LATIN AMERICA'S SEASON OF DISCONTENT

Bolivia's Chaos Reflects Larger Anger at U.S. Policy And IMF's
Prescriptions Mayhem in the streets of several Latin American cities,
including a virtual siege of Bolivia's pro-U.S. president by angry
protesters, shows that the region's disaffected are increasingly making
their voices heard. Like the so-called Arab street in the Middle East,
public protest in this impoverished region is growing more violent and
anti-American, and is starting to limit policy choices for regional leaders.

Wednesday, protests against President Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada spread
across Bolivia, as army troops tried to stop thousands of miners armed with
dynamite from entering the capital. Media reports said troops killed two of
the miners, adding to a grim tally of at least 53 dead in the weekslong
uprising.

The protests began against government plans -- since put on hold -- to
export natural gas to the U.S. But they have evolved into a locus for
widespread dissatisfaction with the government's pro-U.S. policies,
including the eradication of coca plantations as part of Washington's war
on drugs , and the adoption of economic policies prescribed by the
International Monetary Fund.

"People have had it," says Kathryn Ledebur, a U.S. analyst based in Bolivia
with the Andean Information Network, a left-leaning think tank. The gas,
she says, is "a symbol of globalization, frustration, and the feeling that
the government is not interested in the welfare of the people."

It isn't just young men with Che Guevara T-shirts or Indians with mud-caked
feet that are taking to the streets. In Honduras on Tuesday, thousands of
doctors, nurses and high-school teachers went on strike for the day
demanding that the government not renew a debt-payment agreement with the
IMF, the multilateral lender largely seen in the region as a symbol of
Washington. Thousands of other protesters across the Central American
nation blocked streets and burned tires.

A weak economy, thanks in part to the recent U.S. slowdown, accounts for
some of the simmering anger. Latin American output as a whole grew just
0.5% in 2001, fell 0.3% last year, and is expected to rise just 0.9% this
year, according to estimates by Morgan Stanley. But the discontent goes
beyond anemic growth. Many in the region feel that two decades of economic
liberalization have done little to alleviate poverty, and they have little
trust in their leaders to carry out reforms without lining their own pockets.

"In many parts of Latin America, the politics of the street is confronting
institutional politics," says Eduardo Gamarra, director of the Latin
American and Caribbean Center at Florida International University. "There
is no force that can mediate between the street and institutions which are
widely perceived as being weak, corrupt, and blamed for having sold out the
country and impoverished the masses."

Many Latin Americans believe that Washington has become so obsessed with
the fight against terrorism that it has disengaged from the hemisphere.
Meanwhile, the U.S. message of free trade is interpreted in the Latin
American street as cover for a ripoff of the region's riches.

"The U.S. has really dropped the ball in Latin America," says Miguel Diaz,
head of the Latin American center at Washington's Center for Strategic and
International Studies. "We are spending $87 billion trying to create a
democracy in Iraq, while we are letting enfeebled democracies in this part
of the world die for lack of attention and resources."

Even well-meaning plans by the IMF are getting lost in translation.
Honduras's protests, for instance, came a day after an IMF team arrived to
see whether Honduras qualifies as a highly indebted poor nation, which
could result in the organization forgiving $960 million. The country has
failed to meet the terms of its last IMF agreement in part because of a
drop in prices for its chief exports, among them coffee and bananas.

Governments, often lacking credibility among their people, are finding it
easier to row with the tide. Argentina, a staunch U.S. ally in the 1990s,
nowadays defends warmer relations with Cuban dictator Fidel Castro and
Venezuela's populist leftist Hugo Chavez as a result of popular
disillusionment with the IMF and Washington.

Much of the blame lies with local leaders, say observers. Reform-minded
presidents during the 1990s -- from Mexico's Carlos Salinas to Peru's
Alberto Fujimori to Argentina's Carlos Menem -- all left office hounded by
accusations of cronyism and corruption-tainted privatizations. In Bolivia,
President Sanchez won elections last year with a small minority. But in a
nation with an indigenous majority, the aristocratic, U.S.-educated former
mining executive -- who speaks Spanish with a U.S. accent -- didn't tap any
Indians to his cabinet or reach out to a disgruntled population, according
to Mr. Diaz.

But Washington also deserves blame, say analysts. In Bolivia, the U.S. has
largely met its goal of eradicating coca plantations. But the anti-coca
campaign fueled resentment among the largely Quechua Indian growers, many
of whom had no alternative work.

"U.S. policy toward Latin America rarely goes beyond security and drugs ,"
says Riordan Roett, director of Western Hemisphere Program at the Johns
Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. "You haven't been able to
get anyone to focus on a development agenda."