A solution to Santa Cruz?

01.21.2005

Santa Cruz won't back down on their demands, despite Mesa's agreement to partially reduce the price of diesel (one of the original cruceño demands). But now regional leaders are highlighting what was, I believe, always the primary motive: political autonomy. I don't think Mesa can much longer avoid dealing w/ the issue directly. Sure, he's come out in favor of autonomy. But cruceños no longer seem willing to wait.

And, to be fair, why should they? If protesting can get the president to change his mind about gas subsidies, Aguas del Illimani, coca eradication, or pick any number of issues. Right? Mesa seems to quickly fold under pressure whenever El Alto or the Chapare rise up, and cruceño leaders have noticed. The track record of giving in to every social demand has led many in Santa Cruz to question Mesa's ability or willingness to come through on regional autonomy.

Once the government decided to negotiate from a position of weakness against any demand, the number of demands (often contradictory ones) simply spiraled out of control. And Mesa (let's be honest) has a track record of quickly giving in to demands from El Alto, usually en toto. And that's led to many in Santa Cruz to ask who Mesa governs for.

Having lived in La Paz — jokingly called the nation's "marchodrome" — I noticed the city's protest groups, led by highly organized dirigentes seem to have "captured" the state. It's not unusual to see people marching, blocking city streets, demanding the president personally guarantee to a few dozen parents that their children be enrolled at the private school of their choice. And. Of course. Since La Paz is La Paz, the protests are quickly noticed & felt. If the Prado shuts down for protesters every other day, the president has to notice. So, he does.

Add to that this: When El Alto or the Chapare protest, Mesa has refused to use police or military force, often just letting the protesters have their way. But when Santa Cruz protested, the president militarized much of the city. Even I find this rather uneven handling of different protest groups.

Right now, many in Santa Cruz are wondering when they'll see any progress on the question of regional autonomy. And they're unwilling to wait for the national constituent assembly. Especially w/ no word yet on how delegates will be invited. If the assembly's a unicameral body, elected nationwide (as the demands in La Paz currently suggest it would be), then cruceños know they'll be outnumbered. Even if they receive autonomy, it might be in a grossly different context, w/ the central state retaining control over the region's economy — which is the key issue.

La Razón considers Mesa's four options:

  1. Give in to Santa Cruz & hold a referendum on regional autonomy.
  2. Wait out the conflict, hoping for the upcoming Carnaval celebrations to dilute mobilizations.
  3. Hold some sort of "national conference" of the country's leaders.
  4. Step down & call early elections.

I don't think Mesa should step down to held elections in this climate. First, because it's too tense for orderly elections where cooler heads would prevail. Second, because it'd just pass the buck on the issue to the next president. Mesa can — and should — continue to be president (I won't say "govern" since I don't think he's been "governing" so much as "giving in to pressure" for the last few months).

I don't think a national conference would help, since it begs the question of who these "leaders" are, who gets to invite them, how legitimate are they, and whether they can enforce any agreement. Instead, the conference could turn into a disaster & another black eye for the president.

I don't think waiting out the conflict's the answer. And Carnaval could spark a greater sense of regional pride as leaders use the stark differences between the Oruro & Santa Cruz celebrations to further the "two Bolivias" mantra. Also, waiting for things to "blow over" is the sign of a weak government, a way of saying "I don't know what to do!"

I think calling for a referendum on autonomy is the best solution. It's the principle demand from cruceño leaders, and it would allow voters to decide, at the polls, whether Santa Cruz wants autonomy or not. It's a way to make policy change by counting votes, rather than weighing the strength of questionably mobilized masses.

Because if the issue of regional autonomy for Santa Cruz (and other eastern departments) isn't solved soon, the demand could quickly turn from "autonomy w/in Bolivia" to outright calls for secession. Which would be a disaster for everyone involved.

Posted by Miguel at 02:14 PM

Comments

I think the Asamblea is the key to the solution. Like you said, no one really knows who and how the elections will go. I don't think Cruceños are the only one that are afraid that those in El Alto or other social movements may have a disproportionate amount of representation. It's been well documented those Paceños who whistle whenever there are new marches. They are powerless, what are they going to do..challenge the marchers?

It's time for the centrist middle class and their leaders like Juan del Granado, Terceros in Cochabamba, and Paredes to take a lead in putting forth moderate candidates. They are already elected there are no elections to worry about. Plus, there's always Tuto.

Posted by: eduardo at January 21, 2005 05:29 PM

Just caught up on everything! I'm glad you are feeling better, things are a little turmoiled here, but I guess that is "normal".

Mesa has no authority and just wants to satisfy all demandas which is impossible, nonetheless I wish him luck (determination would be better than luck but I think he lacks it). I hope he stays fine because things would be much worse with out him (Vaca Diez taking power would be the detonator for social revolts).

Posted by: Daniel at January 22, 2005 11:21 AM