 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 28 Oct. - 3 Nov. 1999 Issue No. 453 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
|
||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 28 Oct. - 3 Nov. 1999 Issue No. 453
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
|
||
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Features Profile Study Special Sports People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters Time to pay for torture
By Sameh Naguib"Every so often, democracy has to be bathed in blood." Thus spoke General Augusto Pinochet, then president of Chile, and role model par excellence for dictators and torturers everywhere. Now that confession has proved the general's undoing. Last Saturday, Pinochet filed an appeal against a British magistrate's ruling that he can be extradited to Spain to be tried on torture charges. The formal notice that Pinochet would challenge the decision was submitted to the High Court on the final day allowed for filing. The court will now set a date to hear the appeal. If the general loses this appeal, he could yet be allowed to lodge a challenge in the House of Lords.
The case finally proceeded to a formal extradition hearing last month, and Deputy Magistrate Roland Bartle ruled that the 35 charges of torture put forward by the Spanish courts did indeed constitute extradictable crimes. The general was detained in Britain on 16 October last year at the request of a Spanish judge who is seeking Pinochet's extradition to Madrid on multiple charges of torture dating from his 17-year dictatorship over Chile between 1973 and 1990.
The anniversary of the general's arrest was celebrated in Santiago in a Rio-style carnival. A samba band gave the rhythm for over 5,000 demonstrators as they sang and clapped. Meanwhile, on the other side of town, right-wing supporters of the general prayed for his release, before staging their own protest at the headquarters of the Pinochet foundation. Pinochet had led a violent military coup in 1973 against the democratically-elected socialist government of Salvatore Allende. Nearly 100,000 people were rounded up immediately after the coup, and during the following decade at least 3,000 people were murdered and over 100,000 were brutally tortured. The general closed down the Chilean Parliament, banned all political and trade union activity, and in 1974 appointed himself president. The controversies surrounding Pinochet have been fuelled in recent months with the declassifying of CIA and US government documents showing the extent to which the US was involved in the ousting of Allende and in providing financial and military support for the junta.
In a secret message from CIA headquarters to the US station chief in Santiago in October 1970, the aim was made explicit: "It is the firm and continuing policy that Allende be overthrown by a coup... Please review all your present and possibly new activities to include propaganda, black operations, surfacing of intelligence or disinformation, ...or anything else your imagination can conjure..." Support for Pinochet continued after the coup. In a meeting that took place in Santiago in June 1976, during a gathering of the Organisation of American States, Henry Kissinger made it quite clear to what extent his government was prepared to back Pinochet, telling the general: "In the US, as you know, we are sympathetic with what you are trying to do here. I think that the previous government was headed toward Communism. We wish your government well."
It was not only the US government that was involved. Big business had an important role to play. One month before the October 1970 plot against President-elect Allende, Donald Kendall, then chairman of PepsiCo, made a direct plea for action in two telephone calls to President Richard Nixon (who, coincidentally, had previously worked as counsel to the corporation...). Similarly, a board member of the ITT corporation, which owned Chile's phone company, pledged Kissinger $1 million in support of CIA action to prevent Allende taking office. Another major channel of corporate support was David Rockefeller's Business Group for Latin America, which offered to provide $500,000 for the specific purpose of buying the votes of Chilean congressmen to ensure that Allende's victory at the polls was not confirmed.
Now, according to some commentators, all this is history. Memories should be left to rest, and we should "forgive and forget", concentrating on supporting Chile's fragile democracy, and avoiding any actions which might "rock the boat". The Chilean government itself has formally asked for the general to be allowed to return to Chile on humanitarian grounds. There are two problems with such arguments. The first is that the existing instability in Chile is essentially the result of the precarious balance between the armed forces, who do not wish to relinquish what remains of their power, and civilian politicians who are too afraid to push forward with democratic reforms. This situation is clearly untenable in the long run, and is aggravated by growing economic difficulties. The fate of the General, however, cannot in itself do much to alter this balance of power.
In 1988, Pinochet organised a plebiscite to win support for his bid to stay on as president for a further eight years. A massive campaign to vote "no" brought together a broad coalition of opposition parties, ranging from the Communist and Socialist parties to the Christian Democrats. Pinochet lost the plebiscite and stepped down from office. He was able however to ensure that effective political power remained in the hands of the armed forces, of which he continued as leader for a further 10 years.
The 1980 constitution, which was designed by the general himself, defined the armed forces as the major political institution in Chile, with a bloc of seats in parliament reserved for officers. Pinochet's appointees in the army, the police and the judiciary remain in place to this day, and military courts continue to dispense justice, while the national police force is still under army control. If the armed forces choose, they have the power to summon the president to an emergency meeting at any moment.
The continuing power of the military was again demonstrated in 1993, when Pinochet's son's involvement in a massive fraud was exposed. The army promptly occupied a key UN building in Santiago until all the charges were dropped.
Yet there is another, more profound objection to the proposal to 'forgive and forget'. If the likes of Pinochet, who choose to preside over the destruction of democracy, can get away with it, if they are not made to answer for their barbarism, if they are confident that whatever they do they will be safe and secure even after they leave power, then why should they hesitate to carry out whatever atrocities they choose? After all, it was as recently as 1995 that the general told his cheering followers that if he had to do it all over again, he would not change a single thing.
