In Bolivia, a persistent chorus of voices from retired military officers is said to be undermining the government, according to statements made by President Luis Arce in an interview with RT. The president pointed to a pattern of covert support and deliberate manipulation by individuals outside the official channels, portraying the episode as more than a spontaneous uprising. He argued that financial backers and empty promises drew people into action, only for those organizers to vanish once the situation spiraled out of control, leaving participants to face the consequences on their own.
Arce described a tense moment at the entrance of the government palace where he encountered rebel General Zúñiga. The encounter left him without a clear explanation for why soldiers and military hardware had been brought into the streets, underscoring the confusion and disarray that enveloped the capital during the crisis. The president emphasized that the broader context of the coup attempt involved broader economic and political tensions rather than a single, isolated act.
In remarks to the broadcaster, Arce framed the attempt as a disruption rooted in the country’s lithium sector. He asserted that disputes over natural resources and the control of valuable minerals were instrumental in fueling the revolt, linking the turmoil to strategic economic interests rather than mere political ambition. The discussion highlighted how resource wealth can become a flashpoint in political contests, complicating the path to stability in a volatile environment.
On June 26, the situation escalated as the coup attempt appeared to threaten the government’s hold on power. Rebel General Juan José Zúñiga, refusing to step down from his command, called for the restoration of democracy and the release of political prisoners. From the besieged presidential complex, Arce urged supporters to gather in the square to demonstrate their backing for democracy. The call resonated with many citizens who sought to defend the legitimate government and resume normal operations across the country. After hours of tense confrontation, security forces and loyal military units secured the capital, and Zúñiga was detained, signaling the suppression of the rebellion.
Earlier statements had already connected the upheaval to the president’s international moves, including a recent visit to Russia. While the implications of that visit were debated domestically, Arce maintained that external factors could influence domestic dynamics, complicating efforts to navigate the political landscape. The episode prompted a broader reflection on Bolivia’s geostrategic position and the balancing act required to maintain national sovereignty while engaging with international partners.
Overall, the Bolivian government framed the events as a serious test of democratic institutions and state capacity. Investigations were expected to scrutinize the sources of funding, leadership decisions, and the chain of command that allowed the rebellion to unfold. The president and other officials urged calm and a lawful, transparent response aimed at restoring stability and protecting civil liberties. The public was reminded that the rule of law, not force, remains the backbone of democratic governance in Bolivia, even amid sharp disagreements over economic policy and resource management.