What is hailing US-supported military coups then? Armchair fascism? Sorry for being sarcastic but there is no easy solutions to these conflicts. If you believe just one side of the story you are lost.
Am 12. November 2019 00:00:22 MEZ schrieb Hanns Holger Rutz <cont...@sciss.de>: >Maduro come next, to end the repressive regime in Venezuela. No tear >for >Morales from me and thirty million others. Have fun in your European >armchair+cocktail "socialism". > > >On 11/11/2019 23:49, Menno Grootveld wrote: >> Hi there! This is not so much lazy reporting as incredibly overt >> disinformation. >> >> You better read this: >> >> >https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/11/11/global-condemnation-appalling-coup-bolivia-military-forces-socialist-president-evo >> >> >> Op 11-11-19 om 22:10 schreef Felix Stalder: >>> [I don't know much about the situation in Bolivia, but reporting in >the >>> Western media seems incredibly lazy, portraying the situation as a >>> liberal uprising against an anti-democratic leader. >>> >>> There is obviously much more context than that. Some of it is >mentioned >>> in the below interview. Another aspect is that just a week ago, >Bolivia >>> cancelled a very large project to produce lithium with a German >company >>> after local protests again the project. Though that also is probably >>> more complex, because the German won the initial contract because >they >>> were they only ones willing to refine the Lithium locally, rather >than >>> simply export the raw material. Perhaps somebody with more direct >>> knowledge can add more information. Felix ] >>> >>> >>> >>> >https://www.democracynow.org/2019/11/11/evo_morales_bolivia_protests_military_coup >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Evo Morales was Bolivia’s first indigenous leader, was credited with >>> lifting nearly a fifth of Bolivia’s population out of poverty since >he >>> took office in 2006. But he faced criticism from some of his former >>> supporters for running for a third and then a fourth term. Evo >Morales’s >>> whereabouts are unknown. His home was ransacked Sunday. Mexico has >>> offered Morales asylum. Hours before resigning, Morales had agreed >to >>> call for new elections, after the Organization of American States >issued >>> a report claiming there was, quote, “clear manipulation” in last >month’s >>> election results. According to the official results of last month’s >>> election, Morales won 47% of the vote and just narrowly avoided a >runoff >>> election. But the OAS immediately questioned the election process, >>> sparking mass street protests. Critics of the OAS say the global >body >>> did not provide any evidence of actual vote rigging. >>> >>> We go now to Washington, D.C., where we’re joined by Mark Weisbrot, >>> co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, his >latest >>> piece for The Nation headlined “The Trump Administration Is >Undercutting >>> Democracy in Bolivia.” Talk about the latest developments, the >>> resignation of President Evo Morales, the first indigenous president >of >>> Bolivia. >>> >>> MARK WEISBROT: Well, this is a military coup. There’s no doubt about >it >>> now, after the head of the military told the president and vice >>> president to resign and then they did. And I think it’s really >terrible >>> the way it’s been presented, because, from the beginning, you had >that >>> OAS press release, the day after the election, which hinted — or >>> implied, actually, very strongly — that there was something wrong >with >>> the vote count, and they never presented any evidence at all. They >>> didn’t presented it in that release. They didn’t present it in their >>> next release. They didn’t present it in their preliminary report. >And >>> there’s really nothing in this latest so-called preliminary audit >that >>> shows that there was any fraud in this election. But it was repeated >>> over and over again in all the media, and so it became kind of true. >>> And, you know, if you look at the media, you don’t see anybody — you >>> don’t see any experts, for example, saying that there was something >>> wrong with the vote count. It’s really just that OAS observation >>> mission, which was under a lot of pressure, of course, from Senator >>> Rubio and the Trump administration to do this, because they wanted — >>> they’ve wanted for some time to get rid of this government. >>> >>> AMY GOODMAN: And explain how the election went — Morales stopping >the >>> election count, resuming it — and then what kind of majority he >needed >>> to avoid a runoff. >>> >>> MARK WEISBROT: OK. So, this is very important, because this has been >>> very badly described, I think, in most of the media. You have a >quick >>> count, which is not even the official count of the election, and >it’s >>> not binding. It’s not what determines the result. It’s just >something >>> that is done while the votes are being counted to let people know >what’s >>> going on at that time. And so, the quick count was interrupted, and >when >>> it resumed — and it was interrupted with Evo leading by about 7 >>> percentage points. And when it came back, his margin increased. And >if >>> you read the press here, any of the articles, it’s reported as >though >>> something terribly suspicious happened. He didn’t have enough votes >— he >>> needed a 10-point margin in order to — a 10-point lead over the next >>> runner-up in order to win in the first round, and he didn’t have >that >>> when the vote count, this quick count, was interrupted — or, the >>> reporting was interrupted, I should say. And then, you know, he got >it >>> in the last 14 — last 16% of the votes counted. He reached 10%. But >if >>> you look at what was really — so, this was reported as a very >suspicious >>> thing. And this is what’s reported over and over again to make it >look >>> like something was wrong. >>> >>> But if you look at it, actually — actually, the whole vote count — >you >>> see there was a steady trend of Evo’s margin increasing almost from >the >>> beginning. And it didn’t change in the last 16%; it just continued >>> because — and you can look at the areas that were coming in — these >were >>> rural and poor areas where Evo Morales had more support. That’s all >that >>> happened. This happens in elections. You can see this if you watch >>> election returns in the U.S. So, there was never anything there. >>> >>> AMY GOODMAN: Several Latin American leaders have criticized the >ouster >>> of Evo Morales in Bolivia. This is Argentina’s President-elect >Alberto >>> Fernández. >>> >>> PRESIDENT-ELECT ALBERTO FERNÁNDEZ: [translated] What’s >happening in >>> Bolivia is that there’s a dominant class that will not resign >themselves >>> to losing power to the hands of a president who is the first >Bolivian >>> president that looks like Bolivians. That’s what’s happening. >>> >>> AMY GOODMAN: And British Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn tweeted Sunday, >“To >>> see @evoespueble who, along with a powerful movement, has brought so >>> much social progress forced from office by the military is >appalling. I >>> condemn this coup against the Bolivian people and stand with them >for >>> democracy, social justice and independence. So, if you can talk, >Mark >>> Weisbrot, about the role of the Bolivian military? And what about >the >>> Trump administration? >>> >>> MARK WEISBROT: Well, I think the most — you know, the Bolivian >military >>> very clearly said — I mean, before they did that, they said they >weren’t >>> going to intervene, in terms of the protests. But they very clearly >— >>> the head of the armed forces said that Evo should resign, right >before >>> he did that. And so it was a military coup. And Evo Morales is >calling >>> it that, of course. And there isn’t any doubt about it. The media >hasn’t >>> really mentioned it as much as a military coup, but it definitely >is. >>> >>> In terms of the Trump administration, you can look at tweets and >>> statements from Marco Rubio right before the votes were even >counted, >>> saying that there was going to be fraud, and, you know, making it >clear >>> that they didn’t want this government to be there. And so, yeah, I >think >>> that — I mean, it’s very obvious that they supported this coup. And >it’s >>> very obvious that they pressured the OAS, where the United States >>> supplies 60% of the budget. >>> >>> And, you know, this is the problem. The media treats this OAS as >though >>> it’s really an independent arbiter here. And they do have electoral >>> missions, and most of the time they’re clean, but they are not >always. >>> You know, in Haiti in 2011, for example, they reversed the results >of a >>> first-round presidential election without any statistical test, >recount >>> or any reason. It was completely political. And in 2000, they >reversed >>> their position, their report on the election, when the United >States, as >>> you know and you’ve reported on this show, wanted to cut off all >>> international aid to Haiti and spent four years preparing for the >coup >>> of 2004. So, the OAS played a major role in that by changing their >>> report on the election in Haiti. And so, I think this is a kind of a >>> classic military coup supported by the United States. >>> >>> AMY GOODMAN: So, Mark Weisbrot, you have the CIA involvement in >coups in >>> Bolivia in 1952, in 1964, 1970, 1980. Would you add 2019 to that >list? >>> >>> MARK WEISBROT: I would add it to the list. I mean, we don’t have the >>> hard evidence of what they did. You know, it’s not like 2009 in >>> Honduras, where Hillary Clinton wrote in her memoirs that she worked >in >>> the OAS, too, to prevent the elected president, who you’ve had on >this >>> show, from coming back to the country and to the presidency. But I >think >>> we’ll probably find out more later. But it’s just — it is very >obvious >>> that they supported this coup. >>> >>> >>> >> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission >> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, >> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets >> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l >> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org >> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: ># distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission ># <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, ># collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets ># more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l ># archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org ># @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
