Defiant Bolivian state votes on autonomy measure

[maddezmom]

Source: AP

SANTA CRUZ, Bolivia - Bolivia's largest state voted Sunday on a sweeping autonomy referendum that leaders said would forge "a new Bolivia," defying leftist President Evo Morales who called the vote unconstitutional.

Only minor scuffles were reported during the politically charged vote, which sought to separate the state's freewheeling capitalism and mixed-blood heritage from Morales' vision of a communal state ruled by Indian values.

Pre-election polls showed the referendum drawing as much as 70 percent support, though they were conducted by local news media sympathetic to the cause.

"This is a peaceful revolution," Santa Cruz Gov. Ruben Costas proclaimed Sunday. "A new Bolivia is reborn from our decision."

Morales, in an interview with The Associated Press, called the measure illegal, unconstitutional and dictatorial. The vote went ahead despite an order to postpone it by Bolivia's top electoral court, and few international observers were present.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080504/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/bolivia_autonomy

---

Bolivian Vote Pressures Morales, May Ignite Violence (Update1)

By Bill Faries

May 4 (Bloomberg) -- Bolivians in the country's wealthiest province vote today on a ballot measure calling for greater autonomy from the central government, a referendum President Evo Morales says is ``unconstitutional.''

Polls in the eastern province of Santa Cruz opened at 8 a.m. New York time and the first results will be available by 4:30 p.m., the Santa Cruz Electoral Court said. Television images from Santa Cruz showed scattered confrontations, with supporters and opponents of Morales hurling stones at each other. In the town of San Julian, a ballot box was burned.

The push for autonomy has broad support in Santa Cruz, which has been an opposition stronghold since Morales took office in January 2006, promising to nationalize the country's energy industry, divert more natural gas taxes to central government coffers, and break up large landholdings, most of which belong to Santa Cruz farmers.

``It looks like the political opposition in Bolivia is going to have a strong showing,'' Erasto Almeida, a political analyst at the Eurasia Group in New York, said in a phone interview.

more:http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aBRFc32a3kQo&refer=home

[ananda]

1. The wealthy just don't want to share.

nt

[Warpy]

2. Hiccup

[Warpy]

3. It's a bit more than that

It's a whole culture clash between deeply entrenched European values and business practices and Indian culture.

This is the biggest test of Morales's government, learning how to forge a compromise between the two groups that will work long term.

If he fails this test, then he'll join a very long list of deposed Bolivian heads of state. He's already outlived my wildest expectations of his reign.

He will be removed very quickly should he fail to accommodate the pale and moneyed minority in a fair manner.

[roody]

5. How does one accommodate the pale and

moneyed minority in a fair manner?

[Warpy]

7. The New Deal managed to do it in this country

How he manages to do it in Bolivia is his business. I just know that if he fails, he's not going to last long.

What is your suggestion?

[papau]

16. Perhaps we should tell the CIA to not give the moneyed ones help? Think they'd listen?

[bean fidhleir]

20. You call our current situation FAIR????

Surely you're joking!

[harmonicon]

4. So, now we see the real reason for the US supporting Kosovar independence

..... what a bunch of dirty fuckers.

[mitchtv]

6. well I don't think the Albanians

are the fair and moneyed minority in Kosovo
Quite the opposite

[harmonicon]

8. exactly

No matter who the people were, recognizing Kosovo as an independent state was completely irresponsible, and so many countries were against it. It did however set precedent for when Bushco would like to recognize an illegally "independent" state which just happens to be the oil producing section of a country otherwise led by a socialist.

[Mudoria]

9. No..

these are the countries that recognized Kosovar independence:
http://www.kosovothanksyou.com/

Bushco :shrug:

[harmonicon]

10. And your point is? NT

[Mudoria]

12. And so many countries were against it?

The list shows the countries that supported it. Russia and China opposed it... big deal.. we know why they oppose it... Chechnya for Russia and as we're finding out Tibet for the Chinese. Wonderful folks those guys, eh?

[harmonicon]

13. well, a stopped clock is right twice a day

Just wait a day or a week to see all of the countries controlled by oil companies to start recognizing this break off Bolivian state, and using Kosovo to justify their position. This is complete crap, and so was Kosovo. The US was largely responsible for that whole damn war from the beginning anyway.

[davidinalameda]

11. damn Costa Ricans

how dare they recognize Kosovo!

and yes, this is :sarcasm:

[New Dawn]

14. Washington demanded Kosovo "independence" because...

There is a giant US military base in Kosovo, which the regime uses to dominate and control southeastern Europe. If Kosovo, the historical homeland of the Serbs, had remained part of Serbia, Washington feared that its giant military base would get closed down eventually.

[harmonicon]

15. I'm sure that was one of the reaons

but I always thought that Kosovo was small potatoes to these guys. They needed to set more recent precedent for dividing up the world according to their imperial ambitions.

[bean fidhleir]

21. If Kosovo is now populated largely by people who identify as Albanian

rather than Serb, shouldn't they have the right to take over and do what they like, whether that's unify with Albania or (as it is) form their own ethnic-Albanian state?

As what point, if ever, should majority rule stop working?

This isn't an empty question. Immigration and birthrate from overpopulated Catholic-dominated countries could soon produce a majority-Catholic population in the US, leading to more Scalias and Robertses on the bench and in legislatures. We could suddenly find as a result, for example, that the right to Choice is gone, as it is now in Chile, El Salvador, Malta, Nicaragua, and...Vatican City. All majority-Catholic countries where women's rights are minimal. And I mean gone. In those countries there's no "save the life of the mother" exception, no "spare the child a short life of agony", nothing. You get pregnant and it's a death sentence if something goes wrong. It could happen here.

[High Plains]

23. If Los Angeles is populated by people who identify as Mexican?

...

[bean fidhleir]

24. So is there any general principle we can identify?

It feels to me as though there's a serious problem involved. I certainly wouldn't want to live in a theocracy. And I'm also not thrilled by the trend of economic migration from countries overpopulated by the operation of mythocratic dogma. (Having been raised Catholic, I might be more sensitive to that than most)

[Freddie Stubbs]

22. Bolivia's neighbor Peru was one of the first countries to recognized Kosovo's independence

http://www.rree.gob.pe/portal/boletinInf.nsf/mrealdia/C9B70437F80DBAF7052573F700710D15?OpenDocument

[Peace Patriot]

17. This is part of a Bushite USAID-NED-CIA funded (our tax dollars) strategy in South America,

to split the oil rich provinces off from elected national governments that want to use the oil for the benefit of the people. They're trying to do it in Zulia state (where the oil is) in Venezuela. It's a "divide and conquer and take the oil" strategy. The four white separatist provinces (states) in Bolivia that are being funded and organized by the Bush Junta comprise almost half of Bolivia and contain most of the gas and reserves and other resources. But they are landlocked, and I don't know who they will trade with. They are surrounded by countries with leftist governments (Bolivia itself, Argentina, Brazil, and--as of last Sunday--Paraguay). The Bushites are trying to start a civil war in Bolivia, but the end of it all is hard to see. Most of Latin America will not recognize their secession.

[Judi Lynn]

18. United States maneuvers to carve up Bolivia with autonomy vote

United States maneuvers to carve up Bolivia with autonomy vote
May 5, 2008

The illegal referendum held on Sunday to declare autonomy in Santa Cruz, Bolivia‚s richest province, is backed by the Bush administration in an attempt to halt the leftward drift of South America. While the US embassy in La Paz blandly declares its support for “unity and democracy” in Bolivia, the government’s Interior Minister Alfredo Raba states what is widely known, that the United States “has an agenda more political than diplomatic in Bolivia, and this agenda is linked to opponents of the current government.” Evo Morales, the first indigenous president of the country, bluntly declares: “The imperialist project is to try to carve up Bolivia, and with that to carve up South America because it is the epicenter of great changes that are advancing on a world scale.”
(snip)

The US ambassador, Philip Goldberg, who was appointed by the Bush administration in September 2006, has maneuvered behind the scenes to support the political forces opposed to Morales and his governing party, the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS). It is notable that Goldberg came to Bolivia from Pristina, Kosovo, where as the US Chief of Mission, he played a central role in orchestrating Kosovo‚s independence from Serbia, which it had been a province of for centuries.

Last year Goldberg was photographed in Santa Cruz with a leading right-wing business magnate and a well-known Colombian narco-trafficker who had been detained by the local police. Then in late January of this year, the Embassy was caught giving aid to a special intelligence unit of the Bolivian police force. The embassy rationalized its aid by saying “the US government has a long history of helping the National Police of Bolivia in diverse programs.” US-Bolivian relations were next roiled in February when it was revealed that Peace Corps volunteers and a Fulbright scholar had been pressured by an Embassy official to keep tabs on “Venezuelans and Cubans” in the country. Since Morales took office over two years ago, more than $4 million has been provided by the US Agency for International Development to the political opposition.

Bolivia’s neighbors are strongly opposed to the separatist movement and its destabilizing impact on the region. Brazil and Argentina are both dependent on natural gas from Bolivia and fear that an internal conflict would interrupt their supplies. Argentinean David Caputo came to Bolivia as head of a mission of the Organization of American States to try set up a dialogue between the government and the opposition. He found the government willing to engage in discussions, but the opposition vehemently opposed. The United States has provided no support to these regional diplomatic efforts to avoid civil strife in Bolivia.

More:
http://canadiandimension.com/articles/2008/05/06/1807/

[Judi Lynn]

19. U.S. is Promoting Secession in Bolivia

May 6, 2008
It's Not the First Time
U.S. is Promoting Secession in Bolivia
By NIKOLAS KOZLOFF

Having avoided any meaningful coverage of Bolivia since the election of Evo Morales in December, 2005, the international media is now obliged to play catch up. Yesterday, the Andean nation of 9.1 million held a crucial vote which could pave the way for secession of the resource-rich Santa Cruz region.

In a challenge to Morales’ authority, more than 80% of voters approved a referendum which would allow more powers for Santa Cruz, an area which is responsible for about 30 percent of Bolivia's gross domestic product while making up about a quarter of the country's population. Morales, who rejected the autonomy vote as illegal, called on the opposition to engage in a dialogue with his government.

Fundamentally, the Santa Cruz imbroglio is a struggle over oil and gas.

The mixed race elite in the lowlands wants more local control over the resources while Morales, who has the support of indigenous peoples in the highlands, wants the wealthier eastern regions to contribute more to the poorer west.

Affluent leaders in Santa Cruz are particularly incensed by a new draft constitution which would limit large land holdings. In a repudiation of the constitutional reforms, the people of Santa Cruz voted yesterday to give their region more control over land distribution, as well as rich oil and gas reserves.

More:
http://www.counterpunch.org/kozloff05062008.html