Gearóid Ó Colmáin Offical site of journalist Gearóid Ó Colmáin.

In this three-part series, I will expose the crimes of the Morales regime in Bolivia and show how he has been an asset of imperialism, rather than an opponent.

Part One: A Narco-trafficking environmentalist wages war on the working class.

The ousting of President Evo Morales of Bolivia on 10 November by the US-backed right-wing opposition is being described as a classic CIA coup. Given the immediate recognition of the interim government under Jeanine Añez Chávez, the regime change appears to be a victory for the Trump administration.

Addressing the Sao Paulo Forum, former Spanish Prime Minister José Luís Rodríguez Zapatero called it a “golpe de Estado”, a coup. The mainstream media has been divided on the issue. For example, some journalists in the Washington Post are calling it a coup and warning about the dangers of a far-right regime taking over the country. Other columnists disagree. But is it really a coup?

Evo Morales resigned as President; and, in order for his resignation to be legitimate, a majority of senators had to accept his resignation. But because he ordered all other MAS (Movement for Socialism) party members to resign, it means that his resignation has not been approved by the requisite protocol.

So, technically Morales could still be described as the president of Bolivia. Given the mass protests that were against him and the voting irregularities which he admitted existed, did Morales deliberately conspire to use this technicality in order to cling to power?

If Morales had really won the election, why did he resign? He says he resigned in order to avoid a bloodbath. But is that really credible? Morales is now calling upon his friend Pope Francis and the UN to mediate in the Bolivian crisis. As we will see in part 2, there is far more to the Vatican’s role in this affair than has been revealed to the English-speaking public.

But first, let us turn to the circumstances leading up to the regime change. Then we will look at troubling aspects of Bolivian labour history hitherto ignored or distorted by the bourgeois leftist press, before discussing the crimes of the Morales regime.

Morales did not oppose lithium deal with German company

Many journalists are pointing to the country’s vast resources of lithium as a possible reason for the coup. Bolivia has up to 70% of global reserves in lithium, which is needed for electric batteries. Defenders of Morales claim that he had refused to deal with foreign companies seeking to exploit the lithium reserves.

But the Government had already signed a deal with Germany’s ACI, in spite of major protests by workers, some of whom went on hunger strike, complaining about the lack of benefit to the local community.

Morales again said it was a plot by the opposition to discredit him before the elections. Morales clearly wanted to sell out the country’s resources to ACI. Therefore, the fact that the new US-backed regime has given the go-ahead to ACI is of no real significance.

Secret meetings before the coup

A few months before the coup, the head of the Bolivian military General William Kalimans met with the Cuban ambassador to Bolivia Carlos Raphael Zamora Rodríguez, whom his enemies call El Gallo, the rooster. What was the meeting about?

Zamora is considered to be one of the most distinguished and experienced Cuban ambassadors. A former senior official in the Cuban Directorate of Intelligence (DI), he presented his credentials to the Bolivian president on 8 March 2019. He served in the Cuban diplomatic mission to the UN in New York from 1974-77. But this information is curiously missing from his CV.

According to journalist Roxana Lizárraga, Zamora had meetings with Cocalero (coca-growers) unions in Chapare a few weeks before the coup, which she suggested was suspicious. Chapare is the main coca-growing region in Bolivia. While he was there he also met the director of the Organisation of American States Luis Almagro. Almagro is considered to be the most influential man in Latin America. He is also suspected by many to be a CIA operative. A former Minister of Foreign Affairs (2010-2015) for the Uruguayan Government, he was a key player in the executive committee which legalised drugs in Uruguay in 2013.

The legalisation of drugs is supported by billionaire financier and social engineer George Soros and other important oligarchs. As Almagro was an important mediator in the improvement of relations between Washington and Havana under President Obama, he probably knows Zamora well. But there is a strong suspicion that globalists, that is to say, officials linked to high finance and the United Nations, are pushing a pro-drug agenda. Cuba has been accused by the opposition to Morales of being involved in cocaine smuggling.

General Kaliman was a key player in the overthrow of Morales. He is a graduate of the notorious US School of the Americas which trained most right-wing military regimes in Latin America during the Cold War. According to Jep Sprague, up to 8 major Bolivian military personnel were trained there. But how is it possible that a supposedly “anti-imperialist” government would appoint officers to top positions who were trained by the United States?

It might seem obvious as to why the US would want to overthrow a socialist President in a Latin American country. Socialism and popular democracy threaten US corporate interests; Washington has a long history of overthrowing democratically-elected governments and replacing them with military dictatorships or unpopular capitalist regimes. But there is another angle to this story which has been completely ignored; one which concerns the nebulous past of Evo Morales and his links to US/Israeli interests.

What follows will not please many readers. It is not written for those who divide the world into good versus evil; rather, it is an attempt to uncover the truth about a crucial actor in Latin America’s so-called “pink tide”, new left regimes which have emerged in recent decades: President Evo Morales Ayma

Morales and the Cocaleros

When Evo Morales took over as General Secretary of the Cocalero (coca-growers) Union in Chapare in 1984, he began to sabotage efforts which were underway there to develop alternative agriculture to coca production. In fact, the Bolivian government was providing grants to poor peasants to grow other crops which would also help to feed the local population.

Morales became chairman the Six Federations of the Tropics of Cochabamba in 1996, and thus gained influence over the other important unions such as the Unified Syndicate Confederation of Rural Workers of Bolivia Confederación Sindical Única de Trabajadores Campesinos de Bolivia, CSUTCB).

Morales moved the organisation away from class struggle towards “indigenous rights.” But his principle agenda was to oppose efforts to eradicate coca production by claiming that it was part of local culture and tradition and therefore justified.

Farmers who obtained government grants for alternative crops received death threats from Morales’s henchmen. Far from the working class hero leftists like to see him as, many peasants in Chapare viewed him as an agent of narco-trafficking interests backed by the left-liberal wing of the US ruling élite.

According to journalist Jaime Bayly, Morales expanded the coca production in Chapare after taking power in 2006. 94% of coca grown there is processed into cocaine. Morales used tax-payers money to construct the cocaine laboratories. The cocaine is then sold to Mexican cartels, in particular, the Sinaloa cartel of the infamous Mexican drug lord Joaquin Guzman Loera alias El Chapo. Bayly also claims Morales sold drugs to Colombia’s Pablo Escobar in the 1980s.

In his documentary Dictatura Sindical, investigative journalist and Catholic priest Ricard Romero Cossio interviews several cocalero union leaders from the Chapare region. They speak about death threats to them and their families from Morales. They say he completely abolished freedom of speech in the unions and simply used them to gain power and prestige while masking a narco-trafficking agenda.

Cossio received death threats from the Bolivian regime and from the CIA after he released his film. He says the CIA and the US National Intelligence Agency are fully behind Morales.

Franklin Guttierez- the real leader of the Coca growers

The opposition from the Cocaleros to the Morales regime has been growing in recent years. Morales’s legalisation of the coca leaf crops in areas that had previously been used by the cocaine smugglers was opposed by Franklin Guttierez, the president of Departmental Association of Coca Producers. (Adepcoca). He, along with dozens more, was arrested in 2018 when the government sent the military to occupy their headquarters – a clearly illegal and undemocratic act.

The Bolivian government was recently asked by the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) in Vienna to produce a report on narcotics production and smuggling in Bolivia. According to Guttierez, the government took over Adepcoca so as to blame it for the smuggling when, in fact, it only supplies the internal, legal market for coca leaf.

In May 2018, the Chapare cocaleros decided to take political action: Guttierez announced he would be leading a new populist party to oppose Morales in the 2019 elections. His plans didn’t last long.

In August 2018, a police officer from the Rural Mobile Patrol Unit (Umapar) responsible for cocaine eradication, was killed in Chapare. Guttierez and his supporters were blamed for the murder. Guttierez is now in prison but has denied the charges against him and claims he was framed and is a political prisoner.

No proof or credible evidence has been produced to implicate Guttierez in the murder. Hundreds of other opponents of Morales cocaine operations have also been imprisoned. No international human rights organisations have shown interest in their plight — nor have any so-called “left-wing” supporters of Latin American socialism.

Once he had used the poor peasants to get himself installed as leader of the country in 2006, Morales proceeded to build “21st-century socialism” which was neither 21st century nor socialist. But that didn’t matter. He had many powerful supporters in the CIA-funded “left-wing” establishment in the West who wanted the class struggle to be subordinated to élite global governance agendas such as climate change, racism and gender confusionism.

When Unitel media attempted to air the dozens of interviews with labour leaders who denounced Morales, their headquarters in Yacbuiba were bombed. Documents apparently reveal that President Morales’ security personnel were involved. A local businessman claimed the Venezuelan embassy was also involved in the attack. It would be easy to dismiss such claims as anti-socialist propaganda if Morales was indeed a genuine socialist or opponent of globalism but there is scant evidence for that.

Morales’s war on co-operatives

Financial and industrial cooperatives had a major role in developing the country’s wealthiest province of Santa Cruz. Maintaining their independence is a key factor driving opposition to the government in that region. But cooperatives throughout the country have had conflicts with the Morales regime.

The government has come into conflict with the financial cooperatives since the creation of the Authority for the Supervision of the Financial System(ASFI) in 2008. This effectively amounted to a take-over of the cooperative system by the state, depriving workers of autonomy and effective wage-bargaining rights. Corruption in the ASFI has also resulted in the loss of low-income family’s savings. Again, no interest has been shown by the cheer-leaders of 21st-century socialism in any of this.

In spite of the fact that 10 times more mining cooperatives were formed in the first 7 years of the Morales government than the previous 7 years preceding his election in 2005, the increase was largely due to a significant rise in mineral prices. In an attempt to take over profitable cooperatives, Morales has been ruthless in crushing dissent.

In August 2016, 5 miners were shot dead by the army in Potosi after the government attempted to take over the mining cooperative. The miners kidnapped and murdered the Bolivian Deputy Interior Minister, Rodolfo Illanes.

“The miners, who work in co-operatives rather than for private companies, have been hit by the global commodities downturn and were demanding that the government relax environmental restrictions and increase subsidies.”

Environmental restrictions and a lack of government subsidies: this is the essence of élite-backed eco-socialism.

The international news reported extensively on the death of the politician but ignored the deaths of the desperately poor miners which had preceded it.

Conditions in the mines of Potosi are among the worst in the world and make a mockery of the idea that Bolivia is a “socialist” state.

We can get an idea of the anti-working class nature of the Morales regime by watching a September 2016 report on the murders of the miners by the liberal Real News Network. What is interesting about this report is that the American analyst from the Andean Information Network is ultimately defending the Morales government’s actions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0bQPkVjKiI

 The main reason for the conflict between the miners and the Bolivian government concerned the unreasonable environmental restrictions which government take-over of the sector would impose.

In order to please billionaires like Al Gore and his cronies, Bolivian workers are going to have to reduce their “carbon footprint”, thereby agreeing to have their wages reduced for the good of the planet.

To deflect attention from the fact that he is a puppet of globalist interests, Morales used the argument that they were not cooperatives but private businesses. He then suggested that oppositionists were using the mining conflict to stage a coup against him. But no evidence for such a coup was ever produced. The principle motivation for state control of the mining sector is compliance with international environmental regulations; it has nothing to do with improving the lives of the working class.

In the USSR during the Stalin period, miners earned the highest wages and were celebrated as the heroes of socialist revolution; in Morales Bolivia, they are shot dead and work in conditions which are far worse than other capitalist countries.

In the USSR, cooperatives had the full backing of the state. Machinery was provided by the state free of charge. That is how the USSR industrialised so quickly. In Bolivia, the state is a mafia which robs the workers of their livelihood.

Had the Morales regime made an offer to the workers they couldn’t refuse, there wouldn’t have been such violent opposition. The accusation that the workers cooperatives are private and therefore anti-working class, is a typical Trotskyite trope used to mask the bourgeois character of the Bolivian narco-state.

But the miners are not just a brutally repressed class; they are also spiritually enslaved by pagan beliefs: it is common for miners in some regions to pray to El Tío, the Devil to help them survive! The significance of this phenomenon will be explored in part three.

Operation Naked King

In September 2015, the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) filed an indictment against Evo Morales and several top Bolivian officials, including the father of Vice-President Álvaro Garcia Linera.

A secret operation against the Bolivian president codenamed Operation Naked King was led by Carlos Toro, the informant who had secured the arrest of Colombia’s Medelín Cartel leader Carlos Lehder in the 1980s and former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega.

Noriega had worked for the CIA. DEA officials have often complained about the CIA’s persistent blocking of their investigations. For example, during the Iran/Contra affair when a secret international organisation with its own army called the Enterprise was using cocaine to finance a covert war in Nicaragua, the DEA’s investigations were often blocked by the CIA.

Carlos Lehder himself accused élites in the United States of being the real power behind the global drug trade.

Colombia’s former President Andres Pastrana Arango has publicly accused Evo Morales of being behind the cocaine supply to Colombia. He says he is “absolutely sure” of Morales’ guilt. Pastrana had been an investigative journalist specialising in the drug trade before becoming president.

In 2011, Evo Morales said the DEA was trying to undermine his administration and expelled them from the country. If Morales had been put in power by the nacro-trafficking CIA, that is precisely what they would have wanted him to do.

Democracy Now! interviewed Evo Morales about the DEA indictments. His answer was that the US was using drugs as a pretext for imperialist control in Latin America.

That is, of course, partly true but it is unconvincing from a man whose policies have helped perpetuate the global drug epidemic. Had Morales mentioned secret societies in the United States such as Skull and Bones, founded in Yale University in 1832 by the drug-smuggling Russel Trust – one of the most powerful clubs in the United States — he might have been more convincing.

Not everyone in the US military-industrial complex is complicit in the drug trade. One must consider secret societies, masonic lodges, and corrupt banks who are often under investigation by US Federal agencies such as the DEA.

Israeli connections

Trained in infiltration and counter-intelligence the notorious School of the Americas, sociologist and politician Juan Ramón Quintana was one of the most important men in the Morales regime.

Quintana had been a top official in the Ministry of Defense in the neoliberal regimes of Hugo Banzar and Carlos Mesa. In 2008, he was accused of smuggling narcotics when 33 lorries were stopped by officials in Pando Department.

The smuggling was exposed by General López who is now calling for Quintana’s prosecution. President Morales refused to comment on the incident at the time. It was subsequently revealed that a close associate of Quintana and former lover of Morales, Gabriela Zapata had set up a secret organisation which used government agencies for extortion, blackmail and other criminal activities. Zapata apparently had a child with Morales which subsequently died, though no one knows for sure.

While she was sleeping with the “anti-Zionist” Morales, she was a representative for the Israeli power plant company Telemenia. She is currently in jail for corruption but her role as a conduit for Israeli intelligence operations should be questioned. How can one take Morales’s “anti-Zionism seriously when he his girlfriend was an Israeli spy?

To get a real insight into the enormity of the Morales deception, we need to examine some of the major crimes committed during his tenure which have been ignored or distorted by the progressive media.

2007 Cochabamba murders

When Morales took power in 2006, his support base was mainly in the Andean region of Al Alto. The Media Luna regions of Beni, Pando, Santa Cruz and Tarija were opposed to the new regime. It should be clarified here that these regions are mostly mestizo and not “white” as leftists like to claim.

In the Pando region, his MAS party did not have hegemony. Pando and other regions were demanding autonomy from the central government. Morales argued that autonomy would lead to the break up of the country. Pando had had a referendum on autonomy and lost. But Manfred Reyes, the Pando prefect, claimed Morales had manipulated the population by claiming they would need a passport to travel around the country. He called for a second referendum and had amassed a powerful civic movement.

On 11 January 2007, President Morales mobilised his supporters who entered the city, armed with sticks and stones. They attacked elected officials and burnt down government buildings, injuring hundreds of people.

Christian Urresti, a 17-year-old was beaten to death by the pro-Morales mob. His death, along with many of the other victims, was never investigated. Morales called the armed mob “peaceful protesters.”

Urresti’s death was filmed by a witness and handed to the local directorate of intelligence. The video subsequently disappeared and there was no further investigation.

One of the mercenaries sent into the city, a cocalero farmer, was also shot dead. His case was investigated and the murderer was given 14 years imprisonment.

2008 Porvenir massacre

In 2008, Bolivian television published secret documents signed by the General of the Armed Forces Freddy Mackey Peralto that proved the government had a military plan to take over the Panda region which was hostile to Morales.

The plan was called “Marcha hace el Oriente – March to the East”. The government would mobilise volunteers, mercenaries and social movements to drive oppositionists from the region. The report said that international support “respaldo international” was assured. Bolivian state media would cover the event and all other media were to be prevented from entering the region.

In a speech several weeks before the operation, Juan Ramon Quintana said the government was going to drive the Pando prefecture into the lowest levels of the earth — a clear declaration of war.

At 3 am on 11th September 2008 a group of pro-Morales mercenaries shot a truck driver outside Porvenir. Badly injured, he managed to get to a local hospital. By 6 am, locals had got wind of the thousands of mercenaries on their way to Porvenir. They dug trenches in the roads to stop their advance and attempted to persuade them to retreat.

Some of the pro-Morales campesinos wore green armbands so that the military could protect them during the altercations. Although locals had managed to stall their march to Porvenir from one direction, they were not prepared for the pincer movement operated by another group of mercenaries armed with tear gas and assault rifles.

What followed was a massacre, carried out by the Bolivian military and blamed on the victims. Between 12 and 20 civilians were killed.

There are two documentaries on the massacre: Morir en Pando (“To Die in Pando”) a government’s version of events, and Summamente Pando, by Ann TV, by far the most objective investigation. Wikipedia only tells the official story of the massacre.

The “international support” did not fail the Morales regime: the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) gave full backing to the Bolivian government’s version of events. In spite of extensive video evidence of armed campesinos attacking civilians, interviews with tortured hostages, including an elderly woman, and the documentary proof that the entire operation was planned by the government, the official view remains that the Panda prefecture, and not the Bolivian government was responsible for the massacre.

The Michael Dwyer murder

Many pro-Morales media outlets are talking about the supposed plot against Morales in 2009, in which Croatian fascists and an Irishman Michael Dwyer were attempting to assassinate the Bolivian president.

Dwyer met Hungarian Tibor Révész, a member of the Hungarian separatist Skzeler Legion in Romania while working as a security guard for the private firm Integrated Risk Security Services (I-RMS), protecting Shell Corporation in Mayo, Ireland.

He joined some of them on a trip to Bolivia in November 2008, apparently thinking he was going to take a course as a body-guard. He was joined by three colleagues from I-RMS Tibor Révész, Gábor Dudog and Ivan Pistovcak. He was filmed there practising at a shoot-out. One is not going to film oneself at shooting range in a country where one plans to assassinate the president. The video evidence, however, would serve to sell the story.

In Santa Cruz, he joined Eduardo Rósza-Flores, the son of a Hungarian Jew who had lived in Bolivia but had left after the Banzar dictatorship, eventually moving to Europe.

Rósza-Flores had been trained by the KGB during the Cold War, had served in Hungarian intelligence and worked as a journalist before joining Croatian separatists in the Balkan wars where he rose to the rank of Colonel. It is quite possible Rósza-Flores would have been known to the American ambassador to Bolivia (2006-2008) Philip Goldberg who had previously served in the Balkans when Rósza-Flores was a colonel in the NATO-backed Croatian army. Goldberg was expelled by Morales in September 2008 for allegedly interfering in Bolivia’s internal affairs.

It was clear Rósza-Flores was not in Bolivia for a holiday. He had admitted his willingness to engage in the “defence” of Santa Cruz, if the Morales regime used similar mob tactics to prevent their autonomy. However, no evidence has ever been produced to show a plot to assassinate Morales and the military police could easily have arrested Rósza-Flores and Dwyer and put them on trial.

Dwyer soon realised that the course he was supposed to be taking was not going to happen. While staying at Las America’s hotel in Santa Cruz, Bolivian Special Forces entered at 4 am on 16 April and shot him, Rósza-Flores and Hungarian Árpád Magyarosi.

His body was thrown on the back of a truck and displayed before the media cameras. The next day, the Irish media ran stories of a “neo-Nazi” who had attempted to assassinate the President of Bolivia. There was no evidence that Dwyer was part of a plot to kill Morales, nor that he was a member of a neo-Nazi group.

The Bolivian government claimed there had been a shoot-out between Dwyer and the military at the hotel. But an Irish investigation team showed that there had been no shoot-out. Dwyer had simply been assassinated. The Irish State-Pathologist also proved that his autopsy in Bolivia was incorrect.

Morales needed a plot against him, and it looks like Dwyer had been tricked into playing the role of the “fascist threat”.

In the RTE documentary Death of a Son: The Killing of Micheal Dwyer, the victim’s mother talks to a girlfriend he met while staying in Bolivia. Apparently, Dwyer should normally have been staying with her on the night he was shot. When his mother asks her if it was simply a coincidence that he was not with her that night, her body language is, in my view, strange.

For example, she cries a lot but one cannot see any tears. She also smiles when Mrs Dwyer asks her about the coincidence. Was it really a coincidence that she was not with him that night?

The RTE documentary fails to investigate a key suspect in the case: Hungarian Tibor Révész.

He had worked with Dywer for IRMS in Ireland. IRMS had been advertising advanced security training courses involving firearms. Révész had used Irish code names on a website in Hungary which was proposing the same kinds of courses while he was working for IRMS.

Revesz appears to have been the organiser of the operation in Santa Cruz. He introduced Dwyer to Rósza-Flores, then left, returning to Ireland to resume employment with IRMS. The company deleted many of its references to security training after the murder of Dwyer. Révész had been engaged in many illegal activities for the company before the Dwyer case. Residents in Mayo complained of being filmed and stalked by him in the local village.

Why did the Bolivian government not demand an investigation of IRMS? Why has it not managed to capture Révész? Is it because the IRMS operative did Morales a favour by providing him with the assassination plot he needed?

Those journalists in the so-called “alternative media” who have simply reproduced the mainstream media lies about the Dwyer case have not done any serious research. The Bolivian prosecutor in charge of the case resigned after it was revealed that evidence had been planted. Michael Dwyer’s family are calling for an independent investigation.

The Roger Pinto Murder

In 2011, senator Roger Pinto Molina accused Evo Morales, former anti-drugs chief René Sanabria, Juan Roman Quintana and vice-president Alvaro Marcelo Garcia of narcotrafficking.

Sanabria was arrested in Panama airport a few days later by the DEA. He admitted his guilt and was given a reduced sentence of 14 years imprisonment in exchange for collaborating further with the DEA investigation of President Morales.

After receiving death threats, Pinto sought refuge in the embassy of Brazil in La Paz. Afterwards, he escaped across the border to Brazil. On 16 August 2017, Pinto was killed in a plane crash. His family believe it was not an accident.

Although there are extensive articles covering this story in the Latin American press, the Wikipedia entry for Pinto completely ignores the story! It is well known that Wikipedia regularly censors information. Given the gravity of Pinto’s accusations against Morales, it seems censorship may be at play here.

Wikipedia was formed in 2000 by two American Jews Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger. Its censorship of “sensitive” information related to the criminal activities of international Zionism is well-documented, and, according to RT, Israel one of the most important international hubs for drug smuggling.

A BBC article on the case also fails to mention his accusations against Morales. Brazil’s foreign minister Antonio Patriota was forced to resign over the affair. The BBC article mentions that Pinto was wanted for corruption in Bolivia. He was also blamed for involvement in the Porvenir massacre, which we have shown was carried out by the Morales regime.

So, we are led to believe that a Brazilian ambassador would risk his career to save some insignificant crook on the run? The fact that Mr Pinto’s accusations against Morales are not mentioned in the BBC article is highly suspicious.

But the case against Morales gets worse. In February 2011, Morales’ former National Security Advisor René Sanabria Oropeza was arrested in Panama for selling cocaine. He was imprisoned in Miami. He told the Spanish press that he had the full backing of the Bolivian interior minister Llorenti Soliz.

The Left’s complicity in narco-terrorism

Leonardo Coutinho’s 2018 book Hugo Chávez, O Espectro: Como o presidente venezuelano alimentou o narcotráfico, financiou o terrorismo e promoveu a desordem global’ -The Chavez Illusion, how the Venezuelan President alimented narco-trafficking, financed terrorism and promoted global disorder, presents extremely troubling evidence that Venezuela, Bolivia and many other countries in the Latin American “new left” were involved in drug trafficking.

To date, there has been no response from the Venezuelan government to the allegations, no law-suits for defamation and no engagement either from any of the Chavista leftists in the so-called non-corporate media.

The book caused a furore in Bolivia when it was published. Much of the evidence being prepared against Morales by the interim Minister of the Interior Arturo Murillo is based on Coutinho’s book.

Argentinian investigative journalist Nicolás Márquez 2013 book El impostor: Evo Morales, de la Pachamama al Narco-Estado, Imposter: Evo Morales, from Pachamama to the Narco-State, has not been challenged by any of the fawning fans of Bolivia’s “first indigenous president”, who we will see later is neither Bolivian nor indigenous.

Not one of the Evo Morales’s defenders has investigated the serious accusations made in these books. Why is that? Could it be due to the fact that the accusations are true? Perhaps they think that if they ignore the claims, they will simply go away? Perhaps they are simply unaware that such books have been written. After all, the books do not appear to be translated into English and the US media have not reported on them. That is most likely due to the fact that the lords of the drug lords own the US media. Marquez’s book is published by the Inter-American Institute of Democracy, an élite and conservative Latin American foundation based in the United States. However, if it were financed by the oligarchs, the books would probably have been a New York Times bestseller. But most people have never heard of it.

Why has none of the leftist journalists covering the Bolivian crisis investigated the narco-trafficking allegations?  Is it because most of them favour the legalisation of drugs and consume drugs themselves? Cocaine is the drug of choice for wealthy élites in Western states, élites who are obsessed about the environment but less interested in the plight of the millions of poor families whose lives are ruined by narcotics. In my view, this hypocrisy and dishonesty pervade every school of leftism.

We have seen in this article that, far from being a working-class hero, Evo Morales appears to be élite-backed narco-trafficker working for globalist interests. But who are those globalists and why is the US government backing the coup if the CIA is propping up Morales? To answer this, we will need to take a deeper look at some of the operatives in the US media and NGO complex.

In part two, I discuss the role international NGOs and high-profile operatives have played in fabricating the Morales deception, and the importance of Pope Francis and the fake Catholic “progressives” in propping up Latin America’s “pink tide”. Part three will explain the ideological and strategic purpose Morales has played in Latin American globalisation and the direction the country is likely to take if the new regime succeeds in maintaining power.