Unpacking U.S. Democracy Promotion in Bolivia

Abstract

U.S. democracy promotion programs in Bolivia in the early 2000s originally sought to stabilize the neoliberal state through “soft” tactics whose origins were rooted in the “inclusive” neoliberal project of Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada’s first presidency. As left indigenous social forces tipped the balance of power away from U.S. political allies, these programs were reconfigured to undermine the rise of Evo Morales’s Movement toward Socialism (MAS) through “hard” tactics including support for the right-wing departments of the western part of the country, where autonomist forces mobilized to destabilize the MAS after Morales won the presidential elections in December 2005. U.S. programs also continued to channel support to moderate civil society organizations and nongovernmental organizations that sought to confine the popular revolt within a liberal-institutional framework. Soft and hard tactics combined to promote neoliberal polyarchy. Estados Unidos buscó promover la democracia en Bolivia durante principios de la década del 2000 para estabilizar al estado neoliberal; sus tácticas “suaves” de promoción democrática partían del proyecto neoliberal “inclusivo” de la primer presidencia de Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada. Conforme las fuerzas sociales izquierdistas indígenas cobraron poder sobre los aliados de Estados Unidos, estos programas se reconfiguraron para contrarrestar la ascensión del Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS) de Evo Morales. En este caso se utilizaron tácticas “duras” como el apoyo a departamentos derechistas en la parte oeste del país, donde fuerzas autonomistas se movilizaron para desestabilizar al MAS después de que Morales ganara las elecciones de diciembre de 2005. Los programas estadounidenses continuaron canalizando apoyos a organizaciones civiles y no gubernamentales moderadas que buscaron confinar la revuelta popular dentro de un marco liberal e institucional. Las tácticas “suaves” y “duras” se combinaron para promover una poliarquía neoliberal.

The Russian State, Eurasianism, and Civilisations in the Contemporary Global Political Economy

“…The organic intellectuals of the Russian state selectively employ ideas about Russian culture to circumscribe the field in which debate occurs and in which political life is to be comprehended as they produce, propagate and normalise counter-(US)hegemonic world order concepts. Such figures exhibit an understanding of American hegemony that is in consistent with neo-Gramscian conceptions of the term, insofar as they emphasise the 'coercive', 'consensual', material and ideational components of American hegemonic projects (Anderson 2002;Burron 2012; de Graaf and Apeldoorn 2011; Robinson 1996). An examination of the capillary function of ideology and ideas in the discourse offered by the organic intellectuals of the Russian state gives us a deeper understanding of the consensual/legitimacy-seeking components of Russian statedirected capitalist aspirations to regional hegemony and corresponding critique of American aspirations to consolidate global hegemonic structures.…”

Explaining Expulsions of U.S. Diplomatic Personnel from Latin America, 1991–2016

“…One possible proxy is the activities of the U.S. National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which funds a variety of projects related to human and labor rights, freedom of the press, and building democratic institutions in Latin America and elsewhere (Gershman & Allen, ). In Latin America, the NED has often been singled out for criticism for working to undermine governments that are critical of the United States (e.g., Bolivia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Cuba, and Nicaragua), or for promoting U.S. interests more broadly (Burron, ), so NED grant activity might be a trigger for expulsions of U.S. diplomats. Public funding data from the NED are available only from 2014–2017 (NED, ); given the restricted period and small number of observations, we examined the Pearson’s Chi‐Square between NED funding (constant 2010 dollars) and expulsions.…”

Bolivia: desk study on aid and democracy

“…In the early 2000s, the US sought to stabilize the Bolivian state through 'soft' tactics whose origins were rooted in the neoliberal project of the then-President Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada. When left-leaning indigenous social forces gained prominence at the cost of American allies, 'hard' tactics including support for the right-wing departments of Western Bolivia were used (Burron 2012). In a broader sense, foreign aid, military assistance, and diplomatic relation all constitute a critical part of this US 'foreign policy' toolkit in Bolivia.…”