Ragusa
Mon, 20th Oct '03, 4:49pm
In Bolivia the old gvt was replaced by an interim candidate, who before, as a vice president, flagellated corruption among his colleagues. One of the issues he pointed out was the construction of a pipeline to export gas to the US - which is underlined by the fact that he announced to make his people to poll about this issue.
Bolivian gas:
So what I see in this is that the decision about the pipeline before was seemingly much less transparent and, let's say, perhaps influenced. And as a consequence of this he wants to see a poll.
A few thoughts on Bolivia's economical situation: Building a pipeline for export is actually understandable. Bolivia has debts, of course, and a rather high degree of poverty. While the oil profit from export could be used to improve the situation in the country this is unlikely in a time when this is done by private ventures and not gvt companies.
So, lacking the economical base to develop the fields alone they would depend on foreign money, and the profit, to a good part, would go overseas. For a domestic economist this might suggest keeping the gas as a domestic reserve to ensure independent domestic energy supply for the future of the country, helping the future long-term development of the country.
Consequencs of a no-poll:
A no in this poll would interfere with the new US, that is Cheney's, new energy policy aiming on reducing the US dependence on arab oil. A no would be against american interest. So, what is to expect in the time when the US promotes and executes a strategy of *prevention* and *preemption*?
Well, IMO it is unlikely that the Bush administration will accept such an outrageous act of disobedience, that is self-determination, in their backyard. The Monroe-Doctrine is still alive under the Bush Jr. crew. Insofar, what are the consequences? Probably violent ones, as the german gvt has decided to offer to fly out german citizens from Bolivia.
There are a couple of options:</font> Prevention – the soft way :
This would mean diplomatic pressure on the actual temporary president to drop it, the mobilisation of the IMF with the strong US influence and mobilisation of the debtors, accompanied by both a cut of US aid for the government and spending of US aid for the opposition, payed as aid for “democratic development” for the groups promoting US interest, that is have a pro-pipleline position - resulting in everything, from a well sponsored opposition in the election campaign to organised violent riots against the gvt as a part of the oppositions "democratic struggle".
(Well, what would a US citizen think if France would decide to support the democrats in the next elections with a couple of millions? In any case, support of a political group overseas actually destroys real democracy there, rather than supporting it; it is profoundly antidemocratic.)
. Prevention the hard way - Part I:
When the soft way failed, game's not over. There still is the solution of the 1960s – a concenient assassination of this inconveniant idealist would be a possibility but hasn’t been considered for quite a while – however, it is probably pretty cost effective.
. Prevention the hard way - Part II - A Coup:
Now that is a real possibility in Bolivia – it is the country with the longest tradition of coups in whole south america. Iirc in their history they had more coups than actual elections - they are world champion. So it shouldn't be too hard to find one disgrunteled opponent put at a disadvantage by Mr. Clean's actual course.
This would involve rightous patriots wanting to rescue the population from the radical left heresy of the interim president ... and could also include Part-I ... and perhaps a sponsored guerrilla group in case the military can't be won to participate.IMO Bolivia just ascended on the regime change charts to place 2 after Syria ... just my two cents.
[ October 20, 2003, 18:15: Message edited by: Ragusa ]
Bolivian gas:
So what I see in this is that the decision about the pipeline before was seemingly much less transparent and, let's say, perhaps influenced. And as a consequence of this he wants to see a poll.
A few thoughts on Bolivia's economical situation: Building a pipeline for export is actually understandable. Bolivia has debts, of course, and a rather high degree of poverty. While the oil profit from export could be used to improve the situation in the country this is unlikely in a time when this is done by private ventures and not gvt companies.
So, lacking the economical base to develop the fields alone they would depend on foreign money, and the profit, to a good part, would go overseas. For a domestic economist this might suggest keeping the gas as a domestic reserve to ensure independent domestic energy supply for the future of the country, helping the future long-term development of the country.
Consequencs of a no-poll:
A no in this poll would interfere with the new US, that is Cheney's, new energy policy aiming on reducing the US dependence on arab oil. A no would be against american interest. So, what is to expect in the time when the US promotes and executes a strategy of *prevention* and *preemption*?
Well, IMO it is unlikely that the Bush administration will accept such an outrageous act of disobedience, that is self-determination, in their backyard. The Monroe-Doctrine is still alive under the Bush Jr. crew. Insofar, what are the consequences? Probably violent ones, as the german gvt has decided to offer to fly out german citizens from Bolivia.
There are a couple of options:</font> Prevention – the soft way :
This would mean diplomatic pressure on the actual temporary president to drop it, the mobilisation of the IMF with the strong US influence and mobilisation of the debtors, accompanied by both a cut of US aid for the government and spending of US aid for the opposition, payed as aid for “democratic development” for the groups promoting US interest, that is have a pro-pipleline position - resulting in everything, from a well sponsored opposition in the election campaign to organised violent riots against the gvt as a part of the oppositions "democratic struggle".
(Well, what would a US citizen think if France would decide to support the democrats in the next elections with a couple of millions? In any case, support of a political group overseas actually destroys real democracy there, rather than supporting it; it is profoundly antidemocratic.)
. Prevention the hard way - Part I:
When the soft way failed, game's not over. There still is the solution of the 1960s – a concenient assassination of this inconveniant idealist would be a possibility but hasn’t been considered for quite a while – however, it is probably pretty cost effective.
. Prevention the hard way - Part II - A Coup:
Now that is a real possibility in Bolivia – it is the country with the longest tradition of coups in whole south america. Iirc in their history they had more coups than actual elections - they are world champion. So it shouldn't be too hard to find one disgrunteled opponent put at a disadvantage by Mr. Clean's actual course.
This would involve rightous patriots wanting to rescue the population from the radical left heresy of the interim president ... and could also include Part-I ... and perhaps a sponsored guerrilla group in case the military can't be won to participate.IMO Bolivia just ascended on the regime change charts to place 2 after Syria ... just my two cents.
[ October 20, 2003, 18:15: Message edited by: Ragusa ]