It seems obvious that U.S. drug policy was behind Bolivian president Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada's ouster though the Bush administration denies it. The ramifications of this latest leadership change should be significant in the "Whack-a-Mole" game the U.S. is playing in Latin America. Just like the carnival game, as soon as you hit mole a good one with your mallet, another mole pops up in another hole. Just as they start to see some modest success in Colombia the cocaine starts appearing in Bolivia and Peru.

The New York Times

    Bolivian Leader's Ouster Seen as Warning on U.S. Drug Policy

By LARRY ROHTER

Published: October 23, 2003

L A PAZ, Bolivia, Oct. 22 -- On a visit to the White House last year,
President Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada told President Bush that he would
push ahead with a plan to eradicate coca but that he needed more money
to ease the impact on farmers.

Otherwise, the Bolivian president's advisers recalled him as saying, "I
may be back here in a year, this time seeking political asylum."

Mr. Bush was amused, Bolivian officials recounted, told his visitor that
all heads of state had tough problems and wished him good luck.

Now Mr. Sánchez de Lozada, Washington's most stalwart ally in South
America, is living in exile in the United States after being toppled
last week by a popular uprising, a potentially crippling blow to
Washington's anti-drug policy in the Andean region.

United States officials interviewed here minimized the importance of the
drug issue in Mr. Sánchez de Lozada's downfall, blaming a "pent-up
frustration" over issues ranging from natural gas exports to corruption.
But to many Bolivians and analysts, the coca problem is intimately tied
to the broader issues of impoverishment and disenfranchisement that have
stoked explosive resentments here and fueled a month of often violent
protests.

"The U.S. insistence on coca eradication was at the core of Sánchez de
Lozada's problem," said Eduardo Gamarra, a Bolivian scholar who is
director of the Latin American and Caribbean Center at Florida
International University in Miami.

Dr. Gamarra and others point to events in Bolivia as a warning that
United States drug policy may sow still wider instability in the region,
where anti-American sentiment is building with the failure of economic
reforms that Washington has helped encourage here.

In Bolivia the backlash has strengthened the hand of the political
figure regarded by Washington as its main enemy: Evo Morales, head of
the coca growers' federation, who finished second in presidential
election last year.

American officials have considered Bolivia such a success in the
anti-drug campaign that they were looking to replicate their strategy in
Peru. But there, too, signs of discontent are appearing, beginning with
the re-emergence of the Shining Path, the guerrilla group that
terrorized the country throughout the 1980's. "Right now Shining Path is
strongest in coca growing areas," said Michael Shifter, who follows the
Andean region for the Washington-based policy group Inter-American
Dialogue. "To the extent that the U.S. pushes on eradication targets
without any kind of flexibility, it makes people there much more
amenable to turning to violent protest or insurgent groups like Shining
Path."

In Colombia the eradication push has succeeded in substantially reducing
coca acreage and is helping the government in its fight against leftist
rebels. But such successes have often pushed cultivation farther south
to Bolivia and Peru.

The eradication campaign is supposed to be coupled with an "alternative
development" program to encourage farmers to grow crops like pineapples,
bananas, coffee, black pepper, oregano and passion fruit on land once
devoted to coca.

Though the United States has earmarked $211 million for such projects
here in the last decade and helped raise the incomes of a growing number
of peasant families, critics say the money is not nearly enough to
compensate all of those whose livelihoods have been destroyed by
eradication campaigns.

During his Washington visit last year, Mr. Sánchez de Lozada asked for
$150 million in added emergency aid, meant among other things to help
reduce a yawning government budget deficit that had severely limited
spending on social programs.

He got $10 million, and that only after he was nearly toppled in a round
of protests in February.

"These are derisory sums that are incommensurate with what is needed,"
said Jeffrey Sachs, an economist who is director of the Earth Institute
at Columbia University and a long-time adviser to Bolivian governments.
"The United States has constantly made demands on an impoverished
country without any sense of reality or an economic framework and
strategy to help them in development."

David N. Greenlee, the American ambassador here, in an interview on
Monday, disagreed with the notion that added assistance from Washington
would make much difference.

"It's too early to say whether we can provide additional resources," he
said. "I think we currently provide substantial resources, and it is
possible this new government can be more efficient."

He added, "A few million more from the U.S. isn't going to solve the
problems of Bolivia."

At a news conference on Saturday night, less than 24 hours after he was
sworn in, Bolivia's new president, Carlos Mesa, said coca eradication
had created "a complicated scenario" and hinted that some changes might
be in the works.

For Mr. Mesa, who heads a weak interim government, some moderation of
the effort may be inevitable if he is to avoid his predecessor's fate
and hold off the challenges of opposition figures like Mr. Morales, the
leader of the coca growers.

Mr. Morales's position has been enhanced by recent events, despite the
United States Embassy's efforts to isolate and discredit him.

In recent years American officials pushed to have Mr. Morales expelled
from Congress and indicted for the murder of four policemen in the
Chaparé region, his political base and a center of coca cultivation.
During last year's presidential campaign, the embassy suggested that Mr.
Morales's election would be viewed by the United States as a hostile act
and would provoke an end to aid to Bolivia.

"That has merely inflated Evo Morales even more and catapulted him into
the position he is in now," Dr. Gamarra said, that of a power broker
with the capacity to bring down the government. "He has used the coca
issue to construct a national movement, with the coca growers as his
praetorian guard."

The new government, political analysts and diplomats here said, is in a
bind. It may be difficult to keep Mr. Morales at bay if Mr. Mesa does
not declare a pause in the eradication effort, but such a move could
jeopardize Bolivia's international assistance.

In an interview here on Monday, Dionisio Núñez, a coca grower, member of
Congressional and key ally of Mr. Morales, said that their party, the
Movement Toward Socialism, intended to demand that the new government
modify the laws against coca cultivation, whether the United States
likes it or not.

For starters, he said, the opposition wants a recalculation of the areas
in which growing coca is legal, as well as an expansion of the places
where it is legal to sell coca leaves.

"A new president can't return to a policy of repression and
militarization" to combat drugs, Mr. Núñez warned. "There has to be a
change, to a policy that is truly Bolivian, not one that is imposed by
foreigners with the pretext that eradication will put an end to
narcotics trafficking."

Despite Mr. Sánchez de Lozada's fall, the Bush administration seems
committed to continuing the policy, with a modest budget in Bolivia.

"We think on balance that our policies and our emphasis on alternative
development, together with Bolivian participation and their own policies
regarding drugs, have been positive things for Bolivia," Ambassador
Greenlee said. "We don't think it is a problem."

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

Hope you are enjoying your Tidbits. If you're not a member of and would like to join, please fill out our membership application.  And be sure to visit our website.

Click here to unsubscribe to this mailing list.
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.