<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Council on Hemispheric Affairs &#187; Bolivia</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.coha.org/category/browsebycountry/countries-a-c/bolivia/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.coha.org</link>
	<description>COHA is an NGO specialized in monitoring Latin American and Canadian Relations for more than 30 years...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:03:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The TIPNIS Affair: Indigenous Conflicts and the Limits on &#8220;Pink Tide&#8221; States Under Capitalist Realities</title>
		<link>http://www.coha.org/the-tipnis-affair-indigenous-conflicts-and-the-limits-on-pink-tide-states-under-capitalist-realities/</link>
		<comments>http://www.coha.org/the-tipnis-affair-indigenous-conflicts-and-the-limits-on-pink-tide-states-under-capitalist-realities/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 19:42:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bolivia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COHA Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Human Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coha.org/?p=15380</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Executive Summary On December 4, 2011, the Bolivian government signed an agreement with indigenous leaders that clarified an October 24 law banning the construction of a hotly debated highway that would have run through the heart of Isiboro Sécure National Park and Indigenous Territory (Parque Nacional y Territorio Indígena y Parque Nacional Isiboro Secure, TIPNIS), an isolated area where traditional Amazonian native groups can be found.[1] Far from ending the controversy, the law had called into question whether the land and natural resources remain &#8220;untouchable&#8221; for both the Andean indigenous peoples who migrate there to farm and for the Amazonians native to the preserved natural expanse. The parties agreed that the portion of the law making the national park &#8220;untouchable&#8221; (intangible) would only apply to commercial enterprises, and not to those small-scale economic activities that support the traditional subsistence lifestyles that the indigenous groups living in the park depend on for their survival. Although at first glance it might seem that this ongoing conflict simply pits a government against its indigenous constituents, this view overlooks two important conflicts. The highway project, the resultant &#8220;untouchability&#8221; law, and even the recent official clarification of that law have only deepened the conflict between [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.coha.org/the-tipnis-affair-indigenous-conflicts-and-the-limits-on-pink-tide-states-under-capitalist-realities/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Brasil, Chile y Bolivia: El endeble equilibrio económico-ambiental</title>
		<link>http://www.coha.org/brasil-chile-y-bolivia-el-endeble-equilibrio-economico-ambiental/</link>
		<comments>http://www.coha.org/brasil-chile-y-bolivia-el-endeble-equilibrio-economico-ambiental/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2011 12:16:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bolivia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brazil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COHA Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Español]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coha.org/?p=15291</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Esmerados en satisfacer su demanda de energía, los Gobiernos de Brasil y Chile impulsan proyectos de construcción de represas que enardecen la resistencia de grupos aborígenes. En Bolivia, se han organizado manifestaciones de tribus indígenas en rechazo de la propuesta de construcción de una autopista que atravesaría la zona donde subsisten. Involucrado en cada conflicto se encuentra también el poder judicial, que ha ordenado la suspensión de los proyectos en varias oportunidades. ¿Cuán compatibles son el impulso urbanizador y la búsqueda de la sostenibilidad ambiental y la conservación de los suelos? ¿Es concebible un modelo de desarrollo que no comprometa el medio ambiente y que respete los derechos de los grupos aborígenes? Interrogantes básicas de esta índole asoman en Brasil, Bolivia y Chile, tres países donde se registra un auge económico, en diversas manifestaciones, que exige inversiones en materia de energía e infraestructura. En cada miembro de esta tríada se debaten actualmente determinados proyectos que, salvando las considerables distancias, han provocado protestas y otros enfrentamientos entre gobernantes y gobernados. A su vez, enfocar tales conflictos desde un punto de vista global presenta la clásica pregunta: ¿Cómo actuar ante dos modos tan distintos de medir los beneficios del “progreso”? Brasil: La [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.coha.org/brasil-chile-y-bolivia-el-endeble-equilibrio-economico-ambiental/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Price of Civilization: Brazil, Bolivia, and Chile, Trapped between Development and Environmental Constraints</title>
		<link>http://www.coha.org/the-price-of-civilization-brazil-bolivia-and-chile-trapped-between-development-and-environmental-constraints/</link>
		<comments>http://www.coha.org/the-price-of-civilization-brazil-bolivia-and-chile-trapped-between-development-and-environmental-constraints/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2011 17:13:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bolivia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brazil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COHA Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coha.org/?p=15226</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In Brazil and Chile, the government-backed plans to build two dams in order to increase their domestic energy supplies, have led to demonstrations by indigenous people to defend their access to their traditional lands. In Bolivia, a highway construction project has resulted in demonstrations by indigenous villagers living along the route of the proposed highway. Protests and demonstrations in these countries have been challenged in court where judges, in several key rulings, have suspended or halted construction projects. Introduction: Are urbanization and efforts toward environmental sustainability and land preservation compatible? Can we imagine a development strategy that does not destroy territory and also respects the rights of local indigenous populations? These are the fundamental questions that are arising in Brazil, Bolivia, and Chile; each of which are going through various types of economic booms that require investment in energy and infrastructure. In these countries, some projects under discussion, although widely different from each other, have generated protests and clashes between citizens and their governments. Placing these distinct disputes into a global perspective presents a classic problem: the clash between two different methodologies of weighing the benefits of “progress.” Brazil:  Belo Monte Dam The Belo Monte Dam, a proposed hydroelectric project [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.coha.org/the-price-of-civilization-brazil-bolivia-and-chile-trapped-between-development-and-environmental-constraints/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>‘Death Road’ for Morales’ Popularity with Indigenous Groups</title>
		<link>http://www.coha.org/death-road-for-morales-popularity-with-indigenous-groups/</link>
		<comments>http://www.coha.org/death-road-for-morales-popularity-with-indigenous-groups/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 07:56:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bolivia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COHA Blog]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coha.org/?p=14771</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Source: Accidents Planet Driving can be a harrowing experience in Bolivia. Consider, for instance, the North Yungas Road, or “Death Road,” a treacherous stretch of highway that claims over 200 lives annually and has been christened the “most dangerous road in the world.” Although renovations to this Andean deathtrap have rendered it safer, the state of Bolivia’s transportation infrastructure is still a precarious issue. Currently, the Morales administration is locked in a fierce battle with indigenous groups over a highway construction project—if the state has its way, this road will cleave the Isiboro Sécure National Park and Indigenous Territory (TIPNIS) in two, much to the chagrin of its present inhabitants. Located in Bolivia’s northeastern Amazonian region, TIPNIS is both a national park and an autonomous territory. The flora, fauna, and human population of TIPNIS will undoubtedly suffer from the highway’s completion. The indigenous inhabitants of the territory will be forced to deal with unsavory incursions into their homeland by illegal loggers, narcotraffickers, and unsavory cocaleros who practice slash-and-burn agriculture. Additionally, within 18 years of the road’s completion, deforestation will occur throughout an estimated 64 percent of TIPNIS, negatively impacting the territory’s 3,000 plant species and eleven different endangered animals. On [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.coha.org/death-road-for-morales-popularity-with-indigenous-groups/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tradition Trumps the Treaty: Bolivia Repeals its Ban on Coca</title>
		<link>http://www.coha.org/tradition-trumps-the-treaty-bolivia-repeals-its-ban-on-coca/</link>
		<comments>http://www.coha.org/tradition-trumps-the-treaty-bolivia-repeals-its-ban-on-coca/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 14:56:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bolivia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COHA Research]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coha.org/?p=13779</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On June 29, 2011, Evo Morales, Bolivia’s first Aymara Indian president, withdrew his country from the United Nation’s (UN) 1961 Vienna Convention on Narcotic Drugs. His decision was based on the fact that the Convention contradicted Bolivia´s 2009 Constitution, which aims to repeal the current ban on coca chewing, a long held tradition in Bolivia. This bold move puts indigenous rights in the limelight and underlines the anachronistic and discriminatory nature of the 1961 Convention, as well as the need to revisit this treaty in order to create a more appropriate international law directed towards coca chewing. The Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs The UN’s 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs based its views on coca leaf prohibition on the Report of the Commission of Inquiry on the Coca Leaf prepared by ECOSOC (United Nation’s Economic and Social Council) in 1950. This report was “sharply criticized for its poor methodology, racist connotations, and cultural insensitivity.”[1] For example, it claims that coca chewing leads to a lack of productivity in the work environment because indigenous coca chewing communities in Lucre had a poorer job “performance” when compared with non-coca chewing regions.[2] The report did not exactly specify how performance was measured, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.coha.org/tradition-trumps-the-treaty-bolivia-repeals-its-ban-on-coca/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

