different stokes for different folks:

historical accounts relate a hidden subjectivity that reflect the paradigm of he who holds the pen. the conquest of the americas has primarily been transcribed through the eyes of spaniards yielding their swords in the name of all that glitters gold. however, a good friar and an uruguayan storyteller have attempted to repaint the canvas of the conquered.

bartolome de las casas, missionary man of the church and crown, was among the first to challenge the record. although radical in the defamation of the spanish and their conduct, the language employed to describe the native peoples is latent with colonial condescendence. ravaged by “savage lions who had not eaten meat for days,” the indigenous population was desecrated to a measly handful. the survivors, unassuming and submissive as they were, proved to be easy pickins for the claws of christianity. one could argue that an evangelized usurpation is simply another form of conquest under the guise of GOD. it begs the question… bartolome: defender of the indian or perpetrator of holy violence? regardless, the local lambs were slaughtered by the thousands to feed the greedy soul of the new spain. 

http://ff.uhk.cz/politologie/texty/sprinpa1/informace/the-military.pdf

A chapter from the book Democracy in Latin America: Political Change in Comparative Perspective. It outlines nicely some of the issues discussed in O’Donnell’s reading. 

Wars Against Subversion: pgs 84-90. 

“Precedents from Argentina”: pgs 92-96. — this one touches on “Never Again” and Alfonsin’s efforts towards justice. 

This week’s readings on Argentina were particularly thought provoking and moving in many ways. The short poems and narrations of the experiences of Argentinians were really touching. But what I found most interesting was O’Donnell’s piece “Modernization and Military Coups.”

For me Human Rights and Human Security are incredibly interlinked. As human insecurity rises, human rights abuses are likely to increase as well, and vice versa. It was really interesting to read about the Latin American military mentality and how that manifested itself in the wars against subversion.

“But, more importantly, for the armed forces to fulfill their vast ‘mission,’ their organizational power and Argentine socioeconomic development were postulated as necessary conditions. Therefore, any problem that would hinder establishment of these conditions could be interpreted as an impediment to the fulfillment of the armed forces’ mission.”

The military in adopting the US Doctrine of National Security in conjunction with the entrenched belief in their duty to defend “la patria” resulted in a convolution of the issue of national security and its relation to development. Security and development collapsed into each other and their definition became one in the same in the eyes of the army. In their attempts to halt the subversion of agents who would prefer to break away from Western Civilization and steer the nation towards communism, it became a game of anything goes. Opening up space for all of the atrocities described in the other readings to occur in the name of and defense of la patria.

When human rights abuses occur under the conditions of such deep seeded and self-affirming ideologies like in the case of military mentality in Argentina, it becomes difficult to address these issues legally. When Raul Alfonsin won the election in 1983 and attempted to reform the judicial system in Argentina in order to put the commanders, and junta leaders who committed the worst abuses to trial, he was met by an astonishing amount of aversion. Even the church sided with the Military, arguing for the ideological foundations of the injustices and defending the actions of the military.

It’s really mind boggling just how easy it was for many people in Argentina to let the actions of the military go unpunished, how easy it was to join in the ideological bandwagon for national security and development  > human rights. And how this logic continues to manifest itself in politics. How easy it becomes to sacrifice human rights in the name of national security.

In a reading for another class I stumbled upon a flyer distributed by the military during the time defending their actions after “Never Again” was published.”

“That we were cruel? So What! Meanwhile you have a fatherland that is not compromised for doing so. We saved it because we believed that we ought to save it. Were there other means? We did not see them, nor did we believe that with other means we would have been capable of doing what we did. Throw the blame in our face and enjoy the results. We will be the executioners, so you can be free men.” 

Although I have studied the Disaparecidos in Argentina before, what I really found interesting about these readings was how they placed all of these different types of descriptions of the events together. I think it’s really fascinating to read the political analysis of the military coming to power in conjunction with excerpts from Nunca Mas and the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo.

These pieces all being read in conjunction with one another gives a much more holistic view of all the events that occurred. In my opinion, reading about how the political situation and the structure of the presidency lead to the opening for the military government was fascinating. For this is one of the clearest explanations I have read on how the government must have been functioning to allow for all the influences to align and install a military rule.

Then to read the excerpts from all of the personal accounts creates a very sobering reminder of the outcomes that these military governments had. It is truly incredible to contemplate what these people went through: the people who were being tortured, those that were searching for them, and those who were in exile.

One thing I found to be particularly impacting was how the regime produced silence. This was particularly evident in the writings about the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo. It’s incredible to think that these women could go through months of searching for their children without actually speaking to anyone else about it. Obviously, without speaking to others there is no way to organize and fight what’s happening to you. Then again, with that sort of fear culture it is incredibly hard to say anything at all. It’s incredible to think of the amount of courage it must have taken these women to stand up to military police.

 

It seems pretty evident that most of the military dictatorships that took place in Latin America during the 60’s and 70’s were born out of the cold war framework enforced by the United States as a mean to show solidarity against the rise of communism in the continent, and Argentina was not an exception as reported on O’Donnell’s piece.

An important element I take away from Guillermo O’Donnell’s study is also the notion that economic patterns had a great influence in local politics.  Some might say that Latin patterns of imports and exports were essentially raw materials and minerals for a long time. In exchange, the region received imported cars, television and refrigerators. But when Latin America saw the prices of the imported items increasing each year more than the prices of the raw materials they exported, they realized they had to move to an economy that instead of being based on agriculture and minerals is based on industry. So, from my understanding, the only way countries, like Argentina, thought they could compete with those imported products was by limiting them and forcing consumers to buy manufactured goods made locally. As O’Donnell pointed out, the Argentinean industry was not creative. Unfortunately this industrialization process was not very efficient, nor competitive, and was very dependent on foreign capital. The government had to either borrowed or invested, leading eventually to a debt crisis.

At some point, Argentina was one of the wealthiest countries in the world. It was an important exporter of grains and meat. But then a series of global trends including the Great Depression and world wars undermined Argentina’s position. So Peron started what became known as populism and it became very common in many countries in which governments started expanding much more than that were they collecting in terms of revenues and taxes and creating very significant government deficits that then fueled inflation.

This article supports my understanding of the economic history of that time in the region and what fueled many revolts in the area, including the case of Argentina. Industrialization then, essentially meant that you would produce domestically what you used to import. However, companies were not efficient because they were not threatened by competition, the system created very lazy, noncompetitive companies that produce average goods at higher prices. But if you have consumers that are forced to use those products, you end up having economies that have a very high propensity for high inflation and at the same time, governments were spending more than they were collecting, also fueling inflation and tension in the region.

The armed forces at that time  truly believed that they were the only organization that could control inflation in a chaotic scenery of mistrust and polarization among the pernistas and the anti peronistas. The army certainly capitalized on the disparities and ended up following the demands for the most threatening sector at any given time, with little economic or political logic. This era seemed dominated by a power struggle mostly between the armed forces and peronists labour unions. The army determined values to protect depending on their own criteria of importance  (of course always excluding peronistas from the political picture). However, the subjectivity of values created fractions within the army, which later propelled the formation of a modern and professional middle-class driven legalist army. I agree with the author, security was heavily confused with development, and the doctrines of national security did not help.

Thus, las locas de la plaza de mayo piece was very moving. I had never read a piece from the mother’s perspective before, beyond news articles. The contrast between the World Cup’s euphoria and the igniting outrage these women felt over the disappearance of their children was a symbolic manifestation of numbing times of conflict.

Interestingly, Hebe de Bonafini continues to fight for human rights and has participated in many rallies against impunity around the world. She advocates against political persecution still nowadays and seeks betterment of prisoners treatment in jail in Argentina.

 

This news was posted today and could not come in a better time.

BBC NEWS

Former Argentine naval officer Alfredo Astiz has been jailed for life for crimes against humanity during military rule in 1976-83.

Astiz – known as the “Blond Angel of Death” – was found guilty of torture, murder and forced disappearance.

Among his victims were two French nuns and the founders of the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo human rights group.

Eleven other former military and police officers were also given life sentences for crimes against humanity.

Four others were jailed for between 18 and 25 years.

All worked at the Naval Mechanical School in Buenos Aires – known as Esma – which was the biggest secret torture and killing centre set up by the military during what became known as the “Dirty War”.

Of the 5,000 or so prisoners taken to Esma, 90% did not come out alive.

Some were killed by firing squad while others were thrown from planes – drugged but still alive – into the Atlantic Ocean.

More than 70 of those who did make it out were among the witnesses in the 22-month trial.

Symbol of oppression

Astiz looked straight ahead and showed no emotion as the sentence was read out.

Among the others given life terms are Jorge Acosta, Antonio Pernias and Ricardo Cavallo.

Human rights groups had campaigned for years to bring the perpetrators to justice, and there were celebrations as the sentences were read out.

“We resisted. We never committed a crime. This is why this is just. They committed crimes. They are imprisoned,” said Esma survivor Ricardo Coquet.

Astiz, 59, is one of the most notorious symbols of oppression during military rule in Argentina.

As a young naval intelligence officer he infiltrated the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo human rights group, which was set up to find relatives abducted by the security forces.

He then arranged the kidnap and murder of its three founders – Azucena Villaflor, Esther Ballestrino and Maria Ponce.

He had already been convicted in absentia in France for the murder of the French nuns Alice Domon and Leonie Duquet, who disappeared in Argentina in 1977.

In his defence, Astiz said he had acted to save Argentina from left-wing “terrorism”, and he dismissed his trial as an act of political vengeance.

Human rights groups say 30,000 people were killed or made to disappear by the armed forces in their campaign against opposition activists and left-wing guerrillas.

Happy Halloween Monday Everyone,

You can see what I was going to open with on today’s post, but after reading this article, I didn’t want to say Halloween, in case of offending anybody. So in the spirit of this day, here’s some news (not related to Latin America but could be related to rights!)

Some of you have probably already seen this on the internet, if not check it out. It’s a short story and an interesting little read. I’m not sure if it is directly related to human rights, perhaps this is because I am part of the majority as the student suggests. Although after the notion of the 99% out of the Occupy movements, I think the student might have to redefine how they’re using majority. The way the student uses the word majority here appears to refer to a racial majority.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/28/living/halloween-costume-memes/?hpt=us_t2

So, as I was saying, I’m not exactly sure how to frame this in terms of rights discourse, but I suppose the subject and discussion of ‘race’ is always a human rights thing.

Similarly, ex-Canuck player, Raffi Torres is on the receiving end of Twitter/Internet critique (the worst kind – does sarcasm come across over the internet?) over his choice of Halloween costume. Until I read this article (also very short), I was unaware of this ‘Black-face’ activity (this is probably an inaccurate word choice, but I’m not sure) or stereotyping of people of African descent.

http://www.thecheapseats.ca/2011/10/raffi-torres-starts-a-tweetstorm-with-jay-z-costume.html

An undergraduate of Latin American Studies has probably been in a course (or two or three) where Juan Domingo or Eva Perón have come up either for analysis of what Argentina looked like under them, or how their influence has been tremendous on the modern national imagination of Argentina (considering that Cristina Kirchner of the main Peronist party was just reelected in a landslide victory). Professors just seem to love studying about the Perón’s.

In one vein you see leftist practices, mainly the centrality of trade unions in shaping economic policy, a strong base with the working class, and a popular welfare state up into the later decades to the military coup in ’76.  In another vein, you see Peronism stemming from strong exhalations of National Socialism, sympathy for fascist Europe, and the corporatization of bureaucracy.  In such an ideologically polarized historical context, the 20^th century, Peronism seemed to blur the lines, aptly noted by appointing Jewish governmental advisors while simultaneously granting amnesty to Nazis. The only real conclusion to be drawn is that Peronism tugged on the heartstrings of a nation in order to foster a very strong state with a mild cult of personality that encouraged a strong nationalism coupled with resistance to the impending threats of Empire, be it USA or the USSR. Juan Domingo Perón was very strategic in how he led Argentina, using the Argentine tradition of military influence in civilian government to operate as a unique brand of Caudillo.  Eva enjoyed something similar when she took office after sr. Perón’s death. The real debate lies in whether the heavy handed regulation of the democratic process veiled a nation under the control of a strange dictatorship, a very Latin American political tradition.  Maybe we can flush this idea out tonight!

http://news.yahoo.com/honduras-becomes-western-hemisphere-cocaine-hub-145553646.html

This article talks about the position of Honduras a major transit route for drugs, especially cocaine. Apparently, about half of all the cocaine reaching the United States every month is unloaded in Honduras, which comes up to 20 - 25 tons. Whole villages are now part of the drug trade, and street gangs are creating a climate of violence that can only be compared to Kabul, Afghanistan. The homicide rate is euqivalent to 82, 1 killings for evey 100, 000 people. The govenrment, of course, says that fighting the cartels is at the top of the list, but the governemnt itself is far from stable, and corruption is rampant. Often, the police is actively involved in the cartels, and it is believed that many in the government are making a lot of money off of them, leaving the country in an extremely vulnerable position.

On a more personal note, this article hits very close to home due to my personal attachment to Honduras. I lived there when I was younger, my brother is from there, as is my foster sister. I still have very strong ties with people in Tegucigalpa and Copan. When I lived there, it was already routine to bribe the police (even my parents did it, in order to get out of bogus charges), but now, from what I hear from my friends, it's anarchy. They are scared to leave their homes after dark, and my foster sister, who married an American and now lived in Washington DC, is scared to go back, especially when her husband talks of going with her. She hasn't seen her family in over two years for these reasons. I have seen the good side of Honduras, and there is so much I love about it, that this breaks my heart.

http://news.yahoo.com/honduras-becomes-western-hemisphere-cocaine-hub-145553646.html

This article talks about the position of Honduras a major transit route for drugs, especially cocaine. Apparently, about half of all the cocaine reaching the United States every month is unloaded in Honduras, which comes up to 20 - 25 tons. Whole villages are now part of the drug trade, and street gangs are creating a climate of violence that can only be compared to Kabul, Afghanistan. The homicide rate is euqivalent to 82, 1 killings for evey 100, 000 people. The govenrment, of course, says that fighting the cartels is at the top of the list, but the governemnt itself is far from stable, and corruption is rampant. Often, the police is actively involved in the cartels, and it is believed that many in the government are making a lot of money off of them, leaving the country in an extremely vulnerable position.

On a more personal note, this article hits very close to home due to my personal attachment to Honduras. I lived there when I was younger, my brother is from there, as is my foster sister. I still have very strong ties with people in Tegucigalpa and Copan. When I lived there, it was already routine to bribe the police (even my parents did it, in order to get out of bogus charges), but now, from what I hear from my friends, it's anarchy. They are scared to leave their homes after dark, and my foster sister, who married an American and now lived in Washington DC, is scared to go back, especially when her husband talks of going with her. She hasn't seen her family in over two years for these reasons. I have seen the good side of Honduras, and there is so much I love about it, that this breaks my heart.

State repression and brutality are one of the most unforgivable things that leaders can do to their people. It's a complete disruption of social bonds, with the powerful lashing out against the people that they are supposed to protect. The case of Argentina is particularly horrific, though, unfortunately, just one in the long history of militarized oppression in Latin America. The use of paramilitary forces as an excuse to "maintain security" usually means keeping the elite wealthy and in power and keeping everybody else down. In the case of Argentina, this translated in the use of extreme brutality against countless people. I can't even imagine being in such a situation, living in a constant fear of being taken away, or having someone I love disappear. The complete impunity of the military meant that nobody was safe, and that everybody could be subject to torture and murder, creating a climate of constant fear. In a situation like this, it's not surprising that people would choose to flee rather than remain in such an environment. I understand, however, that this in itself would have also been far from easy, with people grieving not only those they left behind, but also the metaphorical death of a country.

In reading this, two things really stood out for me. One of these was the involvment of the US in the strenghtening of the regime. Of course, I know about that involvment of the United States in Latin America, which was more often than not treated as the US' back yard. However, the blatant support given to disctators still shocks me, especially when the reason behind this was mainly to protect US assets. Countless people suffered, and the US turned a blind eye in order to maintain it's own wealthy elite. The second thing that stood out for me is the courage of the people that still stood up and resisted, risking their lives in the process. Personally, I don't know if I would have had that courage to do that. Through the use of contraversial art, dissent was expressed and circulated. Most impressive, however, were probably the "grandmothers of the Plaza de Mayo," the only visible opposition to the regime, who demanded justice for their disappeared loved ones. They displayed true courage, and their commitement to their cause was a strong agent of change.

When reading these horror stories, one is usually left with a "never again" feeling. However, I see these more as a cautionary, a reminder of how easy it is for things to slip into that institutional darkness. It's a reminder of the importance of vigilance and active involvment in politics. Such regimes are not a thing of the past, and they could easily manifest again if we are not careful.

State repression and brutality are one of the most unforgivable things that leaders can do to their people. It's a complete disruption of social bonds, with the powerful lashing out against the people that they are supposed to protect. The case of Argentina is particularly horrific, though, unfortunately, just one in the long history of militarized oppression in Latin America. The use of paramilitary forces as an excuse to "maintain security" usually means keeping the elite wealthy and in power and keeping everybody else down. In the case of Argentina, this translated in the use of extreme brutality against countless people. I can't even imagine being in such a situation, living in a constant fear of being taken away, or having someone I love disappear. The complete impunity of the military meant that nobody was safe, and that everybody could be subject to torture and murder, creating a climate of constant fear. In a situation like this, it's not surprising that people would choose to flee rather than remain in such an environment. I understand, however, that this in itself would have also been far from easy, with people grieving not only those they left behind, but also the metaphorical death of a country.

In reading this, two things really stood out for me. One of these was the involvment of the US in the strenghtening of the regime. Of course, I know about that involvment of the United States in Latin America, which was more often than not treated as the US' back yard. However, the blatant support given to disctators still shocks me, especially when the reason behind this was mainly to protect US assets. Countless people suffered, and the US turned a blind eye in order to maintain it's own wealthy elite. The second thing that stood out for me is the courage of the people that still stood up and resisted, risking their lives in the process. Personally, I don't know if I would have had that courage to do that. Through the use of contraversial art, dissent was expressed and circulated. Most impressive, however, were probably the "grandmothers of the Plaza de Mayo," the only visible opposition to the regime, who demanded justice for their disappeared loved ones. They displayed true courage, and their commitement to their cause was a strong agent of change.

When reading these horror stories, one is usually left with a "never again" feeling. However, I see these more as a cautionary, a reminder of how easy it is for things to slip into that institutional darkness. It's a reminder of the importance of vigilance and active involvment in politics. Such regimes are not a thing of the past, and they could easily manifest again if we are not careful.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/10/27/world/americas/argentina-dirty-war/?eref=edition

Does the idea of human rights sustain the fight for justice against perceived wrongs?