Amid opposition, Morales to face confidence vote
The citizens of Bolivia will vote by referendum on whether their president, Evo Morales, should s
tay in office. The confidence vote, which is actually Morales’ idea, has recently been embraced by the Bolivian Senate, which has long resisted his moves for reform. According to the BBC, the confidence vote will take place within 90 days.
Michael Iafrate previously blogged about Bolivia’s choice to end its association with the School of the Americas.
As I have noted, the politics of Latin America have been leaning left in recent years, a trend perhaps aptly illustrated by the recent election of Fernando Lugo Méndez to Paraguay’s presidency. Nevertheless, I get the sense that we may be witnesses the end of Morales’ brief tenure of leadership. If roughly 54% of the Bolivian population votes against Morales, a new general election will be held. This is just the sort of scenario that motivates the opposition. Stay tuned.
UPDATE: Morales has set the date of the vote at August 10, 2008.
This is actually a good thing… Bolivia (or Evo) has been heavily influenced by Hugo Chavez and Bolivians are furious about the kind of intervention Chavez has had on their country. Bolivia was going in the same exact direction as Venezuela and we definitely don’t want that.
Katerina, I suppose one can see that sort of trajectory for Bolivia inchoate in Morales’ rhetoric. What I think is important here is contrast between the rhetoric and actions of Chavez and Morales on the one hand, and the campaign and direction of Lugo in Paraguay on the other. I think Lugo is going to do some very good things amid the outworn banners of Chavez, Castro, Ortega and Morales.
Katerina,,,
When you state that “Bolivia (or Evo) has been heavily influenced by Hugo Chavez and Bolivians are furious about the kind of intervention Chavez has had on their country,” and “Bolivia was going in the same exact direction as Venezuela and we definitely don’t want that”, where is your proof that (most) Bolivians are ‘furious’, and who exactly is ‘we’?
It certainly is not me, nor is it the sentiment of the majority of Bolivians. and therefore it must be the opinion of the minority–of the oligarchical elite. Is that who you represent?
Morales eagerly submitted to the referendum on his governance because he is confident on the outcome which will simultaneously solidify his support, and more-likely will result in the defeat of some of those who oppose his reforms.
Bolivia is only one of many SA and CA nations who understand what the SOA is really about–the domination and subjugation and control by the USA to allow continued exploitation of the people and their resources by the subversion of their military, especially their leadership. It took Banzer 15 years after his SOA schooling to organize a coup and become the President of Bolivia–only one of many occasions where corrupted SOA grads have, under the influence of the USA, conspired to either take over or disrupt legal governments.
Why is Bolivia the poorest nation in SA? After the Spanish were kicked out, those of us in the USA seeking answers need only look in the blood-covered mirror.
The best action Bolivia could take is the renunciation of involvement in the SOA.
Regards,,,John
John,
This is not about the SOA.
My family in Venezuela is suffering the consequences of Hugo Chavez being in power as well as many friends. The close ties that Evo Morales has with Chavez are anything but promising and it is really interesting that the laws and the changes in the Constitution that Morales wanted to pass are SO SIMILAR to those that Chavez passed and here we are 9 years later.
I had these same debates with friends and family members 9 years ago who said Chavez was going to be a good thing for Venezuela. Nine years later and here we are: with a collapsed economy, healthcare and exponential increase in crime. Only time will tell if the way of Chavez (and Evo Morales) is the way to go.
Katerina,,,
You brought up the SOA, not me. I merely pointed out the influence of it in the politics of Bolivia (and also Venezuela.)
In your response you neglected to answer any of my questions, causing me to wonder why? In addition, your response begs answers to other questions, such as does Venezuela really have a collapsed economy and why? Is it due to Chavez or the machinations of the elite who want to remain in control of that nation and her vast resources? My understanding is that contrary to your suggestion, health care has substantially increased for most of her people, yet you deny it. Where are your facts?
Further, you claim an increase in crime, yet you fail to show a cause and effect relating to Chavez’ policies. My understanding is that the increase in crime is directly related to vast inputs from the USA to create social unrest by fostering anti-governmental criminality. Certainly, it is undeniable that such conduct fostered by the USA is the modus operandi used throughout Latin America to prevent the changes which propelled both Chavez and Morales to power, and yes–it will have a detrimental effect upon the elite who are used to having their own way–and screw the rest of the people.
If you’d like a first-person account of how it works, read Perkins’ “Economic Hitman” and then perhaps you might see things in a different light–that is unless you are part of the elite who might not be quite so privileged any more.
Regards,,,John