A north for Santa Cruz in its struggles

Santa Cruz enters its anniversary month today, the glorious September that moves us so much and gives us reasons to feel undeniable pride in belonging to this land, for being part of its incessant desire to grow, for its people and its cultures, and it does once again in the midst of tensions, as has been happening almost constantly in recent years.

This time the trigger for the tensions is called the Population and Housing Census, an issue in which the region has a very clear objective: we want the big survey in 2023 and not 2024 because Santa Cruz needs up-to-date information that shows that this region grew considerably in its population and therefore it should receive a greater amount of resources, as well as a new assignment of political representation in proportion to that growth.

The rejection of the excessive postponement of the Census has a reason: it is suspected that the national government is interested in doing it in 2024 or even later or perhaps never, because behind it there is a political objective that seeks to ensure that nothing changes for the 2025 elections and partly also because he is not interested in Santa Cruz benefiting from a better allocation of resources.

Until then, all the actors from Santa Cruz agree, with nuances in the argument, but they agree on the great objective of the 2023 Census.

The difference, the division and the controversy arise when it comes to identifying the strategic route to achieve that goal. In the last meeting of the Santa Cruz Interinstitutional Committee for the census, the Government announced that it will not invite the national authorities to the protocol acts of celebration of September 24.

Governor Luis Fernando Camacho’s argument was that the previous year the Government’s guests showed violence, made lawsuits, and said that now the measure of not inviting them will be maintained “until the Government respects Santa Cruz and respects the Santa Cruz struggle.”

But although the region has reasons to feel harassed by the national government, closing the door to the national authorities does not seem to be the most convenient measure, because that implies using the same language of aggressiveness and confrontation that the MAS government develops. And not only that, it also means giving the ruling party reasons to victimize itself, in which it is an expert in scoring political victories, and from there to reversing sentiments and adding expressions of support from regions and social sectors to its ranks, there is only one step.

Paradoxically, this radical position of the Governor’s Office could determine Santa Cruz’s defeat in its struggle to have a timely Census in 2023. The strategies of the game for all or nothing usually gather sympathy from the most radicalized sectors of Santa Cruz, but they do not necessarily guarantee a triumph in complex contexts where the opponent is not a weak actor, but quite the opposite.

There are those who interpret Camacho’s position as distracting after a period of scant visibility of the political figure of the governor; but there are also those who go further and observe in this radicalism an attitude that is functional to the interests of the MAS. In short, and beyond these readings, it is a very dangerous bet in which the player puts absolutely all his chips on a single line in a roulette wheel in which there are several other possibilities of success.

The leaders of Santa Cruz have to act with more intelligence than revenge, putting Santa Cruz causes ahead of partisan or personal strategies. And others should demonstrate that they are with the interests of the region rather than allies of the central government. That is what is expected of them at the beginning of the month of Santa Cruz.