Below is the text of a (very) brief comment I was invited to make as part of their “Featured Q&A” on the current situation in Bolivia—particularly w/ reference to the conflict between the central government & the department of Potosí—for today’s Latin American Advisor (a daily newsletter put out by the Inter-American Dialogue). I always enjoy the challenge of giving a commentary on something as complex as Bolivian politics in 250 words or less.

Just a shameless plug a few things of mine that just came out in print. Two are specifically on Bolivia; the other is a published version of the writing/discussion assignment I developed based on American Idol & presented at the 2009 APSA Teaching & Learning Conference.

The latest controversy in Bolivia pitting Evo & Costas (the opposition/regionalist governor of Santa Cruz) is over style masquerading as substance. This Friday is 6 de Agosto, Bolivia’s national holiday. Instead of celebrating the event in La Paz (the political capital) or Sucre (the historical/constitutional capital), Evo’s government has decided to hold the official national ceremony in Santa Cruz. The dilemma, then, was over the use of the wiphala : whether or not it should be raised & whether or not it represents all Bolivians.

Evo Morales has interjected himself into the recent Colombia-Venezuela political crisis. Speaking to the Bolivian press, Evo underlined that Bolivia is a pacifist country but is prepared to defend itself if drawn into the Colombia-Venezuela conflict. This was an odd statement to make for a strictly pacifist country (as Bolivia’s constitution proclaims), but also because Bolivia borders neither country & is nearly a thousand miles away from the conflict.

The two weeks since I’ve returned from Bolivia have seen a dramatic development: the country’s largest indigenous organizations are directly challenging Evo’s government. In response, the government has chosen to attack USAID, blaming it for fomenting dissension & division w/in the social movements that have traditionally backed MAS. The logic is fairly simple: No legitimate indigenous group/leader would ever challenge Evo unless he/she/they was/were manipulated by foreign interests. But this argument has several problems.

Earlier I commented on the politics of development aid & suggested that Bolivia’s government is politicizing development aid. So far, the government is heavily attacking both USAID & the UN (particularly the various UNDP programs in the country), accusing them of fomenting anti-government activity. Today, that line of attack continues, but is taking interesting twists that international environmental & indigenous rights activists should take note.

What do USAID & the UN have in common? Apparently, they’re both financing anti-government activities in efforts to destabilize Evo’s government. Fidel Soruco, a MAS senator, accused the UN of fomenting the recent protests in Caranavi, which left two dead & scores injured.