text:
It’s Been 80 Years Since the Most Important War in South America’s 20th Century · Global Voices
Gabriela García Calderón Orbe

Fortín Boquerón. In this historic site it was waged the decisive battle of the Chaco War (Paraguay-Boivia 1932-35). The Boivian army was entrenched in this strategic spring with 1200 troops. The Paraguayan assault started on September 9, 1932 with 8,000 troops. The fierce fight lasted 20 days. On September 29, the Bolivian troops surrendered as they were overwhelmingy outnumbered by the Paraguayans. Picture taken from Fickr user Tetsumo (CC BY 2.0).
More than 80 years ago, Paraguay and Bolivia fought one of the most important wars to take place in 20th century South America. Between 1932 and 1935, the outcome of the Chaco War determined who controlled the region known as Northern Chaco, which sets the border between Paraguay and Bolivia. Both countries mobilized roughly 400,000 soldiers for this three-year conflict.
The war in Chaco came almost 70 years after the War of the Triple Alliance (also known as the Paraguayan War), where Brazil, Uruguay, and Argentina devastated Paraguay. The conflict lasted over six years, beginning in 1864 and ending in 1870. When it was over, Paraguay was stripped of much of the territory it disputed with Brazil and saddled with huge war reparations.
The website El Historiador has he following to say about the Chaco War, which ended on June 12, 1935, and of some of the actors who intervened:
En 1932, el gobierno boliviano de Daniel Salamanca decidió ir a la guerra contra el Paraguay. […] Creía que una pronta victoria le permitiría afrontar distintos frentes: el interno y el externo.
En el primero de ellos, aunó esfuerzos en una unidad patriótica y aprovechó para atacar opositores y cerrar sindicatos que denunciaban que el costo de la crisis del 29 lo estaba pagando el pueblo en su conjunto. En el frente externo, se proponía hacerse con el Chaco Paraguayo, y con ello de una salida fluvial, luego de haber perdido tres décadas atrás la salida al océano Pacífico con Chile.
In 1932, the Bolivian administration of Daniel Salamanca decided to wage a war against Paraguay. […] They believed a quick victory will allow them different fronts: internal and external.
On the former, they brought efforts together for a patriotic unity and used the opportunity to attack opponents and close down trade unions that denounced that the people altogether were paying the cost of the Great Depression. On the latter, they were determined to obtain the Paraguayan Chaco, thus gaining a river way, after losing three decades earlier their access to the Pacific Ocean to Chile.
About Paraguay, the website says:
Los paraguayos no buscaron la guerra, pero volverían a mostrar que, pese a los históricos embates de sus vecinos […] tendrían con qué responder. […] el avance boliviano le llevó a decretar la movilización general.
La contraofensiva paraguaya, cuyo punto de inflexión se vivió en la Batalla del Boquerón (septiembre de 1932), le permitió recuperar los fuertes fronterizos y, pronto, ingresar a la región andina, donde se detuvo para el inicio de las arduas negociaciones que siguieron.
Paraguayans weren't looking for war, but they were willing to show that, in spite of the historic attacks from their neighbors […] they would have something with which to answer […] the Bolivian progress made them order a general mobilization.
The Paraguayan counter-offensive, launched with the Battle of Boquerón (September 1932), allowed them to recover the border forts, and soon after that, to get into the Andean region, where it stopped to start the arduous negotiations that came after that.
On June 14, 2015, Bolivian President Evo Morales and Paraguayan President Horacio Cartes met to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the end of the Chaco War:
En el aniversario, ambos gobiernos destacan que el futuro de ambos países yace en la integración, impulsada por vientos de paz en la región sudamericana.
[…]
Este domingo, en el corazón del Chaco, Villa Montes, los gobiernos de Morales y Cartes darán impulso al proceso de integración física vecinal con la premisa de generar beneficios para dos pueblos sin mar y que luchan por salir de la pobreza.
On the anniversary, both governments highlight that the future for our countries lies in integration, powered by winds of peace in the South American region. […] On Sunday [June 14], in the heart of el Chaco, Villa Montes, Morales’ and Cartes’ administrations will drive the physical integration process with the neighbors with the goal of generating benefits for both landlocked territories who fight for defeating poverty.
As noted by the website Infonews, the war is also remembered for the economic interests of foreign governments and private businesses that played a role in the conflict, which Infonews calls a “bloody and useless war”:
En el conflicto también intervinieron potencias internacionales. Principalmente, Gran Bretaña y Estados Unidos, que vendieron armamento y municiones a Bolivia y Paraguay por igual. […] la rivalidad que por aquella época existía entre la petrolera estadounidense Standard Oil, que operaba en suelo andino, y la británica Royal Dutch Shell, que promovía sus intereses desde el lado paraguayo.
[…]
Lo paradójico es que, una vez finalizado el conflicto, ninguno de los dos países logró sus objetivos iniciales. Ni Paraguay consiguió capturar la zona petrolera boliviana en el río Parapetí y sus adyacencias, ni Bolivia pudo expandir su territorio hasta las márgenes del río Paraguay, donde apenas obtuvo un puerto franco y libre tránsito para sus mercaderías, todo acordado en el tratado final de paz de 1938.
Some international powers also took part in the conflict—mainly Great Britain and United States, which sold weapons and ammunition to Bolivia and Paraguay alike. […] the rivalry that existed back then between the American oil company Standard Oil, which operated in Andean territory, and the British Royal Dutch Shell, which promoted its interests from the Paraguayan side.
[…]
What's paradoxical is that, once the conflict ended, neither of the two countries achieved their initial goals. Paraguay could not capture the Bolivian oil region on the Parapetí river and its surroundings, and neither was Bolivia able to expand its territory to the banks of the Paraguay river, where won only a free port and free transit for their goods—all agreed upon on the final peace treaty signed in 1938.
On Twitter, the users remembered the sacrifice by the Bolivian family Campero, which sent out its five sons to the conflict:
La familia que mandó a sus cinco hijos a la guerra. Hermanos Campero fueron a la guerra por amor a la patria. http://t.co/pNwkfPWNrT
— Daniel Antonio (@dvelasquez38) junio 15, 2015
The family that sent out its five sons fight in the war. The Campero brothers went to war out of love to the country.
Fernando Campero Paz, the son of one of the Campero brothers, also tweeted about his family's service to the nation:
Un honor. Los 5 hermanos Campero Trigo defendieron la Patria. Artículo de la BBC Mundo !!! http://t.co/c7ID9aRbkL — Fernando Campero Paz (@Fercapaz) junio 14, 2015
Such an honor. The five Campero Trigo brothers defended the Motherland. Article on BBC World!!!
According to BBC World, a recent survey in March 2015 by the Confederation of Veterans of the Chaco War (known as Conexchaco) found out that roughly 105 veterans of the Chaco War's 180,000 soldiers are still alive in Bolivia today. These men are close to 100 years old.
In 1938, through a secret treaty signed in July 9, 1938, Paraguay gave up 110,000 square km occupied by its army at the end of the hostilities. The Treaty of Peace, Friendship, and Borders was signed in July 21, 1938. Many years later, on April 27, 2009, the definite borders treaty was settled. The old disputed region was divided, and three fourths of it remained under Paraguayan sovereignty, with the other fourth part remaining under Bolivian control. Bolivia received territory on the banks of the upper Paraguay river.

author: Gabriela García Calderón Orbe


text:
Macedonian Activist Ends Hunger Strike for Migrant Rights · Global Voices
Filip Stojanovski

On Saturday, June 20, human rights expert and activist Suad Missini ended the hunger strike he started six days prior in protest of inhumane treatment of migrants passing through Macedonia. Mr. Missini issued the following statement [links added]:
While the effects of the changes of the Asylum Law are yet to be seen in practice, the conditions in the migrant center in Gazi Baba has not been improved. The refugees are still kept in the center which gains characteristics of a concentration camp, under impossible, inhuman and degrading conditions, out of the legal framework and international human rights standards which are part of the national legal system.
Authorities in Republic of Macedonia chose to remain deaf to the demands for solving of this problem by numerous international organizations and institutions. They act blind to the fact that the UN Committee Against Torture characterized the treatment of refugees in this center as torture and breach of the UN Convention Against Torture in its latest report. And all this while our country is a member of the UN Human Rights Council.
On the other hand, I'd like to stress that Macedonia, as member of Council of Europe (CoE), received a visit by the CoE Committee for Prevention of Torture, which included a visit to Gazi Baba center. This summer, the president of this committee Mikola Gnatovskij visited Macedonia and also talked to the authorities about this center, among other things. I emphasize that Macedonian authorities have still not issued approval for the report of this visit to be published.
Finally, two days before the start of the hunger strike, the Ombudsman of Republic of Macedonia presented the catastrophic situation and lawlessness that rule in this center.
Today, we can acknowledge that the public in Republic of Macedonia, as well as the international public and foreign media and organizations, are fully aware and informed about the problem with this center. These days, Gazi Baba center is an international topic. If the government decided that this catastrophic problem should not be a subject of immediate reaction and subsequent solution, then this definitely puts our country among those which openly and unscrupulously conduct torture, while the authorities are legitimized as institutions lead by persons which have no respect for human lives. The lives of hundreds of people detained within this center. And finally, about my life.
Therefore, on this day I end the hunger strike. Because the limits of health risks are already surpassed, and because the potentials of this strike are fulfilled.
My demands, which are demands by an enormous part of the public in Republic of Macedonia, are partially fulfilled.
My civic act was a drop which made waves, which, I sincerely hope, together with all the other efforts, will lead to solving of this problem which turns our country into an uncivilized space.
I am immensely grateful to the thousands who sincerely and unambiguously expressed their support, making this civil act as much theirs, as it was mine.
Meanwhile, Twitter users continue sharing leaked photos showing the conditions of detained refugees.

source: news-globalvoices

license: Creative Commons - Attribution - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

author: Filip Stojanovski


text:
No More Internet: Website Models Effect Of ‘Right to Be Forgotten’ on Russian Search Engines · Global Voices
Tanya Lokot

Search results on the RuNet might dry up as a result of new “right to be forgotten” law. Images mixed by Tetyana Lokot.
A new website created by Russian advertising executives asks you to imagine what search engines in the RuNet could look like in 2018—if the “right to be forgotten” bill becomes law.
The website, zabvenie.com (“oblivion”) simulates a simple search engine front page that looks suspiciously like Yandex, Russia's main search company.
Front page of the “Oblivion” (zabvenie.com) website.
On June 16, 2015 State Duma passed in first reading a draft bill about the “right to be forgotten,” which obligates search engines to delete links to any information that is over three years old, based on citizens’ requests and without court orders. A formal complaint addressed to the search engine and mentioning the topic of the information is enough. This violates the basic principles of the Internet and Article 29 of the Russian Constitution, which guarantees the right to search for information freely using any lawful means.
We invite you to take a look at what search could look like three years after the “right to be forgotten” law is passed.
“Oblivion” allows you to search for any term, but gives you zero information in return for all search queries but one—the last name of Russia's president, Vladimir Putin (in Russian). The only result for this search is his Russian Wikipedia entry. The rest of the searches generate the following message: “In 2018 no results were found for your query. There is no more Internet.”
Only one search query—”Путин” (Putin)—produces any results, and even then, only returns one link.
The creators of zabvenie.com, Vyacheslav Smirnov and Vladislav Arbatov, told TJournal they don't hope to change the bill in any fundamental way, but rather seek to show how dangerous it could be if it becomes law.
Сайт призван продемонстрировать, что там в принципе ничего нет в поиске. Речь не о цензуре ни в коем случае, а о том, что из себя будет представлять ландшафт поисковых результатов с этим законом (точнее, пока ещё законопроектом).
С другой стороны, речь вполне может пойти и о цензуре, но пока рано об этом говорить, так как непонятно, как процедура будет работать на практике.
The website is meant to show that there is nothing there, in the search results. We're not talking about censorship, no, but about what the search results landscape will look like with this law (draft bill for now).
On the other hand, we may well see censorship, but it's still too early to talk about this, since it's unclear how this procedure will work in practice.
The website was launched to mark the passing of the draft of the law in first reading: only one lawmaker voted against the initiative, with 423 in favor. To become law, the draft needs to pass two more readings in the State Duma, be approved by the Federation Council and signed by the President. If that happens, the law will come into force on January 1, 2016.
Internet industry representatives in Russia have spoken out against the law, calling it unconstitutional and claiming it limited Russians’ right to access information. According to Russian media reports, after representatives of Yandex and Russian Association of Electronic Communications met with Duma MPs, lawmakers agreed to remove a controversial component of the legislation's first draft that would have allowed individuals to force search engines to delete links to any personal information that is more than three years old—even without evidence that the information is inaccurate or false.

author: Tanya Lokot


text:
Peruvian Police Arrest Elderly Drivers for a Good Reason · Global Voices
Gabriela García Calderón Orbe

Screenshot of video posted on YouTube about the detention and happy ending for the elderly in Peru.
In the Peruvian city of Huancayo, located in the center of the country, agents of the local Police Transit Authority arrested several elderly drivers of public transportation vehicles:
A pesar que los conductores se resistían a ir a la dependencia policial, por contar con todos los documentos en regla. Fueron trasladados 12 ancianos los cuales se encontraban disgustados con la policía y aseguraban que todo eso les parecía una injusticia.
Although the drivers were reluctant to go to the police station, as they had all their documents in working order, 12 elderly drivers were taken by the police, all of them angry, claiming that it was all an act of injustice.
But what could be considered a routine action was actually a different way to honor these drivers due to Father's Day, celebrated in Peru on the third Sunday of June. When the “arrested” men entered the police station, they were welcomed with presents, snacks and drinks.
The news traveled all the way to Mexico, where El Sol de Nayarit posted the story and the reactions by some of the honored guests:
“Muchísimas gracias, fue una sorpresa”, aseguró uno de los padres.
“Fue una sorpresa grande para mi, nunca hemos recibido nada” dijo otro.
Uno de los afortunados mencionó que en un primer momento se encontraba muy molesto, pues pensó que recibiría una multa que no merecía.
“Thank you very much, it was a surprise”, said one of them.
“This was a huge surprise for me, we've never received anything”, expressed another one.
One of the lucky guys mentioned that at first he was pretty angry, as he thought he'd be unfairly fined.
Broother, se me metió una vaina al ojo… :’) PNP DE HUANCAYO FINGE DETENER A CHOFERES ANCIANOS. https://t.co/wcGX4EsT4y vía @YouTube
— Don Servi (@iServi) junio 20, 2015
Brother, I've got something in my eye… :’) HUANCAYO POLICE PRETEND TO ARREST ELDERLY DRIVERS.
In this video below, you can see the arrest of some of the drivers and the cordial welcome they had at the police station:


text:
Police Shootings, Helicopter Crashes and Bystanders With Cameras: Weighing the Rights of ‘Accidental Journalists’ · Global Voices
Nani Jansen Reventlow

Demonstrators carry a mock coffin at a march in Minneapolis condemning police killings of black men and women. Photo by Fibonacci Blue via Flickr (CC BY-2.0)
On 4 April 2015, a white US police officer shot an unarmed black man named Walter Scott in the back. Officer Michael Slager had stopped Scott due to an alleged traffic violation. Scott abandoned his car and ran from the scene, with Slager first following behind. Then, Slager fired eight shots, hitting Scott repeatedly in the back. Slager put handcuffs on Scott’s body, retrieved an object from some distance away, and dropped the object near his body. He then radioed in the message, “[s]hots fired and subject is down. He took my Taser.”
With over 304 killings of black people by US police in 2014 alone, and only a small fraction of these episodes resulting in criminal charges, it is highly likely that this story would have gone unnoticed. The police officer’s call to the station may have been deemed sufficiently credible and the matter would have been closed after a brief internal investigation. However, this time a bystander filmed the event on his camera phone, providing authorities with documentary evidence of what actually occurred that day. The footage has been broadcast by news outlets worldwide and gone viral on social media, generating major waves in ongoing protest movements across the US demanding justice and accountability for police abuses against people of colour. It also contributed to the decision to prosecute Michael Slager, who has been charged with murder.
The Walter Scott incident is not an isolated example of footage or images produced by a person — who is not a journalist by profession — being picked up and used by the mainstream media. In the category of police brutality alone, two well-known recent examples are the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri and the fatal choking of Eric Garner by police in New York.
The significance of eye-witness documentation in these cases raises many interesting questions concerning the rights of these “accidental journalists” and the public interest value of the work.
I use the term “accidental journalist” in this context rather than the more mainstream notion of “citizen journalists” because I believe the two, while at times related, are distinct. A citizen journalist is someone who, while perhaps not trained and employed by a traditional news organization, sets out to report on an issue of public interest. The citizen journalist has the intent to report on something, while the “accidental journalist”, such as Feidin Santana who filmed the Walter Scott shooting, is a bystander who was in the right place at the right time and captured something newsworthy. Many situations could see overlap between these categories, but the distinction is clear.
So should an accidental journalist receive the same type of protection as a regular journalist when publishing their news or footage?
I would argue that the accidental journalist merits the same level of protection as the traditional journalist or established blogger, based on the inherent public interest in bringing news and information into circulation for broad public consumption. This principle is firmly established under international law and I believe its protective qualities can be extended to those who are not professional journalists or routine bloggers, but only a “journalist for a day.”
This sheds light on the ongoing expansion of norms protecting traditional media to other actors. For example, the increase in online publication has given rise to questions about the level of legal protection available to bloggers’ sources compared to those speaking with the traditional media. Various courts, especially in the US and Canada, have affirmed that so-called shield laws, which allow journalists to protect their sources, apply equally to bloggers. Other courts have ruled that the public has an interest in disclosure regardless of whether the material is published by traditional journalists or bloggers. In Grant v. Torstar Corp., for example, the Supreme Court of Canada wrote:
…the traditional media are rapidly being complemented by new ways of communicating on matters of public interest, many of them online, which do not involve journalists. These new disseminators of news and information should, absent good reasons for exclusion, be subject to the same laws as established media outlets.
Apart from sourcing, there are sometimes elements of personal risk involved in cases like these. In the cases of both Brown and Scott, the individuals who filmed these incidents of fatal police abuse took significant risks when they chose to document and publish this footage, leaving themselves vulnerable to official scrutiny, and placing them in the mainstream media spotlight.
Reports surfaced in April 2015 that news outlets worldwide received cease-and-desist letters concerning the Walter Scott footage. The letters were sent by PR firm Markson Sparks on behalf of Feidin Santana, demanding the news outlets to pay a US $10,000 fee or to stop using Santana's footage. Markson Sparks claims that Santana owns the footage and, now that the initial newsworthy event has passed, is eligible to licence it. The firm is also considering charging news outlets retroactively for previous use of the footage without Santana's permission.
Activists are calling for greater accountability for police, including by filming them. Source: Flickr user Timothy Krause
Copyright is a double-edged sword when it comes to free speech. It is intended as an incentive to put valuable ideas and images onto the market, but it restricts their dissemination. An exception to the right to claim copyright lies in the concept of “fair use”, which allows media organizations to use limited amounts of copyrighted material as part of news reporting.
Feidin Santana's decision to pursue fees for his video footage begs the question: can something that qualifies as news at one point cease to constitute news at a later time, allowing the producer of the material to assert a copyright claim?
English courts addressed this question in the case of Ashdown v. Telegraph Newspapers, in which the Sunday Telegraph published excerpts  from the personal diary of Parliamentarian Paddy Ashdown which described a conversation about cabinet appointments between the Ashdown and now former Prime Minister Tony Blair. The Court found that the case fell within the defence of “fair dealing for the purpose of reporting current events” and focused mainly on the fact that the matters discussed in the article were still relevant to public interest. The Court stated that the meeting “was undoubtedly an event” and while, two years later, it was not current “in the sense of recent in time”, it was still a matter of current interest to the public. The Sunday Telegraph was therefore free to use the material.
A US court recently warned about the threat that is posed to freedom of expression when decisions on copyright infringement are made too hastily. In May, the Appeals Court of the Ninth Circuit reversed its decision in Garcia v. Google to order the removal of the Innocence of Muslims video from YouTube, following a copyright claim by an actress in the film. In a separate opinion one of the judges reasoned:
…[b]y refusing to immediately rehear this case en banc, we condoned censorship of political speech of the highest First Amendment magnitude. Although amateurish, offensive, and banned in many undemocratic countries, Innocence of Muslims is a film of enormous political, social, and religious interests…. The censorship of Innocence of Muslims by our court violated the public’s First Amendment right to view a film of immense significance and public interest.
It is also important to note that copyright is an effective tool to suppress free speech online. Last year, it was revealed that Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa had attempted to stifle critical speech about his policies by issuing copyright violation notices to critics who used government-made footage of the president when reporting on his policies. Some months later, Serbian Vice President Aleksandr Vucic pursued a similar tactic in an effort to censor a satirical online video that included footage taken by a State-run news outlet. These cases are by no means exceptional. Without question, copyright can indeed serve as a convenient excuse for censoring politically sensitive content online.
Perhaps “public interest” should be the guiding principle when answering the copyright question. The underlying logic of copyright protection is that it fuels a system through which the wider public gets increased access to newsworthy items. It encourages the war photographer to go to great lengths to provide us with accurate reporting on what really goes on in a war zone. The accidental journalist has not made a similar investment as the traditional journalist in being able to capture the news – they did not invest in reporting equipment or conduct background research. There must still be an incentive for them to bring the news into circulation. We cannot expect everyone to act with complete altruism in these situations, can we?
Aftermath of the Vauxhall helicopter crash. Source: Flickr user EG Focus
Or can we? There is a fine line to be walked here. Once we accept that the accidental journalist has a right to claim, this also means they will be able to exercise control rights that may prevent others from publishing their work and effectively limit the circulation of the newsworthy materials rather than enhance it.
In contrast to the case of Walter Scott and the claims of Feidin Santana, there is the case of Nic Walker, a bystander who photographed a 2013 helicopter crash outside London's Vauxhall. Walker’s photos of the crash, which he posted online, were picked up by news outlets. Though some commenters encouraged him to seek compensation for the use of his content, Walker stated that he did not want to profit from the crash.
Some news outlets, such as the Guardian, maintain a policy under which they seek, when possible, to get permission and pay for the use of images taken from social media. Such practices may be crucial in ensuring that accidental journalists continue to share their “lucky reporting” with the wider public and feel duly acknowledged (and compensated) for doing so. Otherwise, it may only be a matter of time before stumbling upon an event of importance and capturing it means contacting a publicity agent rather than the press. It is hard to imagine that would be of benefit to the wider public’s interest.
The main question, then, is where the line should be drawn. Should there be specific guidelines for accidental journalists, providing sufficient incentive to increase the free flow of information without at the same time restricting it precisely by creating an incentive scheme? Or can we rely on these standards to work themselves out in practice? The question, for now, remains unanswered.

author: Nani Jansen Reventlow


text:
A Magazine for Bolivia’s Iconic ‘Cholita’ Indigenous Women · Global Voices
Gabriela García Calderón Orbe

Cholitas, Bolivia. Image on Flickr by user Lemurian Grove (CC BY-NC 2.0).
The Royal Spanish Academy dictionary defines the word cholo or chola in its first entry as a “mestizo person with European and indigenous blood.” With the addition of the Spanish diminutive ending of -ita, the word becomes cholita, a term of endearment used in Bolivia for indigenous Aymara women who wear a bowler hat, distinctive skirt and blouse and a colorful shawl, with the hair tied back in two long braids down their backs.
The word was originally derogatory, a term used to refer to indigenous women who moved to the city and adopted the lifestyle of urban mestizos, but now refers to the women born in La Paz who embrace their indigenous identity.
Since 2014, Cholita is also the name of a fashion magazine in Bolivia. It's been called the “Andean Vogue,” and its target audience is indigenous women who dress traditionally and are increasingly playing a more visible and powerful role in society.
The editor Ester Chaym explained in an interview with Spanish news agency EFE in October 2014 that if the magazine only focused on fashion, it would be boring for these “such hard-working, smart, entrepreneurial women so full of initiative.”
According to the article, which was picked up by media throughout the Spanish-speaking world, the monthly magazine was first published in July 2014. Chaym explained:
Es una revista que plantea el matriarcado como una alternativa para hacer de este mundo un lugar plenamente feliz y próspero, quizás ya es tiempo de turnarse y que sean las mujeres las que tengan el poder.
It's a magazine that proposes matriarchy as an alternative in order to make the world a thoroughly happy and prosperous place, perhaps it's about time to change things up so that women are the ones that have the power.
She also shared how she came up with the idea for the magazine:
Chaym relató que la idea de editar una revista de estas características partió de la espontánea reacción de una niña alemana que, cuando llegó a Bolivia y vio a las mujeres ataviadas con las tradicionales mantas, polleras y sombreros tipo bombín, exclamó: “¡Este país está lleno de princesas!”
Chaym recalls that the idea of editing a magazine with these characteristics was first inspired by the spontaneous reaction of a German girl, who when she arrived in Bolivia and saw the women wearing the traditional shawls, skirts and bowler hats, exclaimed: “This country is full of princesses!”
The magazine's team is made up of a group of cholitas who share their own experiences.
On Twitter, the news of the magazine echoed at the time:
“@ELTIEMPO: Nace en Bolivia la ‘Vogue andina’ con consejos de moda para ‘cholitas’ http://t.co/fwWinkf52d pic.twitter.com/cyncqmqKkr” / @GDiegoa
— Trilce Lovisolo (@trilcelovisolo) octubre 31, 2014
In Bolivia, the ‘Andean Vogue’ with fashion tips for cholitas is launched.
#AhListoQueProgre Nace en Bolivia la “Vogue andina” para mujeres indígenas http://t.co/WervPNxAs1
— Ignacio Xoraxuria (@xoraxuria) octubre 25, 2014
In Bolivia, the ‘Andean Vogue’ for indigenous women is born.
Salió la Revista Para Ti de las cholitas bolivianas. Voy a coleccionarla. http://t.co/Up6qS4FSuQ
— enzo (@scargenz) noviembre 6, 2014
The Para Ti magazine for Bolivian cholitas. I'm going to collect it.
Vogue Andina…qué hijaputezZz #Cholitas
— Cecilia Giuffrida (@GIUFFRA) noviembre 17, 2014
Andean Vogue… you bastards. #Cholitas
Las “cholitas” ahora son las reinas de la moda: Esta es la nueva “Vogue” boliviana http://t.co/Vo3KfZqpJd pic.twitter.com/2I3kQW6mvp
— MAFFY (@LidiaMaffy_2014) octubre 28, 2014
Cholitas are now fashion queens: this is the new Bolivian “Vogue”.
In November 2013, the local government of the Bolivian capital La Paz declared the iconic cholita as “intangible cultural heritage” of the city.


text:
An Official White House Visit to Ethiopia? Africans Tell Obama ‘Don’t Do It!’ · Global Voices
Ndesanjo Macha

Ethiopians march for human rights in Washington DC, 2006. Photo by Elvert Barnes via Flickr (CC BY 2.0)
US President Barack Obama's last trip to Africa before his term ends will take him to Kenya and Ethiopia, where he'll be the first sitting US president to visit. Obama first toured Africa nearly two years ago, making stops in Senegal, Tanzania, and South Africa.
Obama's decision to stop in Ethiopia has surprised human rights activists and advocates for good governance both in Africa and elsewhere. Ethiopia is one of the worst human rights offenders in Sub-Saharan Africa. In its 2014 report, Human Rights Watch noted that Ethiopia increasingly restricts the freedoms of assembly and expression:
[…] the Ethiopian authorities continue to severely restrict the rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly, using repressive laws to constrain civil society and independent media, and target individuals with politically motivated prosecutions.
Muslim protests against perceived government interference in their religious affairs were met by security forces with arbitrary arrests and detentions, beatings, and other mistreatment throughout the year. The trial of 29 protest leaders who were arrested in July 2012 has been closed to the public, media, and family members since January. Others convicted under the country’s deeply flawed antiterrorism law—including opposition leaders and four journalists—remain in prison.
Despite the troubling state of human rights in the country, Ethiopia remains a major recipient of foreign aid money and security support from the United States. A White House statement about the trip said that Obama will visit the country for bilateral meetings with the Ethiopian government as well as the leadership of the African Union as part of US efforts to “work with the countries and citizens of sub-Saharan Africa to accelerate economic growth, strengthen democratic institutions, and improve security.”
Last month, Ethiopians voted in parliamentary elections, where opposition parties said the voting was not free or fair. The African Union said the elections were peaceful, but fell short of using the words “free and fair.” While noting that the elections were peaceful, the US State Department expressed concern about restrictions on civil society, the news media, opposition parties, and independent voices and views.
Hannah McNeish, a freelance journalist East and Central Africa, juxtaposed last month's suspicious elections results with the White House's decision to honor Ethiopia with an official visit:
Ruling party in #Ethiopia, that #Obama has just announced visit to, takes all 546 parliamentary seats in election, inc. sole opposition seat
— Hannah McNeish (@HannahMcNeish) June 22, 2015
The ruling Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) and its allies won all parliamentary seats, including the only seat won by the opposition in the 2010 elections. The EPRDF has been in power since 1991.
Discussing Ethiopian elections, Freedom House observed that:
Ethiopia's elections are just an exercise in controlled political participation.
The one potential dividend of these sham polls, however, is the international attention they will garner for the government’s growing political repression. The blatant disregard for internationally recognised standards for free and fair elections just might convince Ethiopia’s largest donors that it is time to rethink their relationship with an increasingly authoritarian government.
Police lead Natnael Feleke (center right) and fellow blogger Atnaf Berahane (center left) to court. Photo courtesy of Trial Tracker Blog.
Ethiopian police, moreover, have routinely arrested and jailed bloggers and online journalists. Ethiopian blogger and GV author Endalk Chala says the suppression of freedom of expression online is not a surprise. The second most populous nation in Africa has only one Internet service provider, which is owned by the government.
In April 2014, nine bloggers and journalists were arrested in Ethiopia. Several of these men and women had worked with Zone9, a collective blog that covered social and political issues in Ethiopia and promoted human rights and government accountability. In July, they were charged under the country’s Anti-Terrorism Proclamation, a policy that was written with robust support from the United States government, as part of a broader effort to suppress organized crime in the Horn of Africa. The bloggers have been behind bars ever since, and their trial has only seen progress over the last few weeks, since the close of national elections.
The country's troubles with bloggers aren't new, either. On July 13, 2012, Ethiopia's federal court sentenced a prominent Ethiopian blogger, Eskinder Nega, and 23 other opposition activists to 18 years in jail for allegedly participating in terrorist activities. Human rights and good governance activists and other Twitter users reacted with shock and dismay.
Facebook image calling for the release of all political prisoners in Ethiopia. Image courtesy of Ethiopia Mitmita Facebook page.
Kenneth Roth, the Executive Director for Human Rights Watch recently asked why Washington appears to be rewarding repression in Ethiopia with an official visit:
Intensifying Ethiopia repression is met with sanctions, right? No, the gift of an Obama visit. http://t.co/yvjhulwhbq pic.twitter.com/QSfmo9a14E
— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) June 21, 2015
Unbelievable: as Ethiopia shuts down nearly any political opposition, Obama chooses to visit. http://t.co/YOubDzsOlH pic.twitter.com/utn3IGnjA8
— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) June 19, 2015
Ethiopia netizen Mengistu Lemma says he opposes the idea of Obama shaking hands with Ethiopian leaders:
I strongly oppose OBAMA shaking hands with the devils in Ethiopia next week.
— mengistu lemma (@mengistu9690) June 22, 2015
Nkunda Rwanda, a Rwandan human rights blogger, said:
The symbolism of Obama's trip (to #Ethiopia), would “further solidify the image that America stands behind Africa's autocrats.”
— Nkunda Rwanda (@Rwandankunda) June 19, 2015
Sarah Margon, the Washington Director for Human Rights Watch and former advisor to US Senator Russ Feingold, wrote on Twitter:
Ethiopia is too often presented as an African success story instead of the human rights disaster that is the reality. http://t.co/79V0conUBG
— sarah margon (@sarahmargon) June 20, 2015

author: Ndesanjo Macha


text:
Matildas’ Awesome Advance to Women’s World Cup Quarter Finals: Australia 1 Brazil 0 · Global Voices
Kevin Rennie

Kyah Simon celebrates her goal against Brazil
- TV screenshot
‘Stun‘ is the word of the day down under, after Australia's Matildas defeated Brazil 1-0 to reach the Women's World Cup quarter finals. There was no shortage of superlatives on the web.
#socialmedia Social media frenzy as Matildas stun Brazil: The Westfield Matildas’ recor… http://t.co/sc09g3aDrH http://t.co/Rhx825MXSs
— Jeff and Sharon Reed (@jeffsharonmtg) June 21, 2015
Kyah Simon's goal in the 80th minute caused an outbreak of the A word — awesome. Like many Aussies in awe, Rosie Thomas of @projectrockit, ‘Australia’s youth-driven movement against (cyber)bullying’, woke to the news:
CELEBRATE! Monday's AWESOME when you wake up to this! @TheMatildas defeat Brazil to make #FIFAWWC quarters! #Matildas pic.twitter.com/DPWgm0xsIl
— Rosie Thomas (@1RosieThomas) June 22, 2015
Other Australians had watched the game live during the wee hours:
#KickOff: Up early to watch the Aussie girls take on the mighty Brazillian girls. Big task but possible. All the best ladies!! #WWC2015
— Rodgers That (@WCDream112) June 21, 2015
Student Edge picked up the D word used by the triumphant coach:
“Dangerous” Matildas Beat Brazil In Women's World Cup; Now Headed For Quarter Finals http://t.co/a7T971475m
— Student Edge (@student_edge) June 22, 2015
Coach Alen Stajcic posed this warning to their next opponents: “We’re a dangerous team, one of the most dangerous teams at the World Cup, if not the most dangerous team in going forward.”
Did you hear that, Japan/Netherlands?
Nat Clegg didn't need to reach for a thesaurus:
INDAILY: http://t.co/L8vMPjW4QW – awesome work girls – outstanding even
— Nat Clegs (@ClegsNat) June 22, 2015
At the link, Adelaide based independent news website InDaily were full of optimism, sharing Alen's string of E words:
Not content with knocking heavyweights Brazil out of the Women’s World Cup, the Matildas are eyeing a place in the last four after their historic triumph in Canada.
Coach Alen Stajcic said it was a deserved result.
… “Exhilarating is the word for such a victory against a big powerful football nation.
“The effort, the execution, the spirit has just been brilliant.”
Melbourne Victory fan Michael was not alone in raising the relatively low media profile, public recognition and earnings of the Matildas compared with the less successful men's team @Socceroos.
@dasher39 @millberry80 @DeanRosario On another note Socceroos flew business class for 1 qualifier and Matildas flown coach for a WC.
— Michael | MVFC (@MVictoryFan) June 22, 2015
Jonno Simpson,a Melburnian who works for Twitter, summed up the historic victory:
So many Tweets. So much love for @TheMatildas! #AUS #FIFAWWC http://t.co/D7enYwlkSS pic.twitter.com/ZMvCGQNlXO
— Jonno Simpson (@JonnoSimpson) June 22, 2015

author: Kevin Rennie


text:
Nepal Is Using a Satellite Collar to Track a Snow Leopard Named Omi Khangri · Global Voices
Sanjib Chaudhary

A baby snow leopard in New York's Central Park Zoo. Image by Linda Asparro. Copyright Demotix (10/11/2013)
High in the Himalayas one of the world’s most beautiful and elusive cats – the snow leopards – are found. Poached for their fur and bones, only 3,500-7,000 individuals remain in the wild throughout Central and South Asia, appearing as “endangered” on the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red List of Threatened Species.
The Nepalese government's Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation, with support from National Trust for Nature Conservation and WWF Nepal, fitted a snow leopard with a satellite radio collar recently to monitor the snow leopard's movements and learn about its behaviour, movement patterns and habitats in Nepal. Omi Khangri, the 5-year-old snow leopard named after a mountain in the Olangchung Gola of Kanchenjunga region, is the second snow leopard to be fitted with a radio device.
A rare snow leopard has been successfully collared with satellite-GPS technology in Nepal: https://t.co/7unfRMHIPi pic.twitter.com/jOCGTMpCw9
— WWF-New Zealand (@WWFNewZealand) June 9, 2015
Conservationists believe that the information gathered from the collar will be crucial to conserving the 350-500 animals that roam Nepal's Himalayas.
A difficult task in difficult terrain
Even spotting a snow leopard is hard in the harsh, rugged and barren terrain, aided by their thick, pale fur with dark grey to black spots that help the cat to camouflage against the rocky slopes. It took about a year and a half for the experts to put a collar on the second animal.
Officials had to wait for more than 20 days and had to change trapping methods to search, capture and fit the satellite collar on Omi Khangri.
Here’s a video of the snow leopard collaring.
The region where the snow leopard was radio-tagged is scenic and beautiful, with the world’s third highest mountain Kanchengunga, but it is also infamous for the 2006 helicopter tragedy. A group of 24 including world-renowned conservationists lost their lives in the Ghunsa of Kanchenjunga in a chopper crash while returning after handing over the management of the Kanchenjunga Conservation Area to local communities – a moment to be remembered in the history of conservation.
The satellite-collaring of Omi Khangri is not new – tigers, rhinos and even gharials have been radio-collared in Nepal to research their movements.
According to the Saving Snow Leopards Report, snow leopards are in danger from the herders who kill them to protect their livestock:
Education programs run by agencies like the Snow Leopard Trust and the Snow Leopard Conservancy to discourage local herders from killing snow leopards are important. Improving herding techniques and coming up with more effective ways of guarding livestock can prevent killing in the first place.
Anil Adhikari, local conservation officer and a coordinator of Snow Leopard Conservancy projects in the Everest and Annapurna region of Nepal, writes in a blog post how other incentives are used to protect the animal, such as compensating herders when livestocks have been killed by snow leopard:
Most of the group members do not own livestock, but some do. If a snow leopard kills a baby yak the owner receives 700 rupees as compensation. 1,500 rupees is given for the loss of an adult.
With the study of Omi Khangri’s movements, conservationists expect to come up with better conservation efforts to conserve snow leopards that are poached for furs and bones and killed in retaliation by herders.

author: Sanjib Chaudhary


text:
New Report Details Unanimous Support Amongst Iran’s Civil Society for the Iran Deal · Global Voices
Mahsa Alimardani

Image from ICHRI's new report ” High Hopes, Tempered Expectations: Views from Iran on the Nuclear Negotiations.”
Global Voices collaborators the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran released a newly written report yesterday entitled “High Hopes, Tempered Expectations: Views from Iran on the Nuclear Negotiations.”
The report engaged with 28 members of Iranian civil society including former members of the Iranian Parliament, journalists, academics, lawyers, economists, filmmakers, writers, publishers, actresses, playwrights, activists, and family members of political prisoners. The key finding was unanimous support for the nuclear negotiations and an agreement to lift sanctions. The following are some of the key findings made from this sample group.
• Seventy-one percent of respondents expect economic benefits from an accord, typically citing increased investment and oil revenues, and gains to employment, manufacturing, and growth. However, one-fifth of those expecting economic gains believe these benefits could be lost to ordinary Iranians due to governmental mismanagement.
• Twenty-five percent of all respondents expect any economic benefits would reach only the upper levels of society and those connected to power, due to entrenched and rampant corruption and the administration’s lack of authority to confront rival centers of power.
• Sixty-one percent of the respondents believe a deal would improve the chances of achieving political and cultural reforms, as the administration could now turn its attention to such issues and it would be significantly strengthened politically in its ability to enact change.
• Thirty-six percent expected no improvement in political or cultural freedoms. Some cited the Rouhani administration’s lack of power and authority, especially vis-à-vis the legislative and judicial branches and Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei. Others questioned Rouhani’s willingness to push forward with reforms, noting his few efforts even in the spheres that are under the president’s direct control.

author: Mahsa Alimardani


text:
Russian ‘Troll Factory’ Agrees to Compensate Former Employee, But She’s Just Getting Started · Global Voices
Tanya Lokot

A lawsuit by a former employee is helping pull an alleged Russian “troll factory” into the limelight. Images mixed by Tetyana Lokot.
The phenomenon of “troll factories” or “troll farms” operating on the RuNet and beyond to shape the conversations and sentiment online has by now received wide coverage in both Russian and international media. In many cases, reporters have relied on testimonies from whistleblowers who work or have worked for one of the alleged “troll factories.”
At the end of May a woman named Lyudmila Savchuk announced that she was suing her former employer, Russia’s most famous “troll factory,” the Internet Research Agency, located in St. Petersburg. Now her lawyers from human rights organization Team 29 are saying the company has agreed to compensate Savchuk over a labor dispute, in which she accused them of illegal hiring and salary practices.
Calling herself a freelance investigative reporter and a civic activist, Savchuk embedded with the “troll factory” on Savushkina street and worked for the office from January 2015 to March 2015 as an undercover “mole.” Her aim was to discover how the “factory” was managing offices full of paid staff posing as ordinary citizens online, leaving fake comments on news stories and blogs, and influencing the online discourse. Although she was unhappy with the hiring practices, Savchuk said the real purpose of her lawsuit was to force the Internet Research Agency to appear publicly before the law, so that more people could learn about the inner workings of the “troll factory.”
On June 23, the two sides finally met in court. Shortly after, Savchuk's lawyer, Ivan Pavlov, posted on Facebook that the Internet Research Agency had agreed to compensate Savchuk for unfair hiring practices, and pay her the salary she was due when she was dismissed.
Тролли сами в суд не пришли, но прислали девушку-юриста на съедение. Девушка-юрист согласилась с нашими претензиями и предложила выплатить Людмиле Савчук все положенные компенсации.
Но сила-то не в деньгах, а сами знаете в чем. Поэтому продолжение следует.
The trolls didn't appear in court themselves, but sent a woman lawyer as a sacrifice. The woman lawyer agreed with our claims and offered to pay Lyudmila Savchuk all the necessary compensations.
But the power isn't in the money, it's in you know what. So, to be continued.
Lyudmyla Savchuk and her lawyers after the court hearing on June 23, 2015. Image by Ivan Pavlov on Facebook.
Pavlov noted that the next steps would be to hold two additional meetings with Internet Research Agency to discuss the terms of the settlement, and said one of the meetings would have to take place in the “troll factory”‘s office on Savushkina street in St. Petersburg. TJournal reports that the visit to the “troll den” will take place on June 30, and that Savchuk will be accompanied by lawyers and journalists.
Among other things, representatives of the Internet Research Agency in court claimed that Savchuk was never fired per se, as her contract was still active, and suggested she might want to return to work for the company. In turn, Savchuk told TJournal she views this as yet another attempt to stall the inevitable publicity that Internet Research Agency is now facing.
Мы думали, что представители фабрики троллей опять постесняются и не придут. Однако они пришли и внезапно согласились с требованиями по моему иску. Как говорит мой адвокат, они выбрали меньшее зло.
Так что мы действительно вытащили их на свет. Тот факт, что они пришли, что прозвучало название ООО «Интернет-исследования» — это означает, что фабрика троллей существует.
We thought the troll factory representatives would shy away again and wouldn't show up. But they did show up and have suddenly agreed to the demands of my suit. As my lawyer says, they picked the lesser evil.
So we really did pull them out into the limelight. The fact that they showed up, that the name Internet Research LLC has been spoken, means the troll factory really exists.


text:
#SaudiCables Show Saudi Arabia Worried About Media Coverage of Bahrain’s 2011 Uprising · Global Voices
Faten Bushehri

Bahraini anti-government protesters protesting and camping at Lulu (Pearl) Roundabout in the middle of Manama, the country's capital, calling for political reform. Manama, Bahrain. 25/02/2011. Photo by HI D. Copyright Demotix
The half a million leaked documents dubbed the Saudi Cables offer a peek into Saudi Arabia's obsession with media coverage of the 2011 Bahraini uprising and the role it played in shaping propaganda.
It's no state secret that the neighboring kingdoms have a close relationship. The Saudi government sent the Peninsula Shield forces to crush the anti-government movement that swept through Bahrain, with protesters calling for democratic reforms and more freedoms.
When entering the word “Bahrain” into the search tab of whistleblowing site WikiLeaks, 145 English and 790 Arabic documents appear as of now.
Saudi Foreign Ministry telegram showing Al Arabiya channel's correspondent in Bahrain kept officials up to date on interviews he conducted with government officials about the situation in Bahrain.
A telegram issued by the Saudi Foreign Ministry showed Al Arabiya channel's correspondent in Bahrain Mohammed Al-Arab was in contact with the ministry to keep them informed of the interviews he conducted with government officials about the situation in Bahrain.
He conducted an interview with the Pakistani president in which he discussed the situation in Bahrain and stressed his country's support of the Gulf Cooperation Council‘s (GCC) position on Bahrain's uprising, and that he shares the Saudi king's concern regarding that matter. It is not clear in the document what position the Pakistani president is referring to.
In another cable, the Saudi ambassador in London reported to the Saudi government that Bahraini opposition channel Lualua TV  is funded by the US and the UK governments, after having suffered from financial problems.
Um Ahmed tweeted a picture of it:
قناة اللؤلؤة ممولة بشروط عدم التعرض لملك البحرين #ويكليكس_السعودية #ويكيليكس #wikileaks pic.twitter.com/hZSzpF9WPP
— أم أحمد (@bahrainmomo) June 22, 2015
Lualua TV is funded on the condition of avoiding criticism of Bahrain's king
The cable also states the funding condition was to shift the pressure on King Hamad to criticism of the Prime Minister Khalifa bin Salman Al Khalifa, the king's uncle. The US and the UK are primary allies to the regime in Bahrain, and played a double standard role with the opposition there. Bahrain, being home to the American naval base and the future home of a British one, it is not in the two countries’ benefit to lay off the king. However, not to tarnish their democratic image in the international community, shifting criticism to the prime minister at least reflects the West's belief in true democracy and freedoms.
Another report, labeled “Secret and Urgent” signed by the former Saudi minister of communications and information technology Mohamed Jameel Mulla on June 1, 2012, states that the Saudi minister of information had a meeting with Bahrain's director of information affairs to discuss the Iranian state-owned TV channel Al-Alam. Bahrain's representative had mentioned in the meeting he will present a memo at the Arab Satellite Communications Organization's (Arabsat) general assembly requesting they stop the broadcast of the Iran-based channel.
A report labeled “Secret and Urgent” states that the Saudi minister of information had a meeting with Bahrain's director of information affairs to discuss the Iranian state-owned TV channel Al-Alam.
The Saudi minister wrote he attended the meeting, held in Beirut on May 26, 2012, and reported that Saudi Arabia, as well as other member states, supported Bahrain's request. Arabsat, whose headquarters is in the Saudi capital Riyadh, is the leading communications satellite operator in the Arab world. Al-Alam, on the other hand, dedicated its coverage to supporting the opposition in Bahrain against the government, which the regime claimed fueled the unrest and played a role in the sectarian divide.
The document also states that Bahrain had also requested for Arabsat's executive body to be more active in monitoring all channels and their content.
But in the end, Bahrain's request was met with no response. An article on Middle East Online published on the day that the general assembly was held said Bahrain will stop broadcasting its channels on Arabsat starting June 1 in a move to boycott its inaction over Iran's “hostile” media campaign against the regime.
Zain Benjamin, a journalist for Radio Sawa based in Washington DC, tweeted a two-page letter written and signed by the Saudi minister of culture and information in which he says that Bahrain had become the hub for media criticism of both the Bahraini and Saudi government.
#السعودية | ويكليكس: #البحرين اصبحت منطلقاً للاساءة الاعلامية للرياض – مكتب وزير الاعلام pic.twitter.com/PJ8RkhA8mG
— Zaid Benjamin (@zaidbenjamin) June 19, 2015
Saudi Arabia WikiLeaks: Bahrain became the springboard for media abuse of Riyadh: Ministry of Information Office
There was a specific mention of Reuters correspondent in Bahrain, Andrew Hammond, who the Saudi government claims to have kicked out of the country previously when he was based in Riyadh for allegedly writing biased articles. The minister continues to say Hammond had now moved to Bahrain to continue his attack against both governments, to the point that it went beyond only reporting but also using his personal Twitter account to publish “insulting phrases.”
In the letter addressed to the Saudi king, the minister had asked to be allowed to meet the Bahraini Director of Information Affairs Fawaz Al-Khalifa to discuss collective media policies and strategies in order to counter campaigns of foreign media coverage on the uprising.
Saudi Arabia did not stop there, but also adopted a strategy to push news that emphasizes regional rival Iran's interference in Gulf states, especially Bahrain and Kuwait, as well as in Iraq. This appeared in another document, which states that there needs to be a focus on countering Iranian media by taking advantage of and supporting religious channels, particularly ones that prescribe to the Salafist Islamic movement. It also promoted guiding preachers to Iran so that they could deliver the message inside that country.
A leaked document that shows Saudi Arabia's desire to combat Iranian media by taking advantage of and supporting religious channels.
Stay tuned as Global Voices digs up more documents from the leaked cache. For Bahrain specific updates and news from Saudi Cables, follow our Checkdesk story “#SaudiCables: Wikileaks Publishes Secret Documents on Bahraini Matters.” Also check out our coverage on Checkdesk Global Voices, where we are tracking citizen media reactions to the Saudi Cables.

author: Faten Bushehri


text:
The ‘Civic Death’ of Dominicans of Haitian Descent · Global Voices
Janine Mendes-Franco

Map of Haiti and the Dominican Republic; image by Jay Clark, used under a CC BY 2.0 license.
Imagine being born in a country and then being told you have no rights as a citizen; that you're not wanted there. That is exactly what has been happening, for quite some time now, to Dominicans of Haitian descent.
The recent June 17 deadline for an estimated half a million people of Haitian origin born in the Dominican Republic to either register with authorities or face deportation has now passed. For many onlookers, the core issue has progressed from simply being one of denationalisation to one of dehumanisation. The term ‘ethnic cleansing’ has been used to describe the filtering taking place, as the government targets dark-skinned, Haitian-looking Dominicans for expulsion.
A court ruling two years ago effectively denied Dominican citizenship to children of Haitian migrants retroactively to 1929, leaving them all stateless. At the time, even while the country tried to assert its autonomy with regard to what it considered an immigration matter, high-profile authors like Dominican Junot Díaz and Haitian Edwidge Danticat said in a letter published in the New York Times that the ruling was “an instantly created underclass set up for abuse.”
The outcry on social media throughout the region was swift, if limited. A member of the Trinidadian diaspora, Allan Tam, called the situation “a tragedy in the making”.
On Facebook, Rhoda Bharath noted:
To reinforce what a friend is saying…
This week, we have ethnic cleaning taking place in Dominica.
In the Caribbean.
In our time.
Caricom is mute.
While this perception of the Caribbean Community remaining silent on the issue was pervasive, freelance journalist Wesley Gibbings brought it to people's attention that CARICOM has indeed spoken out about the situation, issuing its first statement in November 2013 and following up with another release in March 2015. The most recent statement was clear and harsh, saying that CARICOM “noted with grave concern a number of recent developments affecting grievously Dominicans of Haitian descent and Haitian migrants in the Dominican Republic”:
The process of regularisation of Dominicans of Haitian descent arbitrarily deprived of their nationality by the Dominican Republic Constitutional Court ruling on nationality of September 2013 expired on 1 February 2015. Government officials indicated that it would not be extended despite the fact that only a very small number (6937) of the persons affected were able to apply in time, leaving a large number estimated to be over 100,000 vulnerable to expulsion.
This distressing development needs to be placed in the context of the judgement of 22 October 2014 of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights which called for the nullifying of all the dispositions resulting from the ruling on nationality and for the reversal of the ruling itself. The Community reiterates its condemnation of the Dominican Republic Government's repudiation of international law.
The Caribbean Community also condemns the resurgence of anti-Haitian sentiment in the Dominican Republic. This has led to the unnatural death of a Haitian migrant on 11 February 2015, the desecration of the Haitian flag and the expulsion of an increasing number of Haitians without verification of their immigration status. In view of these troubling developments, the Caribbean Community maintains its posture of ‘no business as usual’ with the Dominican Republic.
This was a visible departure from CARICOM's initial statement, in which it said it was “prepared to engage the Dominican Republic but the government of the Dominican Republic must show good faith by immediate credible steps as part of an overall plan to resolve the nationality and attendant issues in the shortest possible time.”
Region-wide and throughout the diaspora, netizens have echoed this sentiment and done what they could to raise awareness of what they saw as a tremendous injustice to their Caribbean brothers. Many signed and shared a petition on Avaaz.org that called on Caribbean governments to “Stop [the] Dominican Republic[‘s] Apartheid against Dominicans of Haitian heritage”, calling the situation “an affront to regionalism”.
On the Haitian Bloggers community page on Facebook, netizens have shared reactions about the forced deportations by everyone from Haitian celebrities to the New York City mayor.
Against the backdrop of the intended deportations, the kiskeácity blog reposted audio of a panel discussion it had held in late 2014 about the Dominican Republic's citizenship ruling. Further south along the Caribbean archipelago, Groundation Grenada was outraged, with writers Angelique V. Nixon and Alissa Trotz calling the reality that people of Haitian descent have been faced with in the Dominican Republic — and even in the Bahamas — a human rights issue:
It seems we are at a breaking point with state treatment of Haitian migrants and persons of Haitian descent, particularly in the Dominican Republic and The Bahamas. Beyond the issue of people being rendered stateless, there are disturbing reports about abusive treatment and human rights violations in The Bahamas’ detention center, mass deportations from the Dominican Republic, and the separation of families in both places. Haitian migrants and their children remain some of the most vulnerable people, and this continues to be more evident in the recent changes to immigration enforcement policies in The Bahamas and Dominican Republic. These grave conditions for Haitian migrants and people of Haitian ancestry across the Caribbean bring starkly into focus the tenuous meaning of rights and who gets to access protection. Further, pervasive xenophobic attitudes towards certain migrants, and specifically anti-Haitian sentiment, remain an underlying yet clearly serious concern facing us as a region.
The post went on to specify several cases of violence and abuse against Haitians in both territories, and criticised the Dominican Republic's regularisation plan, which gave an unrealistic time frame in which undocumented migrants could request citizenship.
Quoting Haitian-Canadian writer Myriam Chancy, the post added that what Caribbean citizens need to be concerned about is the “civic death” being imposed upon its Haitian brothers and sisters. Trinidad and Tobago's Minister of Foreign Affairs Winston Dookeran said that some kind of diplomatic initiative will be taken when regional leaders meet on July 2 and 3 at the Heads of Government conference. Still, Groundation Grenada was of the opinion that “the region is far from finding more ethical ways to deal with migration and citizenship rights”:
With recovery efforts still underway in post earthquake Haiti, this assault on migrants and persons of Haitian ancestry urgently underscores just how much work there is left to do across our Caribbean. It is time to call out anti-Haitian sentiments and xenophobia that underpin much of the migration and citizenship issues in the region. It is time to forge and create responses that are regional in focus and promote solidarity and solutions grounded in social justice. It is time to find better ways of dealing with migration, citizenship, regional movement, and labor. And it is time to develop stronger and intersectional approaches to these issues that take into account class, gender and other differences and inequality.
Recent reports suggest that Andrés Navarro García, the Dominican Republic’s foreign minister, has extended the deadline date for deportations in an effort to help make the process more “credible”. The future of Dominicans of Haitian descent — many of whom have never been to Haiti and do not speak the language — still hangs very much in the balance.

author: Janine Mendes-Franco


text:
The Untold Story of Social Media and the 2015 Nigerian Elections · Global Voices
Nwachukwu Egbunike

Former Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan with newly sworn-in President Muhammadu Buhari during his inauguration ceremony on May 29, 2015. Public Domain photo from the US State Department.
Palpable hope swept across the continent following the inauguration of Muhammadu Buhari as Nigeria’s president on May 29, 2015. President Buhari defeated the incumbent, Goodluck Jonathan.
Not only was this unusual, but the attendant concession of defeat by Goodluck was a new one in a continent saturated by sit-tight leaders. However, there is another element – albeit still untold – of this election: the social media story.
This will not be the first time social media played a part in Nigerian elections. The 2011 general elections bears an imprint of the power of social media in Nigerian politics. Goodluck Jonathan was the first Nigerian president to join Facebook; he wrote a book, “My Friends and I”; and also declared his intention to run for the presidency in  2011 on that same media. This, according to Nigerian journalist, Tolu Ogunlesi lead to the faddification of Facebook in Nigerian politics:
President Jonathan took the shine off the IBB [Ibrahim Babangida] presidential declaration in Abuja by choosing that morning to announce his own bid on Facebook. Ibrahim Babangida launched a YouTube campaign video, and had an aide boast that he had become an avid Facebooker.
Similarly, one of the reasons attributed to the goodwill enjoyed by Muhammadu Buhari’s re-branding and eventual ascendancy to the presidency was propelled by his social media strategy. CNN journalist Lauren Said-Moorhouse reported:
Social media has globally become one of the most important tools for candidates during election campaigns — and Nigeria's race was no exception. Cynthia Mbamalu, programs manager at Nigerian youth charity YIAGA, said platforms like Twitter and Facebook helped the Buhari campaign to reach population pockets that they could have otherwise missed.
“Social media provided the opportunity to connect with Nigerians, especially young people,” she explains. “For the first time in a long while there were tweets targeted mainly at promoting the person of General Buhari and the party's vision for Nigeria.”
It was, therefore, not surprising that President Buhari in his inaugural speech acknowledged that “the Nigerian press is the most vibrant in Africa.” Also, his tacit gratitude to his supporters and critics on social media was not lost on observers: “My appeal to the media today – and this includes the social media – is to exercise its considerable powers with responsibility and patriotism.”
Twitter in Nigeria is a vibrant pool of conversation. This mirrors Nigerian society itself, which “is such a vibrant place that even the most mundane is crackling with energy.” Christian Purefoy, director of news and entertainment channel BattaBox, asserted in 2012, “With the explosion of mobile phones (and their video cameras!) and the coming of the internet – there are now the tools in the hands of every Nigerian to explore, share and make their voice heard.”
Twitter became a battleground for supporters of the two main presidential candidates, Buhari and Jonathan. The “war” was atrocious and divisive with each party dug in firmly in their respective trenches. Those who were indifferent watched keenly and later made up their minds.
However, a different conceptualization of political participation was conceived in Twitter Nigeria, namely “Fencism.” As I explained in a piece for The Scoop earlier this year:
Fencism is not neutralism! I have my political bias but I will not be bullied into displaying it on Twitter. Fencism is objectivism, realizing that both candidates have their flaws and not turning a blind eye – as many do – on them. Fencism is having the courage to tweet for and against any of the candidates. Not being held under the fanatical slavery of ‘my candidate better pass your candidate’. Fencism also means that I will vote on that day but will not waste my precious time only tweeting about the elections.
This stance was contentious as some Twitter users thought it was hypocritical and a cover-up for hiding entrenched political bias.
However, the war got real on the blogosphere as the election results were being collated. Tony Egbulefu reported:
Late in the evening on Saturday, March 28, Social Media users hit the net with the report that President Goodluck Jonathan had lost in the two Aso Rock polling units. The post went viral in an instant and buoyed hope in All Progressives Congress, (APC) supporters that such loss by the president within the perimeters of the seat of power could only be an indicator of matters that could go worse for him in the wider, far-flung political spaces. It turned out that the president won in Unit 021, which was located nearer to the seat of power with 293 votes against Buhari’s 263, while Buhari won in Unit 022, located in the outer reaches with 348 to 302. […]
No matter the perspectives, it is a hard fact that the social media proved handy in bringing anxious Nigerians up-to-speed with the voting outcomes. From Facebook alone, many became certain of the direction the wind would blow, well ahead of President Jonathan’s Tuesday evening concession of victory to Gen. Muhammadu Buhari, and Prof. Attahiru Jega’s early Wednesday morning election returns.
Besides the campaign rants and mobilization that was present on the Nigerian blogosphere, this election also witnessed a cross pollination of news from social media to mainstream media. Since netizens offer more opportunities of immediacy, the Nigerian mainstream media had to play catch up many times.
However, the downside of this was that traditional media fell for unverified news that sprang from social media during the elections. It was a season of propaganda unlimited, Opeyemi Agbaje opined:
This was one Nigerian election that was decided largely on account of propaganda and messaging! The [opposition] APC’s “change” message was compelling and the campaign stayed on message throughout the campaign. This effective message was complemented with devastating deployment of propaganda, often false or contrived but which most voters believed. President Jonathan’s and [the People's Democratic Party]’s communication machinery was in response hapless! A […] ruling party could be so completely incoherent in its communication that it soon became portrayed in the media (and sometimes in its own mindset) as a de facto opposition party. The election also marked the coming of age of social media as a critical force in Nigerian politics, for good or bad!
Emmanuel Onwubiko gave a glimpse of the hate speech prevalent in Nigeria’s blogosphere during the elections:
It is regrettable that the popular social media platforms like FACEBOOK, TWITTERS, and INSTAGRAM among others have become potent weapons for near diabolical attacks targeted at political opponents as Nigeria prepares to hold one of the most contentious general elections in over five decades or indeed since after Nigeria gained her so -called flag independence from the British overlords in 1960. The 2015 General elections have been turned into a theatre of hate speeches and campaigns colored in a form that defies logic and common sense. Various politically motivated hate speeches about various candidates and especially the two leading Presidential candidates of All Progressives Congress and Peoples Democratic Party have been bandied. I am sure if experts should collate analyses of contents of the social media this year, Nigeria will rank tops because arguably more than 40 million young Nigerians who have since graduated and have no means of livelihood have found solace in the various social media platforms and are busy churning out divergent messages.
Nonetheless, the truth is that Nigeria’s social media ecosystem has undergone an amazing transformation over the years. Whether or not it evolves into a platform that propels or hinders change is a story for another day. What is obvious is that henceforth, no Nigerian politician can afford to run for a national election without sharpening his social media presence and/or engagement.

author: Nwachukwu Egbunike


text:
What Can the #SaudiCables Tell Us About the Kingdom’s Foreign Policy? · Global Voices
Mohamed Hassan

Activists hold large banners and posters to demand the release of arrested Saudi Arabian blogger Raif Badawi in Berlin, Germany, on May 22, 2015 — Amnesty International supported activists held a protest in front of Embassy of Saudi Arabia in Berlin, to demand the release of Saudi Arabian blogger and activist Raif Badawi, who was jailed in 2012 and sentenced to 1,000 lashes for insulting Islam. The #SaudiCables reveal that the absolute monarchy, which micro-manages its citizens daily lives, has stretched its arms way beyond its borders. Photograph by Jakob Ratz. Copyright: Demotix
The half million leaked cables to be released about Saudi Arabia's foreign policy by WikiLeaks, which have sparked debates across the Gulf's social media, offer an invaluable insight into the kingdom's foreign policy.
The information in the leaked cables range from issues with visas being granted by the absolute monarchy to female singers to regional and international policies. Reading the leaks you can reach several conclusions.
One of the cables reveal that the sister of a well-known Shia cleric approached Saudi Arabia for donations. Al-Sadr charity foundation is named after Mosa Al-Sadr, who is the founder of the Lebanese Shia party AMAL, a group closely affiliated with Hizbullah.
Despite the widely used narrative of the Sunni-Shia conflict in the Middle East, the kingdom's decision was to provide support the foundation with financial support without publicizing it. That indicates that they're trying to create alliances with ideological rivals. The sectarian divide is more a matter of conflict of interest unlike what a lot of media outlets try to portray.
The amount of cables addressed to the former Foreign Minister Saud Al-Faisal is huge. The fact that he was briefed on matters of so little significance shows that he was micro-managing the foreign department.
This cable shows how Al-Faisal asked the Ministry of Information to give him the name of the boy scouts selected for an exchange programme in the United States, a task that is usually assigned to a low-level clerk anywhere else:
Where does state control stop? In the case of the Gulf monarchies, we might need a bit of time to answer such a question. The cables show that state hand can reach even to your personal and family life. This cable shows how a Syrian citizen whose sister is married to a Bahraini judge had a dispute during a phone call with his sister, which led him to be questioned by the Saudi intelligence until he signed a paper saying the dispute was resolved.
The amount of influence Saudi Arabia has can be seen through the amount of financial resources it employs. Money can be used as a way to finance supporters, like in the case of the Lebanese politician Samir Geagea, the leader of the Lebanese Forces (LF), a Christian political party and part of the March 14 Alliance. In the cable below, Geagea calls for financial help from Saudi Arabia to pay for his personal protection:
The cables also show that Saudi money is used to finance television channels which share their views and work for their interest, like the Lebanese MTV channel. A cable says the channel requested 20 million US dollars but received only 5 million US dollars with the condition that they provide a plan on how they will guarantee the interest of the kingdom in their coverage.
Saudi money, according to the cables, is also used to threaten channels that air material the Saudi government doesn't favour. For instance, this cable reveals that the Saudi ambassador to Cairo scolded Naguib Sawiris, the billionaire owner of ONTV, for hosting Saudi dissident Saad Alfaqih. The cable says Sawairis promised to refrain from doing that in the future and offered to host the Saudi ambassador to refute what Alfaqih said.
What's even more interesting is how the kingdom is reacting to the leaks. They haven't tried to refute their authenticity, but an official from the Foreign Ministry has commented, saying: “The leaked document doesn't contradict the publicized foreign policy that the kingdom adopts.”
Stay tuned as Global Voices digs up more documents from the leaked cache.

author: Mohamed Hassan


text:
Armenian Voices Sound Off at ‘Electric Yerevan’ · Global Voices
Joseph Larsen

Protesters demonstrate near the Presidential Palace in Yerevan on 22 June. Demotix/PHOTOLURE News Agency/7924537.
Armenians are engaging in a defiant act of civil disobedience.
Thousands of residents of the national capital Yerevan have taken to the streets to voice their unhappiness with electricity rate hikes.
The June 19 sit-in followed the announcement by the government of President Serzh Sargsyan two days earlier that a 16 percent increase in electricity tariffs would go into effect on August 1.
The announcement was met with predictable dismay, but the Public Services Regulatory Commission — the national energy regulator —  claimed that the hike was unavoidable.
The Armenian electricity grid is owned by the Russian company Inter RAO UES, which claims tariff increases were necessary because of a drop in the value of the Armenian national currency, the dram. Protesters have demanded that the president cancel the rate increase.
An incensed citizenry moved towards the Presidential Palace early Tuesday in what media have dubbed ‘Electric Yerevan’.
5,000 protesters congregated in front of the palace, railing against electricity rate hikes and the administration's failure to combat poverty in Armenia, the poorest country per capita in the South Caucasus.
Demonstrators violently dispersed
Police cracked down hard on protesters. A total of 237 people were arrested early Tuesday near the Presidential Palace, including prominent journalists Ani Hovhannisian and Hrant Galstian.
Riot police used batons and water cannons to disperse demonstrators. The AFP news agency reported that policemen physically assaulted journalists on the scene.
Police use water cannons to disperse demonstrations in Yerevan on 23 June. Demotix/PHOTOLURE News Agency/7926046.
Not to be deterred, a reported 6,000 protesters made a second march on the Presidential Palace on Tuesday evening.
Journalist Onnik James Krikorian, who lived in Armenia for 14 years before being based in neighbouring Georgia, expressed concern for the demonstrators’ physical well-being:
Time for bed. Hoping I don't wake up to news of another dispersal. Touch wood it doesn't look like that for now… #electricYerevan #Armenia
— Onnik J. Krikorian (@onewmphoto) June 23, 2015
Seven demonstrators and 11 police officers were reported injured as of Wednesday morning.
Sounding off
Natalya Harutyunan, a project manager at UNDP Armenia, saw the protests as about more than just electricity prices:
Importantly, it isn't a power battle, but genuine #citizenry demand for transparent and fair policy decision-making #ElectricYerevan
— Natalya Harutyunyan (@nata_har) June 24, 2015
Monica Ellena, a Tbilisi-based freelance journalist, had this to say:
#Armenia #ElectricYerevan electricity hike, a tipping point for young Armenians (and not only) http://t.co/pnB1HlBfG5
— monica ellena (@monicaellena) June 24, 2015
Global Voices correspondent Karena Avedissian responded to assertions that the demonstrations are an outlet for anti-Russian sentiment:
Again, no this isnt a maidan, but the electric company that the protests are against is Russian-state owned. Can't ignore Russian complicity
— Karena Avedissian (@KarenaAv) June 23, 2015
While many voices view Electric Yerevan as an emerging social movement, others see it on simpler terms.
A 24-year-old former government employee told Global Voices on condition of anonymity that “the reason is very simple. People went to the streets to protest against the rise of electricity rates. That's it.”
Yerevan-based political scientist Akop Gabrielyan also cautioned against drawing broad conclusions when contacted by Global Voices:
The cause, deep-rooted social reason is tied with a number of unpopular moves and decisions by the government: rise of taxes, transport prices, etc. At the same time it is completely wrong to call the movement as the Armenian Maidan … People are against ineffective, detrimental management of the electricity company.

author: Joseph Larsen


text:
Arrested for Criticizing a Former Prime Minister, Singaporean Teen Blogger Amos Yee is Now Being Evaluated for Autism · Global Voices
I-fan Lin

From the Facebook page of Amos Yee
A 16-year-old Singaporean video blogger named Amos Yee was arrested in March 2015 after he uploaded a YouTube video and a blog article criticizing Lee Kuan Yew, the founding Prime Minister of Singapore.
During his public hearing in May 2015, the judge ruled that Yee be remanded for three weeks to assess his mental and physical suitability for reformative training. On June 23 the court found Yee mentally and physically fit to undergo reformative training. In addition, a psychiatric assessment suggested that Yee may be suffering from autism spectrum disorder, and the judge ruled that Yee to be remanded for another two weeks to assess his suitability for a Mandatory Treatment Order (MTO). However, some people have serious concerns about the MTO being applied to people with mental illness, arguing that it can be disruptive to a person's progress.
Autism spectrum disorder is characterized by deficits in social communication and social interaction and restricted, repetitive patterns of behaviors and interests. Although there is no proven cure yet for autism, some medical care may help reduce their symptoms. For example, some medications are approved by US Food and Drug Administration to reduce irritability in children with autism. If the court decides that Yee must undergo MTO, it is not known what kind of ‘treatment’ the teen will receive.
Yee’s father said that Yee had not been assessed for autism. Online commenters suggested that Yee might be autistic earlier this year, though these comments were based chiefly on local media reports about Yee, rather than actual interactions with the teen.
For example, Starboard analyzed the autistic traits observed in Yee’s behaviors in an online forum:
His lack of social skills is demonstrated by releasing the video at the time other people are mourning the passing of a former prime minister. He lacks empathy.
His repetitive behaviour of walking and eating his banana [are] another indicator.
His lack of social development is clearly seen when he was slapped. A normal person would have looked at the assailant, but he just nurse his pain and walks away without making eye contact. All three symptoms taken together shows sign of autism.
These and other similar comments reflected common stigmas surrounding autism and other forms of mental illness in Singapore.
Others see his behavior as simply that of an overzealous teenager. Writer Alfian Sa’at wrote an article about having supper with Yee and his family:
Amos Yee, as a teenager, is as normal as they come. They chafe at authority, will always look for wriggle room and bargaining leverage, have a sharp instinct for pointing out adult contradictions and hypocrisies.
Instead of discussing Yee's behavior, Alfian Sa’at suggested that the reaction of the Singapore government is the real problem at hand:
When a brat acts up—and of course Amos can be taunting and bratty—the best thing that you can do is to ignore him and let him exhaust himself.
But no, some people decided to get all sanctimonious[…] the people who filed those police reports, the 8 policemen who arrested Amos at his house, the AGC, the man who smacked Amos[…]—all of you look so violent, hysterical, foolish and feeble. In trying to solve a ‘problem’ like Amos Yee you've only ended up displaying your own problems and neuroses–your pettiness, your cruelty, your beastliness, your insecurity–in all their garish detail.
UPDATE: Everything You Have to Know About Autism by The Babble Out
Related GV articles:
Singaporean teenager arrested for making videos deemed offensive
Singaporean teenager video blogger sent to rehabilitation for offensive youtube video

author: I-fan Lin


text:
Bolivia Greenlights Controversial Highway, Oil and Gas Extraction in National Parks · Global Voices
NACLA

Protester from Isiboro Sécure National Park and Indigenous Territory (TIPNIS) arrived to La Paz (19/10/2011). Photo taken from the Fickr account of Szymon Kochanski under Creative Commons license.
This article by Emily Achtenberg was originally published on NACLA's website and is republished here as part of a content-sharing agreement.
On May 20, Bolivian President Evo Morales issued Supreme Decree 2366, opening up Bolivia’s national parks—which are protected under the Constitution as ecological reserves—to oil and gas extraction. Just two weeks later, Morales proclaimed that his on-again, off-again plan to build a highway through the TIPNIS national park and indigenous territory in the Bolivian Amazon will finally be realized.
The coincidence of these announcements was not lost on TIPNIS (Isiboro Sécure National Park and Indigenous Territory) road opponents, who have long suspected that the advancement of oil and gas interests is a major impetus behind the road. Within the TIPNIS, four areas covering 30% of the park’s territory are subject to long-standing hydrocarbons concessions. The Securé block is virtually adjacent to the proposed road.
In fact, 11 of Bolivia’s 22 national park reserves are overlapped by existing gas and oil concessions to transnationals like Brazil’s Petrobras, Spain’s Repsol, and France’s Total.  Since the “nationalization” of hydrocarbons in 2006, these companies have operated through joint ventures with YPFB, the state energy company.
Like the TIPNIS, many of these reserves are collectively titled to indigenous groups who have inhabited them for centuries, relying on their ancestral lands for subsistence. In some cases, hydrocarbons concessions cover 70-90% of the park’s territory. These parks could become virtually extinct once the contracts are operational.
While the land area conceded to gas and oil companies in Bolivia has vastly expanded under Morales—up from 7.2 million acres in 2007 to 59.3 million in 2012—activity in the national parks has been largely paralyzed due to the lack of a coherent regulatory framework for extraction—until now. Under the new Supreme Decree, permits for hydrocarbons extraction can be granted under existing or new contracts, as long as the company promises to mitigate any adverse environmental impacts, and contributes 1% of its investment towards poverty reduction and economic development in the affected area.
Critics say these measures won’t begin to compensate for the true costs of hydrocarbons exploitation, especially since the environmental and parks agencies responsible for administering them are strongly biased towards extraction. According to JorgeCampanini of the non-profit research organization CEDIB, Supreme Decree 2366 will be a “terminal sentence” for protected areas already under assault from illegal mining, deforestation, and land invasions by coca-growers.
Morales’s twin announcements highlight a central challenge and contradiction for the MAS (Movement Towards Socialism) government, which has relied heavily on oil and gas extraction to finance its successful redistributive programs. This strategy has increasingly put Morales at odds with indigenous, environmental, and other civil society organizations who argue that extractivism destroys nature and communities, perpetuates dependence on transnationals, and obscures the need to develop a sustainable economic model for the future.
In contrast, the MAS government defends its extractivist and developmentalist policies as a necessary means to alleviate poverty in the present, and to create the resources for a post-extractive economy that will transition towards “communitarian socialism.” Political scientist George Gray Molina has noted that the Bolivian government’s effective take of hydrocarbons taxes and royalties, at 72%, is among the highest in Latin America. [1]
These contrasting visions crystallized in 2011-12 around the TIPNIS controversy, the most divisive conflict of Morales’s nine-year tenure. The protracted dispute ruptured the alliance of indigenous, campesino, and urban social movements that originally brought Morales to power in 2005.
Morales put the road on hold ahead of the 2014 presidential election, in favor of a well-timed government campaign to eliminate extreme poverty in the TIPNIS. He also publicly expressed regrets about the government’s flawed community consultation process. Still, he has consistently defended the road’s geopolitical importance in promoting territorial integration and regional development. Few were surprised by the project’s resurrection, especially since Morales contracted with a state company to begin construction on the initial road segment leading up to the park in 2012, with government funds.
Morales’s decision to expand the hydrocarbons frontier into Bolivia’s national parks was also not unexpected. Vice-president Alvaro García Linera offered a preview in May 2013, invoking the theme of resource nationalism to justify the policy as an “anti-imperialist strategy.” Past neoliberal governments, he argued, protected these reserves to safeguard their resources for the future benefit of foreign investors, ensuring that Bolivia would remain in a state of underdevelopment.
Since then, the government has granted new incentives for oil and gas exploration throughout Bolivia, and at least 5 new concessions in the national parks are teed up for approval. Another Supreme Decree (DS 2298), issued last March, provides for a truncated, government-dominated consultation process in conjunction with proposed hydrocarbons activities, in lieu of one that seeks the “free, prior and informed consent” of affected communities, according to their norms and procedures, as required by the Bolivian Constitution and by international accords to which Bolivia subscribes. (A multi-year effort to develop a general consulta law has apparently been abandoned, due to the government’s inability to reach consensus with indigenous and campesino organizations.)
Morales’s decision to move forward now on both the TIPNIS and hydrocarbons fronts reflects a confluence of several factors. Economically, the dramatic decline in international oil prices (which also lowers the market price of Bolivia’s gas), along with the recently documented drop in the level of Bolivia’s proven gas reserves, has created a sense of urgency to expand the hydrocarbons frontier.
With 80% of Bolivia’s gas currently exported to Brazil and Argentina, there is also a long-postponed need to expand the supply of gas for domestic uses, including industrialization. And in his recent presidential campaign, Morales promoted the vision of Bolivia as a regional energy power, promising to develop new markets for gas exports.
Politically, Morales’s landslide victory last October, with 61% of the popular vote and wins in eight of Bolivia’s nine departments, was based on a newly configured alliance of rural peasants, small producers and merchants, an emerging urban indigenous entrepreneurial bourgeoisie, and elements of conservative elite sectors who have been integrated into the MAS. This coalition, which has reshaped Bolivia’s political landscape, has substantially benefited from Bolivia’s gas-fueled prosperity and provides a broad mandate for Morales’s neo-developmentalist and extractivist policies.
As for the TIPNIS, the MAS party’s first-ever triumph in the Beni department’s gubernatorial elections—albeit after the MAS-controlled electoral commission decertified the popular rival opposition party nine days before the vote—has created a newly favorable local political climate for constructing the Beni: Cochabamba road. And the MAS party’s two-thirds control of the Plurinational Legislative Assembly will assure the votes needed to repeal the inconvenient 2011 law protecting the TIPNIS as an “untouchable” zone. While the road’s design and financing sources have yet to be determined, Morales has indicated that the Binational Social Engineering Corps, a joint venture between the Bolivian and Venezuelan military, is prepared to start construction.
Just how much push-back there will be against these initiatives remains to be seen. Groups opposed to the prevailing MAS policies have been marginalized, intervened, divided, deprived of resources, and badly weakened by the Morales government in the wake of the TIPNIS conflict. And, as anthropologist Bret Gustafson has noted, an anti-extractivist position is difficult to maintain in a country where gas is viewed primarily through the lens of resource nationalism, and as a ticket to economic prosperity.
Still, TIPNIS leader Fernando Vargas, former presidential candidate for Bolivia’s Green Party, and Adolfo Chávez, leader of the lowland indigenous federation CIDOB, have announced plans for a legal challenge to Supreme Decree 2366, an international mobilization in defense of Bolivia’s national parks, and a hoped-for audience with the Pope when he visits Bolivia in July. They will need all the help they can get.
[1] George Gray Molina, presentation at Latin American Studies Association conference, Washington DC, June 1, 2013.
Emily Achtenberg is an urban planner and the author of NACLA’s blog Rebel Currents, covering Latin American social movements and progressive governments.

author: NACLA