Bolivian president Evo Morales’s frequent, blunt criticisms of the United States Government often provoke irritation and complaints in Washington about negative “rhetoric” impeding bilateral relations.

Unfortunate comments from some U.S. officials complicate relations

It’s important to note that although U.S. officials have generally made diplomatic statements regarding relations with Bolivia, there have been some notable exceptions. The most recent appeared in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal: “[U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner] successfully argued against ripping up contracts that controversially allowed millions of dollars in bonuses to be paid to American International Group employees, stating: ‘This is not Bolivia,’ according to two people who heard him say it.”

Although what Geithner inferred about Bolivia is unclear, it’s interesting to note that Bolivia’s economy has weathered the global crisis quite well, and received a positive evaluation from the IMF (http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/pn/2010/pn1009.htm). In the past several years, Bolivia has also witnessed significant increases in property values, something no U.S. homeowner currently enjoys (http://incakolanews.blogspot.com/2010/02/bolivias-property-boom.html).

Another U.S. official recently made strident comments about Evo Morales, demonstrating a general lack of knowledge about Bolivia. On January 21, 2010 Deputy Permanent U.S. Representative to the United Nations Alejandro Wolff responded in a press conference to President Morales’ criticism of U.S. aid efforts in Haiti. Wolff claimed Morales’ accusations were “inhuman, savage and opportunistic” and “far from reality.” He went on to state, “This type of declaration has nothing to do with reality, and is due more to the psychology of the person speaking. [This attitude] is retrograde and has nothing to do with the actual situation.” (http://www.rpp.com.pe/2010-01-21-eeuu-le-dice-retrograda-a-evo-morales-noticia_237070.html).

This is not the best choice of words to describe any president, especially a Native American. His comments also reflect a misconception that continues to make the rounds in Washington: That Morales has an irrational hatred of the United States, and as a result, there is no way to improve bilateral relations.

UN official Wolff also said, he “would like to know more about how much the Bolivians are helping in Haiti,” apparently failing to acknowledge the presence of Bolivian UN peacekeeping forces in that country.

U.S. government reports further complicate relations

U.S. official reports also provoked friction in Bolivia and give the impression of a double discourse that contradicts positive statements from high-ranking U.S. officials. For example, the February 2, 2010 Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence characterized the Morales administration (in conjunction with Chavez and other leaders) as “radical,” suggesting they were becoming more “authoritarian,” and that they are “seeking to undermine moderate, pro-U.S. governments.” The report continues:

In Bolivia, President Evo Morales easily was reelected in December 2009 for another five-year term after changing the Constitution. He is likely to continue to pursue an authoritarian, statist domestic agenda and an anti-U.S. foreign policy. Relations with the U.S. remain poor, and Morales has sharply curtailed cooperation with U.S. counter-drug programs since expelling the U.S. Ambassador in 2008 and three dozen DEA personnel in early 2009 (http://www.dni.gov/testimonies/20090212_testimony.pdf).

The Assessment fails to mention the continued effort to progress in the bilateral dialogue. It is also important to note that, in spite of the expulsion of the DEA, the U.S. and Bolivia maintain relatively fluid day-to-day coordination and cooperation on interdiction and coca reduction.  Although the U.S. recently announced a $4 million reduction in drug control assistance for the coming year, the Bolivian Drug Czar announced on February 20, 2010 that they were asking the U.S. to consider reinstating the funds, as well as seeking additional international support. “International donors are going to reconsider the budget cut we suffered.  We’ve been able to show results and the international donors have decided to reconsider their decision,” he stated.

In 2009 many U.S. documents and determinations also presented inaccurate critiques of the Morales administration.[i] Within the next few weeks both the Report on Human Rights Practices and the International Narcotics Control Strategy Reports should be released. Hopefully this year’s reports will contain more balanced, objective observations and constructive criticism when appropriate. If this does not occur, inaccurate reporting will create yet another impediment to rebuilding U.S.-Bolivia bilateral relations and throw another wrench into genuine efforts on the part of some diplomats from both countries to move forward.

Although frustration in Washington continues over the expulsion of Ambassador Goldberg and the Drug Enforcement Administration, that should not impede the recognition and frank evaluation of past problems with the U.S. role in Bolivia and the implementation of transparent strategies to overcome them. There is no guarantee that an across-the-board diplomatic stance from all U.S. officials and in all reports will end Morales’s pointed critiques, but taking the “high road” can only help build on  the concrete, existing opportunities for a new, positive dynamic in Bolivia relations.

Recent comments from U.S. and Bolivian officials demonstrate a pattern of escalated frustration, despite the best efforts of some officials on both sides:

January 20, 2010: Bolivian President Evo Morales criticized U.S., stating that “…what the United States is doing [in Haiti] is very serious, as there are problems with so many dead and injured from the earthquake, they must go to save lives and not [enter] militantly.” Morales proposed convening a UN general meeting to denounce the supposed U.S. occupation of Haiti.

January 21, 2010: Deputy Permanent U.S. Representative to the United Nations Alejandro Wolff responded in a press conference to President Morales’ criticism of U.S. aid efforts in Haiti, claiming the accusations were “inhuman, savage and opportunistic” and “far from reality.” He went on to state, “This type of declaration has nothing to do from reality, and is due more to the psychology of the person speaking. [This attitude] is retrograde and has nothing to do with the actual situation.” Wolff also said he “would like to know more about how much the Bolivians are helping in Haiti,” apparently failing to acknowledge the Bolivian permanent UN peacekeeping mission in that country.

January 24, 2010: In a speech to name the new national police Commander, President Morales warned the police force to avoid North American “tentacles” and “secret alliances,” alluding to his perceptions of historic police corruption and U.S. interference.
January 25, 2010: President Morales vividly painted the U.S. as a “trash-can for Latin American delinquents,” referring to the number of political refugees who receive American protection.

January 29, 2010: Following traditional first of the year diplomatic salutations, John Creamer, Charge d’ Affairs at the U.S. Embassy in La Paz, stated, “What I want to say is that we [the U.S.] have the desire, and we have seen this also on the Bolivian government side, to continue the bilateral dialogue that we began last year, and in this way normalize the relationship, construct better channels of communication and identify areas where we can work together.”

February 1, 2010: Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs Maria Otero, born in Bolivia, visited the country for President Morales’ re-inauguration. During her visit, she commented to the local press about her views on the contemporary situation, stating, “We need a way to look ahead instead of looking back, without denying that there have been difficult moments in the [U.S.-Bolivia bilateral] relationship. We either turn over a new page, or continue complaining about the past.” Otero went on to remark on a recent high-level talk between U.S. and Bolivian officials intended to revise the basic framework agreement for relations between the two countries: “It was a meeting in which both countries demonstrated that the desire to achieve a new dialogue, trying to create a framework agreement that allows us to reach this goal. The important part of this event was the good will of both countries and the fact that we were able to advance in certain areas and recognize that we need to establish a collaborative, respectful relationship.” Otero also recognized that there are many ways to interpret President Morales’ often strident criticism of the U.S. She allowed that, “His words have been well received in many parts of the world, and this must be taken into account when one looks ahead.”

February 4, 2010: In response to the Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on Latin America, President Morales accused the U.S. of inappropriate involvement in the region, stating that “Military coups are no longer [utilized],” but the United States “seeks [to generate] internal conflict, looking to weaken any profound process of change in Bolivia.” Morales also claimed that the U.S. practices “imperialism” by interfering with local social movements and grassroots groups throughout Latin America.