Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969–1976, Volume E–11, Part 2, Documents on South America, 1973–1976

59. Telegram 599 From the Embassy in Bolivia to the Department of State¹

La Paz, February 2, 1973, 1400Z.

599. Subj: Some Perspective on the Political Prisoner Issue.

1. As recent reporting has shown, the Government of Bolivia has come under increasing domestic political pressure and criticism for its handling of political prisoners. In addition, the Mary Harding case (often inaccurately reported) and a recent statement on violence by a group of clergymen has brought this issue to such public attention internationally that Bolivia under the Banzer government may be increasingly viewed as a police state. An impartial perspective on this issue is therefore desirable at this time.

2. The accusation that Bolivia is a police state is far more a political slogan than a matter of fact. The GOB has in fact “declared war” on extremism, making no bones about it, and has in fact overreacted in its fear of the left and in its zeal to protect itself. Nevertheless, Bolivia today is not a country dominated by fear and oppression as sensational reporting and exaggerated rhetoric tend to portray. Freedom of expression (as exemplified by the current court maneuverings and by ample press coverage thereof, as well as of the political prisoners issue in general) is greater now than under the two previous regimes. Furthermore the level of violence, organized or unorganized, is far less and freedom from intimidation is far more. An impartial appraisal suggests that a small but vocal minority, which was unfortunately silent in the face of past abuses (nightly bombings, unexplained murders, intimidations through the media and by “demonstrators”, etc.) has chosen, because of political differences with the Banzer regime, and in some cases sincere but distorted ideas as to how social justice may be advanced, to exaggerate the abuses of the present.

3. With regard to political prisoners, the Banzer government is clearly in a dilemma and merits some sympathy as well as criticism. While there is no doubt that the Minister of Interior has been overzealous in making political arrests and often too slow in the processing of them as well as inept in his defense of his actions, neither is there any doubt that the hard core of political prisoners (which are the ones they seek to identify and hold) are dedicated to the overthrow of the government. They would presumably continue subversive activities if they were released within Bolivia and many would no doubt engage in terrorism. It is sad to note that violence, being deplored today by some in an indirect attack on the present government, is nonetheless implicitly accepted by many of these same people who have adopted the slogan “Justice Before Peace”.

3. The Department will recall that the GOB has in the past tried to solve its problem by exiling the political prisoners to other LA countries, but this effort largely failed as these countries have refused to accept more than just a token number. On the other hand, Bolivia does not have the resources, tradition nor capability to conduct orderly and fair trials, by international norms, of these prisoners. The legal system is wholly inadequate to the task. More than likely, such trials would become circuses and would bring even greater domestic and international discredit to Bolivia, as well as exacerbate political tensions within Bolivia. It is probable therefore that the GOB will continue arrests on the bases of evidence or denunciations, and will try to resolve the issue of guilt or innocence through indefinite jailing and interrogation rather than trial. As the Department is aware, a large number of people have passed through this process in the last year and a half. Best estimates today are that about 300 people remain jailed as political prisoners and past performance suggests that many of these will be freed as the result of the GOB’s procedures.

4. While what is going on in Bolivia today with regard to political prisoners does violence to our standards, it is nevertheless within the Bolivian tradition and is sanctioned by supreme decrees which are also within Bolivian traditions as the law of the land. It has been in part at least to change this tradition in favor of greater due process that some have recently raised their voices against violence. But progress, if any, in this regard must be tempered by the fact that Bolivia is an underdeveloped country in all respects and its political and legal institutions border on the primitive. Politics are played for keeps. The winners take the spoils and the losers pay the price of losing. The Banzer revolution was viewed by those who participated in it and who now carry it out as a fight to the death against extremism. Many on both sides lost their lives and many of those now in power suffered much and also recognize the consequences should they now lose out. President Banzer and other Bolivian leaders are, like their predecessors, typically Catholic Bolivian family men, who are seeking by their rights and in conformity with Bolivian standards and practice to govern this land and to solve its problems, including the political prisoner issue. With time they will find solutions as it obviously is not in their interest to see the problem continue with the degree of heat it has been generating.

Siracusa

1. Summary: Ambassador Siracusa argued that Bolivia was not a “police state” but had overreacted to the threat from the extreme left.

   Source: National Archives, RG 59, Central Files 1970–73, POL 29 BOL. Confidential. Repeated to Buenos Aires, Brasília, Asunción, Lima, Santiago, Rio de Janeiro, and USCINCSO for POLAD.