1973-08-23

Welcome to Latin American Press Review, a weekly selection and analysis of important events and issues in Latin America, as seen by leading world newspapers, with special emphasis on the Latin American press. This program is produced by the Latin American Policy Alternatives Group. 

The British News Weekly, Latin America, reports from Chile that one of the issues at the heart of the Christian Democrat's decision to break off talks with President Salvador Allende last week was Allende's resistance to the demand for the armed forces to be represented in the cabinet. This, paradoxically, was the reverse of his attitude last October, when truck and bus and taxi owners staged a paralyzing strike, similar to that declared at the end of last month. In October, the armed forces joined the cabinet in a stabilizing move, which prevented the country drifting into civil war. 

The situation is very different now. Not only has the country itself been so sharply polarized that compromise is almost impossible, as the difficulties in the talks between Allende and the Christian Democrats have demonstrated, but the armed forces themselves have become deeply embroiled in the current political strife. The resultant strain is evident not only in the armed forces relations with the left and with the right, but also among the military themselves. Senior officers are being classed by left-wing politicians, not always entirely fairly, as "golpistas" or "no-golpistas".

That is, as to whether or not they would support military intervention in the form of a coup. One left-wing commentator was reported as stating, "The armed forces must be either for or against the people." This would appear to leave little room for the military's own hopes, backed by Allende himself, namely that the military should remain outside politics and retain popular respect.

The British News Weekly continues that many on the left and in the trade unions were already unhappy about the armed forces' program of searching for arms, particularly in the factories and offices taken over after the attempted military coup at the end of June. This resentment boiled over last week, when a worker was shot dead by troops searching for arms in a factory in a southern city. The local socialist deputy denounced the regional army commander as a megalomaniac and a madman, which brought about outraged protests from other generals.

This week, however, it was the opposition's turn to be unhappy with the military, as they began to carry out Allende's strict instructions to requisition trucks belonging to striking owners, and to protect convoys of those not on strike. The army and police have firm orders to shoot anyone attacking these convoys, and already four people have died.

The resumption of Allende's talks with the Christian Democrats still looks very uncertain, despite some measure of agreement over legislative matters. He certainly will not agree to de-nationalize any industries already taken over. Also, it would be disastrous for him to ask the military to dislodge the very militant workers who have occupied a number of factories since the attempted coup in June.

Even if he agrees to include the military in his cabinet, this is likely to create as many problems as it solves, particularly among his own supporters, many of whom fear this may spell the end of the government's revolutionary policies. For the first time, the armed forces are a divisive rather than a unifying factor. This report on Chile was taken from the British paper, Latin America.

Excélsior, of Mexico City, reports from Argentina that General Juan Perón, ratified as presidential candidate in the upcoming elections, has proclaimed that his health is excellent. The ex-leader, 77 years old, announced his decision to run at a national convention, while millions of people demonstrated in support. He delineated as his primary goal unifying all Argentinians. He said, quote, "We will go slowly, but we will proceed." 

He appeared with his wife Isabel, who has been nominated as the vice presidential candidate. Perónsaid that his government would not present any spectacular plans for development, but rather, carefully studied projects, and he criticized economists and politicians who called for rapid development as the top priority for Argentina, saying that the super developed countries regret what they have done, because their technology has caused the destruction of their natural resources. That from Excélsior. 

Latin America, in a more detailed analysis of the Argentinian political maneuvers, points out that the nomination of Isabel Martinez de Perón by the Justicialista party congress as her husband's running mate in the September presidential election seems to be a holding formula which might be altered should the radical party leader, Ricardo Balbin, become available for the vice presidential nomination. Both Perón and Balbin have continued to explore the possibility of a joint, radical Peronist ticket, but the political obstacles in Balbin's acceptance of the vice presidential spot seem formidable. 

While the radicals continue to debate the unpalatable choice with which they're faced, Isabel Perón fits neatly with the new image of Peronism. If Albin fails, Perón has another alternative scheme of his sleeve, the creation of a council of state with members drawn from all political sectors to assist the president. Like the proposed electoral pact with the radical party, such a broadening of the Peronist government's institutional base would help eliminate any threat of a new intervention by the armed forces. 

The British Newsweek continues that the ex-president Hector Campora is about to be sent as ambassador to Mexico, thus ending the attempt of the Peronist youth to build him up as the champion of the left. Perón is denouncing guerrilla activities in terms which seem extraordinary when compared to his defense of the guerrillas only last year. Then he said they were the natural response to an oppressive dictatorship. Today, however, he says that they are agents of international communism. 

For the time being, there is little the left can do. So much face was placed in Perón that even the most amazing inconsistencies have to be accepted or explained away. This from the British News Weekly, Latin America. 

Another news brief taken from Latin America, reports that tensions have been rising again in Mexico. Latin America reports that at the National University in Mexico City, a student was shot dead in a confused incident last weekend. This follows an alleged attempt to kidnap the rector purportedly to be exchanged for 150 students accused of hijacking buses and about 100 protesting peasants they were supporting a student was also shot dead in Guadalajara, Western Mexico. Meanwhile, 17 members of a group that calls themselves the student revolutionary front have been arrested on suspicion of involvement in the kidnapping of the US consul, Terrence Leonhardy, in Guadalajara last May. This from Latin America. 

Tri Continental News Service reports from Mexico City that the current wave of land seizures is an expression of Mexico's rural problems, according to peasant leader Ramon Danzos, now in jail there. The agrarian reform and the government's proposal for deep going solutions will not solve the president's difficulty. Danzos said, "They don't eat speeches, they don't eat promises." 

In recent months, peasants have seized land in the states of Oaxaca, Puebla, Tlaxcala, Guerrero, Veracruz, Jalisco, Guanajuato, Mexico, and San Luis de Potosi. Recently it was revealed that North American owners hold huge estates in the Ciudad Valle zone in San Luis De Potosi state where the peasants have been negotiating for land for more than 30 years. 

The Guardian reports from Uruguay that the Uruguayan dictatorship of President Juan Bordaberry is desperately attempting to destroy its left opposition before it can fight back effectively. 

The Guardian article says that attacks have been launched against leftist political parties, trade unions, and universities. University autonomy was ended August the 1st. Four days earlier, the government passed new union regulations aimed against the Communist Party led National Workers Confederation, which led a two-week-long general strike immediately following the military coup that dissolved the Parliament. The National Workers Confederation itself was declared illegal June the 30th, three days after the coup.

The union has 500,000 members out of the country's total population of nearly three million. A union leader who escaped government repression and reached Cuba, told the press conference there last week about developments during the strike. The union leader, who asked to remain anonymous, said that within an hour of Bordaberry's dissolution of Congress, the National Workers Confederation was able to paralyze 80% of the country's economy. The strike was supported by students, teachers, and after the first week, by the Catholic Church. 

"Because the general strike began just before payday," the Guardian article says, "Workers did not have much money, but block committees were organized for food distribution". The National Workers Confederation leader said that some elements in the Navy and Air Force supported the strike and refused to participate in the repression against it. At one point, sailors saluted striking dock workers in Montevideo. About 200 officers were arrested for disobeying orders, some of them after trying to hold a protest meeting. 

At Uruguay's only oil refinery, though, soldiers did aim rifles at workers and held them as hostages to ensure the arrival of the second shift, forcing them to work. Sabotage forced the closing of the refinery 48 hours after workers damaged a chimney. At a power plant, workers through a chain against the generator, destroying it. Technicians from the power plant hid to avoid being forced to repair it, but were captured by the military after two days. 

Several workers were killed and many were injured during the demonstration in Montevideo. By June 11th, however, the National Workers Confederation said that the workers were exhausted and out of funds. The Confederation directed them back to work, without, however, gaining any concessions and with 52 of their leaders still in prison. 

A number of opposition leaders still remain in jail, including retired General Liber Seregni, the leader of the leftist Broad Front, and Omar Murda, national director of the liberal National Party. The Broad Front and the National Party, along with the communist and socialist parties, have formed a united front against the dictatorship. Those groups, together with the National Workers Confederation, called a one-day general strike for August the 2nd. 

In another important development, the Tupamaros, a guerrilla group, released a statement at the end of July calling for a people's war against the dictatorship. This was the first public statement issued by the Tupamaros since large scale repression began against them in April of 1972. The Tupamaros said the general strike had shown that revolution is a possibility in their country.

The organization also made a self-criticism that it had underestimated the enemy, which had much more power than they had earlier realized. And on the other hand, they said they did not give proper evaluation to the tremendous capacity for struggle of the people, and they confined themselves too much to their own forces. "Without the participation and the leadership of the working classes," they said, "No revolution is possible."

Uruguay is currently being run by the National Security Council created by the military last February. The organization consists of the chiefs of three military services, president Bordaberry, and the ministers of interior, foreign relations, defense, and economy. The council is being aided by the military intelligence service. The military intelligence service has the main responsibility of counterinsurgency against the Tupamaros and repression of political opposition, including torture of political prisoners. The Guardian article concludes that although the workers are well organized and fought hard, they see ranged against them not only the power of the Uruguayan military, but also that of Brazil and US supporters.

Chile Hoy reports from Brazil that the left could take power in most any country in Latin America, but if this happens, what measures would the Brazilian military adopt? they ask. This question, phrased in 1969 by high level officers of the Advanced War School in Brazil, was answered by the highest echelons of the armed forces in a recently released classified document entitled Plan Alpha, in the following manner. If the left took power in Latin America, Uruguay and Chile being the most likely places, the Brazilian armed forces would adopt the following measures. First, they would strengthen and perfect the internal security of Brazil, and secondly, they would transform into strategic areas for Brazil through possible military interventions, various countries and regions, including all of the Uruguayan territory, parts of Brazilian territory, the Guyanas and Paraguay.

The Brazilian military Plan Alpha is not a mere project on paper, as many believed when it was revealed after being smuggled out of secret army files. Ever since the leftist Popular Unity government took power in Chile, the plan appears to be implemented in accelerated form. First, there were expanded arms purchases. Brazil spent $270 million on defense in 1971 and projected spending 800 million in '73, having recently concluded with the Nixon administration in the US, the largest arms deal in Latin American history.

In addition, they have rigorously followed part two of the plan. The aggressive presence of the Brazilian military in Uruguay and Bolivia coincides with the political and economic changes in those countries. Also in Paraguay, the Brazilian regime owns enormous quantities of land along the borders.

Chile Hoy continues that after the Bolivian coup overthrew the moderate liberal Juan Torres, Brazil immediately sent $54 million of credit to the new military regime as well as selling arms to the Bolivian army. A new highway is being constructed through Bolivia to northern Chile and will provide easy access for arms and troops. Before, Bolivia was a landlocked buffer state between the two countries, now it is practically an appendage to Brazil. In another instance, the Brazilian military has a well-known contingency plan known as "Operation 30 hours" to move into Uruguay if opposition to the recent military takeover there becomes too strong. This from the Santiago Weekly, Chile Hoy. 

You are listening to Latin American Press Review, a weekly selection and analysis of important events and issues in Latin America. This program is produced by the Latin American Policy Alternatives Group. Comments and suggestions about the program are welcome and may be sent to us at 2205 San Antonio Street, Austin, Texas. This program is distributed by Communication Center, the University of Texas at Austin. 

Our feature this week is a background analysis of recent events in Chile provided by a group of North Americans called "The Source for North American information", which provides English language news and analysis from Chile. 

This open letter begins, "Chile is entering a decisive stage in its history. Tensions and conflicts which have been held in check for many years are finally surfacing. This process is complex and extremely serious, and as such warrants the understanding of the United States peoples. As US citizens, we have been living in Chile since 1970 and who like everyone else, have been caught up in this increasingly conflictive process, we feel that the people in the United States probably do not fully understand the importance of recent events.

In this brief document, we can neither present a complete summary of recent events in Chile, nor untangle all the misinterpretations and half-truths which appear in US news reports. All we can hope to do is to expose some of these systematic distortions and give you a general framework through which you can begin to understand the real significance of events here."

The recent attempt by sectors of the Chilean army and the fascist organization, Fatherland and Liberty to topple the Unidad popular government coalition by means of a military coup made it apparent to both Chileans and foreigners alike that this nation's peaceful road to socialism is fast exhausting itself. The June 29th uprising, though quickly crushed by loyal troops, has ushered in a new stage in Chile's stormy process. 

In the weeks following the attempted coup hostilities have mounted dangerously. The opposition parties, the Christian Democrats and the National Party have issued threats and ultimatums to the government. The gist of these is that either the Unidad Popular renounce its basic program of transition to socialism or accept the responsibility for any violence that might occur.

In the past, Unidad Popular's enemies have not balked at restricted and strategically timed use of violence. This violence has included the murder of an army chief just before Allende took office, shooting peasants in the South, burning Unidad Poplar party headquarters, bombing a government TV broadcast tower and many other instances, but now for the first time, significant segments of the opposition advocate nothing short of a military takeover.

Confronted by such threats, workers throughout the country have occupied their places of work and have vowed to defend them to the end. In short, dialogue has all but ceased. The nation's institutional framework is tottering and it now seems, little to save Chile from open and widespread conflict. 

What has brought Chile to this point? A view prevalent in the US press is that the economic chaos and political instability was created by the Unidad Popular, and only drastic action can restore the peace and wellbeing which supposedly characterized pre Unidad Popular Chile. The main problem with this view is what it leaves unsaid about Chile's past. 

Economic disorder, extreme social and political instability have indeed made Chile a difficult place for anyone to live at this point, but the current turmoil is hardly an example of life under socialism. Rather, it should be clearly understood to be the chaotic and explosive state of affairs caused by the all-out efforts of a powerful minority to preserve the inherently chaotic and violent system through which it has long prospered. 

Under that system, a nation blessed with vast reserves of national wealth has been unable to provide a majority of its people with even the basic necessities of life. When Unidad Popular took office, 40% of Chilean's suffered from malnutrition. 68% of the nation's workers were earning less than what was officially defined as a subsistence wage and another large number of people were living only slightly above what we would call the poverty level. 

While allowing millions of Chileans to live under such conditions, this system permitted foreigners to drain off vast quantities of the nation's natural wealth. In the past 60 years alone, the US copper companies operating in Chile have taken home profits equivalent to half of the value of all the nation's assets accumulated over a period of 400 years. What little remains of the country's wealth has traditionally been concentrated in the hands of a privileged few. 

This irrational system has been marked throughout Chili's history by a long, bitter and often bloody class struggle. On the one hand, the nation's peasants, miners, factory workers, manual laborers of all kinds, the many sub and unemployed, the vast majority of the population commonly referred to as the working class has demanded a larger share of the nation's social wealth. On the other hand, the nation's upper class, the large landowners, industrialist bankers, those who own and control all the major means of production and sources of wealth in the country, frequently as partners or representatives of foreign interests, have fought to retain its political and economic control of the society. 

The middle class, small and medium landowners, small and medium entrepreneurs, clerks, professionals, white collar workers and public employees have shifted their allegiance between these two antagonistic groups in accord with how they perceive their short range interests. 

Over the years, the Chilean working class struggle has grown in strength and size. It has evolved from sporadic spontaneous uprisings to more organized and strikes, and from there it has entered the arena of parliamentary politics. As it has advanced, the national upper class and the foreign interests whose profit depend upon the continued economic and political power of this local upper class have defended their threatened control. To do so, they have used a variety of means. Violent repression was one. 

On a number of occasions, it took the form of out and out massacres, one example of which was the slaying of some 2,000 striking nitrate miners, port workers and their families, all unarmed, in the town of Iquique in 1907. But as the working class organized in the socialist and communist parties and others made its way into the realm of electoral politics, the elites were forced to change its tactics. If the vote of the organized working class now was strong enough to elect congressmen, then the upper class had to appeal to them in order to win these votes. With practice, the upper class mastered the art of promising enough to win elections while leaving the basic structures of the capitalist society intact once they were in office. 

The party which proved best at the strategy was Eduardo Frei's Christian Democrats. In the 1964 presidential campaign, heavily financed by the US and by Chilean conservatives, the Christian Democratic Party promised the electorate a, "Revolution in liberty." 

This revolution contained many measures traditionally promised by socialism; redistribution of the national income, massive social welfare programs, agrarian reform, banking and tax reform, an end to unemployment and inflation, an attack on monopolies, and increased economic independence. All was brought about in, "Liberty." That is, without class struggle. 

The Christian Democrats easily won the election. They were supported by the conservative elites, who saw the Christian Democrats as a way to keep out the socialists and communists while including the peasants who were attracted to the notion of land reform, large sectors of the middle class, and some workers who had lost faith in capitalism but were taught to fear socialism and were convinced the Christian Democrats offered, "A third way." 

In practice, however, the Christian Democrats simply didn't deliver. Frei promised a lot, but his primary allegiance was to the Chilean upper class. Thus he did not redistribute income because it would've meant taxing the monopolists. He did not curb inflation because the industrialists would not voluntarily freeze prices. Instead of nationalizing copper, Frei, quote, "Chilean-ized it," buying up shares of stock at rates highly favorable to the US copper companies. 

The piecemeal reforms which actually were carried out mainly benefited the middle classes, increasing the gap between them and the working class. The reform, like Frei's elections, were mainly funded through the US Alliance for Progress, which attempted to prove that capitalism was indeed flexible enough to provide a substantially better life for the oppressed. Its main accomplishment for Chile was a huge foreign debt, some $4 billion by 1970. 

Shortly before his party's term was up, one Christian Democratic Congressman summarized its failures in the following words, "We have a historical responsibility and we have done very little for that 85% of the population which voted for a revolution while we are making continual concessions to an oligarchy and a bureaucratic minority of 15%." 

By the 1970 elections Frei's Revolution in Liberty and the US Alliance for Progress had been such a flop that Christian Democratic spokesman edged closer to socialism to hold onto their worker and peasant basis. They spoke carefully of a non-capitalist way to development and even of communitarian socialism. The only party openly opposed to a sharp break with the past was the conservative national party whose sole con turn was to defend its members' monopoly interests. Together, the Christian Democrats' near socialist and the Unidad Popular's frankly socialist programs received 64% of the vote. 

Since then, as the Unidad Popular has tried to implement its program of peaceful advance towards socialism, the Christian Democratic Party has changed its position drastically. From its socialist- sounding 1970 campaign platform, it shifted to support the conservative National Party candidates in various local elections to full alliance with the National Party in the March, 1973 congressional elections to its current position of threatening the government with a military takeover. 

As the Christian Democrats have shifted to the right, they have lost many of their party members who sincerely wanted change. The first splinter group formed the MAPU party. The second formed the Christian Left. Both parties joined the Unidad Popular Coalition. The US press still calls the residual Christian Democrats a, "Left center party". But if that was ever true, it is old history now. The intensification of the class struggle which has split the Christian Democrats has over the course of the past few years divided the entire country into two camps. 

Given Chile's history of domination of the great majority by the local upper classes and foreigners, what is the situation now? Why is there such confusion and instability? On an institutional level, the current conflict is primarily the product of the 1970 elections, which gave control of the executive branch of the government to the representatives of the working classes, the peasantry, the poor, while the legislative and judicial branches remained in the hands of the old ruling classes. 

Unidad Popular's, "Peaceful transition to socialism," called for a legal process which would gradually turn over control of the nation's basic sources of wealth and power held by foreign interests and the Chilean upper class to the workers and to the poor. With the unanimous consent of Congress, Allende began to nationalize the country's natural resources using laws already on the books.

He brought industrial monopolies and banks into the publicly controlled or social area of the economy and broke up the large land holdings which were characteristic of the agrarian sector. If at first the elite were too shocked by its electoral defeat to prevent this, it soon reorganized and fought back with all the arms at its command. One of the strongest is the Congress where opposition parties hold a majority of both houses.

The other tactic of the upper class has been to disrupt the economy, hoping that the disruption will demoralize Allende supporters. By calling the economic disruptions strike, the upper class has tried to imply that workers disagree with Allende, implying that few people actually support the government's position. 

In addition to the local upper class, foreign interests have tried to stop peaceful progress. The Senate hearings on ITT's activities in Chile showed that US corporations and government officials worked to defeat Unidad Popular in 1970 and tried to prevent a Allende from taking office after he won the presidency. Since then, US banks, corporations, the press and government agencies such as the CIA has sided with the Chilean upper class. They have acted in many ways to paralyze and discredit the Unidad Popular. 

The US copper companies, especially Kennecott, have attempted to block Chilean shipments of copper to Europe. The US Export Import Bank, the US dominated World Bank, and the Inner American Development Bank and US private banks have cut loans to Chile and private US corporations have curtailed credit for shipment of replacements parts to Chile, thus effectively denying these nations these items. 

Various CIA agents acting in Chile are implicated in the activities of openly seditious groups. US dollars also have supported opposition strikes such as the October owners strike, when truck owners were paid to stop transporting goods and offers were also made to pay workers if they stopped producing. US funds were also used in the 1964 and 1970 election campaigns, both times against Allende. 

This open letter concludes that the left parties in Chile explored a new road to social justice, the Via Chilena, which was intended to provide a peaceful transition to socialism. This road was blocked by the upper classes using its congress, its courts, its economic power, and most recently, cooperative sectors of the armed forces. In President Allende's words, "It is not the fate of the revolutionary process, which hangs in the balance. Rather, Chile will inevitably continue its march towards socialism. What the fascist opposition threatens is the completion of this process by peaceful means in accordance with our historical tradition. The local upper classes and foreign corporations are trying to make peaceful progress impossible".

This has been report from the Fuente de Información Norteamericana, a group of North Americans who have been providing English language news to North America. 

You've been listening to Latin American Press Review, the weekly selection and analysis of important events and issues in Latin America, as seen by leading world newspapers, with a special emphasis on the Latin American press. This program is produced by the Latin American Policy Alternatives groups. Comments and suggestions about the program are welcome and may be sent to us at 2205 San Antonio Street, Austin, Texas. This program is distributed by Communication Center, University of Texas at Austin.