|
ENADE 2003: disguised fears
“The business sector is happy to
announce the Fourth National Encounter of the Private Business Companies,
ENADE 2003, and its motto, ‘Democratic Governance: everyone’s commitment’,
in an effort to analyze and contribute with the foundations of the country’s
future in order to reach a new stage”. The document of the National
Association of Private Business Companies (ANEP, in Spanish) ended its
introduction with these words, as it was presented to the Salvadoran
business sector in a meeting that took place in a hotel. This year’s ENADE
had an important feature: the businessmen invited the presidential
candidates to listen to their proposals.
The business elite decided to share with the rest of the Salvadorans their
vision about the national reality and about the possible solutions to
alleviate the country’s problems. In this context, this was a very important
event because the different political actors were invited to present their
perspectives. Hopefully, this is not a facade, but an action that proves
that the businessmen are willing to welcome the analysis of their proposals.
That is why it is necessary to reflect upon several approaches contained in
the document made by the ANEP, and evaluate how the politicians reacted to
it.
A biased approach to reality
The first reflection about the contents of the diagnosis about the country’s
situation, a document prepared by the businessmen, is how much they seem to
agree with the vision that ARENA has about the national reality. The
businessmen do not only compliment the ARENA administrations, but they also
follow the thesis of President Flores. “The political, the social, and the
economic development of El Salvador along the last fifteen years has been
outstanding. The international community has acknowledged this effort, they
have seen in El Salvador an example, because it has taken a whole generation
to other countries to reach this kind of accomplishments”.
Without the intention to deny how the country has improved itself since the
end of the civil war, it is still important to recall how this phrase
coincides with a thesis that President Flores has constantly defended in
every international forum he has attended to. Even if the aforementioned
document accepts the existence of several social problems, in the end it
seems to tell the reader that ARENA has nothing to do with them. The
earthquakes and the hurricanes are the scapegoats. They seem to be the cause
of the country’s crisis. The congressmen who transfer funds to other
institutions of the State are also responsible. That is why this document
seems to be connected with the fashionable discourses of the governmental
sector. When we remember that Elias Saca, prior to his designation as the
presidential candidate, had led the ANEP, we cannot help to suspect about
his performance in the future if he is elected president. And that is why we
can refer to a biased interpretation of reality in the ENADE 2003.
The document of the ENADE exudes a certain will to defend the performance of
the three ARENA administrations. On the other hand, when the businessmen are
finally willing to accept some of the problems of the political system, they
blame the parties and the congressmen, those who are constantly receiving
negative evaluations. They criticized the distribution of the seats in the
Congress, and they concluded that it is not representative enough. The
financing of the parties is also questioned. “It seems as if –says the
document- the interests of the parties are the priority of the Congress. It
seems as if the power of the parties is more important than the technical,
the legal, the administrative, and the ethical improvement of a group of
institutions that have the responsibility to play a key role in the
country’s governance and in the consolidation of democracy”.
The target was wisely chosen. It is common to criticize the congressmen, and
the control of the Legislative Assembly is not at stake in the next
elections. Only if these facts are taken into consideration it is possible
to understand the hollow rhetoric of the critics against the legislative
performance. Once again, this is not about denying the serious problems that
this organ of the State is facing. This is about remembering that the
interests that, according to the businessmen, the parties and the
congressmen defend are perfectly combined with those of several social
groups that hold the country’s economic power. That is why the idea to sell
the image of certain parties and congressmen as independent individuals that
form a class with their own priorities in mind is nothing but a farce. In
addition, by criticizing these aspects, they avoid to discuss whose
interests are the parties actually representing. It is enough to look at
some examples to understand the aforementioned idea. The businessmen should
remember that the transformation in the distribution system of the
legislative seats, the sudden approval of dollarization, or the lack of
support to the agricultural sector are the results of a decision that has
been definitively examined by ARENA. And that this has been motivated by the
defense of several specific interests connected with the party’s most
influential sector.
To tie the hands of the dissidents
After making the former considerations, it is only logical to think that
this ENADE 2003 did not have the objectives that were officially announced.
Their approach looks more like a warning to the opposition than the defense
of a democratic government. The advice of the businessmen about the virtues
of a democratic government, is only a reaction against the uncertainties
about the electoral results of next March.
The considerations about the “necessary democratic governance” –beyond the
inexactitude of some assertions that, for instance, speak about the
separation of powers as something exclusive of the presidential regimes, or
the wrong dissertation about an almost idyllic democratic governance, where
there would be no social conflicts- are a wink to an opposition that
threatens to replace ARENA.
However, in order to prevent any kind of sudden turns, the businessmen take
the time to remind the dissidents about the rules of “the healthy economic,
political, and social administration” of the public assets. According to the
businessmen, “it is necessary to accept that, as we speak, the public sector
faces several restrictions that are the result of engagements such as: the
service of the debt, the transactions that according to the law have to be
made in connection to the public sector (with the Judicial Organ and the
municipalities, for example, and the payment of the pensions of the former
system). Because of those reasons, the social conditions have to be
administrated in a prudent manner and with vision. To use the social
problems as a political flag is the worst that could happen to the country,
because the populist perspectives do not resolve the essential problems,
instead, they complicate the situation even more”.
The main concern of the businessmen resides in this text. They fear that the
“irresponsible politicians” use the social problems as a political flag.
This is an absurd argument that reveals the nervous state of the business
elite. To denounce the critical situation of most Salvadorans, to denounce
the lack of economic options of the three administrations of ARENA is to use
the social problems as a political flag. The only thing that they did not
say was that it is not convenient to discuss the economic or the social
problems, and that it is necessary to avoid any arguments about the
political orientation of the right wing, because that would be an obstacle
for the democratic governance.
The politicians danced to the rhythm of the ANEP
The presence of the presidential candidates in the encounter organized by
the ANEP is a sample of how much power this group has inside the national
political circles. The participants were polite enough not to hurt the
feelings of the businessmen. Elias Saca swore that he would support the anti-populist
program. He said that the investments made on the social issues will not
affect the interests of the public finances. According to Saca, his team
will act “with creativity, efficiency, and will power”. He offered to the
businessmen “more opportunities to expand their markets, joining them as the
true partners of progress”. At the same time, he asked them to support him
in order to finish with the country’s reconstruction process. The candidate
from ARENA did not only use the main thesis of the businessmen, but he also
reaffirmed the need to neutralize any change that might affect their
interests.
The candidate of the CDU-PDC, Hector Silva, spoke about the need to discuss
a fiscal reform. He said that it was necessary to “agree about our needs,
and once we are sure about it we will discuss how to fulfill them in order
to have a successful fiscal reform”. However, the candidate of the coalition
did not say how long he will take to reach this sort of agreement with the
businessmen, and who will set the limits. Something similar happened with
the candidate of the PCN, who dedicated himself to rave about the public
administration and the agricultural sector. Rafael Machuca said that he will
not enlarge the dimensions of the State, but that he will make it more
efficient.
In his presentation before the ANEP, the candidate of the FMLN gave a
moralist speech to the businessmen. “My advice to the most prominent
businessmen is that it is important to make certain sacrifices. These
sacrifices will not make you poor, they will allow you to honor this
country, they will bring to you many satisfactions, and will give prestige
to your families and descendants”. Even if the businessmen did not take the
message very well (specially the one about paying their share of taxes in
the right proportion), Handal said that it would be something simple and
accessible for them.
The general line of the candidates’ discourses in the meeting organized by
the ANEP revealed a crucial issue for the democratic governance that the
businessmen claim to defend: their relation with the politicians. It seems
as if the candidates attended to that meeting in order to get the approval
of the business elite. Obviously, this is not about going back to an
authoritarian era and overlooking the importance of the business sector for
the country’s economy. This is only about remembering a golden rule of the
democratic governance: the citizens have to respect the decisions that the
chosen authorities make, according to the already established regulations.
In this sense, even if we have to consider the interests of the whole
country, it is also necessary to remember that in the society there is a
confrontation of interests, because different sectors are competing for the
same (and scarce) resources.
The business elite has managed to be the main beneficiary of the few
national resources. A democratic governance process seems to be the way to
negotiate with them what are they willing to tolerate. Instead of doing this,
we should reconsider the idea of an independent State that imposes its
authority (not in the authoritarian sense of the word) in order to demand
that the citizens fulfill their obligations. The candidates that begged the
business elite for their comprehension in order to face the country’s social
problems (even the FMLN, which had the most aggressive approach), have to
understand that the agreements and the dialogues are not equivalent to an
evasion of the responsibilities that the political authorities have.
The different publications about the redistribution of the wealth produced
inside the country indicate that El Salvador is one of the nations with a
higher level of inequality in the whole hemisphere. It is a fact that the
wealth produced by the society is concentrated in only a few hands. None of
the candidates, especially not Saca, reminded the ANEP that the social
investment has to be financed, mostly, by the businessmen. In other words,
this is about putting more pressure on the wealthiest ones because they are
those who contribute less. The society is not more governable just because
the authorities ask for the approval of the most powerful circles before
making their decisions. Although it is still important to explain the reason
of their decisions, their objectives, and operate with a transparent
procedure.
The sudden preoccupation of the businessmen for the “democratic governance”
seemed more like a desperate measure to neutralize the possible dissidents.
No one spoke about this issue before because with the presence of ARENA in
the Executive power they were sure that their interests were going to be
defended. However, there is no doubt that the ANEP has quite a peculiar
concept about democratic governance. It not only reduces the chosen
representatives to simple marionettes in the hands of the most influential
groups, but with an idyllic idea of social harmony, it prepares the way to
protest against any project that might not beneficiate its most powerful and
influential members. A society that can be governed through a permanent
consensus does not necessarily include the interests of the workers or those
of the majority, a majority that the official newspapers usually refer to as
–whenever they demand respect for their rights- “professional agitators” and
“ungrateful terrorists” who do not appreciate the advantages of
Neoliberalism.
|
