ICAR News Network - Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution

ICAR News Network

Political Conflicts and the Emergence of a New Nationalism in Ecuador, Venezuela and Bolivia
By Ruth Adriana Salcedo, ICAR Certificate Student
Posted: 08/01/07

There has been a dramatic shift to left-of-center governments in recent years in South America. The triumph of the left in most countries from Argentina to Venezuela follows on the heels of two decades of debt crises, low economic growth and limited progress in reducing poverty and inequality throughout the region. From an outside perspective, it would also be straightforward simply to point to a rise in nationalism and a reassertion of the role of the State, especially in Andean countries such as Venezuela and Bolivia. The reality is more subtle and complex, and involves different external and internal factors. In particular, it involves not only a reaction against political and economic policies associated with the United States, but also more or less conflictive processes of transformation of the region’s relatively young democracies.

The Andean region has witnessed some of the strongest reactions against the ‘neo-liberal’ policies associated with the United States and with the international lending institutions (the IMF and World Bank) in which it is seen as having significant influence. The last two decades are associated by the broader population in these countries with the debt crises, failed structural adjustment policies that left the poor unprotected, non-transparent and pro-rich privatizations, the presence of multinationals in key industries amidst accelerating globalization, and a diminished role for the State.

Presidents Chavez in Venezuela, Morales in Bolivia and Correa in Ecuador have all successfully tapped into the vein of strong anti-imperialist sentiment in reaching power, drawing on a nationalist and indeed Bolivarian discourse that reasserted independence from external domination. This has turned into a policy of nationalization of hydrocarbons in Bolivia and a broader role for the State especially in Venezuela. At the same time, the United States is widely viewed as not only lacking a strategy for relating with the region in the aftermath of its discredited ‘Washington Consensus’, but also as having neglected the region since September 11th.

At the domestic level, it must be remembered that 30 years ago most countries in the region still had military governments. Not only are the Latin American democracies relatively young, but also wide popular participation is relatively recent. For example, in Ecuador, voting rights were extended broadly only in the late 1970s. Power has been concentrated in political parties driven more by business interests and political patronage than by ideology. Institutionality has been weak in most of the Andean countries as a result of political influence in the judiciary and in control institutions (e.g. electoral tribunals, Controllers, regulatory agencies, etc.).

Having tried out the different major parties with limited success in terms of addressing their poverty during the past two decades, the general public has turned to “outsiders” (political figures without traditional political party support) such as Presidents Chavez, Morales and Correa. The appeal of these outsiders is that they are not associated with the perceived corruption of the traditional political leadership. Moreover, their populist discourse emphasizes that the people should be the protagonists of truly democratic systems, that the State has been captured by interests, and that it needed to be recovered from the hands of historically privileged oligarchic groups. In Bolivia, with its large, historically marginalized indigenous population, the discourse has also focused on the need to re-found the state as a truly pluri-cultural, multi-ethnic entity, and this theme has also been strong in Ecuador. Constitutional reform has inevitably played a critical role in the political agendas of the new leaders, bringing with it a potential for true reform but also considerable institutional uncertainty in the immediate future, and the risk that the new systems might be imposed rather than broadly agreed and that they might not be as democratic or as effective in meeting the needs of the poor as the public might hope for.

In conclusion, Latin America and especially the Andean Region is facing a critical juncture, not only because of the challenge of consensus building at the regional level especially with the US, but also because of the emergence in certain Andean countries of a new political representation that is radically opposed to the existing establishment. These tensions are compounded by historical internal regional divisions in the case of Bolivia and Ecuador. The result is a complex situation in which subtle understandings are required and a long-term vision is needed to promote an active citizenship, greater transparency and accountability of the State, and policies that directly reduce poverty and inequality. This is a perfect arena for the development of culturally sensitive conflict transformation initiatives, where the promotion of dialogue among the different actors, the establishment of alliances and consensus building are essential ingredients in ensuring that violent conflict is avoided and that agreements reached are sustainable over time.

News Network Homepage / Armenia / 2008 Elections / Afghanistan / Diplomacy/ Egypt / Environment / Global Peace Index / Health / Immigration / Iraq / Iran / Islam / Kosovo / Nuclear Proliferation / Pakistan / Palestine-Israel / Russia / Somalia / South America / Turkey /




ICAR News Network Political Conflicts and the Emergence of a New Nationalism in Ecuador, Venezuela and Bolivia By Ruth Adriana Salcedo, ICAR Certificate Student Posted: 08/01/07 There has been a dramatic shift to left-of-center governments in recent years in South America. The triumph of the left in most countries from Argentina to Venezuela follows on the heels of two decades of debt crises, low economic growth and limited progress in reducing poverty and inequality throughout the region. From an outside perspective, it would also be straightforward simply to point to a rise in nationalism and a reassertion of the role of the State, especially in Andean countries such as Venezuela and Bolivia. The reality is more subtle and complex, and involves different external and internal factors. In particular, it involves not only a reaction against political and economic policies associated with the United States, but also more or less conflictive processes of transformation of the region’s relatively young democracies. The Andean region has witnessed some of the strongest reactions against the ‘neo-liberal’ policies associated with the United States and with the international lending institutions (the IMF and World Bank) in which it is seen as having significant influence. The last two decades are associated by the broader population in these countries with the debt crises, failed structural adjustment policies that left the poor unprotected, non-transparent and pro-rich privatizations, the presence of multinationals in key industries amidst accelerating globalization, and a diminished role for the State. Presidents Chavez in Venezuela, Morales in Bolivia and Correa in Ecuador have all successfully tapped into the vein of strong anti-imperialist sentiment in reaching power, drawing on a nationalist and indeed Bolivarian discourse that reasserted independence from external domination. This has turned into a policy of nationalization of hydrocarbons in Bolivia and a broader role for the State especially in Venezuela. At the same time, the United States is widely viewed as not only lacking a strategy for relating with the region in the aftermath of its discredited ‘Washington Consensus’, but also as having neglected the region since September 11th. At the domestic level, it must be remembered that 30 years ago most countries in the region still had military governments. Not only are the Latin American democracies relatively young, but also wide popular participation is relatively recent. For example, in Ecuador, voting rights were extended broadly only in the late 1970s. Power has been concentrated in political parties driven more by business interests and political patronage than by ideology. Institutionality has been weak in most of the Andean countries as a result of political influence in the judiciary and in control institutions (e.g. electoral tribunals, Controllers, regulatory agencies, etc.). Having tried out the different major parties with limited success in terms of addressing their poverty during the past two decades, the general public has turned to “outsiders” (political figures without traditional political party support) such as Presidents Chavez, Morales and Correa. The appeal of these outsiders is that they are not associated with the perceived corruption of the traditional political leadership. Moreover, their populist discourse emphasizes that the people should be the protagonists of truly democratic systems, that the State has been captured by interests, and that it needed to be recovered from the hands of historically privileged oligarchic groups. In Bolivia, with its large, historically marginalized indigenous population, the discourse has also focused on the need to re-found the state as a truly pluri-cultural, multi-ethnic entity, and this theme has also been strong in Ecuador. Constitutional reform has inevitably played a critical role in the political agendas of the new leaders, bringing with it a potential for true reform but also considerable institutional uncertainty in the immediate future, and the risk that the new systems might be imposed rather than broadly agreed and that they might not be as democratic or as effective in meeting the needs of the poor as the public might hope for. In conclusion, Latin America and especially the Andean Region is facing a critical juncture, not only because of the challenge of consensus building at the regional level especially with the US, but also because of the emergence in certain Andean countries of a new political representation that is radically opposed to the existing establishment. These tensions are compounded by historical internal regional divisions in the case of Bolivia and Ecuador. The result is a complex situation in which subtle understandings are required and a long-term vision is needed to promote an active citizenship, greater transparency and accountability of the State, and policies that directly reduce poverty and inequality. This is a perfect arena for the development of culturally sensitive conflict transformation initiatives, where the promotion of dialogue among the different actors, the establishment of alliances and consensus building are essential ingredients in ensuring that violent conflict is avoided and that agreements reached are sustainable over time. News Network Homepage / Armenia / 2008 Elections / Afghanistan / Diplomacy/ Egypt / Environment / Global Peace Index / Health / Immigration / Iraq / Iran / Islam / Kosovo / Nuclear Proliferation / Pakistan / Palestine-Israel / Russia / Somalia / South America / Turkey /		About ICAR Student Information Prospective Students Faculty and Staff Alumni Career Services Academic Programs Library ICAR In The News Events Technology Resources ICAR Publications Point Of View Center Center for World Religions, Diplomacy & Conflict Resolution