderant power would be to opt for defeat.
Preponderant power must be the object of US policy’.
But it was key that the US seek this kind of power
without the appearance of colonialism. In 1962, the
Kennedy administration underlined this problem. ‘It
is important for the US to remain in the background,
and where possible, to limit its support to
training, advice, and material, lest it prejudice
the local government effort and expose the US
unnecessarily to charges of intervention and
colonialism’. The tactics used to fight against
decolonisation are what we call a ‘hybrid
war’. Better to let the Generals – from
Pinochet to Kaliman – do the dirty work, while the
US embassy remains unblemished, and as the aims of
international capital are eventually met.
Bolivian President Evo Morales
Ayma, UN General Assembly, 24 September 2019 (in
Spanish
here).
Since Morales was first elected in
2006, he has overseen an improvement of the
livelihood of the Bolivian people. Two-thirds of
Bolivians are – like Evo Morales – from an
indigenous background. That he put the well-being of
the indigenous majority first rankled the old
oligarchy. At the United Nations this year, Evo
Morales said that, since 2006,Bolivia has cut it poverty rate from 38.2% to
15.2%, increased its life expectancy rate by nine
years, developed a Universal Health Care system, and
ensured that over a million women received land
tenure; today, the country is now 100% literate and
has a parliament where more than 50% of the elected
officials are women. How did Bolivia do this? ‘We
nationalised our natural resources’, Morales said,
‘and our strategic companies. We have taken control
of our destiny’.
‘Bolivia’, Morales said, ‘has a
future’. That future is now in doubt.
Morales and his closest associates had
taken refuge in Mexico. As the coup regime began to
consolidate power, MAS
said that the people of
Bolivia ‘begin the long road of resistance to defend
the historical achievements of the first indigenous
government’. As they drafted this text, the coup
regime tore the flag of the indigenous – the Wiphala
– down from buildings, burned them, and replaced
them with the Bolivian national flag. ‘Over the
coming days’, said the MAS, the ‘hunting down of our
comrades will continue. Our responsibility is to
safeguard one another like a family, to rebuild the
social fabric, to care for and protect our
persecuted leaders. Today is the moment of
solidarity. Tomorrow will be the time for
reorganisation’. Morales’s great humanity came out
in his statement – not even a day after the coup –
that ‘as a human being’ he implored health workers
and teachers to tend to the population with ‘warmth
and solidarity’.
In 1868, Britain’s ambassador insulted
General Mariano Melgarejo, Bolivia’s dictator.
Melgarejo paraded the ambassador down the streets of
La Paz on a donkey. Hearing of this, Britain’s Queen
Victoria demanded that the Royal Navy bomb the city.
When she was told that La Paz was up in the Andes,
she said, ‘Bolivia does not exist’.
Bolivia might have been erased from
the maps, but it remained a major source of silver
and tin for trans-national firms from Europe and the
United States of America. It continues to remain a
major source of tin and today it is home to up to
70% of the world’s lithium supply. The demand for
lithium – used for batteries for electric cars and
electronic devices such as cell phones – is expected
to more than double by 2025. Morales’s government
set high standards for
its mining partnerships: it demanded that at least
half of the control of the mines remain with
Bolivia’s national mining firms, and that the profit
from the mines be used for social development.
Transnational firms sued Bolivia for breaking its
contracts and rejected the new standard set by the
Morales government. The only firms that agreed to
the Bolivian position came from China. As Morales’s
government cut deals with Chinese firms, this
aggravated not only the transnational firms but also
their governments (the United States, Canada, and
the European Union). One aspect of the coup is for
these companies to gain control of Bolivia’s natural
resources – notably lithium, which is essential to
electric cars.
Yet another is to remove one more pole
of the ‘turn to the left’ in South America, which
includes the
electoral victory of the
Left in Argentina and the
release of Brazil’s
former president Lula from prison. Bolivia’s Vice
President Álvaro García Linera’s
words are a reminder of
the turbulence of class struggle, which finds itself
in the brave struggles of the Bolivian people on
their streets against this coup:
We have difficult times ahead,
but for a revolutionary the difficult times are
our force. We live from this, we are
strengthened from this, from the difficult
times. Were we not those who came from below?
Are we not the persecuted, the tortured, the
marginalised, of the times of neoliberalism? We
have in our bodies the traces and the injuries
of struggle from the 1980s and 1990s. And if
today, provisionally, temporarily, we have to
continue to the struggles of the 1980s, of the
1990s, of the 2000s, then welcome. This is what
revolutionaries are for. To struggle, win, fall,
get back up, struggle, win, fall, get back up.
Until our lives are over, this is our destiny.
Tweet from
self-proclaimed president Jeanine Áñez Chavez.
Meanwhile, Bolivia’s self-proclaimed
president Jeanine Áñez Chavez is on records as
having said, ‘I dream of a Bolivia free of satanic
indigenous rites. The city is not for Indians; let
them go back to the highlands or the Chaco’. Apart
from everything, this was a racist coup.
Vijay Prashad is an Indian
historian, journalist, commentator and a Marxist
intellectual. He is an executive-director of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research
and the Chief Editor of LeftWord Books.
Russia Recognizes
Bolivia’s Interim Leader:
Events leading to Bolivian president
Evo Morales leaving office had all the features of a
coup d'etat, Russia’s deputy foreign minister has
said. Moscow will be working with interim president
Jeanine Anez until the election.
We ask that you assist us in
dissemination of the article published by
ICH to your social media accounts and post
links to the article from other websites.
Thank you for your support.
Peace and joy
The
views expressed in this article are solely those
of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
opinions of Information Clearing House.
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)