berman@psuvax1.UUCP (Piotr Berman) (12/30/85)
> Eduardo Krell UCLA Computer Science Department > >Myers [Latitudarian?] > >And it doesn't put them in control of the military, either. > > Right, that is why Duarte has to be very cautious with the military. > I don't think the military trusts him 100%. If they view his policies as > "too revolutionary", a coup is always possible. > Since Duarte is not in control of the military, the chances are he is controlled (at least partially). Prosecution of death-squads went nowhere, abuses of treasure police continue, land reform is not heard about very much. > >Center-right, Center-center, or Center-left is also a matter > >of perspective, ?no? > > Yes, of course it is, but christian democrats have always fought for > social justice, human rights, etc. I have never seem them labelled > other than as center-left (that is, by some objective observer. > Pinochet views them as being allies with the communist ...). > Say: frequently. > > ... (in reference to President Frei in Chile) ... > >... He also worked for the military coup which killed > >and overthrew Allende and thousands of Chileans on the hope that > >he and/or his party could return to power in post-coup elections > >-- but Pinochet had other plans. > > This is questionable. The christian democrats hold majority in the > congress in 1970 when they had to choose a president between Allende > and Alessandri (the first and second place in the elections). > Since neither candidate got over 50% of the votes, the congress could > pick one of the first two places. > The national party (conservative right, Alessandri's) pressed the > christian democrats to vote for Alessandri (so did the US government > as we learned later), yet they voted for Allende to everyone's surprise. > I do not try to challenge you on those facts, but during the Pinochet coup the alliences were different. Possibly, it was not an allience, but allegedly CD's hoped that Pinochet coup would put them back in power after several years of transition. Any comments about that? Although the latter is partially a speculation, one may say that CD didn't support Allende particularly. Possibly they hoped that after some chaotic period new ellection will put them in the center of power again. > >> (me) > >> Duarte has asked the rebels to sit down and negotiate with > >> the government. They did so a couple of times but the rebels > >> broke up the negotiations. > > >Sources? Talk is cheap > > I am not making this up, believe me. I think it was about a year ago > whem the catholic church sponsored a meeting between Duarte and the > rebel leaders in some remote wooden house in the countryside. > I recall seeing TV footage of the meetings. There were great expectations > from the meetings but the rebels' demands were unrealistic. > -- Because of the influence of military over Duarte, I am not shure that Duarte was making any concessions. Since the political struggle in El Salvador is quite bloody, I would like to have some military concessions, if I were a rebel. For example, providing autonomy for provinces controlled partially by rebels, so they would have some secure regions for themselves in the transitiory stage, similarly legalization of their armed forces, provided that they are contained in their zone etc. Additionally, disbanding some discredided organizations like treasury police. As I recollect, Duarte was proposing nothing more but amnesty. As we know, in El Salvador is very difficult to be found guilty in a court of law (prosecution of nun killers), but easy to be kept indefinitely by police. Thus an amnesty is worthless. Since you, Eduardo, have access to more sources than me, can you comment about what would be reasonable concessions by rebels and by government? Piotr Berman
ekrell@ucla-cs.UUCP (12/30/85)
In article <1947@psuvax1.UUCP> berman@psuvax1.UUCP (Piotr Berman) writes: >I do not try to challenge you on those facts, but during the Pinochet >coup the alliences were different. Possibly, it was not an allience, >but allegedly CD's hoped that Pinochet coup would put them back in >power after several years of transition. Any comments about that? This is correct. The CDs hoped that the military would stay on power temporarily until new elections could take place. They expected to win the elections (and they would have won if the elections had taken place). Of course, Pinochet had a different idea in mind. >Although the latter is partially a speculation, one may say >that CD didn't support Allende particularly. Yes, they didn't support Allende, as they were the main opposition party to the Popular Unity (Allende's party). That doesn't mean they were in any kind of alliance with the coup masters. Let me add that the situatuion in Chile at the time of the coup was so chaotic (a combination of a failure in Allende's policies + help from the CIA, the big transnational companies like ITT and the US banks) that when the coup took place, most people felt a big relief. Of course, they had no idea of what was coming. >I would like to have some military >concessions, if I were a rebel. For example, providing autonomy >for provinces controlled partially by rebels, so they would have >some secure regions for themselves in the transitiory stage, >similarly legalization of their armed forces, provided that they >are contained in their zone etc. Partitioning the country everytime new rebels show up will be catastrophic. Instead, people should sit down and try to negotiate whatever differences they have. If the demands of the rebels are legitimate (like having an effective land reform), there shouldn't be any problem in reaching an agreement with the government in return for peace. However, if all the rebels want is to have a cuban-style revolution, then there is little chance of any talks to succeed. -- Eduardo Krell UCLA Computer Science Department ekrell@ucla-locus.arpa ..!{sdcrdcf,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!ekrell