The cynicism of the war lords

The penitential mood of ARENA

Because of the well-known results of the elections celebrated on last March 16th ARENA has initiated an internal discussion process. Its members say that they will try to understand the meaning of the electoral results in order to make the pertinent corrections. It is difficult to determine what will be the end of this process –it is necessary to remember that this is not the first time that this party speaks about the interpretation of the popular will-. However, this is not an obstacle to analyze the panic that starts running through the party of the businessmen.

The turn of the unsuccessful
During the first days that followed March 16th a set of frenetic evaluations were made by the leaders of ARENA. The former President of El Salvador, Armando Calderon Sol declared, without hesitation, that the negative results have a double origin: the bad social policy of President Flores and the inefficiency of the COENA, which is saturated with businessmen. The party’s directive organism was formed essentially by businessmen, and that was why Calderon Sol suggested the immediate removal of its members and that the Executive power corrected its unpopular policies.

In reference to the removal of those who are presently responsible for the COENA, the expectations of Calderon Sol are being fulfilled. Many of the national news media announced that during the following days the party will go through a process of general “cleaning” inside the directive board. It seems that only a couple of the members of the original directive board –from a total of 12 members- will remain in the new directive board of the party. If this information is confirmed, the cycle of the businessmen at the head of ARENA will be closed. The cycle of the bet that Flores made for the successful businessmen and their faithful “technicians” would be coming to an end.

About the strategy to place the business elite at the head of the party, the press called it a fore front decision. The businessmen were called to rescue the country’s politics from their lethargic state. Their economic and their commercial achievements were seen as the platform for the political success. In the same way that they were able to become rich in a relatively easy way, they considered that they were going to be able to reach the electoral triumph.

They expected that the businessmen were able to erase the intransigent image that the Flores administration had. Flores had always denied that the social and the economic situation of the Salvadoran population were as negative as the local analysts sustained. The macroeconomic stability, complimented by the international financial circles, was the main presentation card of the government. According to Flores, that was the proof of his accurate decisions.

This is how the general evaluation of ARENA represents a double slap on the face for Francisco Flores. He has also been made partially responsible for the negative results obtained by his party during the last elections. On the one hand, his strategy to leave the party in the hands of the businessmen has been discredited. On the other hand, his own colleagues are forcing him to reflect over the reality that he had always denied, that is, the asphyxiating economic decisions of his administration. At this point, the crude reality is more powerful than the false propaganda. The electoral results refuted the idea of a wonderful country, an image that Flores insisted on selling at an international level. Finally, during the only opportunity that the foundations of the party had to express themselves, they did not miss a chance to show their rebellion against the government. The traditional members of ARENA are questioning Francisco Flores, his ministers, and his COENA formed by businessmen.

The dimension of the changes at ARENA
There are various elements that should be considered in order to examine how the reforms announced by ARENA will actually lead to change the perception that the population has about the performance of the official party. In the first place, to discuss the correct interpretation of the electoral results it is necessary to take a look at the reactions of ARENA. In the second place, it is necessary to consider the possible internal obstacles that the party will have to face if it intends to achieve a renovation able to meet the expectations of the Salvadoran population. And, finally, it is necessary to explore the chances that these governmental transformations (as well as the transformations at ARENA) have to succeed now that we are only a year away from the presidential elections.

In reference to the past of ARENA, considering the party’s disposition to make a realistic interpretation of the electoral results, it is necessary to go back to the legislative and the municipal elections of the year 2000, in order to find the closest reference point. Back then, the party of the businessmen had less congressmen than the FMLN did, and it loss the battle to recuperate the administration of the City Hall of San Salvador. During this period, President Flores was about to end the first year of his administration period, and he declared that he was willing to listen to the population. He announced the need to implement a series of measures that could help to solve the causes of the national economic crisis.

In addition, he declared that he was willing to “cross the bridge” in order to speak with the political opposition. After realizing the results of the elections of the year 2000, the President said that it was time “to start working for all of the Salvadorans”. He interpreted that the message of the voters indicated that it was necessary “to meet the expectations of the population”. He declared in one of his special messages to the nation that he was willing to have a dialogue with all of the national political forces. He insisted on the idea that everyone should contribute to the discussion aimed to resolve the most critical problems of the Salvadorans.

However, his good intentions did not bring positive results. In other words, the President never crossed the bridge that led to the opposition, he never really did anything to improve the situation of the country. On the contrary, his administration was known because of its arrogant attitude and its poor performance. Now the gap between the wealthy and the poor is even wider. The social and the economic problems are now even more intense.

Looking back at the behavior of the official party, we cannot talk about their capacity to respect their own words. If we remember the political moves made after the elections of the year 2000, we will be able to see that, at the time, ARENA spoke about a renovation and about the need to answer to the problems of the population. Nevertheless, after the public tears of the former leader of ARENA, Alfredo Cristiani, and the massive arrival of the businessmen who became part of the COENA, we have not seen any important changes. In the mean time, ARENA kept strengthening its bonds with Neoliberalism. At the same time, many of its officials keep sailing -watching their backs, of course- through corruption and taking advantage of the state’s assets.

It is possible to say that ARENA is going through an honesty crisis before the very eyes of the Salvadoran voters. It is difficult to affirm if their present purposes are not simply a communication strategy to distract (and manipulate) the Salvadorans. If reliability and integrity are the parameters of the performance of the parties, there is no way to predict the behavior of the ARENA leaders. The party does not usually fulfill its promises. Its leaders generally take advantage of the heat of the electoral results to make a commitment to the population. However, once their fears come to an end, they keep going in the same direction without wondering if their policies are favorable for the population. The recent history of the party confirms this situation.

It is interesting to look at some objective elements that prevent ARENA from fulfilling its electoral proposals. In other words, it is important to analyze why the official party cannot make the necessary decisions to take care of the national problems. We cannot overlook a significant aspect: the relation between the ARENA leaders and the businessmen. The local economic model, which is associated with the international Neoliberalism that this party has promoted, has not allowed the party to get closer to the needs of the population. That is the case, for instance, of the indiscriminating promotion of the privatizations, the reluctance to reevaluate the minimum wage or to guarantee the access to the basic health services, and the corruption that consumes the institutions of the state. ARENA is in a crossroad: the businessmen’s conflict of interests -always willing to make money- is the main obstacle that prevents ARENA from making a serious proposal to resolve the economic problems.

That is why it is logical to sustain that the only possibility that the official party will have to gain some credibility is to harmonize the interests of the businessmen with the interests of most of the population. ARENA has been exclusively committed to the interests of the business elite. That is why it is crucial to talk about the need to replace the businessmen with politicians, as the former President, Armando Calderon Sol, recently proposed. However, this announcement is not enough. ARENA has to be responsible for its role inside the political system and go beyond the demands of the businessmen. As long as it plays this role, it will be able to answer in an adequate way to the social and the economic problems of the country and increase the number of voters.

Otherwise, ARENA will be condemned to fail once again during the next elections. This might happen even if they decide to increase the minimum wage or to control the abuse of the telephone and the electric energy companies. The voters who have sympathized with ARENA need to see that the partnership between the party and the business companies is breaking up in order to trust in its members again. We do not know if the evaluation of the former Presidents Armando Calderon Sol and Alfredo Cristiani will thoroughly examine the serious electoral problems of the party. However, there is no doubt that to redefine the importance of the businessmen who belong to the party is more urgent than ever. It is too soon to know if the fear of losing the next elections will contribute to accelerate the discussions about the new identity of ARENA. On the other hand, it is evident that this is an urgent task, which the leaders of the party will have to face sooner or later.

Costa Rica is against the war

The war against the Iraqi people found an unconditional defender in the Salvadoran President. This was no surprise. However, no one expected that the Costa Rican government would change its mind. In the beginning the President refused to sign the declaration of support of the Central American governments to the United States. Later on, he changed his mind and he was in favor of the war promoted by George W. Bush. When President Abel Pacheco exhorted Sadam Hussein to disarm his troops and renounce, he became part of the United States’ perspective. Pacheco even made Hussein responsible for whatever the British and the American troops would do inside the Iraqi territory.

This is how Pacheco became part of the list of those Presidents who rather keep a good relation with Washington than to be faithful to the values that respect life. Those are the presidents who, calling themselves Christians, have ignored the voice of the people, the voice of the world, the voice of the decent presidents, and the voice of Pope John Paul II. The Pope disapproves of those who support this violent adventure. The war is taking the lives of many civilians with the bombarding of the American and the British aviation teams, and there are certain “mistakes” such as the one committed by the American soldier who killed seven people in a base.

The decision of President Pacheco caused more surprise because of the well-known pacific tradition of Costa Rica. Traditionally, the Costa Rican governments have been pacifists. In addition, Costa Rica was one of the first countries to demilitarize its society; it abolished the army, and it kept the tradition of the democratic governments. This is an attitude that has not been emulated by most of the Central American societies. Over its civilian governments and its precarious democracy rests the shadow of an authoritarian tradition, and the weight of the military and the economic elites who have not assimilated the democratic habits yet.

During the time of the civil wars, throughout the eighties, Costa Rica did not only remain in peace, but it also intended to promote peace in the countries that were involved in a violent conflict: El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua. The President of that time, Oscar Arias Sanchez, promoted a number of regional initiatives to seek the resolution of the conflicts. Because of all of these reasons, the decision of the present Costa Rican President clashes with the pacifist tradition that had been an example for our region.

Fortunately, not everything represents a negative situation for the Central American nation: the citizenry has gone out to the streets to persuade the government to retract his words. The different opinion polls that were published in Costa Rica revealed that 60.7% of the people are against the war. Other pieces of information held by the University of Costa Rica (UCR, in Spanish) reveal that this percentage will reach a 67%. The protests against the war become even more frequent, and the demonstrators are asking for the resignation of the Chancellor Roberto Tovar.

With the exception of some business leaders, the governmental decision has intensified the rejection that the different social sectors feel, including the political parties. The voice of the former President, Oscar Arias, was added to the massive protests. He condemned the invasion to Iraq. According to Arias, this is a low blow against the system of the United Nations, and it is also a sample of the arrogance of the Government at Washington. The arguments of Arias, who won the Peace Nobel Prize, were not enough to convince the Pacheco administration to change its posture.

The Organization of Medical Doctors Against Violence has proposed that the former president Oscar Arias, along with a group of personalities from all over the world, look for a way to negotiate the end of the war. This is a positive proposal, but it is not a very realistic one because a negotiation takes place when the parts are in an equal situation. The game of a negotiation consists on giving something away in order to obtain something else. What can Iraq possibly give away to stop the fire if the American and the British troops are already destroying towns? Is it Petroleum? Or is it the resignation of a dictator that will not restore the lost lives? Will his resignation guarantee the respect for the human rights?

Last week, Proceso published that in Central America the war in Iraq seemed like a distant drama, incapable to provoke a collective indignation and mobilize the societies of the isthmus. Fortunately, the new facts oblige us to rectify this affirmation. Not all of the Central American territory is indifferent to the killing going on in Iraq. The serious mistake of the Costa Rican government has made the citizenry go out and demonstrate that the democratic and the pacifist values of the society are still alive.

This sort of examples is also taking place, little by little, in the rest of the Central American societies. The struggle for peace is not a reason powerful enough yet to get organized and go out to the streets. However, every week there are a different number of activities that might be small, but constant. In San Salvador, for example, the people have been summoned to participate in the protests against the war. The demonstrations are adding up, a group of demonstrators also rejected the negotiations of the free trade agreement with the United States (CAFTA). They also demanded the resolution of the health sector’s crisis, because it has already lasted for seven months. However, the protest was not as massive as it could have been expected.

As for President Pacheco, he should consider to change his position. Not only because he is in favor of the war against Iraq, but because his economic policies –such as the attempts to privatize the distribution of the electric energy, or the controversial contract offered to a Spanish company to control the emissions- have promoted the discontent of the society. The worst part is that this discontent, instead of being an alarm to rectify the present attitude, has been repressed. As far as we know, this has not been the case of the pacifist protests; however the attitude of the government has not been that positive.

The struggle for the most elemental democratic values
The strict censorship imposed by the United States’ government to any information regarding the war proves that far from reaching a higher level of development for the individual and the collective freedoms, there is a tendency to remain in the past. That is why the civilian struggles must defend the most elemental values of a democratic coexistence: the respect for the human integrity, and the respect for all of the politic, the economic and the civilian rights.

The United States represents the most evident case of all. Not only because of the internal censorship, but also because of how it controls the information of the Iraqi territory. It has adopted a strict set of measures to control the flow of information about the war. The journalists have been assigned to the military units, and that is why they are not free to move around as they please. Those journalists who have gone beyond the official discourse have been expelled from Iraq. This happened, for instance, to Geraldo Rivera, a former talk show host who became a war journalist. He informed that the British and the American troops were not in an advantageous situation, as the media that represent the White House had previously informed. Another journalist was fired from the magazine the used to work for –National Geographic- because of the declarations he made to an Iraqi news media about the situation of the American military forces.

While in the United States the censorship is very explicit, in El Salvador it is hidden beneath the surface. The news media can be heavily censored even without the orders of the Executive power. The pressure of the large business companies is enough to ban the critics.

Those are the threats against the democratic freedom that characterize the American Peace of President Bush. The sacrifice of freedom for the sake of security seemed to be approved by those who are afraid of the hegemonic power. However, it seems as if some fissures are emerging from an authoritarian structure that seemed monolithic. This does not mean that there are enough reasons to be optimistic –or pessimistic- about the future. What this really means is that the American government had placed a very important bet on the Iraqi conflict without carefully considering the consequences of this new military adventure.

The idea was to fight a brief war, destined to end almost instantly. Although the strategic objective was to consolidate the power of the United States in that part of the world, they also expected an immediate benefit. They intended to control the Iraqi sources of petroleum in order to improve the depressed internal economy of the United States, which is characterized –among other things- by an increasing unemployment level.

However, what seemed as a potentially successful weekend adventure, is now getting more complicated than that. A veteran of the Gulf War, who now inspects firearms for the United Nations, said that both the American and the British troops that are in Iraq will have to face the same situations that the Soviet troops once did in Afghanistan. In the mean time, the civilian casualties keep adding up, that is why the struggle for the world peace is nowadays a bare necessity.