iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Daniel Wagner

GET UPDATES FROM Daniel Wagner
 

Bolivia, Expropriation and Chutzpah

Posted: 03/19/2012 2:36 pm

The government of Bolivia has just announced that it intends to raise capital by issuing its first government bond since the 1920s, when JP Morgan helped the country fund construction of a railway. This time around, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch and Goldman Sachs will be leading the bond issuance, designed to promote investment in natural resource production, manufacturing, and the generation of electricity. The government of Bolivia hopes that issuing this bond will erase investors' collective memory and change the prevailing view that the government routinely expropriates foreign investments in the natural resource sector.

Nothing would do that more than stopping expropriating foreign investments. Bolivia first expropriated foreign-owned assets in 1937 (Standard Oil of New Jersey -- ExxonMobil's corporate ancestor) and has seized control of oil and gas assets on numerous occasions since that time. President Morales has a well documented history in that regard, including mass gas sector nationalizations in 2006, and the expropriation of four electricity-generating companies in 2010.

Morales's actions are particularly noteworthy today because they come at a time when many in global business thought nationalizations were passé. But it also comes at a time when economic nationalism is on the rise and the state has demonstrated a growing propensity to become more engaged in business. This is a global phenomenon, and evidence of the value placed on securing long-term energy and natural resources at a time of high commodity prices and seemingly insatiable demand.

In Bolivia's case, history is at the heart of this issue. Since the 19th century, Bolivia has fought with its neighbors over land and what lies beneath it. Approximately half of the land Bolivia once held, which at one time extended to the Pacific coastline, is gone:

  • In 1884 a Chilean attack on Bolivia's Litoral Province cost Bolivia its coastline (the war was ultimately fought over the ability to export dried bird dung, prized at the time for making fertilizer and saltpeter);

  • In 1903 Brazil persuaded the large state of Acre to secede. Brazil thus gained a highly productive rubber-growing state, at Bolivia's expense;

  • A 3-year war with Paraguay ending in 1935 was motivated by Bolivia's desire to secure a disputed border in which it hoped to find oil (it wound up losing a region the size of Utah to Paraguay in the process); and

  • Argentina and Peru secured additional portions of Bolivia through diplomatic demarcations later in the 20th century.

It is the cumulative history of land loss, the resulting national humiliation, and Bolivia's desire to secure and control its natural resources that is ultimately behind President Morales's actions. Resentment over the war with Chile stopped plans last decade for a gas pipeline to the Chilean coast, even though financial backing and export markets were already in place.

Bolivia was one of the first Latin American countries to adopt 1980s IMF policies, which tied loans to privatization, debt reduction, and a relaxation of labor standards. State-owned companies were sold, government spending and regulation was reduced, and foreign capital was courted with the promise of a new beginning. Yet today, half the population still lives on less than $2 per day.

While nationalization is a short-term "fix" for national economic aspirations, its longer-term consequences are nearly always damaging, since foreign businesses hesitate to invest in countries that demonstrate a propensity to nationalize foreign-owned assets. Among Bolivia's neighbors, Brazil, Chile, and Uruguay have achieved what Morales has failed to achieve -- having managed to combine fiscal prudence with open trade and investment policies, and preserving their options with respect to foreign traders and investors while addressing broader national social needs. Morales has closed the door to foreign investors in the natural resource sector, and violated international law in the process by failing to provide fair, adequate and prompt compensation -- not a particularly good combination.

The larger lesson to be derived from Morales's actions is that despite the era of globalization, in which all countries are presumed to play by the same rules and national economies are inextricably linked with the global economy, human behavior and aspirations remain unchanged. Citizens of every country want to be able to say they have control over their own destiny and natural resources. The rise of democracy in Latin America has accentuated this desire, for it raises pressure on leaders to ensure that national economic aspirations are achieved.

In the end, though, Bolivia is attempting a bond issue for a very simple reason -- it has difficulty raising cash in the capital markets -- a position it brought upon itself. Morales has the chutzpah, and three Wall Street institutions have the temerity, to issue bonds for a government that has personified 21st century Latin American socialism and continues a time honored tradition of expropriating foreign-owned assets. It is a sign of the times that Morales would have the audacity to attempt to raise capital in this manner, with the complicity of three Wall Street titans. No doubt, plenty of investors will snap up the bonds. Good luck to them.

*Daniel Wagner is CEO of Country Risk Solutions, a cross-border risk consulting firm based in Connecticut (USA), Director of Global Strategy with the PRS Group, and author of the new book Managing Country Risk (www.managingcountryrisk.com).

 

Follow Daniel Wagner on Twitter: www.twitter.com/countryriskmgmt

The government of Bolivia has just announced that it intends to raise capital by issuing its first government bond since the 1920s, when JP Morgan helped the country fund construction of a railway. Th...
The government of Bolivia has just announced that it intends to raise capital by issuing its first government bond since the 1920s, when JP Morgan helped the country fund construction of a railway. Th...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 23
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
08:58 PM on 03/20/2012
The fact is that Bolivia is going to the capital markets (run by capitalists) because nobody in their right mind wants to invest there. The country is run by mobs who strike and block roads and streets whenever they feel like it. Contrast Bolivia with Chile, next door. Night and day. Evo has no idea how to run the economy. The only reason the country has "prospered" in the past few years is because of very high natural resource prices. His decisions are almost always politically motivated either internally or externally by his masters in Venezuela or Cuba. Zero continuity in the government. Ministers are changed monthly, more or less. The country is now largely run by narcotraffickers. Witness the amount of construction in the major cities. Money from drugs recycled into buildings, whose apartments are then sold to the public. etc.etc.etc.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Domingo Cardoza
USARMY Ret. _Unabowed America-Firster
07:52 PM on 03/20/2012
MR DW: I thank you for a well though out analysis and the background historical information.
10:29 AM on 03/20/2012
The author is just trying to tarnish Evo's reputation. The fact is that Evo's nationalizations have turned the economy around, and Bolivia is in the best economic position it's ever been in in its entire history. Of course there is still a lot of poverty, it will take decades to lift the entire country up, but at least now it's going in the right direction. Evo's government is not an enemy of capitalism. Private businesses still thrive and entrepreneurs can still become wealthy with no fear of losing their wealth. Only certain strategic companies, like the oil industry, were nationalized for the benefit of the people.
12:57 PM on 03/20/2012
The author doesn't need to tarnish Evo's reputation - Evo's doing a great job of that!...

DW
02:57 PM on 03/20/2012
Is that why he keeps winning elections with more than 50% of the vote?  In a multi-party democracy, winning with over 50% is a decisive victory, and he did it TWICE.  His new Constitution also won the majority of the votes.  His reputation among the people of Bolivia is in very good standing.
09:36 AM on 03/20/2012
Viva Evo!
08:09 AM on 03/20/2012
The world is now run by multi nationals. od forbid the poorest of the poor should benefit from the dessstruction of their environment, the poisoning of their water and all with no benefit to them. Sorry. I.m for Bolivia where little boys have to go into mines and not schools.
photo
Kai-HK
Don't Share My Wealth! Share My Work Ethic!
04:12 AM on 03/20/2012
Great Article....but I would file this under buyer beware and let the markest price what the bonds are worth.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert SF
06:14 PM on 03/19/2012
Oh, so when a country decides to stop foreign powers from coming in and stealing its reasources, that's not fair, huh? Daniel, you are despicable. You are part of what's wrong with the world.
07:58 PM on 03/19/2012
Robert,

Your view of the world is a little outdated.

The terrible foreign powers stopped stealing poor countries' resources some time ago.

Today, it is voluntary, and based on international law.

Did you know that?

DW
10:22 AM on 03/20/2012
"The terrible foreign powers stopped stealing poor countries' resources some time ago."
That is one of the biggest lies I've ever heard.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Domingo Cardoza
USARMY Ret. _Unabowed America-Firster
07:32 PM on 03/20/2012
Yeah, tell that to the IMF. The problem with helping the poor is that there is no money in it. And resources are always "allocated" to help the local population. That's why Nigeria is booming, but don't tell those who live there.
05:28 PM on 03/19/2012
The South American experience with the polarized politics of latifundia-based oligarchies with Spanish culture and populist leftists with pre-Columbian cultural leanings has embedded itself in a continent in which modernity cannot take root because the ruling class cling to premodern capricious ways.

Their principal vice is that they are contemptuous of the Rule of Law a habit they have passed on to their leftists populist enemies leaving the middle-class in the middle, isolated with their pleas for the Rule of Law to obtain, dismissed by both sides as nothing more than a bourgeois whim reeking of Nordamericano absurdity.

Bolivia's venture as you describe it must indicate above all, that in Bolivia, the Rule of Law now obtains.

The key to development of the Continent is acceptance by all political players that the Rule of Law takes precedence. There is still too much rightist and leftist gangsterism going on. Land rights remain a central issue. Also the development of civil society with the capacity to collect taxes from the would be kleptocrats who call themselves entrepreneurs.
06:46 AM on 03/20/2012
Eric,

Did you know that Bolivia (as well as Ecuador and Venezuela) have all either pulled out, or said they were going to pull out, of the World Bank's international arbitration arm? In essence, they are saying they will no longer abide by the voice of international law, and will only apply local law to foreign investment disputes.

Another reason Morales has chutzpah to issue this bond at this time.

I wonder how many foreign investors realize this....

DW
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Domingo Cardoza
USARMY Ret. _Unabowed America-Firster
07:44 PM on 03/20/2012
Speaking of Chutzpah and not obeying international law...if you going to go that way you would not find a lack of examples closer to some of our allies. At least you could say that the capitalist model in Bolivia has failed and only a socialists model and long term goals to modernize and educate the country can make Bolivia competitive. Without investing their resources into the population and country; that is, by building the infrastructure for commerce (roads, bridges, schools, electricity, security) Bolivia's economic prosperity is bound to fail. The capitalist/conservative IMF model only made things worse, in which case, your understanding of international law, which is to translate IMF loans as money with strings attached, holds no water. IMF IS NOT INTERNATIONAL LAW
04:56 PM on 03/19/2012
The author has the unmitigated GALL to call "foreign assets" Bolivia's OWN natural gas...
07:57 PM on 03/19/2012
Juan,

The government enters into an agreement with companies who pay royalties to the government in exchange for the natural gas. It is usually governed by international law, which is the reason expropriation without fair compensation is illegal...

DW
photo
Talab
I tot i taw a putty tat
03:58 AM on 03/20/2012
Just curious how often those companys actually Pay for every cubic foot of gas that they extract .... there is an international consensus that Corps should be able to cheat as much as they want (and cook the books to cover it ) not only avoiding fair royalties but their fair share of the tax burden .... Look for more of the same until international companies discover ethics in doing business ( and none of us are holding our breaths waiting on that to happen)
10:25 AM on 03/20/2012
The governments that entered into those agreements were corrupt right wingers who wanted to sell the country out.  They practically gave away Bolivia's natural resources at rock bottom prices without consulting the people.