Revolutionary movement in Salvador
International Viewpoint #151 • November 14, 1988
ALGERIA • EL SALVADOR
Chadli used his public speech of September 19, 1988, to violently denounce those responsible, declaring that this process once started was irreversible. The FLN Congress planned for December 10 seems therefore intended to serve as the framework for the final legitimization of economic liberalization and its relaunch.
on the advance
Paradoxically, the recent uprising which came about precisely as a result of austerity policies and the infitah (which even the
IMF recognizes as more rigorous than its own reflation programs) has reinforced
ATTACKS ON THE ARMY by the Farabundo Marti National
Chadli's position on the eve of the FLN
Congress. The political reforms which he
Liberation Front (FLN) have been increasing in the last had envisioned but not yet dared to adweeks. Le Monde's correspondent Bertrand de la Grange vance, such as the possibility of ending the noted on October 19, "the revival of fighting in September and requirement of an FLN membership card for candidates in local elections, now have the heavy losses inflicted on the army prove that the guerrillas every chance of being accepted as neceshave been able to modify their strategy to compensate for sary evils. After the popular uprising, smaller numbers." He quoted Salvadoran army colonel which has sounded the death knell for the
FLN's legitimacy, such reforms are the
Zepeda as saying, We have had to adapt to this new least that can be conceded to popular hunsituation by reducing the size of battalions from 700 to 300.
ger for democracy.
The hardest thing is to find the guerrillas." The FMLN also
Bourgeois projects cannot solve social problems
In the following interview with Michel Raguet and Arnold
Berthu, René, the representative of the FMLN for the EEC
Speaking to an official delegation of the countries, describes the current situation in the country.
Human Rights League, Chadli has just declared his desire to "promote a legal framework permitting any opinions whatsoever to be expressed in perfect freedom." Such a political project could only strengthen infitah partisans who will be able to take advantage of the coming political opening in order to support their economic reforms.
After having assured Chadli of its solidarity during the repression, international imperialism has clearly picked sides by reaffirming that only economic and political liberalism can save Algeria from the social torment that threatens the former's strategic interests in North Africa. But while extracting as many democratic rights as they can, the working class and popular masses must realize that after the utter failure of populism and its capitalist state project, the youth revolt just bloodily put down was the direct result of Chadli's infitah and its heightening of social contradictions.
Both bourgeois projects have shown their incapacity of resolving the most elementary secial problems. And once beyond the phase of relaxing tensions, the Chadli regime does not have the means to resolve the basic problems of the socio-economic crisis into which he has plunged the country.
The continuation of his infitah process can only make social conflicts more and more explosive. The crystallization of a credible socialist alternative, based on the independence of the self-organization of the popular masses, is thus the only "realistic" perspective that revolutionaries can advance if they want to keep the bourgeoisie, in the interim, from using Islamic funda-
6 or algerian o dive. * mentalists to divert the spontaneous revolt faces new political problems.
HAT ARE the most recent developments in the political situation in El Salvador?
Over the summer, there was a proliferation of strikes and demonstrations, and the level of repression went up a notch. For example, in a demonstration on September 13, four people were killed by the army, 115 were wounded and 350 arrested. At the same time, the regime is trying to restrict the number of international solidarity activists present to a minimum. Ten were of August, the leader of the Swiss solidarity committees was brutally murdered, after having been arrested and tortured by elements of the police force.
The death squads have stepped up their activity. On July 28, they murdered one of the leaders of the Bread, Land, Work and Freedom Movement (MPTTL), A. Orellana. For their part, the armed forces are being obliged to use 70 percent of their troops for counterinsurgency operations, because the FMLN has managed to deal them some very severe blows.
Moreover, there are new organizational forms. For example, the MPTTL was created in June 1988. This movement takes charge of the most unifying vital demands. It clearly identifies the enemy, as well as the tasks to be accomplished, and operates in the mass movement as it exists. The MP IL aims, therefore, to regroup the vanguard in the mass movement in order to radicalize its objectives and its methods of struggle.
Trade-unionists may be at the same time members of their unions and members of the MPTTL. In a way, this is a return to organizational forms such as the Revolutionary's People's Bloc, which although illegal operated openly and publicly. The MPTTL can call demonstrations involving thousands or tens of thousands of activists of various people's organizations (unions, cooperatives, and so on). • How have the Jesuits responded to the forming of the MPTTL?
They perceive it as a movement designed to provoke the regime, one that will make it difficult to achieve national consensus. The Jesuits want a third road, different from that of the regime, as well as from that of the FMLN and its allies. But there is no third road in El Salvador.
With the victory of ARENA [the rightist bourgeois party], the armed forces are going to play a larger role than under Duarte [the Christian Democratic president]. The political institutions have been partially stymied, because there is an ARENA majority in the National Assembly, while unthe presidential elections the government will continue to be made up of Christian Democrats. • Have there been new initiatives to start a dialogue going?
In recent weeks, new initiatives have
November 14, 1988 • #151 International Viewpoint been taken by the Catholic Church and the Jesuit university to relaunch a national discussion in favor of a dialogue. For its part, ARENA has tried to take another initiative, which it calls "Peace and Freedom," in the framework of the constitution and parliament. This is part of the oligarchy's efforts to gain a more acceptable image nationally and internationally. They have tried to get the parties that participated in the elections to agree on a proposal to make to the FDR-FMLN.
On our side, we have again proposed a platform for national dialogue. The mass organizations have begun to hold a series of forums on these three initiatives. On this level, ARENA's initiative has not struck any chord, especially since the two other parties in parliament, that is, Duarte's Christian Democratic Party and the National Conciliation Party, have refused to
The Church's initiative has had more impact. About 50 mass organizations, institutions and even sections of the state apparatus have participated in it. But ARENA, the government and some Christian Democratic organizations have stayed out. The last mentioned have gone so far as to call the Church's initiative a cover for the FMLN's military maneuvers. It is important, nonetheless, to note that the oligarchy has had to declare itself in favor of dialogue. It can no longer limit itself to a military response. • What is the US's attitude to ARENA's victory?
The oligarchy could not survive without the support of the Americans. The military know that the Americans are not going to suspend their aid. They say, "They can't drop us, or else the Communists will take over." The problem is that ARENA is very discredited internationally.
This is why ARENA is trying now to clean up its image. It is putting forward Cristiani, its [new] chair, who does not have such a negative image as the sinister Major d'Aubuisson. Cristiani has just been invited to the United States. He is less repugnant to public opinion d'Aubuisson, but still he has declared that his two political models are Pinochet and
ARENA wants to appear to be a "civilized right capable of engaging in dialogue in a constitutional framework." The United States would certainly prefer to discuss with Democratic Convergence, because it represents a more credible alternative both internationally and domestically. The problem is that the two main components of Democratic Convergence, the MR and the MPSC, which includes the FDR, have already made declarations unacceptable to the United States. • Democratic Convergence has announced that it is going to participate in the March 1989 election. What is the attitude of the FMLN going to be?
We have already said that we are going to boycott this election. We are not against elections in principle, but we are against this one. You have to understand what the alliance between the FMLN and the FDR means. The FMLN respects the autonomy of the FDR, which wants to take part in the elections in the framework of Democratic Convergence. Reciprocally, the FDR respects the FMLN's determination to continue the political-military struggle. There is no danger of a break. We are not going to part company over conjunctural questions. Elections come and go; the
It is a strength rather that we can operate both on the electoral and military level in El Salvador. The FDR leaders are going to try to unmask the counter-insurgency project in the elections, without denying the need for armed struggle. We, on the other hand, are going to say, "The electoral struggle suits the methods used by the • But in practice, the situation may be a bit more complicated. Up until now, the FDR has said that there was not enough democratic maneuvering room to take part in the elections, and it went on to say that that was why the military road was justified.
During the March 1988 elections, the situation seemed to change. The FMLN call for a boycott, the UNTS the radical labor confederation] called for non-participation, while the FDR leaders said that it did not seem intelligent to boycott this election.
For the next elections, it is likely that the Socialist International and the international Christian Democracy are going to try to divide the FDR-FLN alliance by saying: "Today, there is legal room for participating in the elections. So, it is necessary to get a truce, a cease-fire." In such a content, wouldn't the FMLN be in a difficult
No. We have discussed the elections with the FDR allies and we have said that we understood their participation in the elections. Moreover, they have been able to accumulate strength since they managed to return to El Salvador at the end of 1987, thanks to the Esquipulas II accords.
The situation will not be difficult for us because we have accumulated strength on the political-military level. The situation has changed in El Salvador, and that involves different tactical responses, notably with respect to elections. For the 1982 elections, we called for a boycott and an insurrection. For the 1984 ones, we only resorted to sabotage. In March 1988, we sabotaged them completely by paralyzing urban traffic and preventing them from being held in the areas under our control.
The result was that the participation rate in 1988 was much lower than in 1984. The
EL SALVADOR March 1989 elections may mark a deepening of the crisis of capitalist domination, since our military position is stronger, the organization of the masses is advancing and the state institutions are in a profound crisis. So, we are gaining strength in the context of the FMLN-FDR alliance. There are social forces that we will never be able to lead as the FMLN. On the other hand, the FDR can. And a broader alliance may arise, for example, in the framework of Democratic Convergence. • Can you explain concretely how you will respond to pressures that might be brought to bear by the Socialist International and a part of the international Christian Democracy aimed at dividing the FDR and the FLN?
I don't deny that there are international pressures, but we are certain of our allies. We have already faced political-diplomatic problems, and we have overcome them
To use a simple formula, we say: "We have won the war." Now the problem is to forge the victory. To do that, we have to be very intelligent. We have to to be able to see clearly the evolution of the various social forces, and determine what alliances are necessary with a great flexibility. At one point in the 1980s, we were isolated, and in danger of being destroyed. We overcame that situation by achieving the FDR-FMLN alliance and consolidating the unity of the revolutionists, of the vanguard, and by rebuilding links with the masses. At the same time, the mass movement, which had been dismantled, was recomposed.
Now we are able to take initiatives affecting the relationship of social forces. This explains why the FDR leaders have been able to return to El Salvador without being assassinated, although of course the threat remains. • To achieve the seizure of power, the FMLN has adopted a strategic project that combines a military offensive and a mass uprising. The problem is that the masses have drawn the lessons of the 1980-81 experiences. When they were rising up, the FMLN was not yet in a position to deal decisive blows to the dictatorship"s army. Now the masses are waiting for the FMLN to demonstrate its capacity to inflict decisive blows. The masses want to be sure that if they go into the streets, they will not be subjected to a new
For the FMLN, the problem is to set the date for a final offensive without knowing whether the masses are going to follow. Isn't the problem then knowing what spark can light the fuse to the powder barrel?
That's right. The problem is, in the context in which the relationship of forces is evolving favorably, knowing how to choose the decisive moment. *
International Viewpoint #151 • November 14, 1988
USSR