Bolivia\u2019s election results, beyond triumphalist or fatalistic interpretations from either side of the ideological spectrum, signal two key points. First, that the country\u2019s liberal institutions still maintain a degree of health, and second, that the economy exerts a tremendous influence on the political configuration of the nation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In what resembles a second chance for Bolivia\u2019s traditional political elite, a former president (Jorge Quiroga) and the son of a former president (Rodrigo Paz) are competing in the second round<\/a>. Regardless of who wins, the country\u2019s political future will depend on how the Bolivian elite addresses the profound economic problems and manages to generate growth and social inclusion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These challenges are not new. Bolivia has long been considered one of the poorest and most politically unstable countries in Latin America. According to data from the Cline Center for Advanced Social Research at the University of Illinois, Bolivia holds the dubious distinction of being the country with the most coups d\u2019\u00e9tat in the region<\/a>, with more than 40 since 1947\u2014including both failed and successful attempts. Individually, it even surpasses any African country in this category.<\/p>\n\n\n\n During the 1980s and 1990s, following a turbulent period marked by both right-wing and left-wing military dictatorships and an economic crisis, including hyperinflation under the leftist Democratic and Popular Unity (UDP) government, the political system coalesced around three parties: the Nationalist Revolutionary Movement (MNR), the conservative Nationalist Democratic Action (ADN), and the Revolutionary Left Movement (MIR).<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the time, none of these parties managed to secure an absolute majority, typically earning between 20% and 30% of the vote, which made parliamentary coalitions indispensable for governing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, the poor results of privatization policies in the late 1990s and early 2000s eroded those modest gains in political stability. This paved the way for Evo Morales, a coca growers\u2019 union leader, who successfully channeled protest votes and frustration with the traditional political elite through his party, the Movement for Socialism (MAS).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Morales\u2019s victory in 2005, with more than 50% of the vote, was surprising and became the most decisive in Bolivia\u2019s recent political history. His legitimacy allowed him to convene a Constituent Assembly in 2009 and transform the Bolivian state into a Plurinational one, in a context highly favorable due to the commodity boom fueled by China\u2019s demand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The reforms expanded Indigenous representation and extended presidential powers. The higher judiciary began to be chosen through popular vote. During this period, Morales\u2019s hegemony was absolute, and many political scientists classified his regime as a form of electoral autocracy or competitive authoritarianism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yet, the restriction on indefinite reelection proved to be a key stumbling block, highlighting the importance of institutions and their ability to shape political behavior. Morales attempted to bypass this barrier with a 2016 referendum, in which voters rejected his bid. Nonetheless, the Constitutional Court later approved his candidacy, a move widely questioned.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The crisis that ultimately forced Morales from power began during the 2019 election vote count. After a contentious campaign, when early tallies pointed to an unprecedented runoff, the preliminary results system was suddenly suspended. When it resumed, Morales appeared as the outright first-round winner, sparking allegations of fraud. A report by the Organization of American States identified significant irregularities, triggering a political crisis<\/a> that ended with Morales\u2019s resignation, backed by senior military officials.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although MAS seemed delegitimized, the poor performance of interim president Jeanine \u00c1\u00f1ez and the economic crisis brought on by the pandemic revived it. Legally barred from running, Morales endorsed his former economy minister, Luis Arce, who was elected in 2020.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nevertheless, Morales\u2019s shadow lingered. His ambition to return to the political center led to clashes with Arce and the MAS itself, which he eventually left in February of this year after encouraging protests against the government and even issuing veiled threats of civil war. The founding of his new party, Evo es Pueblo<\/em> (\u201cEvo is People\u201d), underscored the personalist and caudillo-like dimension of his leadership, despite former vice president \u00c1lvaro Garc\u00eda Linera\u2019s efforts to portray him as a representative of social and Indigenous movements under the premise of \u201cgoverning by obeying.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Under Arce\u2019s administration, the economic crisis deepened: inflation between 20% and 25%, fuel and dollar shortages, nearly depleted international reserves, and a fiscal deficit close to 11% of GDP. Hydrocarbon production plummeted, and despite being a major gas exporter, Bolivia increasingly relied on imports. In this environment, a failed coup attempt was launched in June 2024 by General Z\u00fa\u00f1iga.<\/p>\n\n\n\nFrom chronic instability to the rise of the MAS<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Evo Morales: a cycle of hegemony and downfall<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Economic crisis, runoff election and an uncertain future<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n