in ,

The Conservative Tide Is Losing in Latin America – That’s Why Morales Had To Go

The Removal of Morales is a Minor Victory in a Series of Losses for Washington

Submitted by InfoBrics, authored Paul Antonopoulos, Research Fellow at the Center for Syncretic Studies…

Former Bolivian President Evo Morales resigned less than three months after completing his third term, dejected by what he denounced was a coup against him that prevented him from carrying out his fourth term that he was democratically elected to do. Morales sent shock waves all across Latin America when he announced he was stepping down from the presidency to avoid continued bloodshed between Bolivians before accepting asylum in Mexico.

The first indigenous Bolivian president announced his resignation in a message on television, after returning to the coca-producing region of Chapare, his political and Union base, after having unsuccessfully sought in La Paz a political agreement that would allow him to complete his mandate that ends on January 22. Morales blamed the opposition candidate and former president Carlos Mesa (2003-2005), who came second in the last elections, and Luis Fernando Camacho, leader of the street protests, for the widespread violence in several cities that has left at least three dead and more than 300 injured.

The man who had left Bolivia “sovereign and independent economically and politically, with identity and dignity” claimed that he decided to resign as president after pressure from the Bolivian Workers’ Central and the mining unions, the Catholic Church and the military and police commanders – all in the effort to avoid greater bloodshed in the country.

This has come as an unexpected shock for supporters of Morales and is a major victory for Latin American reactionaries who have been suffering a string of major defeats in 2019. The year began with a violent and political coup attempt against Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro from openly U.S.-puppet Juan Guaidó. Guaidó spectacularly failed despite having the backing from most of Latin America, North America and the Europe Union, with many of these states cutting diplomatic ties with Caracas and applying sanctions against Venezuela. Venezuela was not left isolated however with China and Russia expanding economic relations with the Bolivarian country.

In the second half of the year, all in short succession, we have seen Ecuador violently uprise against President Lenín Moreno’s attempts to implement strangling International Monetary Fund (IMF) austerity measures; Chile violently rose up against President Sebastián Piñera’s attempts to raise the price of public transportation, which then exploded into a wider anti-neoliberal movement as the exploitative economic system has created a high cost of living despite Chile having the biggest inequality in South America; Morales’ re-election in Bolivia; the election of Peronist Alberto Fernández against incumbent neoliberal president Mauricio Macri who lost his re-election bid for a second term; the likelihood of Leftist Daniel Martínez winning the Uruguayan election on November 24; and, former Brazilian President Lula’s premature release from prison last week after controversially being charged with corruption.

It certainly has been a very tough year for U.S. President Donald Trump who appears to be desperately clinging onto the Monroe Doctrine, but failing. The U.S. cannot directly control the anger of the people in Ecuador and Chile, it cannot change how people vote in Argentina and Uruguay, and it spectacularly failed in Venezuela for reasons that will be addressed.

Rather, the U.S. specializes in Hybrid Wars for regime change, and Bolivia is easy pickings to bring  out of the Pink Tide and into the Conservative Wave, also known as the Blue Tide. Although it is still uncertain what will happen in the near future, the question begs whether there is a suitable replacement for Morales. Although Morales’ policies may be continued by another president, the coup against him is a minor victory for U.S. puppets in Latin America that are facing far more difficult pressures.

Although it is easy to argue that Venezuela and Cuba have experienced far greater pressures – economically, diplomatically and militarily – from the U.S., it must be understood why Morales capitulated so easily to the rioters. Former Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, a former military officer, had radicalized and ideologized the military to Bolivarian dogma and built a people’s militia capable of defending the government from threats. As Morales failed to ideologize the Bolivian military, reactionary and pro-U.S. forces remained, allowing them to apply pressure against the democratically elected Morales.

Morales created economic growth not seen elsewhere in South America, increased the quality of life, reduced illiteracy to 2.4% in 2018 from 13% in 2006, reduced unemployment from 9.2% in 2006 to 4.1%, reduced poverty from 60.6% in 2006 to 34.6%, and extreme poverty to 15.2% from 38.2% in 2006. However, many of these achievements were made by ensuring that industries remained nationalized and by becoming completely independent of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. By becoming independent from the neoliberal order, the country was always at risk of experiencing a Hybrid War via color revolution, especially as Morales had not ideologized the military, essentially meaning he was always at risk of being militarily overthrown.

Despite the Conservative Wave experiencing electoral successes in the latter part of the 2010’s with neoliberalism returning to Brazil, Argentina, Peru and other Latin American states, the short period of time of Conservative Wave rule has meant the return of severe austerity, increasing unemployment and rising poverty to these countries, allowing for a second swing of the Pink Tide. This effectively means that Argentina and probably Uruguay could potentially face color revolutions if they begin to defy the neoliberal order, and Lula will always be at risk of returning to prison. With Ecuadorean protestors smashing any ideas of IMF strangling their country and Chile revolting against the “neoliberal ghost of Pinochet”, U.S. hegemony in Latin America is being severely challenged, and is losing.

Removing Morales was easy pickings for the Monroe Doctrine and it demonstrates that neoliberalism is always willing to use violence to defend its interests. It also serves as a warning to Argentina that is firmly under IMF control and will surely be challenged when the President-Elect finally assumes power. It also serves as a warning to any full-time challenge to IMF interests across all Latin American countries. As Latin America begins to swing back against U.S. hegemony in the region, it can be expected we will see intensified violence in Venezuela and color revolutions emerging wherever the neoliberal order is permanently challenged. Morales was unfortunately the easiest target for the Conservative Wave to have a minor victory after a series of major losses for them. Although Morales may not be in power and is now in Mexico, there is every chance that his replacement will continue his policies and maintain Bolivia’s sovereignty and independence, effectively meaning the balance of power in the Andean country is still being contested between Pink Tide and Conservative Wave forces.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!

Report

What do you think?

14 points
Upvote Downvote

9
Leave a Reply

avatar
4 Comment threads
5 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
5 Comment authors
Olivia KrothThraxitejphtwostimeHelga I. Fellay Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Olivia Kroth
Guest

A very good article. This is true: a coup fails or succeeds with the military of a country. If the president has the support of the military, he will remain in power. If not, he will be overthrown. President Chavez and President Maduro knew and know this. Also it certainly helps having close ties to Russia and China. Both countries will defend a government against coups, if they have a vested interest there: a military base, or participation in the country’s oil, mines, gas, etc.

Helga I. Fellay
Guest
Helga I. Fellay

This US coup was mostly motivated by the US desire to steal Bolivia’s lithium resources, a rare element worth $trillions much needed for modern technology. Bolivia had an agreement to sell its lithium to China, not the US. This is the reason this coup was carried out practically overnight, so quickly that China had no time to intervene.

Olivia Kroth
Guest

I agree, Helga. The Bolivian President was not well prepared to defend himself and his country against the vultures from outside. China has so far never sent military help to Latin America, although it engages in commercial enterprises there. Russia sends military help, though, if Russia has interests to defend, like in Venezuela or in Syria. I wonder what Evo Morales and Vladimir Putin were talking about, when the Bolivian President visited Russia just a few weeks ago. Did Putin not warn him? Did Morales listen to Putin’s advice? Putin is a grandmaster at warding off coup attempts and colour… Read more »

Helga I. Fellay
Guest
Helga I. Fellay

This author is repeating the US propaganda lines when he states “he decided to resign as president after pressure from the Bolivian Workers’ Central and the mining unions, the Catholic Church and the military and police commanders – all in the effort to avoid greater bloodshed in the country.” He actually resigned at gun point, after his sister’s house had been burned down and fled to Mexico fearing for his life. This was a US regime change coup, backing the Bolivian right-wing oligarchs and opposition, not workers. Also naive is the sentence “Although Morales’ policies may be continued by another… Read more »

twostime
Guest
twostime

Helga, inititially I’d agree, the “former Brazilian President Lula’s premature release” is a troubling assertion – in what way “premature” is not eplained. This is a Conservative news site though. There is a slant across The Duran. I firmly disagree with a lot of what they say but generally their reporting is honest. Is it worth a re-read for specific points? You state “gun point” are you able to show that? Just seen Evo (I hope) escaping his would be persecutionars on twitter.

jph
Guest
jph

That “premature” comes from being free as long as the case is still fought in a higher court.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-50351438

“There’s no guarantee Lula will remain free forever – he may not win the appeals that are left – and he’s also been accused of corruption in other cases which he will have to face justice for. “

jph
Guest
jph

Morales last 14 years economic success:
https://data.worldbank.org/country/bolivia

If a right wing government gets control do expect debt, indenturing, forced liberalization, fire sale of national assets and wide spread poverty just like for instance in the Ukraine.

Thraxite
Member
Thraxite

I’d say this is simply Act II. Lets all look forward to Act III where the US-urpers fail to implement any policy due to patriotic resistance and in Act IV the return of the President.

Olivia Kroth
Guest

I hope so. I definitely am looking forward to Act IV, when Evo Morales returns to his home country.

Russia-Zimbabwe Relations

Farage makes bold offer to Tories to keep Brexit alive, will Boris accept? (Video)