SUPPORT FOR BOLIVIA

PRESIDENT MORALES WELCOMES RECALL REFERENDUM

2008-05-09T15:36:00.004-04:00

"Let the people say if they are for the changes or not."

La Paz, 08 may (ABI) .- On Thursday night, President Evo Morales Ayma welcomed the passing of the Popular Mandate Recall Law by the National Senate, through which – he stated – the people will once again have the right to decide whether to continue the process of change and justice undertaken by his administration, or to return to the past.

"To our great satisfaction, we've received the approval of the National Senate for the Referendum on the Recall of the President, Vice-President and Prefects of the nine Departments," Morales said at the beginning of his message to Bolivians.

Morales, accompanied by his full cabinet, pointed out that the referendum would deepen democracy and that the people will decide, with their vote, if his government is complying with what the country wants.

On December 5, 2007, President Morales proposed to all nine prefects of the country to join him in submitting their mandates to a Recall referendum.

In the press conference, the President stated that the decision was taken in order to give the people the final word on whether they agree with the process of change or prefer the neoliberal system.

"I want to propose to Prefects both conservative and not conservative, to the nine Prefects of the country, let us together submit to a recall referendum, and let the people say if they are for the changes or not," Morales stated.

Morales said that the Recall Referendum has to do with preserving the unity and integrity of the country, a respect for legality, for the rule of law and above all respect for the National Congress.

He explained that the law was put forward so that democracy could be deepened in Bolivia, and so that the future of the country would be decided through the ballot box, within the framework of the Constitution and national laws.

In stark contrast to this position, politicians, and civic and business leaders of Santa Cruz carried out an illegal consultation on May 4 on autonomous statutes for their Department that ignored the validity of the country's Constitution.

Three other regions, Beni, Pando and Tarija, are now preparing their own regional consultations, with the same anti-Constitutional and illegal form as the leaders of Santa Cruz.

Morales thanked the people for their support, and for having elected him President of the Republic with a mandate to make profound changes in democracy. He explained that in two years and four months of government, despite some problems and mistakes, he feels that has served the country. Therefore he said that if the people, through the ballot box, decide he should continue as Head of State, he is ready to continue serving the majority.

President Morales also demanded the National Congress approve the Law Against Corruption and other bills which are currently "sleeping in the Senate."

"I am very happy, very satisfied. Something I wanted to happen will finally take place. We turn it over to the Bolivian people now," concluded the President.

LCR / Dgav ABI

Referendum Stresses Bolivia's Deep Rifts

2008-05-06T14:47:00.000-04:00

Americas News

By DPA
May 5, 2008, 19:03 GMT

Buenos Aires/La Paz - The outcome of a maverick referendum in the Bolivian region of Santa Cruz has reinforced heavily polarized positions in the poorest country in South America.

According to preliminary official results made public Monday, 84.2 per cent of the voters in the natural-gas-rich province favoured an increased autonomy for Santa Cruz. Some 64.2 per cent of those entitled to vote actually cast their ballots in Sunday's referendum.

Bolivia lies close to very deep economic, social and ethnic precipices, with very unequal distribution of resources. Its indigenous majority continues to live mostly in poverty following centuries of discrimination by the descendents of European settlers who ruled the country until just recently.

Leftist Bolivian President Evo Morales - a former coca grower leader and the country's first-ever president of indigenous descent - has repeatedly clashed with local elites since he was elected in late 2005, in his declared efforts to improve the lot of the majority.

Indeed, in order to make the changes he thinks are necessary, Morales needs power and money. And - with his push for a new constitution for the Andean country - he has hardly been subtle in his charge to obtain as much as possible at the expense of elites who are not his natural constituency.

In Santa Cruz the poverty rate lies at around 40 per cent, while in western Bolivia it is as high as 80 per cent. Santa Cruz is the richest province in the country, with a GDP per capita that is about three times greater than that in Bolivia's poor western highlands.

Another three provinces in the eastern lowlands are preparing to hold similar referendums in June - Tarija, Beni and Pando.

A different distribution of wealth along the lines proposed by Morales would inevitably worsen the lot of many in Santa Cruz, particularly the wealthiest, and they have bitterly resisted Morales' policies. The search for more autonomy is an effort to isolate themselves as far as possible from the grip of the central government.

Late Sunday, as the Bolivian president proclaimed the 'complete failure' of the election, thousands of pro-autonomy voters celebrated well into the night in the regional capital, Santa Cruz, their triumph over what they called 'Marxism.'

However, the referendum is technically not binding for Morales, since according to the country's laws, the central electoral authority is the only one which can approve referendums and monitor their results, even at the local level.

The international community from the Organization of American States and the United States to Bolivia's neighbours have backed the sovereignty of the Bolivian central government and the country's territorial integrity.

The US, hardly a major fan or Morales' policies and his nationalization of the oil industry, on Monday defended Bolivia's territorial integrity and urged the opponents to hold dialogue and work things out.

All opinion polls prior to the election had anticipated 70 per approval for autonomy, and abstention remained a key element. The fact that it was relatively high, at over 35 per cent, gave Morales reason to stand by his own position.

The president stressed that the referendum, which he described as 'illegal and unconstitutional,' only saw under 50 per cent of the people registered to vote actually support more autonomy. He got the figure from the sum of abstention, non-valid votes and votes against the proposal.

There were no conciliatory moves or disposition to compromise from either side.

Morales' idea of a socialist organization of society collides head-on with the economically-successful representatives of the capitalist economic model in Santa Cruz.

However, it may be argued that that was precisely why Morales was elected president in 2005: most of the people who gave him close to 54 per cent of the votes in the most recent general election in Bolivia want him to improve their lot at the expense of the country's elite, notably in Santa Cruz.

The situation is extremely tense.

In Santa Cruz, one person died and at least 24 were injured, and several reporters were attacked inside the international media centre in the provincial capital. There were heavy clashes in rural areas and in poor neighbourhoods in the city of Santa Cruz between supporters of more regional autonomy and supporters of Morales.

The referendum was a show of force and it changed little for or against Bolivian elites, for or against the left-wing president.

Political analysts in La Paz noted that both sides have nothing left to do but to keep going at each other and will have the chance to do so soon, in the three upcoming referendums.

Evo enacts Decree to disarm 'red ponchos' and unionists

2008-05-03T15:58:00.002-04:00

Early this week, groups of indigenous Aymara of the Omasuyos province announced their intention to violently face off with the promoters of the division of Bolivia, in reference to the referendum on May 4.

La Paz / ANF
On Tuesday night, the Government enacted Supreme Decree 29543, which provides a plan to disarm the civilian population that carries firearms and ammunition of military, police or even civilian use, unless they have the proper authorisation.

It also determines the regulation of the possession, use of weapons and ammunition for military, police and civilian use, with a clear desire to counter threats of clashes between pro-autonomy and anti-autonomy groups during consultations to be conducted in Santa Cruz, Beni, Pando and Tarija.

The new legal tool also determines the regulation, possession and use of weapons and ammunition for military, police and civilian use, taking into account recent developments in Cochabamba and Santa Cruz, where people were killed by gunfire.

The Defense Minister, Walker San Miguel, and the Minister of Government, Alfredo Rada, presented the decree in Palacio Quemado and argued that in recent months several criminal acts have occurred, including the recent deaths of three policemen after a shooting incident along the border with Brazil.

They also made reference to the mutual threats of weapons use by the so-called "red ponchos" of Omasuyos and members of the Cruceñista Youth Union, which is generating a climate of violence that could erupt during the Cruceño referendum scheduled for 4 May.

The decree regulates the import, sale, possession, handling, use, carrying, destruction, deactivation, control, monitoring, seizure and confiscation of weapons and ammunition for military, police and civilian use, in article 1.

Article 3 prohibits the bearing, possession and sale of weapons, ammunition, explosives, whose import has not been previously authorized by the Ministry of National Defense through an expressed Ministry resolution.

It prohibits the bearing, possession and sale of weapons and ammunition for military and police use by individuals, the staff of private security companies and other public or private institutions who are not empowered by the Constitution and existing laws.

Article 4 stipulates that confiscation for the carrying, possession and illegal use of firearms or ammunition shall be carried out by the National Police or the Armed Forces of the Nation, as well as the verification of their legal authorization to import, bear and use.

This decree establishes in Article 7 that the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Nation and the General Commander of the National Police will coordinate the design, development and implementation of the Programme for Active Disarmament.

Article 8 stipulates that all national military units and police of the must carry out a detailed inventory and registration of the arms and ammunition in their possession, and that this task must be done within a maximum of 120 days by the Ministry of Defence in the case of the Armed Forces, and the Ministry of Government in the case of the Police.

Illegally-held firearms will be confiscated without compensation and become the property of the Police. The bearing, use and possession of illegal weapons, ammunition and explosives for military use, will lead to immediate seizure by the Armed Forces of the Nation.

translation: humanist movement toronto

THE AUTONOMIC STATUTES OF SANTA CRUZ IN 9 POINTS

2008-05-02T09:53:00.009-04:00

source: Embassy of Bolivia in Washington
draft translation: Humanist Movement NYC/T.O.

1. Renewable, natural and environmental resources are exclusive domain of the Department (Art6): Forestry, Woods, and their use; Sustainable use of biological diversity and biotechnology; Use of Hydro resources, water, canals, irrigation, mineral and thermal springs; Alternative sources of energy and biofuels; Territorial regulation. Furthermore, the Statue determines the development of an Environmental Law by the Departmental Assembly (Art. 93), with no reference to the existing national law nor of Parliament.

2. Non-renewable Natural Resources. We declare the creation of a Departmental public oil and gas corporation (Art. 117) and another for mining and steel (Art. 121), parallel to those of the State, whose approval, in spite of being within the stated "jurisdiction of national legal approval", will depend exclusively on the Departmental Assembly.

3. The area of Land Transportation also consists of exclusive powers, which are: Land Transportation and other means of transport, and Highways, rail and other means of transport. "Other means" and "other vias" means “all”. With the addition of the field of Communications, the Control and use of the assignation of the electromagnetic spectrum, Telephony and Telecommunications are also the exclusive domain of the Department. (Art. 6).

4. In the Economic-Financial area, the following are exclusively under the domain of the Department: Departmental fiduciary funds and the determination of public investment policy; financing of Departmental infrastructure and taxes of Departmental character (Art 6). In terms of of taxes, it is established that the Assembly can impose "Special Contributions" for concrete budgetary needs (Art. 124; I), finally, State jurisdiction over customs policy is limited, resolving that controls over duties of any kind may not be established except through Departmental Law. (Art. 82).

5. In the area of Work, “work and labor relations” are exclusively under the management of the Department, (Art. 6;2) as are the areas of Education, Culture, Recreation, and Elections (Art 6;2). The latter will be governed by Departmental legislation as well as the national Electoral Code, but only "in so far that it does not contradict the present Statute." (Art 156; I).

6. Regarding the topic of land, the Statute establishes that the regularization of the rights, distribution, redistribution and land administration is the responsibility of the Departmental Government and shall be governed by the Law of the Assembly. (Art. 102)

7. In the field of Justice Administration , the Supreme Court of the District of Santa Cruz is raised to the highest level of jurisdiction (Art. 143; I).

8. With respect to the area of Civil Security, Article 69, I, determines the creation of another police force, which will have among its powers: "the protection of Departmental authorities and the public property of the Department" and only that, because the property and authorities of the State within the Department are not mentioned.

9. With respect to the area of Indigenous Peoples, the proposal begins with a racist declaration (Art. 161), (“the cruceño people recognize with pride their mestizo-majority racial situation,”) that according to the Statute, is "in agreement with Convention 169 of the ILO, and the Convention of the UN on Indigenous Peoples." The Statute promises the maintaining and protection of the cultures and forms of indigenous organization (Art. 2. II;), traditional medicine (Article 64), and language (Art. 5.I). The Statute recognizes only the indigenous natives of Santa Cruz and recognizes their rights to TCOs (Art. 103.II). However, it does not recognize indigenous autonomies.

CONCLUSION

1. What attributes remain for the National State? Article 8 of the Statute expresses the situation of what remains in the State. Its functions are reduced to the following: Credits, banking and insurance, Labor and the healthcare assistance for social security, intellectual and industrial property: Airports and air strips; meteorology, pharmaceutical products, museums, penal and civil registry.

2. Aside from having no legal basis in national legislation, the Statute has been an open rebellion to the established order, as for example when proceeding to take irreversible actions against certain authorities such as the Court of Electoral Department (Art. 152; III).

3. The validity of the State and national legislation are conditioned on the basis of “not contradicting the present Statute”, in the case of the judicial power and the Electoral Court (Art 156; I). Finally they announce the insubordination of the established order in front of measures adopted by the state such as elimination of the supervision in the sense that these departmental entities have the highest administrative instance and create a new departmental structure.(Art. 37; II) The same respect to the Constitutional Tribunal (Art 168). In this context this Project is to break away from the national political system, to protect the departmental authorities but not the State.

4. The statute pretends to eliminate the sovereignty of the National State, creating conditions for separation to an autonomous area. The other factors are accessory. In spite of the recognition of rights of the indigenous or nationalities they are maintained as minorities and do not have power.

The Embassy appreciates the cooperation of the Humanist Movement in this newsletter.

Based on: http://abi.bo/index.php?i=noticias_texto_paleta&j=20080314113921&k=

Bolivia To Nationalize Telecom Italia Unit, Gas Cos

2008-05-02T09:50:00.000-04:00

Thursday May 1st, 2008 / 20h30

LA PAZ, Bolivia (AP)--President Evo Morales said Thursday that he is nationalizing the leading Bolivian telecom company and will return four foreign-owned gas companies to state control.
Morales announced plans to buy back a majority of the former state company last year from Telecom Italia SpA (TIA), but negotiations have dragged out.
Terms of the nationalization announcement weren't immediately clear, though Morales said the company's employees would keep their jobs.
Celebrating May Day festivities in La Paz, Morales also announced the purchase of a majority stake in the energy company Andina, a unit of Spanish company Repsol YPF SA (REP).
Morales also issued a decree placing three more foreign-owned gas interests, including subsidiaries of BP PLC (BP) and Ashmore Energy International, under state control.
Bolivia privatized Entel in 1995 and handed 50% of the company to Stet International in exchange for the Italian company's promise to invest $608 million to improve service. Stet later merged with Telecom Italia.
Telecom Italia has said it has spent more than that to build up Bolivia's largest cellphone and Internet networks while maintaining a commanding share of the now-deregulated telecommunications sector.
But the Bolivian government claims Telecom Italia fell short on the promised investment and owes some $25 million in back taxes.

Source : Dowjones Business News

14 countries smack down the secessionists in Bolivia

2008-04-29T09:59:00.002-04:00

Electoral Authorities Support Resolutions Against Referendums in Bolivia

Rosa Rojas - La Jornada

Translation: Machetera

Electoral authorities in 14 Latin American and Caribbean countries, Mexico among them, expressed their support for the resolutions of the Bolivian National Electoral Court, aimed at preserving the electoral institution and maintaining respect for domestic legal and constitutional norms as a fundamental principle in the strengthening of democracy in Bolivia.

In recent days, the Court rejected the holding of a referendum over the autonomy statutes of Santa Cruz, Tarija, Beni and Pando, a decision that was ignored by the departmental electoral courts, which continued their work toward holding said referendums.

The regional declaration was signed by Argentina, Ecuador, Colombia, Brazil, Venezuela, Guatemala, Mexico, Peru, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Haiti, Santa Lucia, Belize, and Trinidad and Tobago, all present at the fifth inter-American reunion of Electoral Authorities of the Organization of American States (OAS) which ended the previous day in Quito.

Additionally, the text was backed by the Andean Electoral Council and the entity Electoral Experts of Latin America.

In parallel, Bolivia reported that it had denounced the illegality of the four regions autonomy statutes before the OAS. Santa Cruz is pushing for the first referendum to be held on May 4th, something that has kept the country in crisis as it fears an onset of violence.

The councilor David Choquehuanca explained La Paz's position to the Permanent Council, where he pointed out that these processes are happening in a manner that is outside the country's constitution and risks generating legal uncertainty. The OAS will examine the report.

For his part, President Evo Morales said that it is not an issue of autonomy or statute, but that in essence it is he who is considered "the problem" because those pushing the statutes "do not accept that an indigenous campesino could be president of the republic," according to statements he made this week to the BBC in its digital edition.

Morales said that it is not a referendum, but a non-binding "poll, an opinion survey," since the supposed autonomy referendum is anti-constitutional, not just unconstitutional, because autonomy is not a part of the present Constitution, and should a new Magna Carta be put forward, autonomy will belong to the people, not to the oligarchy.

Antonio Peredo, Senator of the governing Movement toward Socialism (MAS) described the statement of the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for the Western Hemisphere, Thomas Shannon, as "insolent." Shannon called the Bolivian government's denunciation of the U.S. Ambassador, Philip Goldberg, for supporting the separatists, "stupid."

Shannon, according to today's La Prensa, declared that his country was "strongly committed to Bolivia's territorial integrity and to the success of democratic government in Bolivia," and that the "serious disputes" between "Bolivia's federal government and the states need to be resolved by political mechanisms and dialogue." (Bolivia is a unitary state, not a federal one)

Amid complaints by Santa Cruz workers of being pressured to vote on May 4th in the referendum or lose their jobs, Bolivian social sectors repudiated a statement from the U.S. embassy, accusing it of abetting the illegal acts of the prefects in the four rebellious regions.

* * *

Machetera is a member of Tlaxcala, the network of translators for linguistic diversity.
Posted on http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=66593

EVO MORALES: "Support for social revolution is very encouraging."

2008-04-24T16:49:00.004-04:00

UNITED NATIONS PRESS CONFERENCE, April 23, 2008

Bolivian President Evo Morales Ayma this afternoon dismissed calls by an emerging separatist movement in the eastern lowland Bolivian state of Santa Cruz to hold a so-called autonomy referendum on 4 May as an "illegal" and "not very important" move by a select group of Santa Cruz wealthy families to divide the country.

"No real Bolivian agrees with division, but there will always be this kind of initiative started by families that want to create obstacles," Mr. Morales said during a Headquarters press conference on Bolivia's current situation, as well as today's opening at Headquarters of the seventh session of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues.

"Our obligation is to maintain the unity of the country and bring about transformation based on legality and constitutionality over and above any sectarian interests or claims," he said, stressing that "the unity of the country comes first".

President Morales, who took office in January 2006, said Bolivia was undergoing a deep transformation towards democracy and the redistribution of wealth as part of its struggle against a 500-year-old history of imperialism.

"When one seeks unity and equality and, above all, social justice, there will always be obstacles," he said. There had been progress in the past few years, but it would take time to make profound structural and social changes, as well as preserve and capitalize on the country's vast natural resources for the benefit of all Bolivians.

"What encourages me is the warmth and affection I experience when I go to the fields and towns and when I visit and talk to people. Their support for a social revolution is very encouraging," he said.

During the country's colonial era, the enemies of indigenous Bolivians were the Viceroy, the Catholic Church and the upper classes, which had a stranglehold on the nation's political, religious and financial life, respectively, he said. While remnants of that legacy remained, and powerful interests continued their fight to maintain control, democracy was in fact deepening and the State was now working for the common good. Just five years ago, Bolivians were granted the right to a referendum on their political leaders and their future.

In 2005, under the previous administration, Bolivia earned $300 million from its hydrocarbons industry, he noted. Last year, thanks to moves to nationalize that industry, Bolivian officials took in $1.93 billion and distributed the earnings to districts, mayor's offices, schools and other public entities throughout the country for socio-economic development.

"We're very happy to see this because this is the first time that the State has managed to have an effect on each home, each family," he said.

He explained that the Morales Administration had also lowered the legal pension age from 65 to 60, and had used 30 per cent of the country's hydrocarbons tax revenues to close the wide pension gap so that all Bolivians from farmers to court judges received a liveable income upon retirement.

In an effort to implement the September 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, he said the right to indigenous autonomy had been incorporated into the Bolivian Constitution and work was under way to consolidate those rights regionally.

Fielding questions from correspondents on his views of climate change, the President also touted the indigenous tradition of communal living, respect for Mother Earth and the end of private property as solutions to global warming.

"The concentration of land or money in a few hands is not the solution to our problems," he said. "The day environmental problems become so acute, you're not going to suffer less because you're so rich or so powerful. Let's use that money to protect the environment so that everyone will benefit."

Further, he criticized the use of farmland to produce biofuels for automobiles, saying it was causing wheat and other food prices to rise fast, seriously harming indigenous and very poor people worldwide. "According to some Presidents and some transnational companies, cars are more important than people," he said, stressing the importance of raising international awareness to end such biofuel development.

As for the right of Bolivians to chew coca leaves, Mr. Morales said the proposal to ban coca leaf consumption was contrary to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People. He had voiced his complaints in a letter to the Secretary-General, calling on the Organization to respect the merits of coca leaves and their historical and cultural value among indigenous communities.

Regarding last year's decisions by the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) to ban soccer matches in La Paz because of its high altitude and Mr. Morales' subsequent lobbying that ended that ban, he said it was a form of discrimination against people living in high altitudes. Soccer, like other sports, was good for one's health and was part of integration. Bolivia was preparing a petition for the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to address the marginalization of and discrimination against Bolivia and to defend the universality of soccer.

Concerning charges by the Peruvian Prime Minister and others that centres of the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) being set up in Bolivia and Venezuela were helping to re-establish rebel groups such as the Shining Path and Tupac Amaru, Mr. Morales said that maybe those centres destabilized empires, but not people. "What we're looking for now in Latin America are liberating democracies," he said.

http://www.un.org/News/briefings/docs//2008/080421_Bolivia.doc.htm

CANADA MUST SUPPORT BOLIVIA'S REAL DEMOCRACY

2008-04-21T10:33:00.004-04:00

Endorse the Following Letter to Canadian Foreign Affairs by April 25:

Rt. Hon. Maxime Bernier
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Ottawa ON K1A 0A6
Tel: 613.992.8053
Fax: 613.995.0687
Bernier.M@parl.gc.ca

April 21, 2008

Dear Mr. Bernier,

We, the undersigned, write to ask you to make a public statement in support of Bolivian unity at a critical time in that country's process of democratic transformation. We feel Canada can make a positive contribution towards a peaceful and constitutional resolution to the current crisis.

As you are surely aware, in 2005, Evo Morales became the first indigenous President of Bolivia, the poorest country in South America. With an overwhelming 54% majority, his mandate was clear: to renegotiate control over the country's natural resources, implement land reform, and draft a new Constitution that recognizes indigenous rights and regional autonomies.

While the new Constitution is still to be ratified by popular vote, powerful economic interests in the resource-rich "Crescent" region are now provoking a division of the country, organizing a Referendum for "Autonomy" to be held May 4, 2008 in Santa Cruz. This is in fact a call for secession, an illegal and reprehensible attempt to retain sole control over the resources that exist to benefit all Bolivians.

In spite of President Morales having called for dialogue and asking the Church to facilitate, civic leaders in the Crescent region have refused, preferring to push the country towards confrontation and breakup. With threats, media disinformation and even physical violence, they are shamelessly circumventing democracy and all legal process.

Faced with these challenges, President Morales has been an inspiring example of non-violence, insisting on dialogue and negotiation, and adhering to Bolivia's democratic laws.

The response that Canada gives now to Bolivia is very important. The Bolivian people need to see that their democracy is respected and that any manipulated fragmentation of the State will not be recognized. More than just an internal matter of State, the crisis in Bolivia should be of concern to all who believe in democracy, social justice, and the right of the people to choose a new future through non-violent means.

As Minister of Foreign Affairs, we ask you to make a public statement supporting the true democratic process in Bolivia, and refuse to recognize this seditious "referendum" that puts Bolivian unity in danger.

Sincerely,

Roberto Verdecchia
Humanist Movement (Canada)
info@humanistmovement.ca

[other groups/associations]

Cc:

Beverley J. Oda
Minister of International Cooperation
Oda.B@parl.gc.ca

Deepak Obhrai
Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs
obhrad@parl.gc.ca

Helena Guergis
Secretary of State, Foreign Affairs and International Trade
guergh@parl.gc.ca

Bob Rae
Liberal Foreign Affairs Critic
RaeB1@parl.gc.ca

Francine Lalonde
Bloc Québécois Foreign ffairs Critic
Lalonde.F@parl.gc.ca

Alexa McDonough
NDP International Cooperation Critic
mcdonough.a@parl.gc.ca

ONE-PAGE BACKGROUNDER ON EVO AND BOLIVIA

2008-04-19T10:38:00.006-04:00

Evo and Bolivia: The Path of Non-Violence in Latin America

In 2005, Evo Morales became the first indigenous President of Bolivia, ending 500 years of colonial and neo-colonial rule in South America’s poorest country. With a stunning 54% majority, his mandate was clear: renegotiate control over the country's natural resources, implement land reform, and draft a new Constitution that recognizes indigenous rights and regional autonomies.

In his first two years, Morales has made good. He has renegotiated contracts with oil and gas companies, bringing State policy in line with countries like Norway, increasing State revenues by about 40%. These revenues have gone to improving childhood education, housing programs, healthcare (six new national hospitals in 2007), and to a new universal monthly pension for the elderly.

The Morales Administration also formed an Assembly to draft a new Constitution. Subject to ratification by popular vote, the proposed Constitution protects human rights, decentralizes power, and grants autonomy to regions and communities. It formally recognises the many indigenous nations who have been discriminated against for centuries, and is a global model of Non-Violence through its explicit rejection of War as a method of conflict resolution.

Carrying out these reforms has not been easy. While some on the Left protest that Morales moves too slowly, it is the former-ruling elite in the resource-rich lowlands that has been most virulent in their opposition to the man they have called "the Dirty Indian".

At every step, they have subverted the people's mandate through violence, media disinformation, physical assaults and threats to divide the country. Their latest action is by far the most confrontational: the organizing of a referendum for "Autonomy" on May 4, 2008 in Santa Cruz, the most conflictive province. This is in fact a call for secession, a shameless attempt to retain sole control over the resources that exist to benefit all Bolivians. Ignoring repeated calls for dialogue, they fan the flames of racism and hate.

In the face of all this, President Morales has been an inspiring example of non-violence, insisting on dialogue and negotiation, and adhering to Bolivia's democratic laws. He deserves our strong support.

Years ago, when South Africa elected its first Black President and ended apartheid, the world applauded. The situation of cultural and economic "segregation" is not dissimilar in Bolivia, and it is for this reason that people around the world have begun to call Evo the "Mandela" of Latin America.

The crisis in Bolivia should be of concern to all who believe in democracy, social justice, and the right of a people to choose a new future through non-violence. It's time the Canadian Government gave its public support to Bolivia's democratic process of change.

humanistmovement.ca

"DEFEND REAL DEMOCRACY IN BOLIVIA"

2008-04-11T15:33:00.008-04:00

Chris Wells
Spokesperson for New Humanism in North America

The Bolivian people will soon vote in a referendum to approve or reject their new Constitution. The proposed Constitution will protect human rights and deepen real democracy, decentralizing power by giving regions and communities more autonomy and decision-making power than before. It is a Constitution that recognises, in its multi-nationality, the many indigenous peoples who have been discriminated against and exploited for centuries. Without eliminating private property, the Constitution includes the right of communities to a collective economy and to recover the sovereignty of the Nation over natural resources. It is an advanced Constitution that also rejects War as a method of conflict resolution. In short, it is a humanist Constitution.

With intelligence and courage, President Evo Morales is leading Bolivia through a historical process of transformation, confronting the violence of entrenched economic power with the methodology of non-violence.

Nevertheless, powerful economic interests in the resource-rich "Crescent" region of the country – actively supported by US funding through agencies like USAID – are now provoking a division of the country. They are ignoring the Constitutional Referendum altogether and instead organizing a Referendum for secession to be held May 4, 2008, creating the conditions for widespread violence.

Rather than accepting the 2005 election results that gave Morales an overwhelming mandate to re-draft the Bolivian Constitution, rather than working to have this proposed Constitution rejected by the ballot-box as is their right, rather than sitting down to dialogue, they are shamelessly circumventing democracy and all legal process, stirring up violence and endangering the lives of their fellow citizens. Their objective is to maintain sole control over the resources that should benefit all Bolivians. They call "Autonomy" what in reality is secession, a separation of the Nation that will of course leave them with control over the riches, and the general population abandoned.

In spite of President Morales having called for dialogue and asking the Church to facilitate, civic leaders in the Crescent region refuse to allow this to happen, preferring instead to organize their own paramilitary organizations to defend their "interests."

The response that populations and governments around the world give now to Bolivia is very important. The Bolivian people need to see that their democracy is respected and that any manipulated fragmentation of the State will not be recognized. Those who are instigating the conflict must be told that democracy cannot simply be sidelined when it is no longer convenient to the interests of the powerful. More than just an internal matter of State, the crisis in Bolivia should be of concern to all who believe in democracy, social justice, and the right of the people to choose a new future through non-violent means. What happens in Bolivia will surely affect the stability of other countries around the world.

Humanists of the world, in solidarity with the Bolivian people, call on the international community to support the true democratic process in Bolivia and refuse to recognize this seditious "referendum" that puts Bolivian unity in danger.

Chris Wells
Spokesperson for New Humanism in North America
9 April 2008

http://chriswells.humanism.org/

April 5 - Bolivia Rising Event in Toronto

2008-04-03T16:00:00.002-04:00

BOLIVIA RISING

An evening of Entertainment Solidarity from across the Americas

When: SATURDAY, APRIL 5; from 7 pm to midnight

Where: At the Steelworkers' Hall, 25 Cecil Street, Toronto, Ontario

$5 (or pay what you can)

Featuring:

* Melodía de Bolivia
* Fraternidad Kantutati
* Aztec Sacred Dancers
* Rosario Arce
* Gustavo Saavedra
* Las Imillitas

sponsored by Toronto Bolivia Solidarity - www.grupoapoyo.org/basn/node/60

Peace Corps, Fulbright Scholar Asked to 'Spy' on Cubans, Venezuelans in Bolivia

2008-03-03T15:40:00.003-05:00

U.S. Embassy Official's 'Spy' Request Violated Long-Standing U.S. Policy
By JEAN FRIEDMAN-RUDOVSKY and BRIAN ROSS

an ABC News Exclusive: http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=4262036&page=1

Feb. 8, 2008—

In an apparent violation of U.S. policy, Peace Corps volunteers and a Fulbright scholar were asked by a U.S. Embassy official in Bolivia "to basically spy" on Cubans and Venezuelans in the country, according to Peace Corps personnel and the Fulbright scholar involved.

"I was told to provide the names, addresses and activities of any Venezuelan or Cuban doctors or field workers I come across during my time here," Fulbright scholar John Alexander van Schaick told ABCNews.com in an interview in La Paz.

Van Schaick's account matches that of Peace Corps members and staff who claim that last July their entire group of new volunteers was instructed by the same U.S. Embassy official in Bolivia to report on Cuban and Venezuelan nationals.

The State Department says any such request was "in error" and a violation of long-standing U.S. policy which prohibits the use of Peace Corps personnel or Fulbright scholars for intelligence purposes.

"We take this very seriously and want to stress this is not in any way our policy," a senior State Department official told ABCNews.com.

The Fulbright scholar van Schaick, a 2006 Rutgers University graduate, says the request came at a mandatory orientation and security briefing meeting with Assistant Regional Security Officer Vincent Cooper at the embassy on the morning of Nov. 5, 2007.

According to van Schaick, the request for information gathering "surfaced casually" halfway through Cooper's 30-minute, one-on-one briefing, which initially dealt with helpful tips about life and security concerns in Bolivia.

"He said, 'We know the Venezuelans and Cubans are here, and we want to keep tabs on them,'" said van Schaick who recalls feeling "appalled" at the comment.

"I was in shock," van Schaick said. "My immediate thought was 'oh my God! Somebody from the U.S. Embassy just asked me to basically spy for the U.S. Embassy.'"

A similar pattern emerges in the account of the three Peace Corps volunteers and their supervisor. On July 29, 2007, just before the new volunteers were sworn in, they say embassy security officer Vincent Cooper visited the 30-person group to give a talk on safety and made his request about the Cubans and Venezuelans.

"He said it had to do with the fight against terrorism," said one, of the briefing from the embassy official. Others remember being told, "It's for your own safety."

Peace Corps Deputy Director Doreen Salazar remembers the incident vividly because she says it was the first time she had heard an embassy official make such a request to a Peace Corps group.

Salazar says she and her fellow staff found the comment so out of line that they interrupted the briefing to clarify that volunteers did not have to follow the embassy's instructions, and she later complained directly to the embassy about the incident.

"Peace Corps is an a-political institution," Salazar says. "We made it clear to the embassy that this was an inappropriate request, and they agreed."

Indeed, the State Department admits having acknowledged the infraction and assuring Salazar that it would not happen again. Yet, it was just four months later that Fulbright scholar van Schaick says he was asked by the same embassy official, Cooper, to "spy" on the Cubans and Venezuelans.

A U.S. Embassy official in La Paz, Bolivia said Cooper was referring all calls for comment to the State Department in Washington.

Van Schaick says he never considered complying with the request, fearful he would violate Bolivian espionage laws and that he would jeopardize the integrity of the Fulbright program, which yearly sends hundreds of American college graduates to countries around the world.

"I am supposed to be a cultural ambassador increasing mutual understanding between us and the Bolivian people," van Schaick explains. "This flies in face of everything Fulbright stands for."

The Fulbright program receives its funding from the U.S. State Department and the Peace Corps is a federal agency, but the State Department insists that neither group has the obligation to act in an intelligence capacity. In fact, both have strict regulations against members getting involved in politics in their host country.

The press director at the Peace Corps told ABC News in no uncertain terms that the corps is not involved in any intelligence gathering.

"Since Peace Corps' inception in 1961, it has been the practice of the Peace Corps to keep volunteers separate from any official duties pertaining to U.S. foreign policy, including the reality or the appearance of involvement in intelligence-related activities," said Amanda Beck, press director of the Peace Corps. "Any connection between the Peace Corps and the intelligence community would seriously compromise the ability of the Peace Corps to develop and maintain the trust and confidence of the people in the host countries we serve." Read the Peace Corps' full statement.

Like many of the Peace Corps workers, van Schaick is carrying out his research in the Santa Cruz countryside, where a number of Cuban doctors are deployed providing free medical services as part of Cuba's solidarity with its socialist ally, Bolivia's President Evo Morales.

The accusations are likely to reverberate in Bolivia, especially given the already shaky relationship between the Bush administration and President Morales' two-year-old government.

"These are serious incidents that we will investigate thoroughly," says Bolivia's Foreign Minister David Choquehuanca in an interview.

"Any U.S. government use of their students or volunteers to provide intelligence represents a grave threat to Bolivia's sovereignty."

Bolivian law provides severe penalties in espionage cases. According to Article 111 of the country's penal code, "he who procures secretive documents, objects or information&concerning [Bolivia's] foreign relations in an espionage effort for other countries during times of peace, endangering the security of the State, will incur a penalty of 30 years in prison." In lay man's terms: if any U.S. citizen provides information of use in a spying effort, they would be subject to Bolivia's maximum prison sentence.

But the U.S. citizens who reported being approached in this way by the State Department official said no mention was made of any legal risks arising from complying with the request to keep tabs on foreign nationals in Bolivia.

There is no indication that any of the volunteers made reports to the U.S. Embassy.

Van Schaick says he is keenly aware of the Pandora's box now knocked open. The Hoboken, N.J. native, however, was adamant that the incident be brought to light -- in the hopes for change. "I came forward because the Bolivian people have a right to know," former union activist van Schaick says. "Asking Fulbrighters to spy is just not OK."

Three of the other four Fulbright scholars currently in Bolivia say they were never asked about Cubans or Venezuelans in their briefings. A fourth Fulbright scholar declined repeated requests for an interview on the subject.

Editor's Note: Jean Friedman-Rudovksy is a freelance journalist based in La Paz, Bolivia where she is the correspondent for TIME Magazine and Women's Enews. She has worked as an associate producer for ABC News in Bolivia and is a founding editor of Ukhampacha Bolivia, an online bilingual Web journal on Latin American social and political issues.

The Story of a Dutch Letterbox which Could Cost Bolivia a Fortune

2008-02-18T12:13:00.005-05:00

an excellent article about the ETI-Bolivia case, from http://www.corporateeurope.org/bolivia-eti.html

Corporate Europe Observatory, February 2008

"Bilateral Investment Treaties represent the codification of a new hierarchy which places private commercial needs above the protection of the public interest, blurring – seriously, and perhaps fatally – the boundaries between public and private interests." - Susan Leubuscher[1]

The Netherlands has long been established as a place to do business and as more and more companies are finding out, all you need ‘to do’ business there is little more than a letterbox. So what are the advantages of owning a letterbox in the Netherlands? The answer is simple: it helps corporations to avoid paying taxes elsewhere[2] and enables them to take advantage of the corporate-friendly Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) the Netherlands has with other countries.

The Netherlands is home to about 20,000 of these letterbox companies and this number is rising, on average, by 5 every day.[3] One such company taking advantage of this corporate-friendly environment is Euro Telecom Italia N.V. (ETI), a wholly owned subsidiary of Telecom Italia SpA. ETI has no substantial commercial presence in the Netherlands, nor staff[4], but is currently attempting to take Bolivia to the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), an arbitration tribunal at the World Bank, using the BIT the Netherlands signed with Bolivia in 1995. Indeed, the BIT between the Netherlands and Boliva contains some harsh conditions not usually seen in BITs: the term ‘investments’ has a very wide interpretation and the BIT also applies to investments made even before it was signed into force – to name just two of its draconian conditions.[5]

ETI has requested arbitration because the government of Evo Morales suggested that ETI, which holds a controlling share of Bolivia’s largest telecommunications company ENTEL, has been providing a poor service to Bolivians, has not been reinvesting enough in its telecommunications infrastructure, and at the same time been pulling out millions of dollars of profits out of the country.[6] The Bolivian government set up a commission to begin a review of ETI’s performance, demanded the payment of back-taxes, and attempted to negotiate with ETI a buy back of what used to be a public telecommunications company (this deal included a compensation package for ETI).[7] ETI reacted furiously and claimed that, by undertaking a review of its performance and attempting to negotiate the renationalisation of ENTEL, Bolivia had “destroyed” ETI’s investments and its earning potential, therefore making it cheaper for Bolivia to renationalise ENTEL.[8] A rather paradoxical statement considering ENTEL continues to operate at a profit and is continuing to advertise new products and services in Bolivia.[9] Instead of completing negotiations with Bolivia, ETI opted for a much safer bet, lodging a request for arbitration with the ICSID at the World Bank.

ICSID is known for being business-friendly, indeed, in 36% of the cases it has presided over, it has awarded in favour of corporations demanding compensation be paid (often the compensation package includes an allowance for ‘lost future profits’). Another 34% result in out of court settlements being paid.[10] In It is not possible for countries to lodge complaints against corporations at ICSID, regardless of how poorly a corporation has behaved within its borders. Seemingly profits are more important than the rights of people to determine how they think how their society should be organised. As Yves L. Fortier QC, ironically a chairman on a board at ICSID, succinctly puts it “Commercial arbitration exists for one purpose only: to serve the commercial man.”[11] ICSID effectively replaces national sovereignty with a corporate friendly, supranational justice system which is answerable to no higher court. Indeed, the influence of ICSID is much larger than the cases mentioned above; just the threat of arbitration is enough to chill a nation’s reform programme.[12]

On May 2, 2007, the government of Evo Morales, well aware of the unfairness of the ICSID officially denounced and gave notice that Bolivia was withdrawing from the ICSID convention of 1966[13], the first country ever to do so. The ICSID convention, however, states that 6 month notice period applies to any withdrawal. ETI lodged its complaint with ICSID on October 12 and ICSID responded on October 29 (just a few days before the notice period was due to expire) stating it was willing to review the case, Bolivia then unsuccessfully appealed (there is some confusion, when other articles in the ICSID convention are taken into account, as to whether the notice period is or is not required). Unfortunately, because ICSID’s decision making processes are rather long winded, a decision will likely be made sometime between July 2009 and March 2010, and that’s just over the jurisdiction.[14] However, if Bolivia refuses, as it doing at the moment, to recognise ICSID then it could be tried in absentia and the case could progress extremely rapidly.[15]

In response to ETI’s action 863 citizens groups from 59 countries sent a petition to World Bank President Robert Zoellick and 15 Dutch organisations made an appeal to the Dutch Government. In their appeal the NGOs asked the Dutch government to support Bolivia and investigate corporate abuse of the investment treaty the Netherlands has with Bolivia. The Ministry for Trade reacted predictably, washing its hands of any involvement in the case, saying “This concerns a dispute between a Dutch investor and Bolivia. The Dutch state is not a party in this and has no opinion about the merits of the case and the legal basis on which the company has submitted the dispute”.[16] What the Ministry doesn’t mention in its response is that the Netherlands receives a considerable income in the form of taxation on capital transfers flowing through letterbox companies and similar financial institutions. In 2006 gross transactions involving these entities amounted to €4.6 trillion, this is more than 9 times the Dutch GDP.[17] There is also a large tax and consultancy sector supporting these financial institutions and it is estimated that this sector employs 2,500 people and the Dutch government receives approximately €1.2 billion in tax revenue every year (plus €0.5 billion in office and management costs). Robert Zoelick, highlighting the undemocratic nature of ICSID and the World Bank, didn’t bother to respond to the concerns of the NGO community. The Italian telecoms giant, meanwhile, can be confident that the tribunal will rule in its favour, Robert Sills, counsel for ETI said, “[...] ETI is confident that the tribunal will determine that it in fact has jurisdiction and proceeed to decide the case.”[18] Given ICSID’s history of ruling in favour of corporations, this confidence is well warranted.

CEO spoke to Rocio Rocabado, a resident of La Paz, Bolivia’s administrative capital. Barely audible because of a crackling telephone line, she told CEO that she was happy with what Evo Morales has been doing, “He’s recovering the natural resources (gas) and strategic resources (water, electricity, telecommunications), he’s trying to provide universal health and education for everyone and I’m happy about his efforts to recover ENTEL.” CEO asked her what happened after ETI took over ENTEL in 1995, “Prices went up immediately. ENTEL failed in its investment commitments for rural areas and it’s also avoiding taxes”, “Even now, many people in rural areas still don’t have telephones, perhaps it’s just not profitable?”, she wondered.

Today, the European Union is aggressively pursuing a new generation of free trade agreements (FTAs), under the aegis of its ‘Global Europe’ project, including an FTA with the Andean Community of Nations, which includes Bolivia. The EU claims that this FTA, which includes further market opening and other privileges for EU service corporations, will bring more wealth and create new jobs. In the light of the Bolivia’s experiences with Telecom Italia and Bechtel, these promises sound very hollow indeed.

Key Facts and Figures[19]

Number of Bilateral Investment Treaties in 1989: 385
Number of Bilateral Investment Treaties in 2006: more than 2,500

Number of known investor-state lawsuits as of 2006: 255[20]
Proportion of cases filed since 2002: more than 2/3 of all cases

Number of cases currently pending at the ICSID: 109
Number of cases in which investor revenues exceeded the GDP of the country: 7[21]

Percentage of cases pending and concluded against
“middle-income developing countries”: 74%
“low-income developing countries”: 19%
G8 countries: 1.4%

Percentage of cases relating to
services (water, electricity, telecommunications, and waste management): 42%
oil, gas and mining: 29%

Bechtel vs. Bolivia[22]
Cochabamban woman confronts police (2000)

US multinational Bechtel was forced out of Bolivia in 2000 after its Bolivian subsidiary Aguas del Tunari raised water prices by more than 50%, sparking off three general strikes and angry street protests in Cochabamba, Bolivia’s third largest city. In an attempt to protect Bechtel’s contract the Bolivian government declared martial law and began arresting protest leaders in their homes in the middle of the night.

The company went to the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes claiming $25 million in damages and $25 million in lost profits using the bilateral investment treaty Boliva has with the Netherlands. It, however, settled for a token amount in 2006.

Oscar Olivera, one of the protest leaders said, “Multinational corporations want to turn everything into a market. For indigenous people water is not a commodity, it is a common good. For Bolivia this retreat by Bechtel means that the rights of the people are undeniable.”

Notes

1. Leubuscher,S., The Privatisation of Justice: International Arbitration and the Redefinition of the State, June 2003.
2. van Dijk, M., Weyzig, F., Murphy, R., The Netherlands: A Tax haven?, SOMO, 2006, p.3.
3. van Dijk, M., Weyzig, F., Murphy, R., The Global Problem of Tax Havens: The Case of the Netherlands (SOMO Tax Briefing Paper), SOMO, January 2007, p.2.
4. Based on Euro Telecom Italia records lodged on the Dutch Trade Register at Kamer van Koophandel and an interview with a Telecom Italia employee based at the address of Euro Telecom Italia, she told CEO “We don’t need to have employees here to have a company here.”
5. Kavaljit, S, Why Investments Matters: The Political Economy of International Investments, FERN, Cornerhouse, CRBM, and Madhyam Books, 2007, p.94.
6. CADTM, CIADI/Telecom Italia: ¡hands off Bolivia, 7 December 2007, p.1.
7. CADTM, CIADI/Telecom Italia: ¡hands off Bolivia, 7 December 2007, p.1.
8. CADTM, CIADI/Telecom Italia: ¡hands off Bolivia, 7 December 2007, p.1.
9. Interview with Bolivian government spokeperson on February 5, 2008.
10. CADTM, CIADI/Telecom Italia: ¡hands off Bolivia, 7 December 2007, p.1.
11. Fortier, Y., “New Trends in Governing Law: The New, New Lex Mercatoria, or, Back to the Future”, ICSID Review, 2001, p.10-19.
12. Anderson,S., Grusky, S., Challenging Corporate Investor Rule: How the World Bank’s Investment Court, Free Trade Agreements, and Bilateral Investment Treaties have Unleashed a New Era of Corporate Power and What to Do About It, Food & Water Watch, Institute for Policy Studies, April 2007, p11: “Canada even repealed an environmental health regulation in the face of one threatened lawsuit by a U.S. corporation.”
13. Ziegler, C., From the presentation: How We Got to Where We Are -- the World Bank's First 50 Years.
14. Interview with Luke Peterson of International Institute of Sustainable Development February 6, 2008.
15. Interview with a Bolivian government spokesperson February 6, 2008.
16. Dutch Trade Minister’s response to parliamentary questions submitted by the Dutch Socialist Party.
17. Interview with Michiel van Dijk of SOMO.nl, author of, The Netherlands: A Tax Haven?, SOMO, November 2006
18. Investment Treaty News, International Institute for Sustainable Development, January 17, 2008.
19. Anderson, S., Grusky, S., Challenging Corporate Investor Rule: How the World Bank’s Investment Court, Free Trade Agreements, and Bilateral Investment Treaties have Unleashed a New Era of Corporate Power and What to Do About It, Food & Water Watch, Institute for Policy Studies, April 2007, p.ix.
20. There are many unknown cases, as some arbitration bodies keep cases secret.
21. For example, in 2005, Royal Dutch Shell’s earnings were 62 times the GDP of Nicaragua.
22. Environmental News Service, BOLIVIA: Bechtel Drops $50 Million Claim to Settle Bolivian Water Dispute, January 19, 2006

Letter from an Indian chief to the governments of Europe

2008-01-30T17:56:00.000-05:00

here's an old article that sheds a different kind of light on the ETI case against Bolivia...

THE REAL EXTERNAL DEBT

I, Guaicaipuro Cuautemoc, have come to meet with those who celebrate the anniversary of the Encounter. I, a descendant of those who have populated America for 40 000 years, have come to meet those who encountered it 500 years ago.

And so we all find ourselves here: we know what we are, and that is enough. We will never have anything else.

My brother, the European customs officer, asks me for a piece of paper with a visa so that I may discover those who discovered me. My brother the European lender asks me to pay a debt accumulated by Judas, who I never authorized to make such a deal. My brother the European petty lawyer explains to me that all debts are paid with interest, even though entire peoples and countries have been sold without their consent. And I go on discovering them.

I can also demand my payment. I can also demand interest. Recorded in the Indian Archive: paper after paper, receipt after receipt, signature after signature, that between only 1503 and 1660, 185,000 kilos of gold and 16 million kilos of silver from America arrived in San Lucar de Barrameda. Pillage? I don’t think so. Because that would be to think that our Christian brothers had ignored their seventh commandment. Plunder? That would be to assume that Europeans, like Cain, kill and then deny the blood of their brothers! Genocide? That would be giving credit to slanderers like Bartolome de las Casas who qualify the Encounter as the destruction of the Indies, or Arturo de Pietri, who states that the start of capitalism and of present-day Europe was due to the flood of precious metals!

No! Those 185,000 kilos of gold and 16 million kilos of silver should be considered the first of many friendly loans from America for the development of Europe. The alternative would be to consider them war crimes, which would give us the right to not only the immediate return of those goods, but to indemnization for damages as well. I, Guaicaipuro Cuautemoc, prefer to think of the least offensive hypothesis. Such incredible exports of capital were nothing but the start of a Marshalltezuma Plan to guarantee the reconstruction of a barbaric Europe, ruined by its terrible wars against the Muslims, the defenders of algebra, daily baths and other superior achievements of civilization.

That is why, as we approach the 500th Anniversary of the Government Loan, we can ask ourselves:

Have our European brothers made a responsible and rational, or at least a productive use, of the resources generously given them by the International Indoamerican Fund?

We deplore it but we have to say no. Strategically, they wasted it on the battle of Lepanto, on invincible armadas, Third Reichs and other forms of mutual extermination, and ended up occupied by foreign troops of NATO, just like Panama (but without the canal).

Financially, they have been unable -- after a 500 year moratorium -- to neither pay back the capital with interest nor to become independent of the liquid assets, the raw material and the cheap energy which the Third World exports to them. This deplorable situation corroborates what Milton Friedman said about how a subsidized economy could never work. And so we are obliged to ask you -- for your own good -- that you pay back the capital and interests that we have generously deferred for all these years.

In saying this, we would like to make clear the fact that we will not lower ourselves to charging our European brothers the vile and bloody floating interest rates of 20 to 30% which our European brothers have charged the people of the Third World. We will limit ourselves to demanding the return of the precious metals lent to you, plus the low fixed rate of 10% interest/year, accumulated during these last 500 years. On this basis, applying the European formula of compound interest, we would like to inform the Discoverers that they only owe us, as a first payment of their debt, a total of 185,000 kilos of gold and 16 million kilos of silver, both of these raised to the 300th power. That is to say, a number whose total expression would require more than 300 digits, and which would easily surpass the weight of the earth.

These gold and silver pieces are very heavy! How much would they weigh in blood? To deduce that Europe in half a millennium has not been able to generate sufficient riches to cancel out this small interest is basically admitting its absolute financial failure and/or the demented irrationality of the assumptions of capitalism.

Such metaphysical questions do not trouble us indoamericans. But we do demand the immediate signing of a letter of intention that will discipline the debtor-people of the old continent and that will make them fulfill their duty through a rapid privatization or reconversion of Europe which will allow it to be handed over to us as the first payment of a historical debt.

The pessimists of the Old World say that their civilization is bankrupt and that this stops them from carrying out their moral and financial duties. If this is the case, then we would be happy if they would pay us by giving us the bullet with which they killed the poet.

But they cannot. Because that bullet is the heart of Europe.

Guauicaipuro Cuautemoc.
Source: Indian Renaissance magazine, #7 (1991)

final push to stop Europe Telecom Int'l

2008-01-28T11:08:00.000-05:00

January 28, 2008

To His Excellency KAREL P.M. DE BEER

Subject: Stopping ETI’s misuse of the investment treaty between The Netherlands and Bolivia

Dear Sir,

I am writing to make an appeal to you because, as the Ambassador of the Dutch Government to Canada, you can use all the influence you have to to correct a serious injustice being done by ETI (Europe Telecom International) against the Bolivian people.

The President of Bolivia, fulfilling with what he has said about “public services cannot be a private business” has requested ETI to sell to the State a majority controlling interest in Bolivia’s phone company to regain the telephone services for the Bolivian people. Without even sitting down to discuss or to negotiate the issue, ETI has initiated a proceeding before the World Bank’s tribunal (ICSID). In May of last year, Bolivia ended its participation in ICSID because it considers ICSID undemocratic and lacking judicial grounds. Coincidentally, it is now headed by Ana Palacio, former Foreign Relations Minister of the Aznar government of Spain(!).

ETI is not a company that represents Dutch interests. On the contrary, ETI represents primarily the interests of Telefonica of Spain, a company that has been fined several times by the European Commission because of bad business practices.

ETI is using the investment treaty (BIT) between The Netherlands and Bolivia to undertake this financial harassment and costly trial for Bolivia.

We ask you, together with hundreds of organizations in over 59 countries, to stop ETI from using The Netherlands’ treaty with Bolivia. If you do not stop this, the proceedings will begin on January 31st, 2008. The Netherlands cannot be an accomplice to this injustice and to the economic violence perpetrated against South America’s poorest country.

Sincerely,

Roberto Verdecchia
Spokesperson for New Humanism
Canada

cc
Premier, Jan Peter Balkenende
Minister van BZ , Maxime Verhagen
Minister van Ontwikkelingshulp, A.G. Koenders
Minister van Economische Zaken, Mw. M.J.A. van der Hoeven
Voorzitter Tweede Kamer, dr Tichelaer
Consulate General of the Netherlands in Toronto, Consul J. Kramer
ANP

More than 800 Organizations call on the World Bank to Respect Bolivia's Withdrawal from its Arbitration Tribunal

2008-01-18T11:12:00.000-05:00

BARCELONA, 15 Jan. (EUROPA PRESS) -
original article: http://tinyurl.com/2k37pq

More than 800 grassroots organisations from 59 countries will today ask World Bank President, Robert B. Zoellick, to respect the decision of the Government of Bolivia to withdraw from the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), whose Administrative Council is headed by Zoellick himself.

In May of last year, the Government of Bolivia became the first country in the world to withdraw from the ICSID after denouncing the history of this court of arbitration, stating that it acts in favour of narrow corporate interests and against the public good.

The ICSID is now refusing to abide by the actions of the Government of Bolivia and is allowing a case by a large European telecommunications company to proceed. The global petition reflects the growing concern over a system of investors' rights that undermines democracy and human rights.

Many of the organizations that signed the petition were already aware of these problems due to the notorious case of 'Bechtel vs. Bolivia'. In 2001, a subsidiary of Bechtel filed a lawsuit against the poorest country in South America following a failed proposed privatization of water services. After five years of intense public pressure, the company withdrew the case.

As stated in the petition, Bolivia is just one of several governments that are defying the excessive protection of investors in free trade and bilateral investment treaties.

While Bolivia followed all the legal procedures to withdraw from the ICSID, the court nonetheless planned to form a tribunal to hear the case against Bolivia raised by Euro Telecom International (TSI), a company incorporated in the Netherlands but whose real owners are Telecom Italia and Telefonica Spain.

---- ----- -----

The petition and list of signing organizations is available in different languages through the following links:

English: http://www.ips-dc.org/reports/080115-boliviapetition-en.pdf
Castellano: http://www.ips-dc.org/reports/080115-boliviapetition-es.pdf

letter to Dutch Embassy in Canada

2008-01-11T10:55:00.000-05:00

Ambassador Karel P.M. De Beer
Royal Netherlands Embassy / Constitution Square Building
350 Albert Street, suite 2020 / Ottawa, ON K1R 1A4
Tel.: +1 613 237 5030 / Fax: +1 613 237 6471
email: nfo@dutchhelp.com

Jan 11, 2008

Your Excellency KAREL P.M. DE BEER,

In your function as the Ambassador of the Dutch Government to Canada, I am writing to you as the representative of the Humanist Centre of Cultures to condemn the fraudulent use of the “Agreement for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of investments between the Republic of Bolivia and the Kingdom of the Netherlands” by Euro Telecom International.

As you may know, on the 29th April 2007 Bolivia announced their withdrawal from ICSID (International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes), a branch of the World Bank, and on May 8 the Ambassador for Foreign Affairs and Integration, Pablo Solon, announced that the next step would be the reviewing and renegotiation of treaties for the protection of investments that Bolivia signed with 24 different countries.

In April 2007 the transnational company Eurotelecom Italia, owner of Telecom ENTEL in Bolivia, sent a letter to the Bolivian Government in which they stated that they had notified ICSID that there was a dispute with the Bolivian State about alleged damages to their investments. On 12 October 2007 the Italian telecom company officially took its case against Bolivia to ICSID.

In order to defend their investments in ENTEL, Eurotelecom International NV (ETI), with their headquarters in Holland, made use of the "Agreement for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments between the Republic of Bolivia and the Kingdom of the Netherlands".

ETI is a shell company that employs no Dutch citizens, and supposedly holds 50% of the shares of ENTEL, but in reality another Dutch company, International Communication Holdings (ICH), is the 100% owner of ETI. ICH, in turn, is 100% owned by Telecom Italia International NV, also a Dutch company, that in turn is 100% owned by Telecom Italia s.p.a, an Italian Company.

ETI, ICH and Telecom Italia International strangely have the same address in Holland: Stravinskylaan 1627, 1077XX, Amsterdam.

The twisted figure of ETI-ENTEL is being fraudulently and misleadingly used by Telecom Italia s.p.a for legal reasons to take the case of ENTEL and the Bolivian State to ICSID.

This action is fraudulent because it is not at all a matter of protecting Dutch investments in Bolivia. All of these supposed investments in ENTEL came directly from Telecom Italia s.p.a, or rather, from Italy.

We categorically condemn this fraud and ask you, Ambassador De Beer, and the Dutch government to intervene and stop this fraudulent use of the Bilateral Treaty between Holland and Bolivian with all the measures at your disposal.

We also want to express our great concern about the defamation campaign that the ex-Bolivian oligarchy, the same people who have oppressed the indigenous peoples for 500 years, is instigating against President Evo Morales Ayma.

In Bolivia a profound process of transformation is happening, non-violently set in motion by President Morales, with a mandate given to him by the majority of the Bolivian people: a process of political, economic, social and legal transformation that is to be ratified by means of a referendum for a new Bolivian constitution. This new constitution will end more than 500 years of oppression of the 70% of the population—the indigenous peoples—and their status as people without rights.

The UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, Rodolfo Stavenhagen, said on 7 December in La Paz, after a 12-day visit, that Bolivian President Evo Morales is like Nelson Mandela because he is trying to change an unfair society. He pointed out that Mandela was the first black President of South Africa and that Morales is the first indigenous President of Bolivia.

Evo Morales is trying to end the system of apartheid that has ruled de facto for centuries in Bolivia. Regarding the bilateral agreements, he wants a relationship of equality and not foreign bosses. He wants ICSID to disappear because it was formed to guarantee the usurious profits of transnational companies at the expense of the people of poor countries. Of the 232 cases brought to ICSID, 230 were cases by multinational companies against States, in which the multinationals always won.

A President that defends the rights and well-being of his people, a people who have elected him fairly, merits our solidarity, admiration and support.

Evo Morales is a brave humanist and the first democratically-elected Bolivian who is calling on the world to abandon the path of wars, violence, economic oppression and human humiliation and to build a truly just world where people coexist in equality.

Therefore we ask you and your government to openly support the President of Bolivia and stop the fraudulent use of the Bilateral Investment Treaty between Holland and Bolivia by ETI-ENTEL, and defend him in front of the attacks by economic interests whose only objective is to undermine the new democratic process of Bolivia.

I look forward to receiving a response to this email, and I leave you with the greatest respect and cordial greetings,

Roberto Verdecchia
Centre of Cultures
Toronto, ON Canada

Copy to:
- Minister President Jan Peter Balkenende
Binnenhof 20 / Postbus 20001
2500 EA Den Haag
fax. +31 70 3564683

- Consul-General J. Kramer
Consulate General of the Netherlands in Toronto
1 Dundas Street West, Suite 2106
Toronto, ON M5G 1Z3

- Chairman of the Parliament, Jaques Tichelaar < J.Tichelaar@tweedekamer.nl>