Bolivia: The Day After

By Pedro G. Cavallero *

The recently held presidential elections in Bolivia have generated unprecedented interest and wide coverage in the international media, which usually ignores South America’s poorest nation. As Bolivians struggle in their uncertain march toward a full-fledged democracy, President-elect Evo Morales has become a magnet for worldwide attention. During the campaign, his highly-charged and at times explosive anti-American rhetoric resonated strongly with Bolivia’s impoverished masses, particularly among its indigenous people, who make up 55% of the population. This rhetoric has also been welcomed and amplified by other like-minded movements in the region, as Latin Americans have a heavily-scheduled election calendar that extends well into 2006. To further distance himself from centrist candidate Jorge Quiroga, Morales energized his supporters by sloganizing “Long live coca, death to the gringos” and toyed with the idea of nationalizing hydrocarbon reserves. With great fanfare, the radical leader announced the imminent termination of coca eradication programs, generating a rallying cry among poor peasants and his indigenous followers. Currently, Bolivia is the third-largest coca producer in the Western Hemisphere (following Colombia and neighboring Peru) and receives approximately $150 million yearly in anti-drug funds from the United States. Soon, that situation will drastically change.

After the January 22 swearing-in ceremony, Morales will face daunting challenges. Despite the vastness of Bolivia’s energy reserves (one of the largest natural gas reserves in the world), 70% of the country’s 8.8 million inhabitants live below the poverty line, and 14.4% struggle with living on less than $1 a day. Bolivia is also haunted by highly-disenfranchised ethnic groups, extreme inequality, deep intra-regional tensions (and even secessionist sentiment), and an institutional framework which periodically collapses under the weight of widespread social mobilizations and chronic political unrest. Two recent presidencies (headed by Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada and Carlos Mesa, respectively) came to an abrupt end as a result of unrestrained popular protests. Precisely Morales’ Movement Towards Socialism (or MAS, as the political party is widely known by its Spanish acronym), has been catapulted into the limelight by agitating and generating popular uprisings.

In the international context Evo Morales has openly embraced the Cuban regime. In fact, Havana was selected as his first stop on a pre-swearing-in international tour, during which he will visit several capitals in Western Europe, South Africa, China, and Brazil. He has also been courted effusively by the omnipresent and unpredictable Hugo Chávez, as Morales expressed his admiration for the leader of the so-called “Bolivarian Revolution.” Even Argentina and “big brother” neighbor Brazil have both long predicted that the left-wing Bolivian’s accession to power was inevitable. And they acted accordingly. Argentine government representatives have placed great importance on their dialogue with Morales and downgraded their contacts with Bolivian official counterparts. Far from having a moderating influence, the ongoing communication with various Latin American counterparts has emboldened Morales, reinforcing his radical views.

Clearly, his intensive sloganeering and readiness to engage in anti-American harangues while campaigning have paid off. Ultimately, Morales captured more than 54% of the popular vote in an undisputed, clean election. He also safely avoided the historically-troubled recourse of having Congress electing the new president, which it must do when no candidate receives at least 50% of the ballots plus one vote. However, to effectively deliver on the promises of prosperity made to his fellow countrymen, democratically-elected Morales will not only have to generate broad-based popular legitimacy, he will have to work and engage constructively in the international arena in an era marked by unprecedented globalization and increased regional integration. Moreover, to tackle successfully the many challenges faced by this impoverished landlocked nation (whose causes and effects reach beyond the country’s borders) a Morales administration will have to adopt a more constructive, dialogue-oriented, and sophisticated approach. His insistence on defining himself as “Washington’s nightmare” falls well short of that if what is at stake is no less than the improvement of living conditions among Bolivia’s destitute masses. In fact, the profound depth of this nation’s challenges requires formidable leadership skills. As the countdown to the January 22 swearing-in ceremony continues so does the need for Morales to articulate a more balanced, nonadversarial, and forward-looking message.

* Pedro G. Cavallero is a policy analyst.