The dog of the gardener (in the manger), is an article written by Susana Seleme Antelo. that appeared yesterday in El Deber, follows [there are some notes I made inside this type of brackets for clarifying purposes only]:

The famous play by Lope de Vega [“El perro del hortelano”] inspired me to write about the manipulation of the term ‘intangible’, which for Doña Justa Cabrera, wise Indian leader, “intangible means sustainable development.” Instead, for the always splenetic government of Evo Morales and his accomplices, that word is intended to avenge the political defeat, inflicted by the Indigenous people from the east after their historic and peaceful march, the march of all, to stop a highway through the heart of the Isiboro Secure Indigenous Territory and National Park (TIPNIS).

As in the cited work, Morales and his men are “… the dog in the manger, nor eat nor let eat, nor is it out nor is it in” and make a regulation of the law that the intangible becomes a tangible revenge. In other words, if the ruling party and his hordes can not use the land of the national park to expand their coca crops, the raw material for cocaine, then the Indigenous can not hunt or fish, or gather fruits or use the forest goods, and live as they have lived there since the beginning of times.

[indigenous people have lived there] Long before the powerful economic illegal-criminal-political arm of the cocaine have settled inside the Chapare coca-growing zone, whose crops have no other fate than drug production.

The TIPNIS land is intangible, now says the chorus of the MAS, and intentionally forget art. 30 of the Constitution of the State and its more than ten paragraphs that give indigenous Yuracarés, Chimanes and Moxeños the self-determination of their territory and territoriality, the protection of their sacred places, the right to live in a healthy environment with management and use properly the ecosystem, to be consulted through appropriate procedures, using appropriate legislative or administrative measures in the event there would be something that intends to affect them, and the famous prior consultation, as is known, was not fulfilled.

While the indigenous people want to have regulations that includes the terms preservation, conservation and sustainable use in the Amazon territory, and that the inviolability applies to third parties and not for their own initiatives, or ecotourism projects and cultural revaluation implemented by the natives of that region; coca growers, smugglers, traffickers, settlers, colonizers-traffickers and other related anthropological invention of the so-called ‘intercultural’ continue with their claims. [to get inside, deforest, plant coca, engage in narcotrafficking]

Supported and pressed by their constituents, they become entangled in explanations, but few words to the wise: if we can not use these lands, neither will you! As the dog in the manger, “nor eats nor eat leaves …” and make tangible their anger in retaliation. Will they fulfill their wish?

It is hard to find something else worse that this orchestrated revenge by Morales, García Linera, Juan Ramón Quintana and his followers, unshakable in their racism against indigenous people of the lowlands. Like injured wild animals, they try to damage, try to divide, and are now assaulting them as they are returning to their home, the forest [the indigenous protest-walk group]; and as accomplished totalitarian men, they despise the contents of the democracy and those who think differently.

http://www.eldeber.com.bo/2011/2011-11-06/vernotacolumnistas.php?id=111105211552