'The first significant move by Morales, six months into his presidency in May 2006, was, as pledged, to nationalise Bolivian industries, most notably the oil and gas of the east.'

Martin Piper looks at the political games taking place in Bolivia

Bolivia’s political game of chess appears to be moving from stalemate to a renewed effort at an all out win.

The question is who has the strongest moves and will pawns be enough to ensure the troubled indigenous president, Evo Morales, obtains the required votes in a recall referendum in August 2008?

The opponents are geographically and culturally split between the poorer highland Andean region, home to the predominantly indigenous majority (60%) who constitute the bulk of Morales’ supporters against the wealthy lowland population of mixed race and Spanish descent who occupy the regions vast oil and gas reserves and fertile land to the east of the Andes.

The first significant move by Morales, six months into his presidency in May 2006, was, as pledged, to nationalise Bolivian industries, most notably the oil and gas of the east.

The re-structured national energy company YPFB (Yacimientos Petroliferos Fiscales Bolivianos) aimed to secure a 51% stake in all multinational interests and distribute the profits more evenly across the country.

Angered

Whilst multinationals and affected countries, particularly, Brazil and Spain were angered by such moves, an earlier referendum had shown widespread national support, with 90% of Bolivians approving nationalisation in 2004, falling to 80-85% shortly after nationalisation took place.

Next came a new constitution, finalised in December 2007 and presented to the public, it promotes land reform aimed at helping the indigenous majority, long excluded and marginalised under previous governments and allows the president and vice-president to run for a second five year consecutive term.

Opposition governors refused to sign, claiming it unfairly favoured the indigenous and ceded too much control to the government in La Paz.

In an attempt to push the constitution through, Morales proposed a recall referendum allowing voters to decide if they were still in favour or the government’s policies. Opponents refused, no doubt fearing that he maintained the support of the indigenous majority and would likely win.

Santa Cruz , the wealthiest state, comprising 25% of Bolivia’s population, called for a separate referendum on autonomy. The state, lead by opposition governor Ruben Costas, has long been reluctant to share its oil wealth with the poorer western provinces and fears that the government will illegally wrest their land if the constitution is signed.

Condemned

An emergency meeting was immediately held in Caracas with Morales’ leftist allies, Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba. They jointly condemned the move stating the vote was illegal and would not be recognised.

Later Morales called for dialogue with opposition governors and said that his constitution would bring autonomy, “autonomy for all of the people of Bolivia”. He encouraged his supporters to abstain from voting.

The statutes of the referendum would allow Santa Cruz greater control of its taxes, control over its own land reform and its own police force, Costas also said he would overturn the government scheme to divert gas revenues into a nationwide pension for the elderly.

The vote went ahead on May 4th and early counts suggested that up to 80% of Santa Cruz residents were in favour of greater autonomy.

Despite widely differing figures on the results and Morales’ tepid claim to victory due to abstention, the outcome gave opposition leaders hope that they could further weaken the government’s position. The next day three more eastern regions said they would also hold autonomy votes.

This, in turn, revitalised the idea of a recall referendum, previously suggested by Morales, but now pushed by his opponents. Morales accepted, setting the date for August 10th.

Faith

The vote will determine whether Bolivians have faith in the government and agree with its policies. “For the first time in our history, people not only have the right to choose, but also, to decide if the authorities are failing them,” Morales said.

Opposition leaders now feel they have the support and momentum to unseat Morales. The vote will decide whether he, his vice president and all regional governors should continue in their posts, if not, national elections will be held.

However it appears that the government has played through the moves and the rules of the vote favour Morales. To lose, he and his vice president require more “No” votes than the “Yes” votes they obtained in elections, almost 54%, at unlikely outcome at the national level.

Regional governors face the same test, some opposition governors won with less than 35% “Yes” votes, making their future less certain. No doubt Morales hopes to strengthen his position and perhaps oust some opposition governors into the bargain.

Martin Piper is a former employee of Christian Aid who now lives and works in South America.

These are personal comments and not necessarily the position of Christian Aid or its partners.

• Read other On the Ground columns