by Paul Schmutz Schaller for The Saker Blog
Preliminary note
Of course, I have read the Saker’s article „A few short comments about the Fascist coup in Bolivia“, posted on November 12, as well as most of the comments. However, the predominant assessment did not satisfy me. Considering that my knowledge of the situation in South America is quite rudimentary and that my ideas were not clear enough, I was not prepared to write a comment. In the meantime, there were some new developments, notably the fact that Morales continues to directly influence the political situation in Bolivia and that big demonstrations in favor of Morales are taking place or are prepared. These events have encouraged me to write a short text, just from somebody who asks some questions, but does not intend to provide answers.
* * *
On November 10, Cuba’s president has strongly condemned the coup d’etat in Bolivia against the legitimate president Morales. Already on November 9, Cuba’s ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a declaration stating, “Disregarding electoral institutions and the people’s mandate expressed at the polls, sectors of the Bolivian opposition, with the support and leadership of the United States and regional oligarchies, have launched a coup with the aim of denying the Bolivian people the electoral result. The opposition coup strategy has led to severe violence across the country, which has cost lives, hundreds of wounded, and expressions of racism toward original peoples.” (Granma, November 14)
„The Mexican government view the resignation of now former Bolivian president Evo Morales as a ‚coup‘ under military pressure. Mexican Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard made the pronouncement at a press conference in Mexico City on Monday.“ (cited from Ruptly)
On November 13, Xinhua reported: „In the capital city of La Paz, fear grows among the residents as looting and unrest continue. Government offices are closed, streets blocked, and many businesses remain shuttered. […] In Potosi in south Bolivia, the situation was even more critical. Protestors burned the house of Victor Borda, president of the Chamber of Deputies, and took his brother hostage, which forced him to resign.“ In my experience, it is not very usual that Xinhua speaks of such events.
So far, I agree. However, there are a number of questions; I shall discuss the three which are – in my eyes – the most important ones, namely the comparison with the putsch in Chile, the left-right schema, and the real power of the USA.
Chile 1973 – Bolivia 2019
This was the first short formula describing the events in Bolivia, which I read. Of course, there are resemblances. But there are also crucial differences. Remember that Pinochet was general and commander-in-chief of the army. His economical politics are widely seen as the beginning of the era of neoliberalism between, say, 1980 and 2000. The putsch in Chile represents thus the beginning of something which is very important. There were also big (left wing) demonstrations in Europe against the military coup.
(There is the quite tenacious idea that the reforms in China, which started with Deng Xiaoping in 1978, were also part of the era of neoliberalism. I do not at all share this view. Nevertheless, I think that the reforms in China were a very positive correction of exaggerated collectivism in direction of more liberalism. Note however that while the term „neoliberalism“ is quite exactly defined, the terms „collectivism“ and „liberalism“ are much vaguer.)
In my eyes, the putsch in Bolivia is rather the end of something, not the beginning. At least until now, the army has not taken the direct power and, compared with Chile 1973, violence is – until now – much weaker (see however the Saker’s article for description of violences). By the way, I would not be surprised if there was some kind of arrangement between Morales and (parts of) the army. This is not at all a criticism against Morales, but it would explain why the departure of Morales was so quick. It remains to see what the army did promise in return – if at all.
The left-right schema
Traditionally, military coups in South America are seen as reactions of the (extreme) right against left wing governments. The latter are usually more nationalist and more social. This is certainly true for the government of Morales.
On the other hand, the left-right schema is outdated in most parts of the world. With the – possible or supposed – exception of Latin America. But I have big doubts that Latin America is still such an exception. There was enough time in order to build a national bourgeoisie. Saker’s article speaks of a patriotic opposition inside the Brazilian military; this is exactly what I understand by national bourgeoisie (according to wiktionary, this is a Marxist term, but do not make a big deal about). Of course, the comprador elite remains strong, but probably less strong than expected.
The real power of the USA
Many forces who are condemning the coup against Morales, assume that the USA have still the power of ruling South America more or less as they want, except in a country where the army is clearly nationalist – and strong enough. I cannot believe this. In my eyes, the hegemonic forces and the anti-hegemonic forces are – worldwide – in some kind of dynamic equilibrium. Moreover, the hegemonic forces have lost the initiative. If it were true that the coup in Bolivia is such a big success for the USA, then this would change the strategic situation. But the latter is not apparent.
Moreover, the USA are divided. Bolivia was never an aim for Trump. Which, of course, does not mean that he does not welcome a „victory against a hostile government“. Nor does this mean that there were not US-forces planning this coup with determination (Marco Rubio is often mentioned). Nevertheless, Trump has other priorities.
* * *
As a conclusion, I expect that this coup in Bolivia is far from „consumed“. Otherwise, I obviously have to change some of my ideas.
the hegemonic forces have lost the initiative
…
There we go again, with this recursive narrative on this site,
Who pray tell is the hegemon?
I dare say, its who we cannot name, it is anglo-zio-nazism, and they still own the earth, and they’re doing just fine,
What was Morales crime? He transferred the Lithium rights from Musk (team-USA-RahRah-zio) to China ( team-Mao-Rockefeller-RahRah-zio), oh and Google also needs lithium to power their killer drones&robots(think terminator)
I think at the most simple the explanation is this. HUAWEI needs lithium, anybody in mobile phone needs lithium and Trump(CIA) team just took the lithium away from Huawei, by giving a Morales a deal he couldn’t refuse, his life
China has its own lithium mining: http://www.lithiummine.com/lithium-mining-in-china
However, as can be read in this article, ca. 75% of lithium is found in South America, in a belt ranging over Argentina, Chile, and Bolivia.
I think the USA is very interested in ‘helping exploring it’. Gee, they might even send the military to protect it against ‘terrorists’….
Cheers, Rob
Bolivia has +70% of world reserves, North-Korea has Lithium ( &oil&rare-earth), China has very little
Morales had just signed a deal with China, and USA corporations were pissed
South America has 70% of known lithium reserves. Mongolia and Russia far east may also have large reserves in close similar scale.
As for Bolivia’s lithium it is special due to its easy exploration, located in a salt desert. https://cdn-prod.opendemocracy.net/media/images/Mina_de_sal_en_Uyuni_1_6PdUO8E.width-800.jpg
My daughter has been to Bolivia and has friends there with whom she is in contact. Most are teachers. Their position on Evo was that he was good at first and then became more and more corrupt– the “C” word– and that he should go away. They are not that different from those of us in the US and Europe who are college educated and self identify as more intelligent, smartphone addicted westerners. They seem to be somewhat conflicted in that they are mestizo and while they embrace the concept of Bolivia’s indigenous roots they also look on the full bloods as hillbillies.
That was a year ago. Right now I don’t know how they feel about Morales but they are scared for their own safety. They are, like us, bit players– often willing to do a job as long as they are paid. But in Bolivia the “middle class” is not very large and I doubt that they are a main artery in the Bolivian system: it’s really the right wing fascists from the lowland oil rich area against the 60-70% indigineous in the mountains. It’s a zero sum: one side will win– no room for compromise, which is why the small middle class is scared.
I, too, have questions. How organized are the Christian nazi thugs? How connected are they to the U.S. intelligence network? Who is the resistance? Are the army and police divided? Over time I think the indians will win. could be 10 years, could be 100. They have the numbers, the cultural ties and practices, languages, the history. The land is theirs.
Miguel, there is another possibility,… the country ends up divided in two. Two different countries, with two different flags, presidents, etc. It almost happened when Morales took power the first time.
The spread of Pentecostal and other fundamentalist Protestant spiritual poison has been Thanatopia’s worst attack on Latin America in 200 years of unrelenting aggression and violence. The situation has been growing worse for decades, particularly since Wojtyla, the Polish pontifical protector of priestly paedophiles, in league with Rightist death-squads, destroyed Liberation Theology, thereby definitively turning the Catholic Church’s back on the poor, who were encouraged to turn to Octopus Dei and self-flagellation instead. ‘The Scourge of God’ lived in the Vatican, and is now a ‘Saint’???!!
Sadly, while one’s attention was turned to the poor world, the Pentecostal pollution infected Austfailia, too, and our Pentecostal thug PM, that ‘bunyip Bolsonaro’ Morrison, was propelled to power by the stupid, the greedy, the ignorant and a large cadre of Pentecostal imbeciles, not one whit concerned that the country is burning down, but celebrating it as part of God’s plan for the End Times. What a way for a ‘sapient’ species to commit forced mass suicide.
Yes, am sad ande always surprized by the utter stupidity of most people.
Morales is the best president Bolivia has had in the whole hisory of the country; under his president a lot of things have greatly improved, the level of income and attention given to teachers among other things.
Yet, “he is becoming corrupt and has to go” ?
How can those teachers be so naive and so guillible ??!!
When the elections results showed less than 60% of favorable votes I had been very sad; that was a very bad thing.
I thought to myseld “Evo should resign if people don’t want him in; that will teach those lazy and uncaring voters a lesson”.
Well, eventually Morales had been forced out; and those lazy and stupid people that don’t take the effort to vote or that stupidly followed the Evil media narrative are now for an ugly lesson; a lot of things will sharply deteriorate, and there will be regrets.
How bad that such lessons have to been taught with blood and tears :-(
That being said, it seems things are not going well for the democracy-haters putschists. In the Colonel Kassad’s blog there is information about what’s going in Bolivia; and the is situation is far from being won by the enemy.
Actually, there is a possibility to beat the enemy back.
And if that happens, it will be a historical new; as no putsch has ever been reversed (at least not in Latin America) so long after it started.
If that reversal happens, I hope a very harsh retribution will follow; that the whole world, and particularly the “pitiyankis” of the other latin american countries, see what it will cost them if they try by force and lawlesness to crush the will of the majority.
How?
Because the new rulers get to write the history books
They get to pick the professors
Might makes Right, been that way forever, especially in LatinAmeriKKKa
ʻas no putsch has ever been reversed (at least not in Latin America) so long after it started.ʼ
The coup in Venezuela in April 2002 was reversed after 3 days.
Sorry but this is a lie. It’s the same story told in Brazil to justify the 2016 coup and arrest Lula.
The coup is not based only in take the power by force, it include the media, the US Embassy, the allied governments to the comploters, the police, etc. The lies jump into the media immediately because the majority of them are from the oligarchs. And one of the lies mainly is the corruption, but seeing the Evo’s apartment nobody can accuse him of illicit enrichment but they tried, in a video somebody talk about transport trucks near of the plane that will bring Evo to Mexico trying to spread the idea that he was carrying out money in cash. The plotist are mad and evil.
I’m quite surprised by Russia “neutrality” and lack of action, especially when compared with the substantial support activity to Maduro in Venezuela during the coup attempt. Morales is to be blamed for not having cleaned Armed Forces, Police and Intelligence from fascists and Washington proxies during 14 years in power. But there must be some more hidden behind the scene in the relation between Moscow and La Paz that explain the 180° change of politics when compared with Venezuela, someone would write some thoughts and explanations?
“I’m quite surprised by Russia “neutrality” and lack of action, especially when compared with the substantial support activity to Maduro”
Lack of action in part dictated by geography. Russian planes simply don’t have the range and they have to have overflight permission from countries who are in favor of the putsch.
Probably because Morales cowardly made concession after concession to the fascists and lost his power.
He basically fled to save his own skin and left his people to die.
He could at least have done what Maduro is doing: giving rifles to the people, forming popular militias, so that they can defend themselves from the fascists.
The Russians never leap straight in, particularly when it’s that far away.
And, I wouldn’t say their stance is “neutral” – Putin was quite pointed, if you read his full remarks.
This article from Scott Ritter describes how they approached Syria. An excellent ‘case study’;
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/russia-isnt-getting-the-recognition-it-deserves-on-syria/
“….If there is to be peace in Syria, it will be largely due to the patient efforts of Moscow employing deft negotiation, backed up as needed by military force, to shape conditions conducive for a political solution to a violent problem. If ever there was a primer for the art of diplomacy, the experience of Russia in Syria from 2011 to the present is it.”
”On the other hand, the left-right schema is outdated in most parts of the world. With the – possible or supposed – exception of Latin America.”
Actually, Francis ”End-of-History” Fukuyama had an unintended point that the destruction of the Eastern bloc was a terminal step, if not in the sense of a guarantee of ever-lasting capitalism. What it did do away with for good was the idea of the ”Left/Right” divide as the world’s principal contradiction — it was absolutely nothing of the sort. The main contradiction always was and is that between imperialism and the world’s immiserated global majority.
The above conclusion should only escape the wilfully blind by now. Latin America is only an exception in the sense that its left forces have been and still are overwhelmingly anti-imperialist and its right forces equally pro-imperialist. In Western Europe and North America, the stench of imperialist reaction and cowardice is one and the same, with the left mostly infatuated with sexual perversions and other expressions of bourgeois decadence while the right sticks to defending unearned wealth, exempt of taxation.
Russia and the Muslim world are proof positive of socially conservative countries and governments being at the very edge of the fight against imperialism.
Bolivia’s internal traitors will be facing the same kind of societal ’development’ as their kith and kin in ”Ukraine”. Neoliberalism doesn’t care about the perceptions of its lackeys anywhere.
The Empire prefers the rest of humanity to be suffering, and other countries devastated. It feeds their Exceptionalist delusion, drives immigration into the USA from educated strata in destroyed societies and because sacred murder is a religious obligation to these Old Testament zealots-just like their Talmudist and Wahhabist allies. That’s why they hate China so viscerally. That a country full of ‘mere Asiatics’ dares to far outdo the USA in every parameter of civilized life is an affront that can only be met by unlimited violence, destruction and genocide.
Very true. USA = Ugly Sadist Aggressor.
Very true, Mulga. So obvious, but so few dare say it.
If you’re going to run a nationalist (probably leftist, but the basic point is, if you want to control your own resources and economy) government in the global South, you need to confront certain realities: The US and its allies will try to use your armed forces, your media, and global finance against you. You will need to reform the military. You would be wise to take control over your central bank and indeed nationalize your country’s banking sector overall, and prepare to find ways of doing commerce which get around the inevitable sanctions. The US et al. will squall if you nationalize the banking sector, but no actual people anywhere will care.
And you will need to do something about the media, which will shortly start calling you corrupt and generally running down everything you do. The problem is, nationalizing the media will not only give the needed excuse for the hegemon to hit the sanctions etc. hard, it will also cause domestic problems–the people will not be happy, and you will find yourself with a media which is crippled in important ways, not least that they won’t say anything when your government actually does screw up. A controlled media will help your government drift into tyranny, corruption and inefficiency. What you want is a media which is diverse and independent both from the government and from the forces of international reaction. The minimal approach would be to break it up–pass a law barring media companies from being larger than a certain size or being foreign owned. Personally, I would go further: First, break it up. Second, turn all media companies into co-ops–hand the ownership to the journalists. Third, institute a “Patreon” model of media funding; every citizen gets a certain amount of “money” which they can allocate to funding the local media of their choice. But advertising is banned. Thus, the big money, transnational and local comprador-owned corporations, cannot indirectly control the media through the purse strings of advertising revenue. The resulting media landscape would not necessarily be your friend, but it would not be structurally predisposed to be your enemy–rather, it would be structurally predisposed to be the people’s friend. The Americans would be livid, and they would claim that the media was controlled by the government with an iron fist yadda yadda yadda, but it would be a tricky lie to sustain.