HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Places » International » Latin America (Group) » Bolivia leader threatens ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 12:51 AM

Bolivia leader threatens to close US embassy

Latest Update: Tuesday 20/3/2012 March, 2012, 12:14 AM Doha Time
Bolivia leader threatens to close US embassy

Bolivia’s leftist President Evo Morales warned in comments published on Sunday that he would close the US embassy in La Paz if Washington continued interfering in his country’s domestic affairs. Morales, who has faced a proliferation of protests over a variety of issues, has accused the US of fuelling the unrest against his government. “If the US embassy continues bothering Bolivia, as it is doing now, then it is best we close the US embassy in Bolivia because we are anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist and anti-neoliberals,” the state-run ABI news agency quoted Morales as saying. The US embassy had no comment. The two countries have not exchanged ambassadors since 2008.

http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=493883&version=1&template_id=43&parent_id=19

8 replies, 1344 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 12:57 AM

1. Why do they do that? The country is doing so well, and the bullies have to try to destroy it.

Good for him for taking a firm stand against this kind of interference.

I love what he said about being anti-Imperialism, anti-capitalism and anti-neoliberalism. They know all about it and its disastrous consequences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #1)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 01:14 AM

2. Sad, isn't it? They tried to destroy his Presidency before he was elected, when he was ahead

and everyone knew he would win.

That was when Rumsfeld went behind the sitting President's back and arranged secretly with the top military brass to hand over ALL their shoulder-held anti-aircraft missiles and they were spirited out of the country to an air base in Texas.

When the President learned about it he fired everyone concerned in Bolivia, but of course it was too late, and Morales made a big point of his anger about it when he was elected.

Filthy behavior.

Later this article appeared concerning US subversion there:

Undermining Bolivia
By Benjamin Dangl, February 2008 Issue

A thick fence, surveillance cameras, and armed guards protect the U.S. Embassy in La Paz. The embassy is a tall, white building with narrow slits of windows that make it look like a military bunker. After passing through a security checkpoint, I sit down with U.S. Embassy spokesman Eric Watnik and ask if the embassy is working against the socialist government of Evo Morales. “Our cooperation in Bolivia is apolitical, transparent, and given directly to assist in the development of the country,” Watnik tells me. “It is given to benefit those who need it most.”

From the Bush Administration’s perspective, that turns out to mean Morales’s opponents. Declassified documents and interviews on the ground in Bolivia prove that the Bush Administration is using U.S. taxpayers’ money to undermine the Morales government and coopt the country’s dynamic social movements—just as it has tried to do recently in Venezuela and traditionally throughout Latin America.

Much of that money is going through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). In July 2002, a declassified message from the U.S. embassy in Bolivia to Washington included the following message: “A planned USAID political party reform project aims at implementing an existing Bolivian law that would . . . over the long run, help build moderate, pro-democracy political parties that can serve as a counterweight to the radical MAS or its successors.” MAS refers to Morales’s party, which, in English, stands for Movement Toward Socialism.

Morales won the presidency in December 2005 with 54 percent of the vote, but five regional governments went to rightwing politicians. After Morales’s victory, USAID, through its Office of Transition Initiatives, decided “to provide support to fledgling regional governments,” USAID documents reveal.

More:
http://www.progressive.org/mag_dangl0208

The progressive leaders have been far more polite to Washington than Washington could ever deserve. The constant bullying will, in the end, work against the aggressors.







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Reply #2)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 01:40 AM

3. They should kick USAID out of the country also.

I hope South America can become stronger through the formation of their version of NATO, Chavez's idea. They seem to realize that each country alone is still very vulnerable to the Colonialists. THEY never give up and the only way to keep them out of their business is to unite the Continent so that if they go after one country they will have to deal with all of them.

It's amazing they have done so well despite the interference. Thanks for those links. I feel that South America is the only part of the world at this point that provides hope that good can prevail when the will is there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #3)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 03:25 AM

4. I agree! Thanks for your comments, sabrina 1. Especially...

"I feel that South America is the only part of the world at this point that provides hope that good can prevail when the will is there."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Peace Patriot (Reply #4)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 03:54 AM

5. And thanks for yours, Peace Patriot!

I always learn so much from them. All we can hope for is that S. America has enough time while the Western Powers are busy trying to clean up the mess they've made here and elsewhere, to consolidate the power they need to remain free and independent for the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #1)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 02:41 PM

6. Because there are resources in Bolivia they want to get their paws on

like the natural gas in Santa Cruz. So, their support for the white separatists there.

And I agree, Go, Evo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #6)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 03:38 PM

7. It's shameful. What would be wrong with buying what we need in an honest way?

I know, the profits for private Global Corps. But our government is directly involved and has been for so long, both parties it seems.

Americans do need to know what their government has been doing in their name. I know there are many who will still feel we are justified in stealing other people's resources and killing them in order to so when necessary. But I can't believe that a majority of Americans would feel that way if they knew the facts. I hope not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 07:57 PM

8. USA policy and action has been tone deaf regard to Latin America.

Looks to me that Latin America has been less impacted by the wars and economic problems of the 21st centrury by their policy (that is just kinda sorta New Dealish) because they have ben victimized and now reject neoliberal policy.

Neoliberalism is more for the few now at a cost to the present and future for most. The nature of neoliberlism is to destroy local economic ecologies and drain capital and control from communities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread