The malinchista right wing

The international advisors of ARENA

The party that praises its nationalism has a very odd habit that does not have much to do with its political beliefs. ARENA and its spokespeople in the national press do not take seriously any political, economic or social considerations about their performance if this advice does not come from abroad. The important comments, according to them, come from the “analysts” that they advertise with drums, praising their alleged incomparable knowledge of the national reality. Oddly enough, the nationalist convictions of the ARENA leaders are so weak, that they are not enough to clarify what is their perception of the national reality and put those thoughts in the hands of their local analysts.

The need to look for the advice of foreign personalities to sustain their internal political positions means that the most important leaders of ARENA disapprove of the analysis that are made inside this country. It is easy to understand why there are those who do not sympathize with the thesis of the right wing. And more than talking about the allegedly questionable nature of the reflections made here, it is necessary to consider the deliberate decision made by ARENA about not getting involved with the “dissidents”.

It is necessary to notice the systematic decision of the ARENA leaders: to declare an anathema against the local analysts, who are constantly accused of playing the game of the left wing. In the end, the important aspect for the right-wing opinion directors is not the alleged truth about what the foreign experts say –because they usually speak about the subjects that the local analysts discuss-, what is really important is to indicate the external precedence of those who say things.

In the case of the right-wing intellectuals, who usually insist on how much they agree with the ideas of the local business elite, such attitude should make them analyze their behavior. For them, it should be frankly deceiving that their employers usually tend overlook them, or that they see them as second hand thinkers when it comes to look for a source to sustain their opinions. The official spokespeople, who usually dictate conferences about their last anticommunist inventions, should reflect upon their conduct. The fact is that their tutors usually put more trust on the foreign analysts, instead of repeating the local discourse about the good features of the right wing.

The masterful dissertation that the Nicaraguan academic -according to the journalists of El Diario de Hoy who interviewed him- who came from Oxford dictated to the neophyte members of ARENA, contains nothing but well known facts. He said that an alternative for the country is to adopt a central political option, because it would be the best bet for the country’s stability in the long term. However, this professor forgot to mention that the political center will become relevant only if it is able to moderate the political life. No one asked him, and he did not bother to say it, but it is a fact that in a polarized plural system the power of the center works as a perfect mechanism to conduct the waters to the windmills of the extremists.

In any case, there was no time for subtleties. Those who manage the interests of the business elite needed to emphasize (for those willing to listen) that ARENA is the best option of power for the next elections. As far as that idea is concerned, their guest fulfilled their expectations. According to the journalists, he complimented the candidate from ARENA, Antonio Saca, and he spoke about the fear that the FMLN awakens. He did not say who were afraid and why, though. However, he said that the solution will not necessarily come from the traditional left wing. The traditional right wing can be the solution, while it does not get tired. When this happens, it will be the turn of the political center, according to the analyst from Oxford.

Another explanation of the systematic resource used by ARENA (to look for the opinions of the foreign analysts to sustain their internal political and their economic vision) obeys to the fact that their recipes are not connected with the daily needs of the Salvadoran population. The paradoxical aspect of this whole matter is that at the same time that it prides itself about offering national solutions to the country’s problems, it has to ask for the help of foreign mercenaries to sustain its posture. In the end, they know that they do not count with much internal credit, and that not too many Salvadorans will be convinced with their discourses in favor of freedom because these speeches are out of context. That is why they look for the support of their honorable guests, in order make their old tunes sound like a new melody.

Today it was the guest from Oxford; in the past, the American economists. These personalities charge a fortune –if the amounts paid to these guests are compared with the usual salaries of most Salvadorans- to come and repeat what everyone already knows. And still, they are put on a pedestal with laurels. Later on, the businessmen take several ideas from what they say they have learned, and they discard what they consider too dangerous for their bank accounts or the stability of their companies.

For example, a couple of years ago, a Mexican guest told them that they had to reinvest in the society a portion of their profits. That it would be the best way to obtain publicity. Ever since then, many businessmen decided to support several noble causes that could get the attention of the media. Several athletes acknowledged by their good performance in the past have also been adopted. A spectacular Telethon was organized last year as a proof of solidarity with the less fortunate. The businessmen had a parade. They made considerable donations that got many standing ovations, but that were also deducted from their taxes later. However, at the same time, these “generous businessmen” that appear in the media embracing the national causes, discard the idea of improving the salaries of their employees or the recommendations to pay more taxes in order to improve the national solidarity. In the same way, after their guests leave, they try to clarify the dangerous ideas that might lead to a misconception of the advice, That is the case, for example, of the reflections made by an editorialist about the parties of the center that could be accepted by the businessmen. He discarded those that, according to him, supported Communism in the past and who now belong to the center. For this editorialist, only the right wing has a voice when it comes to deal with the country’s public administration, because it is the sector that has allegedly nothing to do with the destructive savagery of the past.

In summary, while the nationalist right wing condemns any possible bond of the opposition with the international subversive elements, it uses alleged foreign authorities to legitimate its position. Its witnesses are the international sectors that can strengthen their internal power. However, it declares an anathema for those who dare to look for external help to get rid of the flagrant control that the right wing has over the country. The right wing turns nationalist only when someone contradicts its governmental vision. Otherwise, it uses its foreign advisors to discredit its internal adversaries.

All is fair in love and war. Even to use foreign personalities who have caused harm to the important sectors of the country. This is the only way to explain how Cass Bellanger, an American congressman, came to reveal his doubts against the political intentions of the FMLN, during last August. He counted with the most efficient news coverage of the national press. According to a note of the Co Latino Newspaper (08-09-03), “this dark character of the United States’ Congress is one of the most anti-immigrant elements of the American Congress. He would have sponsored laws and modifications for the Constitution of his country, with the objective to promote tacit solutions against the illegal aliens in the United States”. However, as everyone knows, this person was the object of a tremendous news coverage, emphasizing his anti- left wing position. None of the honorable thinkers of the right wing bothered to check his background against the Salvadoran interests.

A change in the direction of the world trade?

The reunion of the World’s Trade Organization (OMC, in Spanish) will take place in September. This event has a special character, since the consequences of this meeting will be extremely important for the development of the global commerce of the new century. A group of developed countries will participate in this reunion, in order to encourage and strengthen the commercial model that has characterized the world trade during the last years. Several less developed countries will also be present, and its spokespeople consider that it is necessary to make significant changes in the world’s present commercial model.

This division of opinions seems to be a constant, and it has been present in other similar meetings. It is convenient to remember what were the differences that emerged during the last reunions of the OMC. In Seattle as well as in Doha there were serious disagreements between the wealthiest nations and the less developed countries. These divergences have grown stronger with the construction process of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (ALCA, in Spanish). Therefore, these differences of opinions at the OMC are part of a group of wider controversies connected with the excluding logic of the trade in the world.

Those voices of the less developed countries that intend to change the world’s trade system sustain that during the last years they have been able to notice quite a notorious bias in the OMC in favor of the wealthiest nations. Inside this entity there is a certain indifference when it comes to deal with those commercial issues that are proposed by a considerable amount of those countries that are trying to reach a higher standard of development, which have been harmed by many of the dispositions made by the OMC.

This is how many people have realized that the United States, Japan, and several nations of Europe have turned this institution into a legislator for their private interests. Mark Ritchie, president of the Institute of Agricultural and Commercial Policies, considers that “the OMC has somehow failed by not acting according to the interests of the farmers and the workers of the world. A frustrating feeling grows inside the organization and among its members, as in the civil society. The reunion at Cancún will definitively be a test to see how sensitive will the OMC be with this movement in favor of the regulations that guarantee a fairer trade”.

The Cancún reunion has an especial dimension, since the strongest countries inside the organization are interested in making several public assets of the less developed countries profitable. The former have put some pressure, before the meeting, to adopt an agenda that would make the rest of the members of the OMC accept the privatization of the essential public services –including the water services, health, energy, and education-, as well as multiple negotiations to include new issues, such as investments. These measures would seriously damage the less developed economies. The poorest countries think that it is crucially important to achieve a transparent and a democratic decision making process inside the OMC. For the experts, this is vital to improve the credibility of the institution and the credibility of the multilateral commercial system.

This relation of power inside the OMC is similar to the one that prevails in other international organizations that seek to satisfy a profitable economic interest. The International Monetary Fund (FMI, in Spanish) and The World’s Bank (BM) have been the organisms through which the less developed countries have performed a series of changes in the international policies in their own benefit. These institutions have made decisions that have contributed with the deterioration of the life standards of the poorest countries, just as the renowned economist Joseph Stiglitz has explained.

What position will El Salvador take?
To respond to this question, it is necessary to observe the economic dogmatism of the official party. According to ARENA, the best that can happen to the country is to play the free trade game, because this could bring welfare and development for the citizenry. The Flores administration supports the dispositions of the developed countries –especially the dispositions of the United States-. And, at least explicitly, the Flores administration does not identify itself with that group of nations that is urgently asking to transform the regulations of the international trade and the countries’ representation inside the OMC.

It is evident that the Salvadoran government has adopted the postures of Washington. Now it is just a matter of time to see if –in case that the less developed countries are not truly united in a meeting of this nature- the winners will be the wealthiest countries of the world. It seems that through the OMC, these countries will perpetuate the regulations that they have created and imposed over the rest of the members of this international institution.

The position of Flores and his team nourishes itself with the economic interests represented by ARENA. The most influential business sectors of this party wish to expand their markets to other countries. For these businessmen, everything that might favor the free trade of merchandise is correct. It is a different case with most of the small and the medium companies’ owners, who can hardly bear to deal with the competition in the local market.

One of the characteristics of the ARENA administrations is that they keep spreading the idea of the free trade and the benefits of the market, thinking that the needs of the population will automatically be resolved with just any free trade agreement. It is a mistake to consider that poverty will be eradicated just by opening the local market to the foreign products, when the truth is that many companies of this country will have to obtain their profits through a low remuneration system.

From the perspective of the political economy, it is clear that not all of the sectors of a country are equally favored or harmed by the changes that take place in the international trade scene. The arguments used by the mediators of the commercial agreements are not completely honest. They say that the trade agreements are negotiated in a way that all of the members are potentially able to be part of a win-win deal. This thesis reveals how misleading this deal is when you finally understand the diversity of the groups and the sectors that are part of the society. An economic policy measure definitively does not have the same impact in all of the countries.

Before all of the consequences of the free trade agreement with the United States, it is necessary to realize that there is a considerable part of inhabitants that depends on the development of the agricultural activities. A governmental position against this sector can affect the nutritional stability of this part of the population. It also reveals the dislocation of a series of economic activities performed by several companies that, in an incipient way, have managed to develop themselves in the local market. That is why it is important to pay close attention to the governmental dispositions and the effects on the economic and the social fields.

1 Malinchista, in Spanish, is an adjective that refers to those individuals who feel a preference for foreign goods or people. The word malinchismo is used as a noun.