Harvard Honors Ex-President Accused of Massacre
The activists delivered a letter signed by nearly 100 Massachusetts residents and Harvard students to protest the university’s embrace of Sánchez de Lozada. Initially the group was turned away by the Harvard Police Department which asserted that the conference was taking on private property and that the group was therefore trespassing. The police explained that a conference organizer would come out to receive the letter. When that did not happen, 3 activists returned to the conference site and delivered the letter.
The Spanish-language newspaper, El Planeta, covered the action and organizers with the Martin Luther King, Jr. Bolivarian Circle of Boston (http://www.BostonBolivarianos.org) spoke with representatives of the aggrieved Bolivian families by telephone directly from the action.
Letter to HBS and DRCLAS
| Dean Jay Light Harvard Business School Soldiers Field Boston, MA 02163 |
Director Merilee S. Grindle David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies 1730 Cambridge Street Cambridge, MA 02138 |
Dear Dean Light and Professor Grindle,
There must be a mistake! Mr. Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada is a keynote speaker at the HBS Latin American Conference, “Shaping the Future Today,” scheduled for March 7, 2009.
Surely, the School is aware that the Bolivian government requested Mr. Sánchez de Lozada’s extradition from the United States in November, 2008?
Indeed, Mr. Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada presided over several of the worst massacres in Bolivia’s recent history. These include the “Gas Wars” he initiated and during which his security forces massacred dozens and injured hundreds of others. Their families and country demand justice. Two-thirds of the Bolivian Congress sanctioned the charges against him before their current administration was elected and at a time when a majority was drawn from Mr. Sánchez de Lozada’s political party.
To his dreadful record, we must also add the gutting of the Bolivian economy as he pushed for the privatization of gas lines, imposed austerity and opened the economy to corporate plunder. The Business School’s and DRCLAS’s association with these practices is not now our concern, however Mr. Sánchez de Lozada’s presence in our community is deplorable.
He should be returned to Bolivia in order to answer the charges against him in a fair and open judicial proceeding. Families need to heal; Harvard’s fêting of Mr. Sánchez de Lozada represents a gross indifference to their suffering.
We, the undersigned, call on Harvard Business School to:
(1) rescind its invitation to Mr. Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada;
(2) investigate the connections between your institutions and personnel, on the one hand, and the governments and presidencies Mr. Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada on the other hand;
(3) fully cooperate with any domestic, international and Bolivia proceeding and investigations concerning Mr. Sánchez de Lozada.
As our own country comes to terms with the wrong doing of its elected leaders and business people, so too must we assist the efforts of the Bolivian people to hold accountable theirs.
Sincerely,
| María Alejandra Cárdenas Cerón Lauren Pappone Marissa Vahlsing Carolina LeonEric Motika Diego Covarrubias Ann Raj Anabel Vazquez Michael Shively Joy Richmond Jerry Sobieraj Andy Klatt Phyllis Ewen Brandon Rawnsley Sharon Alworth Anne Knauf Dorothea Manuela Stephen Lewis Suren Moodliar Susie Zeiger Teri Anderson Emily Lewis Stephen Trudel Gabriel Camacho Richard Krushnic Ruth Hooke Michele Spring-Moore Margarita Sejas Sergio Reyes Kristine Hansen Kelly Moncheski Galen Mook Kaveri Rajaraman Eugene Schiff Sarah Larson Anand Vaidya Helen Snively Julie Kleinman Jorge Marin Sacha Christianson Pan Angelopoulos Javier Castro Zachariah Hughes Francis Baird Rebecca Chabot Monica Mendizabal |
John MacLeod Peter Haroutian Katherine Miller David Schaich Aileen Montour Wendell Refior Laura Stupin Chengiah Ragaven Marilyn Frankenstein Nancy Ramsden Chiaki Nishijima Ilaria Minio-Paluello Ninoska Nogales Alyssa Aguilera Sandra Harris Norma Wassel Tito Fuster Marco Montellano Dea Savitzky Linda Weltner Dean Stevens Sean Donahue Edgar Rodríguez Michael Gould-Wartofsky Kelly Lee Marcelo Lazarte David Amdur John Harris Komala Ramachandra April Van Buren Verónica Rocha Fuentes Margaret Sells Chris Traft Alicia Solombrino Lisa Fuller Christian Gomez Jennifer McCray Juan Lima Kathy Bull Sonia Dettmann-Quisbert Arthur Conquest Jennifer Holmes Deanne Dworski-Riggs Maggie Fogarty Bala Guerrero |
Comments
March 11, 2009
Mr. Jason Pramas
Editor/Publisher
Open Media Boston
33 Harrison Ave., 5th floor
Boston, MA 02111
Dear Mr. Pramas,
Suren Moodliar’s piece published on your web site on March 7th is a misleading account of the 2003 violent protests in Bolivia. The piece lacks important factual information that is vital to understanding the events in question.
Nowhere does the author mention that current Bolivian President Evo Morales, who actually orchestrated and led the civil commotion, had repeatedly and publicly vowed to topple the democratically-elected government of President Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada. Nowhere does the author mention the government’s repeated attempts to so resolve the national crisis peacefully through dialogue. Contemporaneous U.S. Department of State documents state that it was the armed demonstrators who first resorted to violence, held more than 800 people hostage (including foreign tourists) in Sorata, and endangered the lives of innocent people in La Paz by preventing the safe passage of food, fuel and other needed supplies. Nowhere does the author mention media reports that document the deaths of at least three newborn babies when their hospital in the Bolivian capital ran out of oxygen.
Let the record show that the events of February and October 2003 have been investigated by the Organization of American States (OAS) and independent prosecutors from the Public Ministry of Bolivia. Both investigations concluded that the response of the Bolivian armed forces was not only legal but responsible.
The truth is that the extradition request against former President Sánchez de Lozada is nothing more than another effort by Evo Morales to persecute former political opponents both inside and outside of Bolivia. In fact, Mr. Morales has ordered legal actions against all five former living Bolivian presidents. The impact of the worthy work of credible human rights groups is jeopardized by publications that do not truthfully and objectively report these events.
Sincerely,
Mauricio J. Balcazar
This letter to the editor from Eloy Rojas (Spanish original below the translated English version) clarifies several important points left out of Mr. Balcazar's anti-Morales missive. If Mr. Balcazar requires a further response than that provided by his compatriot, we will be glad to add details about his resume.
From Eloy Rojas, father of the late Marlene Nancy Rojas Ramos
Mr. Pramas,
I am aware that in recent days Mr. Mauricio Balcazar sent you a letter reproaching you for publishing on your website a letter from Suren Moodliar regarding the violent protests in Bolivia in 2003, indicating that Mr. Moodliar’s version of events was deceptive.
I am the father of Marlene Nancy Rojas Ramos who was eight years old when elite military forces, in an operation personally ordered by Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, assaulted the village where we lived and killed her.
I do not speak English, but with indignation I read the translation of Mr. Mauricio Balcazar’s letter that was sent to me by persons in the United States who are in solidarity with our cause. I lament very deeply that Mr. Balcazar has lied in this way, and I feel it is necessary to offer some explanations.
Mr. Balcazar, son-in-law of Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, tries to make it appear that Evo Morales overthrew Sanchez de Lozada’s government, and that this government had sought dialogue. Personally, I think that it was Sanchez de Lozada’s lack of appreciation for the life of the poor, as well as his violent actions, that caused the people to protest to such an extent that Sanchez de Lozada had to resign.
Mr. Balcazar lies and distorts the truth. There were not 800 hostages, only people who were delayed by the blockades of highways. There were no armed protesters, and no armed confrontations. And neither were there three babies who died for lack of oxygen; there was only mention of this once in a press account, and it was never confirmed by the ensuing investigation. Neither was there ever an investigation by the Organization of American States of the events in Bolivia in September and October 2003.
Bolivia is a peaceful country, even in critical situations. According to the Observatorio de Derechos Humanos y Políticas Sociales, between 1971 and 1982, in an eleven year period of coups d’etats and illegal governments, there were 201 deaths in Bolivia caused by state repression. During the second government of Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, between August 2002 and September of 2003, a period of one year and two months, there were more than 100 deaths caused by state repression.
No, it is not Evo Morales who pursues Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada. It is I who does so, because I cannot allow that my daughter’s death go unpunished, nor those of all of the victims of those bloody days. I only want that he present himself before a judge in Bolivia, or the United States or wherever, that he face his responsibility before a judge who knows of the events and the investigations, and who can determine if he is guilty or not, and the consequences that there ought to be.
Eloy Rojas Mamani
Señor Pramas,
Conocí que en días pasados el señor Mauricio Balcazar le envió una carta reprochando la publicación de Suren Moodliar en su página Web del 7 de marzo sobre las protestas violentas en Bolivia del 2003 señalando que es un relato engañoso.
Soy padre de Marlene Nancy Rojas Ramos que tenía 8 años cuando fuerzas militares de elite tomaron por asalto el pueblo donde vivía y la mataron en operativos ordenados por Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada en persona.
No habló ingles y leí con indignación la traducción de la carta del señor Mauricio Balcazar que me hicieron llegar personas solidarias con mi causa de justicia en los Estados Unidos, lamento profundamente que el señor Balcazar recurra a la mentira de esta forma por lo que me veo en la necesidad de hacer algunas aclaraciones.
El señor Balcazar, yerno de Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada, procura hacer ver que fue Evo Morales quien le derrocó y que su gobierno procuró dialogar, personalmente pienso que fue su desprecio por la vida de los más pobres y sus acciones violentas los que determinaron que el pueblo haya protestado tanto que el tuvo que renunciar.
El señor Balcazar, miente y falsea la verdad, no hubieron 800 rehenes sino personas que estaban demoradas por el bloqueo de caminos, no hubieron manifestantes armados como que no hubieron enfrentamientos armados, tampoco hubieron tres bebes muertos por falta de oxigeno salvo en una nota de prensa que no fue confirmada en la investigación realizada, ni siquiera hubo una investigación de la Organización de Estados Americanos sobre los hechos ocurridos en Bolivia en Septiembre y Octubre de 2003.
Bolivia es un país pacifico aún en situaciones criticas, entre 1971 y 1982 en 11 años, período de golpes de Estado y gobiernos de facto en Bolivia hubieron 201 muertes por la acción de represión del Estado, según el Observatorio de Derechos Humanos y Políticas Sociales; en el gobierno de Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada entre agosto de 2002 y septiembre de 2003 en un años y dos meses hubieron más de 100 muertes por la acción de represión del Estado definida por el entonces presidente.
No, no es Evo Morales el que persigue a Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada, soy yo porque no puedo dejar que la muerte de mi hija quede impune y conmigo todas las víctimas de esos días sangrientos. Sólo quiero que se presente ante un juez en Bolivia, en Estados Unidos o donde sea, que enfrente su responsabilidad y que sea un juez que conozca los hechos y las pruebas el que defina si es culpable o no y la sanción que debiera tener.
Eloy Rojas Mamani
Mauricio Balcazar has asserted that the legal and legitimate request for extraditon of his father-in-law, Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, to Bolivia is an effort by president Evo Morales to "persecute" his former political opponents. He also later dismisses Mr. Eloy Rojas' poignent call for justice and closure around the killing of his young daughter by saying in effect, lets not play "politics". To this I feel I must respond because, indeed, it IS a question of politics...politics versus justice. The playing of politics, however, as well as the assumption of impunity, is to be attributed to Mr. Sanchez de Lozada, the ex-president of Bolivia. He is neither a refugee nor a political exile in the U.S. Rather, since returning here in 2003, he has used his considerable political and economic connections to ignore and disdain the legal process in his own country. "Spinning" himself as a victim of persecution is yet one other effort on his part to that end. Politics indeed...
Political persecution? We must reflect on a few key points:
In September and October of 2003, 67 were killed and 400 wounded or maimed because then president Sanchez de Lozada authorized the use of lethal force on a civilian population. But this was not an isolated incident. In fact, as Mr. Rojas pointed out, during the fourteen months of Sanchez de Lozada's second term, 150 were killed due to excessive use of force- almost as many as during the entire bloody Banzer dictatorship.
Bolivia is a democracy. After Sanchez de Lozada fled, his vice president, Carlos Mesa, stepped into office. In 2004, during Mesa's presidency, the authorization for a "Trial of Responsibility" came from the Bolivian National Congress. 2/3 of the members of both houses, many allied with Sanchez de Lozada or in his own party, voted to approve this. Further, the then Supreme Court in Bolivia, again having largely been appointed by Sanchez de Lozada or other party members, also ratified this decision. It was no political vendetta. Rather, it was the result of the evidence uncovered.
All of this took place before Evo Morales was elected president.
Like the father of that little girl who was killed, the civil parties to the case have all along asked only for a broad, transparent, and thorough investigation to determine who should be held accountable...no matter what their position in society. To this end, politicians from Sanchez de Lozada's government, syndicate leaders, military leaders, and even Evo Morales himself...everyone except Sanchez de Lozada and his two ex-ministers who are also hiding here in the U.S...all others have submitted themselves to the legally constituted Bolivian authorities. Sanchez de Lozada has never presented himself for questioning.
Along with numerous ex-ministers, Sanchez de Lozada has been indicted and needs to return to his country to stand trial. The attorney general in Bolivia has taken testimony from some twelve former ministers who have explicitly blamed Sanchez de Lozada for the decisions that lead to the October 2003 massacre.
As Sanchez de Lozada has used his political connections during the Bush presidency to turn a deaf ear to the requests that he go home and participate in the judicial process in his country, the Bolivian government finally made a formal request for his extradition in November, 2008. There is a trial date set for May, 2009. The current Morales government has guaranteed full protection for Sanchez de Lozada should he return for the trial.
So, I repeat. Sanchez de Lozada spinning himself as a victim of "political persecution" and manipulating his connections in the U.S. to elude the democratic judicial process in his own country is the height of impunity and "politics" in the worst sense. And Mr. Balcazar's dismissal of Mr. Rojas' testimony is inexcusable. There is NO REASON that Sanchez de Lozada should not be extradited to answer to the charges against him. If the tables were turned, would we as Americans not demand as much?
Ginny Dwyer