by David Broder
The social crisis in Bolivia is deepening as the oligarchy and the far right step up their struggle to break off chunks of the country and lay their hands on its natural resources. Yesterday (Thursday 11th September) eight people were killed during a fascist attack in Cobija, at the same time as the right continued its occupation of municipal buildings, government treasury offices and natural gas regulators. They also set fire to the house of Lucio Vedia, the leading trade unionist in Santa Cruz, the country’s largest city. However, although Evo Morales has sent troops into the natural gas extraction plants and has now dismissed the United States ambassador for his role in supporting right-wing coup attempts, he still refuses to organise any effective action to stop the violence waged by the oligarchy and militias such as the fascist Union Juvenil Cruceñista. Instead, the Morales government offers talks on a “negotiated re-distribution of power” and has called on what it calls the “violent minority” on the right to “return to the negotiating table”. As he seeks the reconciliation of the “Andean” and oligarchic strata of the bourgeoisie, workers and indigenous people under attack from the UJC are having to organise against the violence themselves, once again showing that the class struggle underlies the near-civil war in Bolivia.
As this excellent piece of analysis from www.econoticiasbolivia.com makes clear, Morales’ project is to broker a new constitution which will hold the country together and allow himself to stand for re-election in 2010, while embarking on a developmentalist economic course designed to build infrastructure and use tax revenues to strengthen small businesses and the petty bourgeoisie: what his vice-president Álvaro García Linera calls “Andean capitalism”. Such development requires heavy state intervention in the economy, but not necessarily nationalisations and certainly not the expropriations without compensation demanded by the union federation (Central Obrera Boliviana) and social movements during the 2003 and 2005 general strikes. Most important here is control of natural gas extraction: although the poorest country in South America, Bolivia has the greatest gas reserves of any country on the continent apart from Venezuela, and although not actually taking back reserves handed over to multinationals by president Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada in 1996 (at knock-down prices, unconstitutionally and without the consent of Congress), Morales’ government has forced multinational energy firms like Petrobras and Repsol to sell the state a 51% stake in their holdings in Bolivia.
Although none of Morales’ economic project is “anti-capitalist” or challenges the right to private property, the “Andean capitalism” promulgated by the country’s first indigenous president is not in the interests of the Bolivian oligarchy, the “100 clans” who profit from exporting commodities such as natural gas, tin, and the produce of the large agricultural estates (latifundia) they own. Furthermore, although Morales (long-time leader of the coca growers’ union), García Linera and their supporters call for the workers’ movement to desist from its struggles, and want the unity of the bourgeoisie with a “great national accord” to re-balance the economy, the oligarchy do not feel that they need to negotiate with Morales. Not only do the plans of the indigenous-left face of capital endanger the oligarchy’s economic well-being, but Morales is a political lame duck and is clearly unable to assert his authority. His vacillating rule has sapped the confidence of most of the social movements who have taken part in the prolonged popular contestation since 2000, and so his defence is weak as he tries to claw back control of the five provinces now under the total control of the parallel right-wing government (Beni, Chuquisaca, Pando, Santa Cruz and Tarija).
Whenever the oligarchy mount violent attacks against workers and indigenous people, Morales expresses his regret at the situation, calls for an “end to the violence” and then backtracks on his reformist agenda. He has repeatedly made huge concessions to the upper strata of the bourgeoisie: most recently handing over the pensions system to Zurich Financial Services with the result that only 10% of people will receive any money; in 2007 decreeing that a two-thirds majority of the Constituent Assembly have to agree to any Constitutional changes, giving the right an effective veto (an explicit concession to Cochabamba governor Manfred Reyes Villa); not prosecuting fascist militiamen but offering to negotiate with them. But the oligarchy still want nothing to do with Morales, since he can make no concession which will satisfy their main grievance: that the right do not hold state power. Although some of the bourgeois press has called for “international mediation”, which would no doubt favour the interests of multinational capital, the oligarchy does have a clear strategy of its own: to seize power in the provinces they can, block any constitution which would allow Morales to run for another term (two weeks ago the National Electoral Court simply annulled Morales’ call for a referendum on the constitution), and wait to take back full control in 2010.
Of course, this is not just a question of manoeuvring in Congress and taking advantage of Morales’ concessions, but also facing down the social movements emboldened by the struggles of 2000-2005, as well as the Central Obrera Boliviana itself. While the movement of the urban poor and peasantry has wilted thanks to its ties to the Morales government, and the COB has suffered from the same problem (a general strike in June was called off thanks to government pressure on Morales-aligned union leaders), there are still significant working-class struggles independent of both the government and the right-wing opposition. This is what makes the 2,000 strong Union Juvenil Cruceñista properly fascist: not only that it carries out racist attacks on indigenous people from the Altiplano and that it kills women and children, but that it is a mass armed organisation of middle-class youth, a weapon the oligarchy uses to break up the revolutionary workers’ movement and restore capitalist order.
Most central to the continuing strength of the workers’ movement is the miners’ union (FSTMB) and the union of Huanuni tin miners, many of whose members have leading positions in the COB itself. The miners, although severely depleted in numbers after a sweeping series of mine closures in 1984, are still the most effective and militant part of the Bolivian working class, not only playing a leading role in the 2003 and 2005 general strikes but also staging an arduous but successful battle against privatisation in October 2006, in which 18 miners died; until July 2007, a campaign for workers’ ownership and management of the Huanuni mine; and a 12-day pay strike in April 2008.
In early August the FSTMB staged a general strike against the new pensions system and demanding the implementation of the COB’s own welfare reform bill: they blocked roads and marched on La Paz, with several days of demonstrations, and forced the government to review the situation. There is currently a 45-day “truce” between the government and the union. At the same time there was a prolonged teachers’ strike, which also involved road blockades. Although Morales refuses to use force to counter-act the right, he did send in the police to break up miners’ road blockades, resulting in two deaths and fifty injuries. Contrary to what is implied in a report by the Socialist Workers’ Party’s “man in Bolivia”, there is sharp distrust between the government and the workers’ movement: García Linera accused the striking miners of being “agents of imperialism”, and when “labour militants addressed thick and eager crowds with defiant demands for economic transformation”, it was in fact an explicit and damning criticism of the Morales administration and its concessions to the right.
Indeed, the Central Obrera Boliviana has since 2005 talked of organising its own “political instrument”, a party with which to organise independently of Morales. This initiative has time and again been rebuffed by those unwilling to sap support for Morales’ Movimiento al Socialismo party, and so while on 10th August two million people (67% of votes cast) voted for Evo Morales, the COB has been unable to represent a coherent alternative political centre. Another setback has been the fashion in which the Constituent Assembly has been organised: while social movements and the COB long demanded a constituent assembly alongside their economic demands, in fact they were excluded from the elections by Morales. Not only were new parties and organisations not allowed to register to stand in the 2006 election, but those activists who negotiated positions on other parties’ lists were mysteriously “blanked” from ballot papers without explanation – the miners’ union leader Roberto Chávez was removed from three separate lists.
Furthermore, the left wing of the workers’ movement, most prominently the FSTMB, faces the problem that popular political mobilisation is not on the same scale as five years ago, with Morales’ own electoralist attitudes fomenting conservative attitudes to political activity amongst his supporters. Solidarity strikes and actions responding to the FSTMB’s calls for general strikes are rare. Several union leaders are members of organisations like the various splinters of the once mighty Trotskyist Partido Obrero Revolucionario and the Communist Party-based Alianza Revolucionaria Anti-imperialista, but given the size and militancy of the workers’ movement as a whole, these groups are very small and have minimal real implantation in the working class.
While workers and the urban poor in the eastern cities have had no choice but to defend themselves from fascist gangs who attack them, with little organisation and using whatever weapons are at hand, the right’s shock troops have little implantation in the Altiplano regions of Bolivia, where the workers’ movement, Morales and MAS are strongest, and so they are somewhat removed from the violence. However, given the fact that Morales wants to negotiate a pact between the different strata of the bourgeoisie and will do nothing to fight the fascist gangs at the same time as he cracks down on strikes, it is clear that the workers’ movement has to organise militias to defend itself and the indigenous masses from fascist attacks. The demonstrations calling on Morales to fight the far-right are not enough, since there is no sign that he plans to do so.
Organising workers’ self-defence is far from impossible. Miners have long used dynamite and fought to defend their workplaces from private companies (such as in the October 2006 struggle where privateer miners tried to occupy Huanuni), while in January 2007 workers and the urban poor of Cochabamba organised a militia armed with machetes and guns to resist the attacks unleashed by the egregious right-wing governor Manfred Reyes Villa, and succeeded in overcoming the fascist squads, occupying the regional capitol building and setting up a revolutionary committee to run the city before an invasion by Morales’ troops. Failing to organise to fight the fascists will not only lend weight to Morales’ claims to be the sole or main defender of democracy and thus boost his support in the workers’ movement, but it will give the oligarchy free reign to attack indigenous people, smash the trade union organisations and mount a coup d’état.
11th September 1973, 35 years ago yesterday, saw Chilean president Salvador Allende overthrown by the military after his repeated concessions to the bourgeoisie and his refusal to arm the workers bolstered the confidence of the right. The same may well happen again in Bolivia unless the workers’ movement immediately starts mobilising action against the far-right independently of Morales rather than just calling on him to act with the Army and Police.
Finally, below we reproduce both the statement produced by the Huanuni miners’ assembly on May 28th in the presence of national and Oruro COB executive members, along with sections of the political declaration passed by the FSTMB congress in Oruro on 1st July, which are both of some pertinence to the question of how the workers’ movement can fight the fascists and organise as a coherent political centre:
Huanuni mineworkers’ statement:
1.- The Huanuni mineworkers unanimously condemn the savage attacks committed against our peasant brothers by groups in the pay of the oligarchs and landowners in Sucre and the east. We warn that this fascist savagery will continue unless miners march in defence of our class brothers and punish those responsible for these attacks, which have become commonplace in Sucre and the provinces controlled by fascist bands financed from abroad.
2.- The cowardly repression of our peasant comrades in Sucre by fascist groups is a fresh provocation against the majority national groups and the working class, which is tires of these attacks and humiliating abuses organised and financed by the multinational and landowning oligarchy which is openly conspiring against the established order, promoting systematic violation of the laws of the republic.
3.- The class struggle is ever more polarised. Attributing these continuous attacks against our indigenous and peasant brothers, of which we are part, to racism alone, would be an error we must go beyond. The minorities we crushed in 2003 and 2005 must be eliminated once and for all, as these are the financiers of the anarchy and crimes carried out under the great smokescreen of regional autonomy. The written and spoken press, in its majority, lies in the hands of these scroungers, who use it to spread disinformation, distort the truth and foment discord between class brothers.
4.- Our struggle must be directed at cutting off the sources of the economic power of this oligarchic and landowner minority. This means fighting for the implementation of the demands raised in 2003 and 2005, nationalising the multinational companies and taking back privatised businesses. This will strike a deadly blow against the wealthy, stop the carve-up, generate jobs and overcome the poverty which capitalism and neoliberalism has long subjected us to.
5.- The government must not be irresponsible and avoid taking this path. Enough of working with the conspirators and those who sabotage the real process of change! Change must not be an empty slogan but rather should mean structural change to take back our natural resources: these should be extracted by the state under social control. Nationalising and developing our wealth must be the immediate objective. Experience shows that this can only be done via the state.
6.- The sustainability of the Huanuni Mining Company depends on these structural changes taking place. Investment to prevent the imminent crisis in tin prices, which could happen at any moment, is the number one priority of the workers, the five thousand of us dedicated to making our workplace the national leader and a model of a state mining company in the service of Bolivians.
7.- Finally, we express our solidarity to our working-class brothers and the indigenous people in the east for their valient struggle against the fascist lodges and mafias who want to enforce statutes of autonomy which will only serve the interests of the rich minority who are in power in these provinces. Autonomy, unless it is carried out by the workers and the majority populations, is a virtual split which only serves to sow confusion and distract from the struggles of Bolivians.
FSTMB congress declaration:
“National
* Unity of the workers and the people of Bolivia against the oligarchic minority and the landowners who plan to divide the country using their Civic Committees in the east, against the bosses and the multinationals and against the neoliberal political parties like UN, PODEMOS, MNR, MIR NFR, etc.
* A decisive and organised struggle alongside our mother organisation, the COB, to implement the demands of the 2003 and 2005 struggles as the only way to deepen the revolutionary process of the Bolivian people.
* An urgent struggle for the annulment of the unconstitutional Decree 21060 [which called for widespread privatisation] and other laws which keep a neoliberal economic policy in place. Nationalisation of the usurious multinational banks.
* A struggle for salary reform and increases in line with the cost and living and inflation, in line with COB suggestions.
* Immediate struggle for a new pensions bill which will make a dignified retirement possible and give thousands of the unemployed access to work.
* Form a workers’ political instrument to carry out the historic revolutionary agenda of the Bolivian people.
* For the re-foundation of the state oil firm YPFB and COMIBOL (Bolivian Mining Corporation) and prioritising the re-strengthening of the Primera Empresa Estatal Minera, and no longer engaging in distractions like shuffling administrative posts.
“Trade unions
* For the unity of all Bolivian workers in the COB and its affiliates, defending its statutes and fundamental principles.
* Defend the Political Independence of the workers and their union organisations, taking a class struggle line with no quarter given to the oligarchic, landowner and multinational minority who want to divide and bloody our country.
* Implement Workers’ Social Control in all the country’s workplaces, particularly in the mines, as a step towards direct administration by the workers.
* Reject yellow unions and strengthen revolutionary unionism in accord with the principles and statutes of our affiliates.
* Trade union and political education of the workers to make revolutionary and qualitative change, uncovering once and for all the double-think and deference which weakens the effectiveness of Bolivian trade unionism.”