The full Crossing Borders 07 group on our last day in El Salvador
In the past two weeks, we spent our time in the country of
Students in the ARENA office during our visit. The man in the photo at the left is Roberto D’Aubisson, the founder of ARENA
One of the most challenging parts of the trip was our visit to the Legislative Assembly where we met with deputies from the ARENA and FMLN parties, the two major parties in
Take ARENA, the National Republican Alliance, for instance. It was founded 26 years ago by a man named Roberto D’Aubisson, who graduated with high honors from the
And don’t forget the FMLN! The party started as a guerrilla group in 1981 but was institutionalized as a political party with the UN Peace Accords on January 16, 1992.[5] They came together for many reasons, but one of the major reasons was that they saw a lack of democracy in the country. To go from fighting this to being a part of a democratic system is something that seems a bit contradictory, although I can understand how they are able to make change in different ways now. FMLN deputy Blanca Flor Bonilla, who took part in the guerrilla struggle during the war, shared this same problem of vision, saying that the “transition from military guerrilla group to political party has been very difficult” in that some of the members thought that the FMLN should no longer be a revolutionary force, but should be transformed into a social and democratic party,
while others maintained that they should stay as a revolutionary group because that would be the only way to obtain the rights they were seeking.[6] I tend to look at the situation like the latter group of people and have a hard time seeing how real change can take place when there are restrictions and when a group is fighting within a structural institution. Many former FMLN members, when discussing the FMLN as a political party, have pointed to their differences of opinions, although never explicitly, mentioning that while they respect the party as people, they don’t share their opinions.[7] There are some, like Hector Ibarra Chavez, former comandante of the FMLN, that are “ashamed of comrades who fought together but are now big politicians”.[8] It just makes me wonder if institutionalizing a social movement is the best way to enter into change. The FMLN deputy also shared that although during the war, the FMLN really knew how to give personal attention, but with the onset of the government party, it is hard to give personalized attention because they have so much more to focus on as a group. In speaking with Hilda Parduchi, a member of Las Dignas, the first feminist organization in the country that emerged out of the FMLN, there are still major problems with the structure of the FMLN as a patriarchal institution with the ideology that “when all class issues are resolved, then we can focus on women’s issues”.[9] This focus on economic struggle without much regard for sexual and bodily rights comes right from Marxist ideology, of which the FMLN is heavily influenced by.
Even though I feel contradictions between ARENA and FMLN serving as political groups, I am very glad that they are fighting in a democratic political front for electoral change, and not in another war. Leslie Shuld, director of The Center for Exchange and Solidarity with El Salvador (CIS for short), however, presently sees a situation with similar conditions for war which she feels could result in a social explosion, fighting against the increased poverty and “unbearable economic situations” that the country is presently under.[10] These conditions are such that, half of Salvadorans live on $2 a day[11]; the price of beans, a staple in the Salvadoran diet, has increased over 100% from 50 cents to $1.25[12]; common crime has risen, resulting in beatings and killings for little more than $5-$10 dollars all throughout the country[13]; and remittances from the United States have become close to 20% of the Gross National Product of El Salvador, reaching $3.5 million every year.[14] Through all of this, however, there are still groups living and working for change, such as the cooperative community Nueva Esperanza in the south of
[1] The SOA Watch: www.soaw.org
[2] Sister Kathy Long, 11/13/107
[3] Mariela Pena Pinto 11/23/07
[4] Mariela Pena Pinto 11/23/07
[5] Carlos Garcia, 11/22/07
[6] Blanco Flor Bonilla, 11/23/07
[7] Rolanda Cazeras, 11/27/07
[8] Hector Ibarra Chavez, 9/24/07
[9] Hilda Parduchi, 11/22/07
[10] Leslie Shuld, 11/22/07
[11] Leslie Shuld, 11/22/07
[12] Carlos Garcia, 11/22/07
[13] Carlos Garcia, 11/22/07
[14] Leslie Shuld, 11/22/07
1 comentario:
Perhaps you should do some original research before libeling your fellow US citizens (the ones who taught at the School of the Americas). Look all through SOAW's claims, and you will not find one person who ever used what he learned at the school to commit a crime, not one. Not even Roberto D'Aubisson, whose only course was a Communications Officer Course of a few weeks in 1972. Perhaps you can explain how learning how to use military radios and telephones leads to murder planning--I fail to see the connection. Whatever you think of the school, Pres. Clinton and the Congress closed it seven years ago. The Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation that replaced it is open for your observation/investigation any workday. Come sit in classes, talk with students and faculty, review our instructional materials. Then you can speak with authority about why we should be closed. I am the public affairs officer at the institute. I'll be glad to send you driving directions to our door.
Sincerely,
Lee A. Rials
Publicar un comentario