The following notes have been edited to correct errors and to add explanations and updates. Parenthetical notes and remarks from the original are enclosed in parentheses. Present day [2022] updates are italicized and enclosed in square brackets.
3 October 1990, 2:00 PM - The Permanent Commission of the National Debate for Peace in El Salvador (called CPDN or National Debate)
There are treasury police outside, so Chris and BD go ahead to check out whether or not entering will be safe. When we are given the signal, we go in as a tight, silent! group through a heavy wrought iron gate with an attendant, into a large, impressive-looking building. We are ushered through a reception area and seated on folding chairs in a circle in a large, airy room. The walls and ceiling are white, with royal blue trim and much use of black wrought iron. The floor is terrazzo tile. I point out to Linda that the roof has a sawtooth design very similar to that of the Mill Building [an old paper mill repurposed as a bank operations center, where she and I both worked at the time]. There are two other meetings going on in this room, and voices become loud at times. The sign on one wall says FEDECACES.
An international church worker gives us some background on the organization, which he explains was started at the initiative of the U.S. Embassy as a confederation of cooperatives. Later they went over to the UNTS (National Union of Salvadoran Workers). At this point the embassy went to them as said, "You have a debt to pay for the building. If you stay with UNTS, you must pay at the current exchange rate of 5 to 1, but if you leave UNTS you can pay at the old rate of 2.5 to 1. And if you don't pay, we will take you to court."
The building now houses the National Debate, which was started by Archbishop Rivera y Damas as a mechanism to have representatives from across the political spectrum sit down and talk with one another. The center to left responded positively, but the right, especially the religious right, launched a massive campaign saying that the National Debate is just a front for the FMLN. The Catholic hierarchy was rather chagrined and pulled back from the process.
Most recently they organized a march on 15 September 1990 to promote demilitarization and an end to the war. This drew 150,000 marchers to San Salvador, and many more buses were prevented from entering the city. The march had no apparent effect on the government, however, drawing no official response and very little publicity. Earlier they had gotten 100,000 out on 1 May 1990.
(Slogan on the wall: "Unidos por un Mundo Mejor" - united for a better world.)
Debate has been a major force in persuading people to get together and work things out. The Christian Democrats, now that they are out of power, have taken up all the slogans and rhetoric of the popular organizations. The U.S. embassy has no more use for them, so they are now looking around for support from inside the country. They are a very opportunistic group.
(Chris comes back from having made a phone call and announces that we have been issued our salvos to travel to Chalatenango tomorrow. He and Gail leave to pick them up at the High Command.)
As our guide was talking we were served glass mugs of the best coffee we were to taste in El Salvador. Milk is not an option here, so I drink mine with just a bit of sugar and enjoy it very much. As soon as Chris and Gail leave, we are moved to a small office and seated around another board table. In the pile of books and papers on the table I recognize El Arte de Amor (The Art of Love) by Eric Fromm, and a Garfield cartoon. Two members of the leading directive of the Commission for National Debate are introduced to us: Hector Cordoba, who represents small and medium sized enterprises, and Salina Monterosa, who represents non-governmental organizations and organizations which defend human rights.
The National Debate began in September 1988 when a public assembly was sponsored by the Archdiocese offices. More than seventy organizations attended. At the assembly they discussed the causes and effects of the social crisis in El Salvador, and possible solutions. As for the causes, what was agreed upon was that there is structural social injustice, manifested by and large in the concentration of wealth, especially land, in the hands of the few. This social injustice is aggravated by the armed forces and institutionalized violence.
Injustice generated conflict between big enterprises and the workers, because the workers found it impossible to cover the basic needs of themselves and their families. This conflict led to the military conflict. In terms of a viable solution, they agreed that there could not be a military solution of one army over another. The only viable solution is a political solution, based on recognition of dual powers, and a negotiated settlement.
The National Debate is not an organization per se, but rather a mechanism to bring the popular organizations together. About seventy organizations make up the Debate, including labor, peasant, churches, enterprises, women, professional associations, etc. They are all firm in their belief that there must be a political solution. The vast majority of the Salvadoran people want peace; not simply an end to war, but peace with social justice. Construction of this peace is something in which all sectors of society must participate, because it affects everyone.
"We organize a number of different activities to promote peace. We have written various documents to be presented at the negotiations. For example, we are planting the idea of complete demilitarization of society. Based on experience, we do not want an army in our society. To this point our experiences have been very negative. It is clear that while the army claims that it defends the civilian population, its real role is to oppress the civilian population.
"We can show clearly that within the Debate we have many organizations with different thoughts. The government accuses us of presenting only one side. For instance, we have labor organizations which are assumed to be leftist, and others connected to the government. The historic churches have played a large role in the Debate. We staged the largest demonstration since the deepening of the crisis in our country. Our activities promote the negotiations."
Question: Please explain what you mean by "historic churches."
"The term implies action in favor of the people, identification with the people and joining in struggle with them. Other churches are concerned with the spiritual wellbeing of the people, but not their material wellbeing. Debate believes that the role of the churches must be to help build a new society."
Question: What is the National Debate's place at the negotiations?
"It is important for us to gain recognition, but it is not the fundamental thing. It is more important to have our ideas and positions discussed. We are asking that representatives of the civilian population have a place to put forward what they believe. This space has been denied by the government, which has insisted that our presence would complicate the process. This is because we represent the wishes of the Salvadoran people. We have our own agenda, which is not necessarily the same as the FMLN position."
Question: What percentage of the people do you represent?
"About a million persons are connected with the different organizations within the Debate."
- Cyril commends the organization for their work.
"We are a response to the grave situation in our country. There is also a kind of exhaustion. Different solutions put forth have not borne fruit. It has been said that here the people have no political ideologies, they have necessities. It is these necessities which drive the Debate."
Question: What historical models do you have for demilitarization?
"The closest one is Costa Rica. There is no standing army there, though they are in a region with many wars. We want no army, but rather a civilian police force which would take care of internal social order.
"There are those within the armed forces, hard liners, who say that this is an absolute impossibility. But our idea is of a gradual process. As part of the scheme, we see that the FMLN would evolve from a politico-military force to strictly a political force. Also the army, which historically has been an oppressive force, would disappear entirely, and a civilian police force would rise from the people.
"Sixty per cent of our country's budget goes to military ends. What we see is that in a society which is highly militarized, plus has major social problems such as high infant mortality and 70% unemployment, we have institutionalized injustice. We want a more just society."
Question: What has been the government's response to the Debate?
"We have had meetings with the government, but the government says that it is not viable to have the participation of social organizations in the negotiations. The government has also systematically denied the power of the Debate, that we really represent the numbers that we do. They deny that we exist, and they refuse to talk with us, but we keep saying here we are."
Question: What has been the response of the FMLN?
"We have also met with the FMLN. In terms of the way they have responded, it has been very positive. The only thing is that the FMLN arose when all space for opposition was closed, and they decided on the military path. We are trying to find a peaceful space to press for justice. Though the government has not accepted us as a representative of social force, they have signaled us as part of the FMLN. So in a way, they are saying that the FMLN represents a large cross section of society.
We are shown a short video about the march on 15 September. The government had organized a "march of war," so they organized a counter "march of peace." The army detained a large number of vehicles, preventing potential marchers from entering the city, but still they had one of the largest marches in years. There were also helicopters overhead trying to panic the people. More than two hundred buses were turned around.
Question: Have you heard any news about the new formula proposed for the U.S. Senate aid bill, which would require that the FMLN agree to a ceasefire within sixty days or all aid would be restored?
"Yes, we are aware of this proposal. We see it as a way to continue to send aid. A ceasefire should not be just on the FMLN, but should be contingent on agreement on accords. The Geneva protocol says clearly that there needs to be accords on such things as human rights, reform of the military, social justice, etc., before a ceasefire is achieved. Since the government has already spent five months at the negotiations without agreeing to any such accords, it is easy to see that another two months would go by without any accords.
"It is not the objective of the people to reach a ceasefire. We want to eradicate the injustices which are the causes of the war. We are looking for redistribution of wealth. The reality is that if the FMLN surrendered their arms and disbanded, and a ceasefire were to be put into effect without a resolution of the underlying causes, there would be another guerrilla force rise up. We want to stop not just the deaths caused by bullets, but also the deaths caused by malnutrition, lack of medical care, and other social inequities.
"We of the Debate committee have talked with members of the U.S. Congress. We feel that a 50% cut in aid is unethical. We need a 100% cut. Send aid for development, if you send anything. We cannot accept a cut of just 50% of the deaths. We don't want a peace of just a ceasefire. That would be fine for those who have no other problems. But there is also the problem of feeding the children. We fight for peace and we fight for justice."
Question: Have you worked on a plan to integrate the two armies into the civilian sector?
"Within our economic and social plan, we have one part which includes incorporating military personnel into the production sector. We have thought about this problem. One problem is a lack of basic income for families. We need to emphasize production to help internal problems. No practical plan has been worked out yet, but we acknowledge that this should be part of the overall program. We are having discussion forums on how to deal with economic and social problems, because we need to form a consensus.
"We are very worried after our most recent meeting with the FMLN, because there has not been even minimal movement at the negotiating table, and the FMLN is looking at the possibility of a military operation to break the impasse. We see that the government responds to nothing except pressure. It is clear that they are negotiating based on what happened last November. The government is trying to signal that the FMLN is weak. The army is saying that they can win on the battlefield.
"We don't want a new offensive, but we don't want ten more years of negotiations, either. We don't want to die drop by drop. In the end, the cost would be the same. So we are organizing a political offensive, with massive demonstrations to demand that the government end the stagnation in the negotiations. It is clear that it is the government stalling the negotiations, not the FMLN."
Copyright © 2022 Marian L. Shatto
No comments:
Post a Comment