Bolivia's Perfect Storm: Political Dispute, Economic Crisis Converge in Deadly Protests

At least six people killed (four police, two civilians) during clashes between security forces and Morales supporters attempting to lift roadblocks.
Without Evo, there are no elections.
The slogan adopted by Morales supporters as they intensified blockades and threatened to sabotage the voting process.

At least four police and two civilians died during week-long blockades as Morales supporters demand his electoral eligibility and President Arce's resignation. Constitutional court rulings barring Morales from elections and invalidating his political alliance have excluded his faction from the ballot entirely.

  • At least four police officers and two civilians killed during week-long blockades in early June 2025
  • Constitutional Court barred Morales from running and invalidated his political alliance in November 2024
  • Economic losses from blockades exceeded 800 million dollars; inflation at 30-year high
  • 62 days remained until August 17 elections when third week of blockades began

Bolivia faces escalating protests and roadblocks led by Evo Morales supporters demanding his candidacy reinstatement, resulting in at least six deaths. The conflict compounds an economic crisis with fuel shortages and record inflation, threatening August elections.

Bolivia entered mid-June 2025 in a state of compounding crisis. A week of roadblocks and street clashes had left at least four police officers and two civilians dead. The immediate trigger was the exclusion of Evo Morales from August's presidential election, but the roots ran deeper—into a bitter power struggle between the former president and his onetime protégé, Luis Arce, now sitting in the presidential palace. What began as a political dispute had metastasized into something more dangerous: a collision between electoral chaos and economic freefall, with the country's most volatile political force locked out of the ballot entirely.

The rupture between Morales and Arce had been widening for years. When Arce took office in November 2020 as Morales's chosen successor, the two men quickly discovered they wanted different things. Arce sought to govern independently; Morales wanted to control the Movement Toward Socialism party, the political machine that had dominated Bolivia for two decades. By September 2024, the tension boiled over into the streets. Morales led a seven-day march against the government, then orchestrated blockades lasting more than a month, demanding his right to run and recognition of his party leadership. During these protests, the judiciary reopened an investigation into an allegation Arce himself had once called an open secret: that Morales had fathered a child with a minor during his presidency. The case forced Morales to retreat to his stronghold in the coca-growing region of El Chapare, where supporters shielded him from arrest.

The Constitutional Court, meant to be the guardian of Bolivia's constitution, became the instrument of political victory. In November 2024, it issued two rulings that favored Arce: one validating his faction's control of the party apparatus, another barring Morales from the presidency by limiting any president to two consecutive terms. The evistas—Morales's base—rejected both decisions as illegitimate and unconstitutional. Morales created a new political movement bearing his name, but it lacked the legal standing to participate in elections. He then forged an alliance with a smaller party, Pan Bol, which managed to register. But when the alliance was announced, the electoral authorities disqualified Pan Bol on technical grounds applied retroactively. The effect was total: Morales had no path to the ballot, and his supporters had no independent vehicle to cast votes for his faction.

With the registration deadline passed and the evista movement erased from the electoral slate, the protests intensified sharply. Starting June 2nd, roadblocks spread across multiple regions. Some remained impassable into the weekend. The government claimed economic losses exceeded 800 million dollars. Morales's most militant supporters adopted the slogan "Without Evo, there are no elections" and threatened to sabotage the voting process if their leader remained barred. The Justice Ministry filed criminal charges against Morales for terrorism and related offenses, citing an audio recording—which he denied making—in which a voice purportedly ordered the encirclement of cities for a "final battle." Police and military units moved to clear the blockades. Some encounters turned violent. Six people died in the clashes.

But Morales's supporters were not alone in the streets. Bolivia was simultaneously gripped by an economic crisis that had accelerated dramatically in recent weeks. The price of basic goods had surged beyond the reach of ordinary families. Fuel shortages had created endless lines at gas stations across the country. Inflation had reached its highest level in thirty years. A black market in foreign currency had emerged, further eroding purchasing power. Multiple sectors—truckers, students, workers—had mobilized with their own demands: fuel, price controls, and calls for Arce's resignation. Some of these protests operated independently of the evista movement, though they shared a common target in the government.

As the third week of blockades loomed, Bolivia faced a genuinely novel situation: a political system fractured by the exclusion of its largest opposition force, an economy in free fall, and two months remaining until an election meant to resolve the crisis. The government had secured a commitment from electoral authorities and other candidates to proceed with voting as scheduled, a decision that amounted to backing Arce's position. But the convergence of forces—the rage of Morales's base, the desperation of citizens facing economic collapse, the institutional machinery that had locked one faction out of democratic participation—suggested that the ballot box alone might not contain what was building in the streets.

Without Evo, there are no elections
— Morales supporters organizing blockades
The conflict was described as an open secret by President Arce regarding allegations against Morales
— President Luis Arce
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Inventor

Why did the Constitutional Court's rulings matter so much if Morales's supporters reject them as illegitimate?

Model

Because legitimacy and legality aren't the same thing. The court's decisions had the force of law—they barred him from running, they dissolved his party's legal standing. But they had no moral authority in the eyes of his base. So you had a situation where the law said one thing and millions of people said the law itself was corrupt. That's when law stops working as a tool for resolving disputes and becomes a weapon one side uses against the other.

Inventor

The economic crisis seems almost separate from the Morales dispute. Are they really connected?

Model

They're connected in the way a match is connected to gasoline. The economic crisis created a population already furious and desperate. The Morales exclusion gave that fury a focal point and a leader. Separately, either one might have been manageable. Together, they became something the government couldn't contain.

Inventor

What does it mean that Pan Bol was disqualified on technical grounds applied retroactively?

Model

It means the rules changed after the game had started. Morales found a legal workaround, registered his alliance, announced it—and then the authorities said, actually, no, there's a rule we're applying now that bars you. It looked like the system was rigged to keep him out at any cost. Whether it technically was or wasn't almost doesn't matter. That's how it felt to his supporters.

Inventor

If the government secured a commitment to hold elections on schedule, doesn't that suggest they're in control?

Model

It suggests they're trying to project control. But control means the ability to enforce your will. If you're losing control of the streets, if fuel is running out, if people are dying in clashes—a commitment to hold elections becomes less a sign of strength and more a prayer that the system survives long enough to vote.

Inventor

What happens if the blockades don't end before August?

Model

Then you're voting in a country that's been partially paralyzed for months. You're asking people to believe in democratic institutions that just locked the largest opposition movement out of the ballot. You're asking them to accept election results when the economy is collapsing. The election becomes less a solution and more a gamble that voting will somehow restore legitimacy to a system that's already fractured.

Quieres la nota completa? Lee el original en infobae ↗
Contáctanos FAQ