FROM SOUTH TO SOUTH

If there is something that I find positive about globalization, it is the fact that now Southern countries can share experiences and solutions to their problems without being mediated by the North. Coming from another Southern part of the world –Latin America-, I have been thinking a lot about experiences from there that are relevant to the current Nepali debate.

Bolivia is the most similar South American country to Nepal. Both share some sad figures and facts regarding social and economic development. They have a very short (and weak) democratic background and have historically been regarded as “failed states”. Even geographically, they are very similar: both have landlocked and mountainous territories. But, above all, they are multicultural, multiethnic and multilingual countries with a huge part of their populations remaining marginalized. For a historic coincidence, these two countries also began a political process to change this situation almost simultaneously.

After decades of being seen as the poor and unstable neighbor of the region, Bolivia is becoming to change this image. And part of it is related to the political process that started after President Evo Morales’ electoral victory in 2005.

Before becoming the head of state of Bolivia, Morales was the leader of the “cocaleros” movement, a coca leaf-growing peasants union that resisted the “Plan Dignity” implemented in 1995 to eradicate the coca plantations. Morales’ party, the MAS (Movimiento al Socialismo –Movement To Socialism), won the general elections promising the decriminalization of the production of coca for domestic use –closely related to the traditions of the indigenous populations-, a land reform, and the renationalization of the oil and gas industries privatized during the 1990’s.

It is impossible to understand Morales’ political rise without an overview of Bolivia’s history. Probably, only a few Latin American oligarchies have been as dominant as the Bolivian one. A small minority group of European descendant has controlled the political, economic and cultural spheres since the country independence, 200 years ago. Behind this supremacy were some racist prejudices against the indigenous majority that makes up 60% of the Bolivians. The original population was historically marginalized and excluded from all decision-making spaces until the victory of Morales.

After years of a severe social crisis that included ethnic backlashes, Bolivia was in need of formulating a new social agreement. And what is a constitution if not a pact among all the social groups to regulate their life in a shared territory?

A Constitutional Assembly was created with this purpose in 2006. The only key for its success was to write a constitution that for the first time was going to leave behind the practices that have aggravated marginalization. After working for almost two years, the text was approved by 61% of the population in a national referendum.

The new constitution strengthens the position of the indigenous population, reinforces the role of the state in the economy and recognizes an autonomic state at the departmental, municipal and indigenous level. The constitutional text dedicates a whole chapter to the rights of the indigenous populations; it defines a quota for them in the Parliament, recognizes indigenous forms of justice and assures their presence in the Constitutional Court. Moreover, it declares Bolivia as a Plurinational State and abolishes Catholicism as the national religion.

The Bolivian experience does not prove that a new Constitution can produce a radical change from one day to another. However, some progress in the integration of the indigenous population already shows that it can represent a step toward; especially, if the constitution represents a national agreement to avoid exclusion and shorten the social, geographical and ethnic distances of the past.