Center for Information, Documentation and Research Support (CIDAI)
E-mail: cidai@cidai.uca.edu.sv

Central American University (UCA)
Apdo. Postal 01-168, Boulevard Los Próceres
San Salvador, El Salvador, Centro América
Tel: +(503) 210-6600 ext. 407
Fax: +(503) 210-6655
 

     Proceso is published weekly in Spanish by the Center for Information, Documentation and Research Support (CIDAI) of the Central American University (UCA) of El Salvador. Portions are sent in English to the *reg.elsalvador* conference of PeaceNet in the USA and may be forwarded or copied to other networks and electronic mailing lists. Please make sure to mention Proceso when quoting from this publication.

     Subscriptions to Proceso in Spanish can be obtained by sending a check for US$50.00 (Americas) or $75.00 (Europe) made out to 'Universidad Centroamericana' and sent to the above address. Or read it partially on the UCA’s Web Page: http://www.uca.edu.sv
     For the ones who are interested in sending donations, these would be welcome at Proceso. Apdo. Postal 01-168, San Salvador, El Salvador.

INDEX

Editorial:  The irresponsible ones from the left and the right-wing
Politics:  About terrorism and terrorists
Politics:  What the attacks meant for the right-wing
Economy:  Terrorist attacks, aerial transportation and tourism
 
 
 
 
 
 

EDITORIAL

    Irresponsibility is not the exclusive property of anyone in particular. Anybody can commit a serious mistake in front of everyone's eyes, and still seem as fresh as if nothing is actually happening. Certainly, much of this has occurred in El Salvador during the last days, after the terrorist attacks against the United States. Because of the dimensions of the events, the FMLN's left-wing had to say and do something about the drama that the United States was living. On the other hand, the right- wing, specially the one closer to El Diario de Hoy, was going to pay close attention to what the left-wing party would do (or not do).

    Four days after the attack to the United States, the FMLN served a "scrumptious" dish to the right-wing on a silver platter. During a demonstration convoked by different social organizations because of the independence day celebrations, some of the participants not only burned flags from El Salvador and the United States —something that is already traditional in this type of protests—, but they also celebrated with screams and graffiti the destruction caused by the terrorist attacks against the United States. Several personalities of the FMLN accompanied the demonstration that, obviously, was not intended to support the terrorist who perpetrated this tragedy, but that was the chance for ignorant individuals —their social and politic roots are unknown— to display their most primitive instincts.

    A terrible mistake of the ones who do not seem to realize the human, economic and political consequences that would follow after a war declared by the United States against one or several Arabian nations. The only aspect that can be on their side is that their ignorance is of such proportions that things like that do not even cross their minds, just as they cannot even think about the consequences that can affect Latin America if a green light was given —in the context of an offensive from United States and its alliance against the world's terrorism— to the reinforcement of both the defense and the security apparatus. The FMLN leaders deserve to be judged even more severely, because although they were present at the demonstration, they were not even capable to separate themselves immediately from it nor to condemn the actions perpetrated by ignorant ones, fanatics or the people with negative intentions who joined them.

    For ethical reasons it was necessary to take distance and to protest against those who think that the suffering and the death of the innocent are a mechanism for the redemption of humanity. The leaders of the FMLN gave signs of a lack of human sensibility, without which their moral authority to judge others and to judge itself breaks in pieces. Political reasons oblige to an unrestricted rejection to the attack, specially because of the importance that the cooperation relations with the United States government might have in order to complete a political, economic and social reform project as an alternative to the already established one. Giving signs of an unforgivable lack of political sense, the FMLN leaders -the ones who stood by the demonstration, the ones who did not, and the ones who did not even realize what was happening- have been just one step away from becoming enemies of the United States government, and not precisely for defending a fair cause.

    These political and ethic mistakes of the FMLN have become the main course of the right-wing press, who has not only exposed the FMLN's errors —or by emphasizing on the disagreements between orthodox, renovators or institutional ones—, but has also, with immoral journalistic actions, distorted some of the declarations officially made by the left-wing party. The guinea pig was the press release "The world peace is in danger", delivered by the legislative sector of the FMLN (dated September 11th), in which first section the following is mentioned: the legislative sector of the FMLN "condemns and is awfully sorry for the terrorist acts the city of New York suffered this morning, these acts prove the grotesque use of violence of the states and the anarchy groups. It also condemns any kind of terrorism, the one that attacks the civilians and promotes economic policies that affect humanity and subject people to hunger".

    Making a display of the lowest kind of journalism, in El Diario de Hoy (September 18th, page 12) a part of the text formerly described is quoted a couple of times in the following way: "the authorities of the FMLN connected the attack 'with the grotesque use of violence of the United States and that one of the anarchy groups'". One thing is to condemn the grotesque use of violence of the states —as it is written in the FMLN's document, displayed for more information in the El Diario de Hoy— and another thing is to say that the violence is exerted by the United Sates, which is not said in the FMLN's press release. The reporter who wrote the story -or the person who edited it- added the word "United" to the word "States", clumsily distorting the original text. It can be read again in the same page that "in the first part of the press release, the FMLN expresses that the terrorist attacks against New York and Washington prove 'the grotesque use of violence of the United States and the one of the anarchy groups'".

    The first time it could have been considered a mistake, but not for a second time, no matter if on September 21st (page 24) the mistake is accepted. This is one of the traditional practices of a manipulative and irresponsible journalism, that invents accusations against those who do not share their same ideas and options.  In El Diario de Hoy, therefore they do not go around the bushes to distort reality. In this particular case, the irresponsibility of this newspaper is not something to joke about, since it is accusing the FMLN of calling terrorist a State that besides suffering a terrorist attack, is preparing itself militarily to fight a war against terrorism in a world level. It seems that there are people in the right-wing who, just like in the left-wing, do not realize what is at risk in he present context. Their selfish rivalry and their personal interests do not allow them to see beyond the tip of their noses.

    In the events of the terrorist attacks against the United States, the need to reflect about terrorism and terrorists emerges again in our country. Plenty of wrong opinions have been expressed about it, sometimes even with the specific intention of confusing the public opinion, and continue, by the way, with a anticommunist battle that lost sense a long time ago.

    Before anything else, it must be clear that the word "terrorist" has not the same meaning of the word "guerrilla member", the definition of "terrorism" has not the same meaning as "insurgent movement". Only by a clumsy manipulation —ideologically interested— someone can fall into the already mentioned identifications. The so called "smart" Salvadoran politicians, taking advantage of the shock caused by the September 11th attacks against the United States, have made the former interpretations, at the same time that they have exposed their deepest resentments.

    Many of them are still at war, with the only difference that now their ferocity is at the service of the opposite band. Then again, this does not mean that a guerrilla member cannot commit a terrorist act or that an insurgent movement cannot have terrorism ingredients, either as a part of their strategy —for instance, the Sendero Luminoso, in Peru; or the ETA, in Spain—, or as an effect derived from the execution of their strategy of a political and military struggle in the context of an open civil war.

    However, the equation is not immediate, and it cannot be established a priori. Precisely, that was what happened in El Salvador during the eighties —thanks, in a good measure, to the anticommunist speech that came from the Pentagon and from the Department of State of the United States—, when the name "terrorist" was used to refer to those who were part of (or those who sympathized with) the FMLN. As a consequence of this identification, thousands of innocent people were murdered, while many others were tortured or just "disappeared".

    Even now, when the situation should be very clear in reference to this issue, there are those who insist on identifying the insurgent Salvadoran movement as a terrorist movement, and consider as terrorists those who were part of it, forgetting that terrorism is not an exclusive risk of the armed left-wing —or that it is not an exclusive feature of movements such as the Sendero Luminoso, nor a particular characteristic of the radical Arabian groups or the ETA—, but that any groups or individuals  —just the same as any State—  who claim to be jealous defenders of the human rights and democracy are equally prone to terrorism.

    It has to be spelled with all its letters: there were terrorist actions among the Salvadoran left-wing, but terrorism was not the factor that defined its revolutionary strategy nor the identity of most of its followers.

    Certainly, whatever amount of terrorism that the Salvadoran insurgents had has no justification, and at some point those who were involved in such acts should respond to the society and to justice. Once this has been said, the other side of the coin must not be hidden: the terrorism in which the Salvadoran army members as sponsors or accomplices of the Death Squads, or as the executors of the so called Low Intensity War Strategy —designed by expert members of the United States Army— which included terrorism as one of its basic components.

    The state terrorism was not an empty phrase in El Salvador —or in Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, Bolivia or Brazil— and it is not an invention of the freedom and democracy enemies. It was about a daily reality of fear, uncertainty and terror, not caused by the guerrilla, but by the "order agents": national guards armed men, the police and the immediate reaction battalion. Those who were responsible of this terrorism will also have to respond to the society for their misdeeds; just like those who advised and sponsored them.

    The Salvadoran right-wing is taking advantage of the September 11th terrorist attacks against the United States to discredit the main national left-wing party, with the intention to consolidate their control power in the country. Among the factors that make that campaign possible are the international political context, the mistakes of the FMLN or the public opinion's shock. The sudden panic for the world's safety issue has been a reason for the right-wing politicians to rearrange the pieces of the national political game.

    The first symptoms of such actions are evident through the press campaign aimed to highlight the mistakes of some of the left-wing politicians, because of their participation in movements that support the idea of the mentioned terrorist acts. On the September 15th demonstration, a traditional left-wing concentration apart from the official independence celebrations, curses were screamed against the United States and its international policies, at the same time the demonstrators emphasized on their support to Osama bin Laden. The descriptions used by the national press editorialists to refer to those demonstrators leave no room for doubts: they are considered as a band of terrorists, willing to cause suffering to the Salvadoran population again.

    Evidently, with these complaints, the right-wing wants to keep emphasizing on the idea that they were the only ones who brought the peace to this country. A former president of El Salvador, Alfredo Cristiani is presented as the only mastermind of the Peace Agreements. At this moment, it is all about reminding this idea, convincing the Salvadorans that the FMLN is not ready to live in peace: with their actions they seem to be insensitive to the pain that saddens the families of the world, and they tarnish the image of the country. And, in the worst of the cases, they want to turn El Salvador into an international conspiratorial point against the United States.

    It is useless to say that the right wing appears to be willing to block the accomplishment of such dreams; not only to reassure tranquility to the life of the Salvadorans, but also to avoid bad relations with the United States government. The media does not become tired of enhancing the declarations of the president of that country, inviting humanity to choose its place between the two parts in conflict: the good ones and the bad ones. Deciding to support the occidental good ones, defenders of freedom, democracy, and the free market, or prepare themselves to receive bombardments for collaborating with the bad ones and the terrorists.  This simplified definition of the relations between the countries is convenient to the right-wing thinkers. That is the reason why the war and the anti-taliban combat drums sound louder here; even louder than the ones that are heard in more important countries at an international level, such as Canada or France.

    There is not enough information yet to testify about the effects of the fear campaign over the national public opinion, but it is growing larger everyday. In addition, the FMLN, with their childish way to conduct politics, contributes to give credit to the campaign of its detractors. After the participation of some of its leaders in the demonstration, its answer to the right-wing's campaign has been shy and its emendation actions have not helped to stop the avalanche. That might be the reason why a reporter called their initiative "mea culpa", when he referred to the committee who visited the United States Embassy, together with a legislative delegation.

    However, others will also see how legitimate is the fact that the right wing takes advantage of the FMLN's mistakes to damage their potential political support from the citizenry. To tell the truth, at first sight, there would be nothing satanic about that. Any competitive political system could go through the same situation. The different political sensibilities try to take advantage of the mistakes of their contenders.

    Still, the right-wing's tricks to take away political support for the FMLN, in certain occasions, go beyond what is permitted in a competitive party system. In other words, the propaganda and certain political actions of the right-wing predict a political context contrary to the so called liberty of the adversaries in order to gain electoral sympathy. In other words, the struggle to gain electoral sympathy must have certain barriers that should not be trespassed, to avoid putting at risk the flag that everyone claims to defend. The adversary's discredit intentions do not legitimate any political decision.

    On the other hand, it is interesting the replacement of the security guards at the Comalapa International Airport and the Acajutla Seaport by members of the Armed Forces and the National Civilian Police. According to several press sources, that change is due to the last visit of the FBI to check on the safety of the main national airport. The newspapers picture the arrival of the armed forces to the Acajutla Seaport as commando actions that assaulted those installations without saying a word.

    Because of this situation, people could think that it is all about a governmental effort to provide the airports and seaports with more security measures, considering the September 11th tragedy in the United States. This decision would also be made in the context of an offer from the Central American presidents who, during their meeting last week, expressed their determination to collaborate with that country in its anti-terrorist fight.

    People could also think that it is all about an action that justifies its legitimacy after the September 15th demonstration, where left-wing activists expressed their support to bin Laden and the taliban. It would be a way to give confidence to the United States and to try to alleviate the fact that the country has been pointed out as a possible hide-out for terrorist groups. The governmental decisions are aimed to prevent the possible use of the national ground by terrorist groups. And because of this objective it pictures the image of this country lined up with the United States positions regarding the war that the U.S.A. is about to fight against terrorism.

    However, the nature of the declarations, and the media manipulation of the incidents that took place on September 15th, in which FMLN sympathizers participated lead to suppose that their intentions are dark and that it is convenient to clarify them to the public opinion. These type of commando actions, apparently without any justification at all, do not provide us of more safety, and it do not allow the common citizen to understand what is the nature of this problem.

    On the other hand, it all seems to indicate that in the struggle to monopolize the popular support and to discredit the left-wing in this context, their opponents are willing to start with a militarized process of the country. The starring role that is intended to give to the armed forces when it comes to protect seaports and airports is inopportune and it is not related to the type of threat that the country would have to face in the present context. However, it seems that the right-wing understands the present moment as an opportunity to accomplish its dreams of seeing once again the armed forces involved in both vigilance duties and in the police intelligence activities.

    There is no reason to be surprised about: it is a strategy to keep away the FMLN, and to consolidate the right-wing's power. The arguments that might come about the approval of the national budget predict an even more stronger campaign that will intend to penetrate even more into the public opinion. In the end, a discredit war is considered more important than a rational discussion about the national and the international issues.

    Two weeks after the terrorist attacks against the United States, it can be said that the most affected economic sectors have been the aerial transportation, tourism and its related sectors. This is due mainly to the indirect effects of the events, since the direct material loss has been —in relative terms— of very little importance: four commercial planes and a small percentage of New York and Washington Buildings. Without denying the strong human impact, the truth is that the material loss is not considerable, and does not explain just by itself the almost immediate crisis that has been generated in the main aviation companies of the United States.

    As soon as the New York stock market was opened, the aviation companies started to suffer a millionaire loss, due to the reduction of the investors trust, and due to the avalanche of stock market agents rushing to sell the shares. In fact, how most of the United States stock market's prices dropped can be explained by the reduction of the share's value (at the main aircraft and aviation companies). Without a real consideration impact, speculation has shown again its preponderant role in the world's economy.

    Fortunately, to this day the impact over the aerial transportation in Central America (where about 7,000 people work) is limited, although it does give signs of a small reduction of the ticket sales. In the same way, an impact over the tourism and the services-utilities sectors is also expected, if the average of tourists, businessmen and governmental officials is reduced.

    However, the most important impact would not come from the already mentioned sectors, but from two vital sectors for the Salvadoran economy: the family remittances and the textile maquila. This context asks for an examination of the airlines' situation as well as an examination of its perspectives and economic implications at a mid and a short term.

    A Salvadoran company is known as the one that has eventually absorbed its neighbor countries' aerial companies. In the present, the "TACA Group" gathers all the Central American international lines, and already counts with affiliates in South America.  In fact, the aerial transportation in El Salvador and Central America lays the foundations of its profitability in a captive market (the one of the Central American travelers). Additionally,  the "natural" flow from and to the United States of the migrant workers and their families becomes another very important source of profitability for this company.

    In this scenery, relevant effects cannot be expected over the aerial transportation, and this is how the TACA group's executive president (Federico Bloch) understands it. For him, the most relevant aspect is not the reduction of travelers, but the impact that the United States government's subsidy has given to its companies to reduce the consequences of the stock market's crisis. In this context, he invited all the TACA customers to remain "faithful" to his company, which now will have to compete with subsidized ones.

    As for the tourism sector, El Salvador will not suffer a great impact, since this country is relatively small if it is compared with its neighbors. In addition, it essentially depends on the amount of tourists who come from other countries of the region, and the one generated by the migrant workers who live in the United States, a group which is not expected to suffer any relevant reductions.

    Although there are no reasons to think that El Salvador will suffer a significant impact in the aerial transportation or in the tourism derived from the confidence crisis generated by the attacks, it must be said that the country is exposed to possible impacts of great importance derived from thedemand's reduction of the exportations to the United States, a reduction of employment and work for the migrant Salvadoran population, and/or a lower growth of the family remittances.

    In pessimistic scenery, it should be expected that the United States reduces its consumption of not-too-necessary goods as well as secondary importance services, two of the branches where Salvadoran employment sources are placed. In El Salvador, clothing items are assembled by the local labor for the United States' market, while in that country services of catering/restaurant business and accommodations are provided by companies who employ the Salvadoran workers and their relatives. Consequentially, negative effects could appear in the generation of jobs at the maquila and in the growth of the family remittances.

    For the moment, it would be exaggerated to say that the present conflict could acquire world war characteristics; however, in any case, it is one more complication in for the Salvadoran economic scene. There was already a first impact in the behavior of the United States clothing orders and in the aerial transportation activities that, fortunately, was only temporary and not very significant. Another short-term possible impact could be an increase of the petroleum prices and its products, due to a possible military conflict in the Middle East; however, for the moment, the prices have remained low.

    In the international economic scene, practically no country is exempt of being affected for what is happening in the more developed countries and, most of all, in the United States. However, beyond those implications, the impact that the protective policies could have is already predicted, such as the subsidies to strategic sectors that —because of the attacks— are now also excused by the United States government, as in the case of the aerial transportation business (the farming sector enjoys a wide program of subsidies and state assistance ever since a while ago).

    In this context, the tense situation reminds us of two issues that, even though they are not new, still are and will be debate topics in El Salvador: first, the false assumption that says that the less intervention of the state assures a better economic activity; and, second, the urgent need to diversify the production and the exportations.

    While in El Salvador, and in other Latin American countries, markets are opened while the regulation duties of the state in the economic issues are reduced, in the United States not only the highly interventionist policies remain (subsidies and the state's manipulation of the interest rates), but they have also grown because of the effect of the recent attack, to the point that now the aerial companies also enjoy the state's protection. Instead, in El Salvador, the eventual disappearance of the state has gone to the extreme of eliminating its capacity of implement measures for the monetary policies.

    On the other hand, the dependency that the Salvadoran economy has from the family remittances and from the maquila activities turn it highly vulnerable to what happens outside its frontiers. Even so, The government insists on placing in those activities its economic model (assuming that it counts with one). Probably, the most important challenge that the present government faces is to overcome its ultra-liberal economic visions, and accept —just like the United States and other "free economy" countries often do— that development is not achieved without the intervention of the state.