OBSERVARE

Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022)

THE DIRECTIONS OF MOVEMENT FOR SOCIALISM (MAS) IN BOLIVIA:

THE DIALOGUE BETWEEN FOREIGN POLICY AND DIPLOMACY

NATALIA CEPPI

natalia.ceppi@fcpolit.unr.edu.ar

PhD in International Relations from the National University of Rosario (Argentina). Master in

Integration and International Cooperation (CEI-CERIR-UNR). Degree in International Relations

(UNR). Deputy Researcher at the National Council for Scientific and Technical Research

(CONICET). Professor of Consular and Diplomatic Law, Bachelor’s Degree in International

Relations, Faculty of Politics and International Relations (UNR).

Abstract

Foreign policy and diplomacy are, within the framework of International Relations studies in

general, two categories that enjoy great prominence. In practical terms, they have a close,

symbiotic bond and even the idea persists that both mean the same thing. However, from a

theoretical-conceptual perspective, foreign policy broadly implies the objectives of the state

at the international level, while diplomacy reflects the means to achieve them. Based on this,

this paper seeks to identify and reflect on the central axes that crossed the dynamics of

Foreign Policy and Diplomacy of Bolivia during the three governments of Evo Morales (2006-

2019). Likewise, a brief projection is made on this very particular binomial after the return of

MAS to power, following the triumph of Luis Arce and David Choquehuanca on October 18,

2020.

Keywords

Bolivia, MAS, foreign policy, diplomacy, change/continuity

How to cite this article

Ceppi, Natalia (2021). The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia: The dialogue

between foreign policy and diplomacy. Janus.net, e-journal of international relations. Vol12,

Nº. 2, November 2021-April 2022. Consulted [online] on the date of the last visit,

https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.12.2.3

Article received on January 26, 202 and accepted for publication on March 24, 2021

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

THE DIRECTIONS OF MOVEMENT FOR SOCIALISM (MAS) IN

BOLIVIA: THE DIALOGUE BETWEEN FOREIGN POLICY

AND DIPLOMACY

NATALIA CEPPI

Introduction

The arrival of MAS to the presidency of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, after its first

presidential victory on December 18, 2005, constituted a fact of great impact beyond its

implications in the national reality. At the regional and extra-regional levels, the media,

academics, and policymakers closely followed the rise of the Evo Morales-Álvaro García

Linera formula. Such an expectation can be understood, among other things, from the

development of the electoral contest itself. In the collective imaginary, the 2005 elections

were not seen as just another suffrage, that is, as part of the intrinsic practice of the

democratic game, since these, for the first time since 1985, offered reliable possibilities

to put an end to the coalition governments that constituted the period of the so-called

Pacted Democracy

In this context, the triumph of MAS was an unprecedented event for several reasons. In

the first place, its access to power was given through obtaining an absolute majority of

the votes (53.74%), which had not happened since 1982. Secondly, MAS differed from

traditional political parties by being a political movement that represented and, at the

same time, articulated indigenous, peasant and trade union demands, whose identity

components were wielded around the strong leadership of Evo Morales (Mayorga, 2008,

2016). Thirdly, its government program was focused on the process of Refounding the

State, which, broadly speaking, implied disruptive policies not only at the domestic level,

but particularly in the external agenda and in the international linkage of the country.

For MAS, it was imperative to provide foreign policy and diplomacy with new contents

and structures by understanding them as the reflection of national identity, but also

because they would allow the satisfaction of certain political and economic interests.

Article translated by Hugo Alves.

The present work continues and deepens some lines of analysis that have been developed in previous

research instances within the framework of the National Research Council Scientific and Techniques

(CONICET).

Exeni Rodriguez (2016: 84-85) maintains that Agreed Democracy is "taxation" of the Pact for Democracy

as a post-electoral event of the 1985 elections where the Presidential election fell to Congress in the absence

of an absolute majority. By tradition, the first majority was ratified, but on that occasion, Hugo Banzer

Suárez, a former de facto president, and DNA candidate, was displaced by Víctor Paz Estenssoro of the

MNR. with the backing of his party and other forces Legislative. Two months later, ADN supported the

Executive in parliament, and they signed a governance pact. From there, the traditional parties (MNR, ADN

and MIR) were rotating in power thanks to the alliances made in the Legislative together with other minor

forces.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

This paper proposes to reflect on the central aspects that have marked the compass of

Bolivia's foreign policy and diplomacy during the three administrations of Evo Morales

(2006-2019). It also seeks to infer possible modes of action in the matter with respect

to the recent mandate of Luis Arce and David Choquehuanca, whose triumph in the

elections of October 18, 2020, gave way to the return of MAS to the executive branch

after the interim government of Jeanine Áñez. It is argued as a conjecture that, under

the leadership of Morales, the foreign policy and diplomatic actions of the Andean country

have been disruptive and marked by a rhetoric with a strong ideological component,

especially when compared to the governments that preceded MAS. In both cases, there

is a clear commitment to pragmatism to conquer and benefit from the political and

economic possibilities of the context, whether in the framework of bilateral relations or

in multilateral instances.

For the purposes of this study, a qualitative methodological design has been used with a

view to comprehensively characterize the core of the analysis. Being flexible and having

a holistic perspective, it approaches the object of study from the idea of unity, that is, as

a whole – and not as a sum of parts – so the focus is on the phenomenon and its context

(Taylor and Bogdan, 1987; Sautu, 2005; Hernández Sampieri, Fernández Collado and

Baptista Lucio, 2014). On the other hand, the empirical references come from official

documents, national regulations and specialized articles on the different edges that are

part of the research, using bibliographic and documentary searches as techniques for

collecting information.

In organizational terms, the analysis is presented in three sections. In the first one, a

brief presentation is made on the MAS government proposal at the domestic level and

then establish its connection regarding the external actions of the country. It should be

noted that the stay of MAS in the presidency of Bolivia throughout three consecutive

administrations aroused curiosity and interest on the academy, whose production has

put under the spotlight multiple aspects and dimensions that have been part of the

government plans of Evo Morales, both domestically and externally. In general, at the

domestic level, studies focused mainly on the relationship of MAS with social movements,

the territorial advance of the ruling party versus the decline of the opposition; the

demands of the indigenous-peasant collective and its proposal for change in the link

between the state, society, and market forces. Regarding the country's external actions,

much of the analysis has focused on the transformations that have been established since

2006 in the central guidelines and basic guiding principles of foreign policy, the agenda

items and in the regional and extra-regional links of an actor with little room for

maneuver in the international context (Fernández Saavedra, 2011; Canelas and Verdes

Montenegro, 2011; Trejos Rosero, 2012; Namihas, 2013; Olmos Castro, 2014; Ceppi,

2015, 2019; Querejazu Escobari, 2015; Souza, Cunha Filho and Santos, 2020; Ponce

Costa, 2020, etc.). This has had as a correlate, the enrichment of academic debates and,

at the same time, has contributed to strengthen the analysis of this process based on

two central notions in the international activity of states, such as foreign policy and

diplomacy. Both categories have a close relationship and great coupling, and it is common

that they are usually used as synonyms. However, for International Relations and

Diplomatic Law, they conceptually comprise different notions (Pérez Manzano, 1989;

Moreno Pino, 2001, Arredondo, 2016; Vilariño Pintos, 2016; Hocking, 2016). Foreign

policy represents the objectives and goals of the state in its international actions, while

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

diplomacy is an instrument – always peaceful – for the achievement of them (Arredondo,

2016: 8-10).

The second section identifies the most relevant aspects that have given content to the

foreign policy and diplomacy of the Morales governments. Bearing in mind that in the

foreign policy/diplomacy distinction, the former deals with the what (what goals or

objectives) and the latter with the how (the means or tools), the most significant

objectives of the period 2006-2019 are analyzed with their corresponding implementation

policies. The decision to approach them in a distinctive way – in conceptual terms, but at

the same time as a unit – contributes to deepen the theoretical analysis of each category.

At the same time, their treatment together makes it possible to have a sort of snapshot;

a more complete picture of the situation on the positions, decisions, and actions of

policymakers at the international level, considering the domestic and systemic situations.

Finally, in the third section, which works as a closing one, some aspects related to the

conduct that Luis Arce and David Choquehuanca intend – at least from the rhetoric – to

print to the foreign policy and diplomacy of the Andean country are outlined tentatively.

1. The starting point

The arrival of Evo Morales and Álvaro García Linera to the presidency can be synthetically

contextualized in a scenario that combined countless elements, many of them, opposed

to one another: great expectations, in particular, on the part of the indigenous-peasant

collective, political-institutional instability, and enormous challenges at the socio-political

and economic levels. The promises of growth, development, and well-being of the

governments of the Pacted Democracy – anchored in the implementation of orthodox

economic programs – lacked correlation in the actions. At the beginning of this century,

recession, poverty, and inequality had become a profound structural problem and,

consequently, the leitmotiv of the demands for change versus continuity of a large part

of the population

. Popular discontent was channeled into events such as the Water War

(2000), the Gas War (2003), the resignation of Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada in October

2003 and multiple citizen and peasant protests that had social movements as main

protagonists. Those made more evident not only the erosion of the traditional political

parties, but also a determining factor in the triumph of MAS. According to Zuazo (2010),

MAS has resulted from the expansion of democracy during 1982-2000 but, at the same

time, it has been a consequence of its deep crisis. It was born by the decision of the

peasant social organizations to have a political instrument, which was later extended to

the cities, generating because of its triumph in 2005 the transition to an "urban party",

with an overwhelming leadership of Morales as President and head of the party.

For MAS, the two decades of Pacted Democracy had generated a weak, porous state,

whose roles and functions were restricted to favor transnational capital and the

conservative groups that had traditionally governed the country (MAS-IPSP Government

Program, 2005: 10). Faced with this, Evo Morales understood that the refoundation of

According to Bolivia’s Social and Economic Policy Analysis Unit (UDAPE), in 2000, moderate poverty reached

66.4% of the population; extreme poverty accounted for 45.3% and the Gini Coefficient was 0.66. Statistics

Dossier Number 30. Available at

https://www.udape.gob.bo/portales_html/dossierweb2020/htms/dossier30.html.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

the social pact required the existence of a state that had a strong presence in the

domestic sphere and in the external agenda to establish multidimensional changes, in

accordance with his campaign proposal. The guiding principles of action – which were

subsequently renewed in the following mandates – were presented in the National

Development Plan of 2006, as a comprehensive strategy, aimed at the construction of a

Dignified, Democratic, Productive and Sovereign Bolivia to Live Well (National

Development Plan, 2006). In general, it implied the implementation of measures aimed

at redefining the state-market and state-society link, rescuing, and incorporating the

worldview of the peasant indigenous peoples. For its part, Vivir Bien

is a philosophy, an

ancestral paradigm conceived in interculturality; "an alternative civilizational and cultural

horizon to capitalism and modernity", which is understood and achieved practically and

collectively by integrating the social, cultural, political, environmental, and economic

dimensions (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia, 2014: 60).

In fact, MAS proposal for changing has rested on the construction of an active state – in

this case, in its plurinational version – (Cordero Ponce, 2012), based on the ideals of

national development, social reformism and more inclusive forms of participation and

representation. At the domestic level, this process has been cemented through:

a) The nationalizations and renegotiations of contracts in strategic sectors, such as

hydrocarbons (Supreme Decree 28, 701, 2006), mining [Huanuni, the most

important tin mine in the country (2006)], telecommunications [ENTEL company

(2006)], metallurgy [Vinto company (2007)], fuel [Air BP (2009)], electricity [Corani,

Guarachi, Valle Hermoso and the electricity distributor of Cochabamba (2010)],

smelting [the Vinto antimony plant (2010)], and airport services [SABSA (2013)-

(CELAG, 2019)];

(b) The promulgation of a new National Constitution (2009), which, among other things,

is based on the expansion of citizenship rights with the recognition of the rights of

indigenous peasant communities, such as autonomies, intercultural democracy, and

the formation of Bolivia as a plurinational state (Cordero Ponce, 2012);

conditional cash transfer programs in health, education, the elderly, and pregnancy.

At the end of Morales' third term, in 2018, 51.2% of the total population was a

beneficiary of some social bonus (Ministry of Economy and Public Finance of Bolivia,

2019). This generated a virtuous circle with respect to social indicators since poverty

– both moderate and extreme – and inequality had a clear downward behavior in the

period 2005-2018. Moderate poverty went from 60.6% to 34.6%; the extreme kind

from 38.2% to 15.2% and the Gini Coefficient from 0.60 to 0.46 (Ministry of Economy

and Public Finance of Bolivia, 2019: 196-197).

However, for the Refoundation of the State to be understood in a comprehensive and

conclusive way – "total refoundation", according to the MAS position – the foreign policy,

diplomacy and international relations of the country must, by extension, have

differentiating features from the governments of the Pacted Democracy.

On the analysis of Vivir Bien in Bolivia, it is recommended to consult Martínez (2016).

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

Now, what is meant by foreign policy and diplomacy? Returning to the initial proposal of

this work, where these categories are observed in terms of unity, but at the same time

they are conceptually differentiated, foreign policy comprises, following the ideas of

Hermann (1990), a program – a plan that is elaborated from the executive power for the

achievement of goals to be accomplished at the international level. In this sense, foreign

policy, as stated by Wilhelmy (1991), Lasagna (1996), Milani and Pinheiro (2013), Busso

(2016, 2019) and Míguez (2017, 2020), among others, is inscribed as public policy, that

is, as the set of objectives and actions carried out by a government in the face of

problems – or could be added, issues in general – that at a certain moment arouse

interest on the part of the government itself as well as other actors, among them, the

citizens (Tamayo Sáez, 1997). This implies, according to the analysis of Oszlak and

O'Donnell (1976), a position taken by the state, which is concretized in decisions that are

not necessarily expressed in formal acts, aimed at resolving that question that arises.

Being a mode of intervention where the decisions or perspectives of various actors are

included, this "position taking does not have to be univocal, homogeneous or permanent"

(Oszlak and O'Donnell, 1976: 21). This results in three important elements to take into

account: 1- that predominant position that concerns other sectors of society, develops in

a specific historical context and moment; 2- when several actors coexist in the fixation

of the position, sometimes, the decisions can be contradictory and/or conflictive and 3-

the taking of position can be active or by omission, both being a way of dealing with the

agenda item (Oszlak and O'Donnell, 1976: 21-23).

The particularity of foreign policy lies in the fact that when the state adopts positions in

the face of problems of interest, a constant interaction between the domestic and

external planes is observed (Busso, 2019, Míguez, 2020). In the words of Wilhelmy

(1991: 177), the specificity of the international problem generates that foreign policy

objectives are identified from the incidence of the influences that come from the political

system, domestic considerations of politics and from the significance of the actors and

the international environment.

Therefore, while foreign policy sets and decides the guidelines for action – mediate or

immediate – by a state, diplomacy is a way of executing, always peacefully, that foreign

policy (objectives and agenda items) that has previously been decided. That said,

diplomacy is essentially a tool or an instrument at the service of foreign policy (Vilariño

Pintos, 2016: 75). For Vilariño Pintos (2016: 75-76),"diplomacy is not an end, but a

means; not a purpose, but a method". This implies understanding, according to the

author, that foreign policy has a substantive character and diplomacy an adjective

character, generating that they are – according to the neologism he uses – of an order

that is “completive”, since diplomacy does not have an existence separate from foreign

policy.

Considering that in the construction of the objectives and agenda items that mobilize the

international action of the states, there are factors of a domestic and systematic order,

foreign policy, in its condition of public policy, is not something static or unalterable. On

the contrary, the coexistence between change and continuity is a recurring pattern when

it is put under analysis. In this sense, the foreign policy of MAS is no exception, since

throughout the three administrations of Morales, in terms of Lasagna (1995), the

presence of traditional and contingent criteria emerges. The former alludes to aspects or

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

guidelines that are part of the assembly of a country's foreign policy, regardless of

changes in government; being in the case study, the defense of democracy, sovereignty,

and human rights; non-interference in the internal affairs of other states, the peaceful

resolution of conflicts and the claim for sovereign access to the sea in the face of their

dispute with Chile. On the other hand, the latter responds to conjunctural questions by

understanding the inclinations or preferences of the government of the day and the

"inputs it receives from abroad" (Lasagna, 1995: 390-391). When applied to Bolivian

foreign policy, the contingent criteria are unfailingly associated with the process of

Refoundation of the State; the idea of rupture and the need to establish a paradigm shift

in international relations. According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the governments

that preceded MAS shared a foreign policy whose objectives were marked by the political-

ideological dependence of the United States of America, the fulfillment of the orthodox

postulates of the international financial organizations and the obtaining of benefits for

the ruling elites and the business sector (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia, 2014).

Faced with this, the Morales administration set out to provide foreign policy with a new

doctrinal structure in accordance with the redefinition of the state's ties with the market

and society and the principles held in partisan terms.

In discursive terms, the former president opted for a rhetoric that was more radical than

moderate, with a marked counter-hegemonic stance, very critical of capitalism in general

and neoliberalism and a defender of Vivir Bien and the principles upheld by the indigenous

peasant collective. This was reflected in the habitual use of the idea of "us-others" within

the United Nations. Consequently, the “we” (the indigenous, peasants and social

movements; the developing countries victims of capitalism and colonialism and the

governments that seek a more just and equitable world) and the “others” [the pro-

capitalist countries – USA – transnational corporations and international financial

organizations (Olmos Castro, 2014)], have had a leading place in the dichotomous

worldview of Morales as a leader, but also in the design of foreign policy and the so-

called People's Diplomacy

This new paradigm was the framework of Bolivian foreign policy between 2006 and 2019,

which was especially focused on the treatment of the following macro-objectives: 1) the

maritime claim, 2) the establishment of complementary, diversified and less asymmetric

external relations and 3) the revaluation of national identity. Next, each of them was

developed, also considering the diplomatic actions – as tools – that were implemented

with a view to concretizing them. As Wilhelmy (1991: 179-180) puts it, the instrument

– in this case, diplomacy – is at the service of the objective and "a repertoire of

instruments must be adapted to each constellation of interests and objectives; the

calculation of this adequacy constitutes one of the central tasks of the governmental

actor in foreign policy".

According to MAS, the “Diplomacy of the Peoples” is based on “Living Well” as a philosophical paradigm of

the Andean indigenous peoples and it can be understood as one of the pillars of the foreign policy of the

period, being this one in charge of fulfilling the established management objectives. It is clear from the

official documents that it is a new way of carrying out a foreign policy whose principles, objectives, and

interests, differ widely with the past. Its central characteristics are the broadening of the idea of

international relations, that is, there is talk of linkage not only between states, but between peoples and/or

nations; social movements have an important role, especially in political forums; promotion participatory

democracy and the construction of solidary, complementary, and cooperative relations (Ministry of Foreign

Affairs of Bolivia, 2014: 111-112).

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

2.1. Maritime demand vis-à-vis Chile

Unlike the other objectives of the external agenda, the demand for sovereign access to

the Pacific Ocean has been a constant in Bolivian foreign policy beyond the changes of

government. Since the signing of the Treaty of Peace and Friendship in 1904, contacts

with Chile have gone through various conflictive situations – including the rupture of

diplomatic relations in 1978 – in the face of the existence of diametrically opposed

positions: for Chile, the territorial issues were settled at the beginning of the 20

century,

while, for Bolivia, sovereign access to the sea still constitutes a pending claim.

Seeking to obtain some kind of progress in the matter, Evo Morales bet on the dialogue

with the first government of Michelle Bachelet (2006-2010) and both agreed on the need

to renew the spirit of the bond between the two countries by signing the Agenda of the

13 points or “agenda without exclusions”, where the treatment of the maritime issue was

incorporated. At that time, diplomatic efforts were concentrated at the bilateral level with

the aim of improving the quality of interstate dialogue and from there delving into the

possibility of finding a "face-to-face" agreement on the matter (CorreaVera and García

Pinzón, 2013: 96). The meetings between Bolivian and Chilean officials were held

annually and were in line with the process of rebuilding trust proposed by the then

presidents. However, with the beginning of the government of Sebastián Pinera (2010-

2014), the dialogue between the foreign ministries of Bolivia and Chile was gradually set

aside, with crossed accusations about the responsibility of what happened, evidencing

that the talks could never overcome the formal aspect due to the lack of mobility in the

position traditionally held by each actor.

Towards this situation, Morales decided to establish changes in the actions of diplomacy

in face of this historical claim. The first measure was presented in the creation of the

Strategic Directorate of Maritime Reclamation (DIREMAR) within the ministry of foreign

affairs, assigning it the tasks of planning, developing, and implementing everything

related to the maritime issue. The second measure was reflected in the judicialization of

the lawsuit before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on April 24, 2013, under the

American Treaty of Peaceful Solutions of 1948, known as the Pact of Bogotá

(International Court of Justice, 2013). However, the turn in tactics (diplomatic action)

was not only evident in the abandonment of the bilateral level, but also in the axis of the

claim since the demand did not focus on the direct denunciation of the Treaty of 1904 –

as had happened other times – but on the alleged breach by Chile in its obligation to

negotiate a sovereign exit to the Pacific. For the Bolivian foreign ministry, this obligation

was based on a set of events, such as unilateral declarations, diplomatic exchanges,

bilateral agreements and diplomatic declarations and interactions within the framework

of the Organization of American States (OAS), which followed independently of the 1904

Treaty (International Court of Justice, 2013; Ceppi, 2019). Besides, Evo Morales took

advantage of the opening sessions of the UN General Assembly to promote the Bolivian

cause, raise its profile to the maximum and, at the same time, seek international support,

appealing to issues such as Chile's lack of understanding in the face of a 'just and

inalienable' claim; the importance of the peaceful settlement of disputes, especially

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

between neighboring countries, and the recommendations made by world leaders for the

two states to work on finding a solution for that conflict

Once the written and oral phases established in the regulatory procedure were carried

out, the ICJ issued its judgment – binding and unappealable to the parties – on October

1, 2018. By 12 votes in favor and 3 against, the international court completely dismissed

the Bolivian lawsuit by rejecting each of the legal instruments on which Andean diplomacy

had built its claim (International Court of Justice, 2018). Beyond the legal evaluations

that may be carried out, the ICJ pronouncement implied, from the perspective of Bolivia's

international relations, the end of the judicialization of the claim as a diplomatic action

and, consequently, the need to rethink in the future new mechanisms for the treatment

of this problem. As González Vega (2019: 86) summarizes, "the Court did not [see] in

any of the documents, of the long payroll provided by Bolivia, nothing more than mere

political commitments, unfeasible to establish a legal obligation in charge of Chile" (...)

"The closure of the judicial procedure has meant a defeat – almost without palliatives –

for [Bolivia's] claims, given the tenor of the arguments developed by the Court. However,

the disagreements between neighboring countries do not end with this" (González Vega

(2019: 97).

2.2. External relations: new approaches, new media?

According to the ministry of foreign affairs of Bolivia (2014), Vivir Bien translates, among

other issues, in the field of foreign policy, the construction of new forms of linkage based

on cooperation, complementation and the reduction of asymmetries with a view to

strengthening the regional and extra-regional positioning of the country. Seeking to get

closer to this objective, Bolivian diplomacy provided different instruments at the

multilateral and bilateral levels of the external agenda. At the multilateral level, regional

integration occupied a prominent place throughout the three Morales administrations

since "no country alone can meet its needs and solve its problems" (National

Development Plan, 2006: 239). However, for MAS, traditional integration schemes,

focused on economic-trade liberalization, such as the Andean Community of Nations

(CAN) or the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), had as a critical point the lack of

construction of a broader agenda that included addressing social, political, cultural, and

environmental problems. Integration policies should have a 'holistic' perspective that

would allow the development of relationships whose orientation rested on the principles

mentioned above.

Faced with this new perspective, the schemes of cooperation and concertation that

emerged in the light of the so-called “post-liberal regionalism” (da Motta and Ríos, 2007;

Sanahuja, 2012), were the means through which the Bolivian government sought to

channel much of its interests with Latin American peers regarding the political dimension.

The dynamics of regionalism were not left out of the process of ascent that, from the

present century, progressive governments had

. They not only questioned the idea of

It is recommended to consult the speeches of the former president in the UN digital library. Available at

https://digitallibrary.un.org/search?ln=es&cc=Speeches

As Svampa expresses (2017), with this generic category covering different policy and ideological trends, it

alludes to the change of era that crossed much of the South American continent between 2000 and 2015.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

open regionalism, that is, that regionalism that prevailed between 1990 and 2005, based

mainly on trade where integration was directly associated with the liberal policies of the

Washington Consensus, but also led to its redefinition (Sanahuja, 2012). Consequently,

regionalism was thought in a post-liberal key, giving rise to structures such as the

Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America-Peoples Trade Treaty (ALBA-TCP), or

the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR). Despite their specific features, they

were characterized, in general, by attaching importance to political and social issues,

appeal to South-South cooperation, reject orthodox economic policies and promote a

state more present in the different dimensions of the national agenda (Sanahuja, 2012).

MAS found in these mechanisms, on the one hand, spaces for dialogue, sometimes more

ideologized, as is the case of ALBA-TCP and, on the other hand, platforms for the

generation of agreements of various kinds, as well as the minimization of conflicts

(Agramont Lechín, 2010). Taking the ideas of Diamint (2013: 64), these schemes

, did

not know the commercial plane; rather than that, they were conceived as primarily

political and non-economic agreements, where the consequences of "political

intertwining" extended to the economic field, contrary to the proposal offered by a

process of classic trade liberalization. Bolivia's presence within the framework of ALBA-

TCP is an example of this statement. The Andean country benefited from the sending of

various social missions in the fields of health and education, that were supported by

economic contributions (Venezuela) and human resources [Cuba (Ceppi, 2015]. It was

also the recipient of donations, tariff reduction in trade agreements and reimbursable

credits for infrastructure works (Vergara Toro, 2016). It should be noted that a large part

of these funds was received directly from the Venezuelan embassy in La Paz, so the

amount of money sent is not known exactly as the true destinations of the same (Vergara

Toro, 2016: 77).

The promotion of an integration with a political nuance did not imply the loss of interest

in traditional commercial schemes. Bolivia did not abandon the CAN and signed in 2012

– coinciding with the decline of ALBA – the protocol of accession to MERCOSUR as a

member state, seeking to overcome its status as an associate

. In short, Morales leaned

firmly towards multilateralism and integration, either in its “open regionalism” version –

where the economic prevails – or the “21

century version”, typical of the progressive

cycle that mostly passed through the South American space between 2000 and 2015.

Consequently, about regionalism, MAS appealed to dual-member diplomacy, which

contributed to diversifying the foreign policy agenda, strengthened Bolivia's visibility in

the regional context and energized, in general terms, contact with peers, especially with

those who were in the same ideological harmony.

At the bilateral level, diplomacy broadened the horizon of inter-state dialogue to reach

agreements on various issues, some of them still old, others with a propositional

character. The renegotiation of energy contracts with Argentina and Brazil after the

nationalization of YPFB in 2006, the final border demarcation with Paraguay, product of

the Chaco War in 2009; the signing of a supplementary protocol to the International

Labour Organizaion Conventions (1992) in 2010 and then the ILO Declaration with Peru

In her work, the author focuses on ALBA-TCP and UNASUR.

This process has not yet materialized.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

in 2019; the renewal of memorandums of understanding with the EU on cooperation

;

the establishment of diplomatic relations with Iran in 2007 and the updating of ties with

China and Russia reflect the role of diplomacy as the executing arm of a diversified and

pragmatic foreign policy (ministry of foreign affairs of Bolivia, 2014; announcement of

the government of Peru, 2019).

At the extra-regional level, ties with China and the USA deserve special consideration.

For its part, the Asian country had a vertiginous rise in the Bolivian external agenda

thanks to trade complementarity – export of raw materials and import of value-added

products – and the economic and political aid that has been framed as part of South-

South cooperation (Hedrich, 2016). Taking advantage of Morales' anti-imperialist and

counter-hegemonic rhetoric, China has provided loans and investments and acquired

large volumes of products such as lithium, silver, tin, lead, refined copper, quinoa, and

sesame seeds, among others. However, being an asymmetrical link, the Chinese action

is responsible for determining, according to its interests, in what and how to forge

bilateral agreements. In this sense, in terms of results, the compromise with China –

which here is understood as a receptive diplomacy – would be far from fulfilling the

objective of generating complementary and more balanced relations.

As for the link with the USA, the Morales government opted for a diplomacy of retreat.

In the political arena, the relationship was characterized by tension and cooling.

Ideological differences, especially during the Trump administration, rapprochement with

Russia, China, and Iran; support for Venezuela; the expulsion in 2008 of the then USA

ambassador, Philip Goldberg, accused of conspiring against the Morales government, and

the suspension of the activities of the DEA and USAID in Bolivian territory, undermined

the possibilities of building high-level contacts.

2.3. Bolivian identity to the world

Cultural diversity, as one of the basic features of the country, implied, at the level of the

MAS foreign policy, the international promotion of a large part of the causes that make

up the demands of the indigenous peasant collective. To this end, Bolivian diplomacy

firmly bet on multilateral spaces, especially the UN, either by establishing a position on

certain issues, or by taking the initiative with respect to the actions to be followed. In his

years as president, Morales concentrated on:

(a) The defense and promotion of the rights of indigenous peoples (self-determination;

the possibility of living in community; respect for customs and traditions; recognition

of autonomy, etc.). Bolivia accompanied, together with other Latin American states,

the initiative to have a declaration by the organization as a tool that would contribute

to the process of reparation of those communities that were victims of the policies

of colonialism. Finally, on 13 September 2007, the UN Declaration on the Rights of

Indigenous Peoples was adopted by the general assembly with 144 votes in favour

Bolivia and the EU have been pursuing their relations since 1995, especially in cooperation. It is the main

recipient of EU bilateral development aid in Latin America, with a budget of 281 million euros for the period

2014-2020. Source: EU Delegation to Bolivia. In: https://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/bolivia/966/bolivia-

y-la-ue_es.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

and 4 against. In November of that same year, it acquired legal force in Bolivia when

it was elevated to the rank of law.

b) The defense of the coca leaf as a symbol of Andean culture. According to Morales,

the criminalization of the coca leaf constitutes a historical injustice by being directly

associated with drug trafficking. "I mean it's the green coca leaf, not the white one.

This coca leaf represents the Andean culture, the environment, and the hope of the

peoples. It is not possible for the coca leaf to be legal for Coca-Cola and illegal for

other types of medicinal consumption in our country and throughout the world"

(Morales, 2006: 37). After several years of claims, the UN accepted in 2013 a

reservation of the Andean country to the Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961, in

which Bolivia is recognized the acullico (chewing of coca) as an ancestral practice,

as well as the consumption of the coca leaf for cultural and medicinal purposes and

its legal trade within the national territory

launched a global campaign against the participation of private companies in the

provision of services, including water. For MAS, they represent universal rights and

not a commodity, so it is the competence of the states and not of the private sector

to guarantee their access in a universal and equitable way

. At the V World Water

Forum (2009), at the initiative of Bolivian diplomacy, 25 countries signed a

declaration parallel to the official one, where access to water and sanitation were

considered fundamental human rights (Justo, 2013). A year later, the Bolivian state

bet more strongly on this request and requested – co-sponsored by 33 countries –

that the UN be promulgated in this regard. With 122 votes in favour and 41

abstentions, the general assembly recognized the right to safe drinking water and

sanitation as essential human rights per se and for the enjoyment of other human

rights.

(d) Natural resources and climate change. In 2007 Morales stated that, for the

indigenous movement, land was a sacred issue and therefore could not be turned

into a simple business or commodity. In this sense, the former president has been

an active actor in the promotion of the rights of Mother Earth and respect for the

bond between indigenous peasant communities and natural resources by maintaining

that capitalism is the cause of the process of environmental degradation and social

inequalities between and within countries. In the Bolivian case, this criticism

translates, in part, into the need for the state to regain prominence in the extractive

industries, seeking to reduce the asymmetries in terms of benefits compared to the

private sector. This claim had, like the issue of water, reception at the UN. On the

initiative of Andean diplomacy, April 22, 2009, was declared the International Day of

Mother Earth (UN general assembly, 2009). However, it is worth mentioning that this

issue, as the axis of public policy, has not been without tensions and contradictions.

The intensive exploitation of raw materials, particularly minerals and hydrocarbons,

Consult Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, as amended by the Protocol amending the Single

Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961. Available in:

https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-

18&chapter=6&clang=_en#EndDec

Just (2013) affirms, based on the position of the constitutional court of the country, that the look anti-

mercantilist it is a consequence of the events of the Water War in Cochabamba in 2000.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

has been one of the pillars on which MAS based its social and economic policies. In

the first decade of this century, coinciding with the boom in commodity prices,

Bolivia, like other South American neighbors, bet on mega-extractivism,"promoting

indiscriminate exploitation (...) with export objectives (Svampa, 2019: 70). Ties with

Argentina, Brazil and China are examples of such. This whole process has put in

check the basic principles of “Living Well”, among which the abandonment of

unlimited growth is promoted as part of the development and promotion of a more

sustainable and solidary economy. In parallel, it has generated numerous conflict

situations with indigenous and peasant communities because of the expansion of

extractive activity – or related projects – in their territories, being emblematic the

case of the Indigenous Territory and Isiboro-Sécure National Park (TIPNIS) (Svampa,

2019).

Finally, two events that are results of diplomatic work with a view to fulfilling the

revaluation of cultural identity as an objective stand out: the incorporation of the wiphala

– symbol of identification of the peasant indigenous peoples – in the acts of state,

together with the tricolor flag and, the curricular changes in the training granted by the

Bolivian foreign ministry to its officials. As an example, there is the teaching of the

Aymara language, the introduction of subjects such as decolonization and political

doctrines and the participation of the main indigenous social organizations in the training

carried out by the diplomatic academy (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia, 2014).

3. Áñez, the return of MAS and the memory of Morales

Throughout his three administrations, Morales gave a hallmark to Bolivian foreign policy

and diplomacy. As noted at the beginning of this work, both were disruptive, but

especially pragmatic. Disruptive by the doctrinal scaffolding and sustained actions,

especially contrasting them with the nineties; pragmatic, because they were designed in

the search for political and economic functionality, sometimes more of a partisan nature

than as a government program. All this generated that the country had a great exposure

on the international stage, being understood as an unprecedented moment.

The wishes of a fourth term on the part of Morales and García Linera were truncated in

the face of the high degree of conflict that the country was going through, product of the

claims around the 2019 elections where the ruling party had obtained a new victory. Here

converged issues such as social polarization – those who supported the victory of MAS

and those who rejected it for forcing their candidacies through the judicial route – and

the denunciations of fraud by the OAS and the opposition parties. With no room for

manoeuvre, the presidential formula was forced to resign a month later at the request

made by the armed forces and other actors, such as the Central Obrera Bolivia (COB),

paradoxically, related to MAS.

Jeanine Áñez, opposition senator for UD, occupied the presidency on an interim basis,

after the resignations of the president of the senate and the first vice president of the

chamber of deputies, with the task of calling elections again. In her brief stay, she sought

to openly differentiate himself from the principles, postulates and political partners held

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

by the Bolivian foreign ministry between 2006 and 2019 (ministry of foreign affairs of

Bolivia, 2020). In general, she ordered a diplomacy of “reversal”, which was manifested

in actions such as the withdrawal of Bolivia from ALBA and UNASUR; the open questioning

of Venezuela, Cuba, and Iran; the request for membership of the Lima Group

and the

existence of winks for the recomposition of the relationship with the US. Nor did she

appeal to the Latin American approach – typical of MAS – by vehemently criticizing the

accompaniment and protection of Morales and members of his cabinet by the

governments of Argentina and Mexico

The instability of the national scenario and the impacts of Covid-19 were delaying the

holding of the presidential elections, which finally took place on October 18, 2020. With

55.11% of the votes, MAS returned to the Bolivian executive by the hand of two actors

already known to the citizens: Luis Arce, minister of economy during the Morales

administration and David Choquehuanca, in charge of the country's foreign relations until

2017 (Ceppi and Martínez, 2020).

The short time that has elapsed since the beginning of the new government allows, now,

to make only some projections about the future of Bolivian foreign policy and diplomacy.

From the government plan presented by Arce and Choquehuanca, it is inferred that

foreign policy will show lines of continuity with respect to that implemented by Morales

in terms of objectives and sustained postulates. Consequently, the rights of indigenous

peoples, the defense of water and the coca leaf, the processes of integration and the

maintenance of links with a focus on solidarity and cooperation, confirm, among others,

the issues around which diplomacy must be put into action. "Bolivia's foreign policy has

managed to place its own approaches on the international agenda (...) Its actions have

been based on the Diplomacy of the Peoples for Life, which constitutes a vision of

sovereign, proactive international relations with social participation (...) proposing

initiatives of global interest, in the struggle for a culture of life and peace, to Live Well,

and an international framework of solidarity, complementarity and strategic alliances

capable of contributing to the development of the country" (MAS-IPSP Government

Program, 2020: 45). Bolivia's return to ALBA-TCP, UNASUR and CELAC and the

reestablishment of relations with Iran and Venezuela – suspended by Áñez – show that

diplomacy would also be repeating the pattern of Morales' efforts.

However, it is important to consider that neither the actors nor the context (national,

regional, and international) are the same as in the period 2006-2019. Arce must

overcome multiple challenges both at the domestic level – reactivation of the economy,

social conflict, pandemic – and in the external agenda. His statements have emphasized

dialogue and consensus; elements that, it is assumed, would be the compass of the

country's international action, which would contribute to lowering the profile of opposition

and reactivity in the face of situations of dissent. In short, it is inferred, considering the

first measures of the current president in this brief period of management and the

This multilateral space Arose in 2017 to monitor the Venezuelan crisis, seeking to obtain a peaceful and

negotiated solution, in clear opposition to the actions of Nicolás Maduro. The Lima Declaration was signed

by Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, Peru,

and Venezuela (opposition). Bolivia joined during Jeanine's interin government Áñez resigned after the

return of the MAS.

Mexico granted political asylum, while in Argentina refugee status was processed.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

difficulties of the complex scenario created by Covid-19, that Bolivian diplomacy will

oscillate between marches and countermarches.

References

Arredondo, R. (2016). Derecho Diplomático y Consular. Abeledo Perrot, 220.

Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas (2009). Observaciones del Presidente de la

Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas sobre la proclamación del Día Internacional de

la Madre Tierra, 22 de abril [Accessed on: 13/12/2020] Available at

https://www.un.org/es/ga/president/63/statements/pga_proclam_motherearthday_apr

il222009.shtml

Busso, A., Actis, E., Lorenzini, M. E., Zelicovich, J., Fernández Alonso, J., Simonoff, A. &

Calderón, E. (2016). Modelos de desarrollo e inserción internacional: aportes para el

análisis de la política exterior argentina desde la redemocratización 1983-2011.

Busso, A. (2019). El vínculo entre los condicionantes internos y la política exterior.

Reflexiones sobre el caso argentino. Ciclos en la Historia, la Economía y la Sociedad,

(52), 3-32.

Canelas, M., & Verdes, F. (2011). La nueva política exterior boliviana (2005-2010): más

autonomía y nuevos desafíos. Ahora es cuándo, carajo, 239-266.

CELAG (2019). ¿Qué sería de Bolivia sin su política de nacionalizaciones? Unidad Debates

Económicos. La Paz [Accessed on: 15/11/2020] Available at https://www.celag.org/wp-

content/uploads/2019/05/Informe-CELAG_Que-sera-de-Bolivia-sin-su-poltica-de-

nacionalizaciones.pdf Ceppi, N. (2015). “Bolivia, el camino a la transformación: un

proceso de cambios, conflictos y tensiones sin resolver”. Leiras, S. (2017). América del

Sur en los comienzos del nuevo milenio: entre la continuidad y el cambio. Eudeba.

Ceppi, N. (2019). Bolivia y Chile ante la CIJ: punto final a la judicialización del reclamo

marítimo.

Ceppi, N., & Martínez, C. (2020). Bolivia: todo pasa, todo llega, todo acaba.: Las

elecciones presidenciales de 2020. El regreso del MAS. Perspectivas Revista de Ciencias

Sociales, (10), 63-75.

Correa Vera, L., & García Pinzón, V. (2013). Turbulencias desde el mar: Chile y Bolivia.

Si somos americanos, 13(1), 93-121.

Decreto Supremo 28.701 (2006). 1 de mayo. Héroes del Chaco. Gaceta Oficial del Estado

Plurinacional de Bolivia.

Diamint, R. (2013). Regionalismo y posicionamiento suramericano: UNASUR y

ALBA/Regionalism and South American orientation: UNASUR and ALBA. Revista CIDOB

d'afers internacionals, 55-79.

Exeni, J. L. (2016). Democracia (im)pactada. Coaliciones políticas en Bolivia 1985-2003.

La Paz: Plural Editores.

Fernández, G. S. (2011). “Continuidad y cambios en las relaciones exteriores de Bolivia”.

Decursos. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, Año XIII, (23) 115-140.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

Gobierno de Perú (2019). Comunicado del Gobierno de Perú. Declaración de Ilo [Accessed

on: 21/01/2021] Available at https://www.gob.pe/institucion/rree/noticias/29777-

declaracion-de-ilo

González Vega, J. A. (2019). En busca del esquivo mar: la controversia Bolivia-Chile ante

la Corte Internacional de Justicia. En busca del esquivo mar: la controversia Bolivia-Chile

ante la Corte Internacional de Justicia, 75-99.

Hedrich, M. (2016). Bolivia y China: oportunidades y riesgos de una relación

desequilibrada, Diálogo Político [Accessed on: 17/08/2021] Available at

https://dialogopolitico.org/actualidad/bolivia-y-china-oportunidades-y-riesgos-de-una-

relacion-desequilibrada/

Hermann, C. F. (1990). Changing course: when governments choose to redirect foreign

policy. International Studies Quarterly, 34(1), 3-21.

Hocking, B. (2016). “Diplomacy and Foreign Policy”. Constantinou, C. M., Kerr, P., &

Sharp, P. (Eds.). (2016). The SAGE handbook of diplomacy. Sage.

International Court of Justice (2013). Application Instituting Proceedings. Obligation to

negotiate access to the Pacific Ocean (Bolivia v. Chile), 24 de april [Accessed on:

11/09/2019] Available at https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/153/17338.pdf.

International Court of Justice (2018). Obligation to Negotiate Access to the Pacific Ocean

(Bolivia v. Chile). Summary of the Judgment, 1 de october. [Accessed on: 11/09/2019]

Available at https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/153/153-20181001-SUM-01-00-

EN.pdf

Justo, J. B. (2013). El derecho humano al agua y al saneamiento frente a los Objetivos

de Desarrollo del Milenio (ODM).

Lasagna, M. (1995). Las determinantes internas de la política exterior: un tema

descuidado en la teoría de la política exterior. Estudios Internacionales, 387-409.

Lasagna, M. (1996). Cambio institucional y política exterior: un modelo explicativo.

Revista CIDOB d'afers internacionals, 45-64.

Lechn, D. A. (2015). “Bolivia mira hacia el sur. El ingreso al Mercosur y la poltica exterior

de Evo Morales”. Nueva Sociedad, (259), 15.

Martínez, C. B. (2016). El vivir bien en el proyecto político del MAS en Bolivia (2006-

2015) (Bachelor's thesis, Facultad de Ciencia Política y Relaciones Internacionales).

Mayorga, F. (2008). “El gobierno de Evo Morales: cambio poltico y transición estatal en

Bolivia”. En Murakami, Y. (Ed.). (2008). Tendencias políticas actuales en los países

andinos (pp. 41-63). CIAS, Center for Integrated Area Studies, Kyoto University.

Mayorga, F. (2016). Bolivia: ciclo electoral 2014-2015 y mutaciones en el campo político.

Elecciones y legitimidad democrática en América Latina, 205-234.

Míguez, M. C. (2017). La política exterior del primer año del gobierno de Mauricio Macri:

¿Situación instrumental del Estado?. Revista Estado y Políticas Públicas, (8), 103-120.

Mguez, M. C. (2020). “Los factores internos de la poltica exterior. Hacia la

profundización de un debate en las Relaciones Internacionales latinomericanas”. En

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

Míguez, M. C. y Morgenfeld, L. (2020) Los condicionantes internos de la política exterior:

entramados de las relaciones internacionales y transnacionales. Buenos Aires:

TeseoPress, 21-74.

Milani, C. R., & Pinheiro, L. (2013). Política externa brasileira: os desafios de sua

caracterização como política pública. Contexto internacional, 35, 11-41.

Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas Públicas de Bolivia (2019). Memoria de la economía

boliviana 2018. La Paz.

Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia (2014). La

revolución democrática y cultural y su política exterior. Memoria 2006-2013. La Paz

[Accessed on: 13/09/2020] Available at

https://www.cancilleria.gob.bo/webmre/sites/default/files/Logros/1%20Memoria%20In

stitucional%202006-2013%20%281%29.pdf

Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia (2020). Memoria

institucional 2019-2020 [Accessed on: 11/01/2021] Available at

https://www.cancilleria.gob.bo/webmre/node/4038

Morales, Evo (2006). Discurso del Presidente de Bolivia en la Asamblea General de

Naciones Unidas [Accessed on: 13/01/2019] Available at

https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/583259?ln=es

Pino, I. M. (2001). La Diplomacia. Aspectos teóricos y prácticos de su ejercicio

profesional. México: SER-FCE.

Namihas, S. (2013). La demanda boliviana contra Chile ante la Corte Internacional de

Justicia de La Haya. Agenda Internacional, 20(31), 55-70.

Olmos, P. (2014). La construcción de un “nos-otros” en los relatos de Evo Morales ante

la organización de las Naciones Unidas. Perspectivas de la Comunicación, 7(2), 75-95.

Oszlak, O. y O’Donnell, G. (1976). Estado y políticas estatales en América Latina: hacia

una estrategia de investigación. Documento CEDES-CLACSO, (4), Buenos Aires.

Pérez, A. M. (1989). La diplomacia. Orientación vocacional y profesional. México:

Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.

Plan Nacional de Desarrollo (2006). Bolivia Digna, Soberana, Productiva y Democrática

para Vivir Bien: Lineamientos Estratégicos”, 2006-2011. Gaceta Oficial de Bolivia,

Decreto Supremo 29.272, La Paz [Accessed on: 11/08/2020] Available at

http://www.ademaf.gob.bo/normas/ds29272.pdf.

Ponce, S. C. (2012). Estados plurinacionales en Bolivia y Ecuador: Nuevas ciudadanías,

¿más democracia?. Nueva Sociedad, (240), 134.

Ponce Costas, V. L. (2020) La política exterior de Bolivia en el marco del proceso de

integración de UNASUR en el gobierno de Evo Morales Ayma (PhD thesis). [Accessed on:

13/08/2021] Available at https://repositorio.umsa.bo/handle/123456789/25814

Programa de gobierno MAS-IPSP (2005). Por una Bolivia Digna, Soberana y Productiva

para Vivir Bien [Accessed on: 13/12/2020] Available at

http://www.archivochile.com/Portada/bol_elecciones05/bolelecciones0009.pdf

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 12, Nº. 2 (November 2021-April 2022), pp. 28-45

The directions of movement for socialism (mas) in Bolivia:

The dialogue between foreign policy and diplomacy

Natalia Ceppi

Programa de gobierno MAS-IPSP (2020). Agenda del Pueblo para el Bicentenario y el

Vivir Bien [Accessed on: 03/01/2021] Available at

http://www.protagonistas.cm.org.bo/archivos/programas/Programa_Gobierno_MAS-

IPSP_EG_2020.pdf

Querejazu Escobari, A. (2015). "Indigenidad" in Bolivia's Foreign Policy During Evo

Morales' Government. Desafíos, 27(1), 159-184.

Roberto, H. S., Carlos, F. C., & Pilar, B. L. (2014). Metodología de la investigación 6ta

Edición. DR-D.-D. Lucio, Metodologia de la Investigacion Mexico DF: McGRAW-

HILL/INTERAMERICANA EDITORES, SA DE CV. (6)

Ruth, S. (2005). Todo es Teoría; Objetivos y métodos de investigación. Bs. As.: Lumiere.

Sanahuja, J. A. (2012). “Regionalismo post-liberal y multilateralismo en Sudamérica: El

caso de UNASUR”. En Serbn, A., Laneydi M., y Ramanzini Júnior, H. (2012), El

regionalismo “post–liberal” en América Latina y el Caribe: Nuevos actores, nuevos temas,

nuevos desafíos. Buenos Aires: CRIES, pp. 19-72.

Souza, A. L. C. F. D., Cunha, C. M., & Santos, V. (2020). Changes in the Foreign Policy

of Bolivia and Ecuador: Domestic and International Conditions. Brazilian Political Science

Review, 14.

Svampa, M. N. (2017). Cuatro claves para leer América Latina. Nueva sociedad.

Svampa, M. (2019). Las fronteras del neoextractivismo en América Latina: conflictos

socioambientales, giro ecoterritorial y nuevas dependencias (p. 144), Alemania: Bielefeld

Press Univesity.

Tamayo Sáez, M. (1997). “Análisis de las polticas públicas”. En Bañón, R., Carrillo E.

(1997). La nueva administración pública. Madrid: Alianza Editorial, pp. 281-312.

Taylor, S. J., & Bogdan, R. (1987). Introducción a los métodos cualitativos de

investigación (Vol. 1). Barcelona: Paidós.

Rosero, L. F. T. (2013). Ejes Articuladores del Discurso Internacional del Presidente del

Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia Evo Morales Ayma. Encrucijada Americana, 5(2), 43-53.

Veiga, P. D. M., & Rios, S. P. (2007). O regionalismo pós-liberal, na América do Sul:

origens, iniciativas e dilemas. Cepal.

Vergara Toro, M. A. (2016). Evolución de la cooperación de Venezuela con Ecuador y

Bolivia en el periodo 2006-2014 (Master's thesis, Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar, Sede

Ecuador).

Pintos, E. V. (2016). Curso de Derecho Diplomático y Consular. Madrid: Editorial Tecnos,

Quinta Edición.

Von Wolff, M. W. (1991). Los objetivos en la política exterior Latinoamericana. Estudios

Internacionales, 176-193.

Zuazo, M. (2010). Los movimientos sociales em el poder?. Revista Nueva Sociedad,

(227).