The Foreign Service Journal, March 2004

B O O K S inclusion of fundamentalists (not ter- rorists) in the mainstream of political life. Here his step-by-step approach makes eminent sense: “get the politics and economics right (and) culture will follow.” As for America, Zakaria clearly sees the recent gubernatorial recall in California as democracy run amok. His remedy, however, is to insulate decision-makers from democracy and resuscitate the old “power elite,” with its sense of public service, probity and willingness to exercise authority — a remedy that seems quixotic in the age of Enron, Worldcom and Parmalat. Elizabeth Spiro Clark, a longtime member of the Journal ’s Editorial Board, was a Foreign Service officer from 1980 to 2000. A former fellow at the National Endowment for Demo- cracy’s International Forum for Demo- cratic Studies, she is now an associate at the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University. Bolivia: Timely Insights Proclaiming Revolution: Bolivia in Comparative Perspective Merilee S. Grindle and Pilar Dominago, eds., Harvard University Press, 2003, $24.95, paperback, 424 pages. R EVIEWED BY D AVID B OYLE On Oct. 17, 2003, Bolivian Presi- dent Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada resigned in the face of massive and violent protests, touching off the most serious challenge to constitutional democracy in Bolivia in the last 21 years. For many, the government’s fall was a surprise. It should not have been, say the authors represented in Proclaiming Revolution: Bolivia in Comparative Perspective. The book contains 13 papers delivered at a 2002 conference at Harvard marking the 50th anniversary of the 1952 Bolivian Revolution, plus two chapters by the editors introducing and summarizing the material. Representational democracy in Bolivia has never succeeded in putting down roots. Indeed, the most endur- ing legacy of the 1952 Revolution was the creation of a state only tenuously connected to the population and too weak to resolve bitter social divisions. That is not to say that Bolivia did not undergo as profound a transforma- tion as Mexico had decades earlier, and Cuba would experience only a few years later. The short period from 1952 to 1956 saw the adoption of uni- versal suffrage, agrarian and educa- tional reform and the nationalization of mines. Indigenous groups entered the mainstream of society and the role of the state expanded significantly, partic- ularly in the economy. Yet post-revolutionary Bolivia was still seriously flawed. The three most insightful contributors to this collec- tion, Juan Antonio Morales, Eduardo A. Gamarra and George Gray Molina, provide a range of explanations for what went wrong. Morales maintains that the new government adopted a state-led model for economic growth that resulted in dismal economic per- formance from 1952 to 1995 and left the private sector near death. Policy decisions over-emphasized wealth re- distribution, isolated the country from trade and capital, and fueled corrup- tion and paternalism. Gamarra argues that Bolivian soci- ety never completely accepted the idea of representative democracy in 1952, and since then has shown widespread disdain for the traditional parties and the National Congress. Political par- ties exist as mere extensions of the state, fail to represent citizen interests, and are unable to build a national con- sensus on what good government means. Gamarra suspects the system will be unable to address the crises the nation will face in the coming years — coca cultivation, economic stagnation, indigenous demands — and Bolivia will therefore face a prolonged period of social conflict. Molina agrees that the future of Bolivia does not lie with the traditional parties but with emerging grass-roots organizations that oppose the constitu- tional system. He cites approvingly a series of reforms begun in 1993 that redistributed power from the federal level to the local level. As a result, the old system of national state patronage was dismantled, and political power fragmented along territorial lines. Molina, in fact, says Bolivians have never developed a shared set of secular doctrines necessary to create a nation. His account is essentially descriptive. His point is, whether you like it or not, the old system is breaking down. For him, the revolution did not create a nation, and the increased pressure of contemporary social conflict will fur- ther weaken the state. None of this is good news for over- burdened desk officers following Bolivia or for Embassy La Paz. But the book is very good news for those interested in deepening their under- standing of Bolivian politics and soci- ety. The authors debunk myths, prowl forgotten corridors of revolu- tionary history, and skewer anyone foolish enough to disagree with them. It is hard to imagine a more timely or helpful analysis of what is taking place in Bolivia today. FSO David Boyle has served in Lagos, Malabo and Washington, D.C. He is currently desk officer for Bolivia in the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs. M A R C H 2 0 0 4 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 63