DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS SPECIAL TOPICS CPO 4306.

transcript

DEMOCRACY AND

HUMAN RIG

SPECIA

L TOPI

SPECIAL TOPICS COURSES

If you have taken a Special Topics Course previously you can still get credit for this one

If you take this one and want to take another Special Topics Course in the future you can do that and get credit

Opportunity to explore a new topic

PURPOSE OF THIS COURSE

To explore what has happened in cases of democratization after human rights violations

To consider this question across several different regions of the world

To allow you to help me think about a new book on human rights and democracy

Books as listed on syllabus

One book is Anderson, 2010

Books also on reserve 2 hours plus overnight.

CoursepackHard copy = $25E copy = $9.40

Also includes Anderson unpublished, chapter 3 only

READINGS

There are no texts for a class like this

Coursepack

Anderson

TALK ABOUT THE READING

WHAT HAPPENS IN CASES LIKE THESE?

What difference does it make that a nation experienced gross human rights violations?

Is it possible to develop democracy in the aftermath of such events?

What alternative paths have nations chosen?

Latin AmericaChileEl SalvadorArgentina

Europe: Germany

Africa: South Africa

CASES CHOSEN

THE LATIN AMERICAN CASES

Argentina First case Few examples to follow Became an example itself

Chile Came later Possibly the most successful

El Salvador

possibly the least successful

ORDER OF THE COURSE

Germany First Worst Early example

Latin America Largest number of cases

South Africabest known

best example

COURSEPACK MATERIAL

Robert Rotberg and Dennis Thompson: Truth vs Justice: The Morality of Truth Commissions – selected chapters

Anderson unpublished (don’t read this yet)

ROTBERG AND THOMPSON

First introduction to some of the issues

Vocabulary

dilemmas

Justice

Reconciliation, social healing

Preventative (never again)

Restorative (healing for victimes [if alive]; for families [ if victims are dead]; and for society at large)

Move society to a new place where it can let go and move forward

CHOICES

Acknowledge or ignore?

Investigate or close the books?

Trials? Yes or no

If Trials then where? Military courts? Chile Civilian courts? Argentina International tribunals? Germany Special judicial authorities? S Africa

CHOICES: INVESTIGATE

Once we know, then what

Punishment or amnesty?

If punishment, what punishment?

Reparations or no?

POWER OF OUTGOING REGIME

Varies considerably

Human rights violators want impunity

Power can also change with time

ROLE OF INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

Varies

Can be central and essential (Germany, El Salvador)

Can be interested observer (S. Africa)

Can be totally absent (Argentina)

INTERNATIONAL ROLE

Depends on timing

This has only been a field since 1990s

If you were Germany you had no examples

Today there are many examples, all slightly different

CHOICES IN FINDING TRUTH

Public or private

Who to interview

Should you also interview perpetrators?

OTHER RELEVANT TERMS

Forgiveness

Vengance

Just punishment

Catharsis

Repentance

Restorative justice

COURSEPACK CHAP 2GUTMANN AND THOMPSONRealism: the task is too large, let it go and move on Prosecution is impossible or unfeasible

Compassion Relief Redemption Forgiveness Spirituality, possibly a religious experience (role of religion)

Retributive justice (punishment)

Restorative justice (dignity)

Reparations

All of these cases have had to make decisions about each of these terms.

History

How far back do you go?

Is history irrelevant at some point?

Example of S Africa and the Boers vs the English

ALTERNATIVE POSITIONS

Amnesty and restoration are incompatible

Amnesty ruins democracy

Amnesty makes justice impossible

Disharmony is good for democracy

RIGHTS

ONS BY

LIBERAT

OVEMENTS?

ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS

Ignore

Punish

Acknowledge but treat differently: justifiable struggle versus deliberate repression

VALUE OF DELIBERATION

Sitting down to talk has a value

Social discussion is part of democracy

Try to disagree without being extreme

WHO IS GUILTY?

The top general or president?

Those who gave orders?

Those who followed orders?

Those who were spies?

Those who voted?

Those who looked away?

Those who did not fight back?

FORGETTING VS REMEMBRANCE

Forgetting favors perpetrators

Remembrance provides dignity. This is a crucial point. Society must acknowledge what happened to these people

But eventually victims also need to forget or accept

How far to go in either direction?

FORGIVENESS

Do people have to forgive?

Should people decide never to forgive?

MIRED IN THE MUCK OF COMPROMISE

From Elizabeth Kiss, p 70

Most countries have found answers to all of these questions that are compromises

Someone is always dissatisfied

Someone always wants more or less

GERMANY

H THE N

GERMANY

2001 WIT

IF NOT,

THEEN A

ND WILS

ON OR A

NY OTH

ER BRIE

XT ON G

ERMANY

GERMANY DEMOCRACY

Germany came to democracy late relative to France, Britain and US

Became democratic after being a monarchy

Began democracy just prior to WWI

GERMAN SKEPTICISM ABOUT DEMOCRACYInexperience with democracy

Greater faith in a central, non-democratic leader

Democratization coincided with Defeat in war Economic depression

BREAKDOWN OF GERMAN DEMOCRACY

Defeat in war: reparations payments, esp to France

Economic crisis

Hitler offered a solution: let me solve all your problems for you

Germans voted for him

COMPLEXITY OF THE FASCIST VOTE

Social Democrats opposed Hitler and the Nazis from the outset They were the only party to take this position They recognized Hitler for who he was

Conservatives did not take the Hitler threat seriously. Did not oppose him but did not support him

HITLER’S VICTORY

Nazism won a plurality, not a majority

In a parliamentary system

Making Hitler Chancellor, not President

A position more like Prime Minister in Britain

This is not a separate presidential mandate but his PARTY was in power

END OF DEMOCRACY

Hitler then ended all elections

Someone burned the Reichstags (symbolic more than practical) but it has come to symbolize the end of democracy

Probably was the Nazis but this has never been proven

Gradually increased repression and control

HITLER’S SOUP KITCHENS

Provided food to poor and unemployed

Credit support for farmers losing farms

Family support for new and young families

Various types of real poverty relief

Ursala’s story

COMPLEXITY OF HITLER SUPPORT

Not everyone supported the Nazis but many people did

Those who supported the Nazis had good reason to do so

The ugly side of Nazism did not reveal itself until after it won power and not even immediately after winning. Nazism came slowly, the stealth factor.

DEFEAT IN WAR

Utter collapse of the Nazi regime with no power and no legitimacy

No influence over new democracy

Absolute occupation by Allied Forces

Germany divided

RETURN TO DEMOCRACY

Overseen by Western Allies, W Germany only

Began with Nuremburg Trials, top officials

Suicide of Hitler

Denazification (Chap 2 of Frei)

FREI: CHAP 1

1945-1949

By 1949 major trials past

1949 amnesty law

AMNESTY

4 years of trials

Effort by Western allies to govern Germany

When does Germany begin to govern itself?

Expenditure of time by Western governments

DELIBERATION

Result of parliamentary decision

Extensive discussion in media

Further discussion by judiciary and in law journals (amnesty to be applied by judges inside domestic courts in individual cases)

OVERSEEN BY WESTERN ALLIES

Adenauer checked the law with the occupying powers

Checked again as it formulated itself

Respect for Adenauer by Allies

FURTHER AMNESTY DETAILS

Context for democracy had existed before the 12 years of Hitler’s authoritarianism

Only one side target of prosecution

Brits offer amnesty on certain days (part of German argument)

Amnesty started small, expanded gradually

What must cease in Germany is the chase after human beings (p 22)

The end of vengance

Figures p 24

----------

Amnesty also as a rejection of occupation, re-establishment of nation, assertion of self

FREI CHAP 2: DENAZIFICATION

Also begun and imposed by Western Allies

Purge of officials from positions of power, influence, decision-making.

Nazi Party outlawed: Establishment of elections but you are not allowed to run as a Nazi or vote for Nazism

A LEGISLATION FOR THE PAST

4 years of denazification had been a legislative perspective looking backward

Need to look forward

Loss of human capital and expertise

Exclusion of millions from society

PUTTING A PROCESS IN PLACE

P 32 – definitions of categories of those excluded and purged

Gradual extension of amnesty to groups 2-5

WHY DENAZIFICATION?

Recovery of human power vs continued loss of skills, education, training, intelligence

Effort to rebuild a nation

Rejection of occupation

CHAP 3:

READ THIS

N, NO LE

CTURE H

FREI CHAP 4: AMNESTY LAW 1954

P 67: 1945-1951: 17,000 legal investigations

5,500 convictions

Shifting public mood Reluctance to continue trials Tired of it all

SHIFTING MOOD

Social reluctance, a social decision Compare this with Argentina

A Vengeful, punitive, vindictive society? Compare this with S. Africa

Quote p 91

FREI P

ART II

UESTION O

AR CRIM

DEFINITION

Began with top commanders, Hitler and his top men

Began with Nuremberg Trials

Continued downward through military ranks

Ended with soldier, policemen, SS and all those following orders

Included concentration camp staff

REACTION OF GERMAN PUBLIC

Support for trials of top political command

Shock over revelations of what regime did

Growing distaste for continuation of trials

What right to foreigners have to do this?

Became outright resistance

EASTERN GERMANY?

What was happening there?

Mostly unknown

30,000-40,000 condemned

We do not know. This book still needs to be written

CHANGING GEOPOLITICAL CONTEXT

Focus on Germany and Nazis took western attention away from Soviet Union

Growing threat of Soviet power and fear of it

Desire by Bonn and West Germany to be part of democratic alliance against USSR

Need to make Germany into a friend

WAR CRIMINAL PROBLEM

By 1955 this had become a question of average soldiers and prison guards

Just about everyone in jail had been following orders

Why should they face punishment when average citizens did not? (singled out men and young people)

Growing resistance from right

THE PROBLEM OF THE RIGHT

Most legal parties were democratic, legalistic and not neo-Nazi

This allowed democracy to continue to develop

Continuation of war crimes imprisonment strengthened right, weakened democracy

Growing resistance from average Germans

ROLE OF PARLIAMENT

All of this continuously debated in parliament

Also debated in media, especially newspapers

This is what Gutmann and Thompson call deliberation: this is the best way to arrive and the best solution

SOCIAL RESPONSE

Growing refusal to help Allies catch escapees

Growing resentment of Allies

Gradually and quietly most prisoners released

GUILT OF A NATION

If anyone is guilty then everyone is guilty

Then no one is guilty, or at least not guilty enough to keep paying a price

Nazism without Nazis: yes it was a bad regime but no specific person is any longer guilty

NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES

Reduced German willingness to do their own soul searching

This is what they are doing now

RETURN OF THE NAZI RIGHT

Allied bottom line: this would not happen

Prepared to back that position with military might

But also pragmatic and realistic: end the continued punishment – take away the soil upon which neo-Nazi right was beginning to grow.

FREI - CONCLUSION

Overarching goal of Adenauer years Reintegrate Nazis into German society Which necessitated amnesty

MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF POLICY

Agreed upon by most observers: consensus

Sweeping scope

GERMANY’S RETURN TO NATIONHOOD

Rejection of denazification policy

Rejection of allied definition of collective guilt

Solidarity of the not guilty or the less guilty with the more guilty

Return toward normalcy, while also having lost half their country

GERMAN JUDICIARY

This case began with extensive international intervention, i.e. defeat in war and occupation.

Higher level of external intervention than any other case here

But it terminates with the domestic judiciary playing the central role

Initiative moved from international to domestic, a significant achievement

AMNESTY THEMSELVES

A need to stop self-flagelation

A need to give meaning to their own loss of lives

An inability to cope with the full reality of what the Third Reich had done and their own complicity in those crimes

NOT BECAUSE T

INNOCENT

BUT PR

ECISELY

BECAUSE T

ERE GUILT

AS IF TO SAY:

Yes, we did this.

In fact, we did more than we are quite prepared to look at just now

But so what?

What are we supposed to do now?

Should we freeze and do nothing now because of what we did then?

Or should we move on?

CONTINUED PRESENCE OF NAZISM

Undoubtedly still there

1953 election among parties who knew that one decade earlier the majority of the electorate would have voted for Hitler (possibly overstated)

Never able to take hold owing to Allied presence

Brown trickle or dark fountainhead ? P 306

AND THOSE WHO DO NOT BELIEVE IN DEMOCRACYOld German Prussians

Adherents of the monarchy

Hindenburg supporters of the old German right

AN EXPERIENCE OF DISINTEGRATION

Threat of no longer being a nation

Losing Germany entirely

Had already lost half

This was more than they could cope with and so a selective and limited memory emerged and a desire for self-amnesty

GEOPOLITICAL CONTEXT

USSR seen as greater threatEspecially by AmericanAdenauer’s clear desire to link the new Wester

German state to the west ideologically, economically and militarily

So if German army demanded amnesty he was prepared to go along with it for that reason

Adenauer’s perception that USSR constituted an individual threat to Germany along. They had already taken half his country.

AMBIVALENT ROLE OF THE ALLIES

POSITIVE

Ensured that no Nazi party would gain power

Protected against USSR

NEGATIVE

Still an occupying powerStill overseeing all German decisionsStill a target of resentment

GERMAN REARMAMENT

Goal of German military

Also of Adenauer

Also of the Americans (more than the West Europeans, as you can easily understand)

Asocial elements

Criminal regime

German soldiers

Regime of criminals

DEFINITIONS AND TERMS

BASIC LAW

and 94 of 2001

LIMITED ABILITY TO ADDRESS THE PAST

This would continue for several decades

Perhaps is changing now

This last chapter is highly critical of the Germans and I do not know if he could have published this in 1960.

Due Thursday, January 31 at 5pm est.

Send to landerso@ufl.edu

Keep a hard copy

WHEN I AM AWAY

1. If you miss class you are responsible for the material you missed and you are responsible for it obtaining it without contacting me. Form a student contact.

2. If you need a syllabus, find one without contacting me. Sources include

1. Other students2. Political science main office (do you know

where that is?) If not, find out. Use the campus guide/map.

3. If you miss class the day the exam is passed out, do not try to reach me afterwards to get the exam. If you miss class, that is not my responsibility. It is your responsibility. Form a student contact. Do not miss class. Pay attention to exam dates and key class events.

ARGENTINA

NEWER CASE

This is a much newer case but still one of the early cases in the modern history of human rights studies.

This case dates to 1983 and the immediate years thereafter, esp up to 1985, 1986.

A BRIEF HISTORY

Long history of military coups

First democracy was 1916-1932

Subsequent decades characterized by circumscribed elections (not all parties allowed to compete) or by more military governments

PERONISM

An authoritarian populism

That instituted elections the Peron felt certain he could win

Particular and peculiar emotional hold over the low income population

BATTLE OVER PERONISM: 1956-1973

Effort by military and wealthy elites to exclude Peronism

Effort by Peronism to exclude everyone else

Deteriorated into political chaos and terrorism in 1970s

1973-1976 Peronist presidency

1976 MILITARY COUP

March, 1976. This has become a national day of memorial and commemoration in Argentina

Military coup removed elected Peronist governments

Yet another military government except….

HE MOST

BRUTAL D

TORSHIP

THE DIRTY WAR

Popular name for the military dictatorship of 1976-1983

The military called it the Process of National Reconstruction, also known as “El Proceso.”

During this time the military murdered people, approximately 30,000.

PATTERNS OF THE DIRTY WAR

People disappeared. This became a verb. The military “disappeared” people.

Kidnappings at night

Breaking and entering homes where people slept

Kidnapping and jailing entire families, including children, infants, and pregnant women

PATTERNS OF THE DIRTY WAR

Kidnappings in broad daylight

Kidnappings from cafes, offices, schools and campuses

Most common were midnight break-ins and when people were walking alone on the street

THEN WHAT?

For most of the dictatorship, no one knew the answer to that question

Argentines simply knew that their friends, families, children had disappeared

So the mothers went looking for them. These became the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo.

MOTHERS’ ACTIVITIES

Schools, offices, friends’ houses

Hospitals

Police stations

Morgues

CHARACTER OF THOSE DISAPPEARED

Mostly young people. Your age group was a particular target

People age 20-35

University students and young people

Activists

Professionals engaged in resistance Human rights lawyers Independent union organizers

CHARACTERISTICS OF YOUTH

Many people this age are dating people

Headed toward marriage

Starting jobs, families, careers

Starting families

At least some of the disappeared were young women who were pregnant. This gave you no protection against being “disappeared.”

SO THE MOTHERS WENT LOOKING

Now they were also looking for grandchildren, babies, infants they had never seen

They searched hospitals

Clinics and women’s care centers

Morgues

THE HEADSCARF

Symbolism

Self identification

To converse with each other and share information.

FINDINGS OF THE MOTHERS

That these people were really and truly gone

That something terrible may have happened to them

That the police may have known something and denied it

That babies were also gone

A MOTHERS’ SOCIAL MOVEMENT

This became the origins of the social movement that eventually brought down the military

Thursdays at 3: those who survive still walk there at that time

Men could support but not participate and here’s why:

THE FALL OF THE PROCESO

A mothers’ and grandmothers’ movement

Other human rights movements

International condemnation

Falkland Islands/Malvinas War, lost, defeated by Britain

Economic crisis

RETURN TO DEMOCRACY

Military agreed to step aside and allow elections

Amid nationwide and international recriminations, disgust and outrage

The military had little power to negotiate their new condition. Remember this. This matters.

But they also had no remorse or regrets.

MOVIES

The Official Story La Historia Oficial

Cautiva

The Secret in their Eyes

La noche de los lapices

LANDERSO@

CI.UFL

ON WRITING

Intro, concl, body of essay

Topic sentences

Grammar : green

Spelling: red

Thesaurus

1983 ELECTION

Radicals and Raul Alfonsin promised investigation and trials. “No podemos actuar como nada hubiera pasado.”

Peronist (Luder) said nothing about human rights but were widely suspected of pacting w/ military and offering amnesty

Age-old Peronist affinity with the military (Peron was an officer)

1983 ALFONSIN VICTORY

Human Rights Policy = # 1 Agenda Investigate what happened Try the topbrass Have the military try themselves

MILITARY RESPONSE

Military found everyone innocent

This was a war

In war there are casualties

So now what? Do you say “OK, let’s move on?” Or do you move jurisdiction elsewhere?

INVESTIGATE

Truth Commission

Find out what happened

Then decide what to do

Head = Ernesto Sabato

NUNCA MAS TRUTH COMMISSION

Finally the truth emerges

The disappeared were imprisoned in clandestine prisons

The police and military knew all along where they were

They were tortured, raped, killed

Bodies dumped in the South Atlantic

Human rights violations

Murder, rape, kidnapping

Theft of property

Numbers unknown

Location of children unknown

Forensic work

Then finally DNA

How to respond?

Amnesty?

Judicial trials and domestic legal system?

Upon what grounds?

These acts were legal under the military regime.

Can justice be retroactive?

SO NOW ARGENTINA KNEW THE TRUTH

Now what? Now what?

POSSIBLE RESPONSES

ARGUMENT # 1: TRIALS

Military trials of their own members

These were military men so they should not be tried in civilian courts

Laws applied should be those of previous regime

No retroactive justice allowed

ARGUMENT # 2: IGNORE

Explosive issueWould invite another coupWhen the military regime was in power these were not illegal acts

STEP ONE

Move decision-making to Congress

Remember Gutmann and Thompson: call for deliberation

Centralizing Congress as decision-making body protected Alfonsin (easier to overthrow one man than 400)

FIRST CONGRESSIONAL LAW

Try the military, including all those who engaged in egregious behavior

Sapac amendment

How broad is that???!!!

EARLY TRIALS

Had the potential to address all military members

Soldiers and officers alike

Continue trials downward

Apparently endless investigations

CONGRESSIONAL DECISION

TRY THEM IN CIVILIAN COURT

Military have refused to find themselves guilty

Congress moved trials to civilian courts

Judiciary = center of process

Human rights law, Geneva Convention not laws of military regime

BROADCAST PROCEEDINGS

Make trials publicTiming to touch the next generationMonths of proceedings

PUBLICIZE

Live coverage

International attention

Played on daytime television at 3 pm when all children are at home

Reach the next generation first: so that it will never happen again

MILITARY RESPONSE

Resentment

Threats

Attempted coup

SEVERAL COUP ATTEMPTS

These began during the trials

Alfonsin government thought they would discontinue but they did not

Growing military strength as democratic government weakened

Move toward economic collapse

GROWING MILITARY RESISTANCE

We have done nothing wrong

This was a war. People died. This is what happens in war.

Threatened coup

CONGRESSIONAL RESPONSE

OBEDIENCE DEBIDA

Following orders

Denial would have meant death to soldiers

Deliberate effort by military to incriminate everyone

PUNTO FINAL

After a certain date no new cases could be filedFrantic 6-month period of putting together cases and filesEnd of trials thereafter

END OF INITIAL ARGENTINE RESPONSE

These 2 laws ended the legal response

Military still dissatisfied but accepted this solution

Mothers very angry but helpless to change the situation

ARGENTINA MOVES ON

Economic crisis

Reform of labor

New election

Defeat of Radicals

Return of Peronism to power

1989 ELECTION

Peronist victory

New President: Carlos Menem

Old Peronist sympathy with military

MENEM AGENDA

The economy

Other reforms like control over labor

Education

Human rights was not part of Menem’s agenda

MENEM IN POWER

Amnesty

All generals released

All other military prisoners released

Left terrorists also released

AMNESTY

MENEM’S AGENDA FOR MILITARY

Forget the disappeared

Move on

Keep military on tight leash

Keep them occupied otherwise NATO Peacekeeping forces (Argentina???!!!)

ONE FINAL COUP ATTEMPT

Against Menem

Menem ordered the military to fire

They followed orders

Rebels taken prisoner

This was the last attempted coup (so far)

Promotion of Balza

ROLE OF CIVIL SOCIETY

Women and young girls

Refusal to date soldiers

Scorn for the military and for soldiers

Low pay, difficult to make a living

OUTCOME

Volunteers all but disappeared

Draft continued

END OF DRAFT

One final event

Death of recruit

Public response

Ending of draft: now a fully volunteer army

Probably do not have military power to overthrow the government. Maybe

KIRCHNER YEARS

National day of mourning every year in March

Re-opening of some trials

Mostly symbolic

WHAT WAS LEFT UNDONE?

FURTHER TRIALS?

What do you think

REPARATIONS

Social policiesindemnity

ASSESSMENT OF ARGENTINE CASE

RECOMMENDATIONS

What would Gutmann and Thompson have recommended in the Argentine case?

What would others have recommended?

How far did Argentina go toward those recommendations?

FACTS FROM CASE

Honest effort to find truthMore accountability; more deliberation

BACKGROUND

Chile: coup 1979

Elected ousted: Allende Socialist Elected by plurality Extensive reforms Military coup US involvement

CHILEAN MILITARY REGIME

Pinochet

3,000 disappeared

Parties illegal

Elections ended

All civil rights (association, speech, freedom of press)

ENDING OF MILITARY REGIME

Plebiscite: 1988 – Yes/No Parties reactivated Parties united: Voto para el NO Pinochet position: economy

Pinochet lost

1989 ELECTION

3 parties competed

Center won

Chile returns to democracy

PINOCHET STEPPED DOWN

Amnesty

Impunity

No trials

Etc etc etc

RUTHLESSNESS OF THE REGIME

Movies: Missing House of the Spirits

Law abiding

Started late and slow

Possibly accomplished more than Argentina

Certainly accomplished more than El Salvador

WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM CHILE?

Particularities of the Chilean case

Was this the best way to proceed?

Advantages of going slowly

Role of international actors

Early efforts

Aylwin’s sincerity

Aggression of Armed Forced

Limited progress

But it was not a total loss

Later role for international actors

Pinochet’s visit to London: turning point

Role of the Courts

TWO PHASES

CHILE’S PHASE I: DOMESTIC EFFORTDeclaration by President

Rettig Report

Reparations

DECLARATION BY PRESIDENT

March 1990 Aylwin’s inaugural speech Find truth Social debt for economic system reconciliation

Established investigative commission which let to Rettig Report

Help to Exiles

Reform judiciary

RETTIG REPORT

Officially established and sanctioned by the executive

Gave the truth commission legitimacy and some power

Recommended reparations

Hostility of military

Also investigated terrorism by the left

WORK OF RETTIG COMMISSION

Traveled nationwide

Interviewed everyone who wanted to present their case

Staff members (60 in all) studied documentation gathered by human rights organizations

NOTE: this was unique in Chile: careful documentation of violations during dictatorship

REPARATIONS

The belief that reparations were appropriate and possible

7000 people targeted for reparations

$380 monthly salary for specified period

Health and educational benefits to families of disappeared

SYMBOLIC ACTIONS

National Day of Mourning over death of Allende

Public launching of Rettig Report

MILITARY RESPONSE

Never apologized

Never admitted wrong doing

Reiterated reasons for Coup: if they had it to do all over again they would do exactly the same thing

Ultimate show of force in Santiago

Pinochet’s absolute defiance

Discussion groups Tuesday

DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT BACKS DOWNFear of coup

Decision that democracy was more important

Roll back of progress on any human rights issues

ROLE OF INTERNATIONAL ACTORS

If international actors had not stepped in this would have been the end of the story

Aylwin tried to reform the judiciary

Forward progress stopped by aggression of military and fear by democratic government

END OF PHASE I

Aggression by Armed Forces

Fear on part of democratic government

Desire by some social sectors to move on

CHILE’S PHASE II

Pinochet’s visit to London

Entry of international actors Spain: demand to extradite Pinochet from

Britain British refusal to comply

Domestic Courts Legitimized and reinvigorated by international

actors Beginning of a new battle through legal system

PINOCHET’S ATTITUDE

Impunity

Wealthy man seeking maximum health care

He felt he had done nothing wrong

The rest of the world would agree

LONDON WEAKENED PINOCHET

Gave weight to international opinion

Held up a mirror to Chile

Chile cared about international opinion

INTERNATIONAL ACTORS

Limit to what they can do

They cannot Punish someone else’s military Arrest and try nationals in another country Change laws

But they can use their own domestic court system

And international law

SECOND EXAM

Between Chile and Argentina, which country did a better job addressing human rights violations? Tell me what standard or benchmarks you are using to compare and assess the policies of these two countries. Say why you think what you think. Write 7 pages.

Due in class March 19.

DOMESTIC COURTS

Linked into what was happening abroad

Already fortified by domestic reforms

Chile’s court system became the new forum for forward progress on human rights issues

OES CHILE

UP?COMPA

RED TO W

ALL THINGS ARE RELATIVE

COLLINS PERSPECTIVE

Chile looks pretty good

Chile looks good compared with El Salvador

Chile started out not so impressive but got better

OTHER COMPARISONS

To ArgentinaTo Germany

CHANGES TO THE SYLLABUS

March 19-28 El Salvador: Read Wood, 2003, entire book

Part III: South Africa April 2-11 South Africa: Read Wood, 2000 and Wilson, entire book

Part IV: Overview and Assessment April 16-18 Coursepack chapters again

April 23 Final exam

PEND T

WEEKS O

N EL S

ALVADOR

L SALV

ADOR WE W

E USIN

G WOOD A

ND COLL

READ COLL

SALVADORAN PA

HEN READ T

EL SALV

ALSO KNOWN AS SALVADOR

Smallest country in Central America

Poorest country in Central America

Second most violent history, second only to Guatemala where they are currently using the term genocide

We do not study Guatemala

TWO WEEKS ON EL SALVADOR

Background

Human Rights

EL SALVADOR: OVERVIEW

This is your worst case scenario

Why is this true?

Is this acceptable or could the Salvadorans have done better/more?

Where does Salvador stand in comparison with our other cases?

THE FOURTEEN FAMILIES

Small country in land mass

Extremely high population density

Limited sources of revenue COFFEE SOME COTTON SOME CATTLE

1930S-1980S

Extreme exploitation of the population

A tiny wealthy class

Most people were poor

No middle class

1930S-1980S

First popular resistance in 1930s – massacre

1940s-1960s: continuation of same

US preoccupied with World War II and then with Cold War

This is the period of the Somoza years in Nicaragua (for those of you who took 3303)

BEGINNING OF RESISTANCE

Early 1980s: development of revolutionary movment

FMLN: Frente Farabundo Marti de Liberacion Nacional (Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front)

Beginning of a guerrilla war

SALVADOR AND NICARAGUA

Nicaragua had a successful socialist revolution

Threw out dictatorship

Semi-socialist government with command economy

US opposition – mostly failed

Salvadoran dictatorship was 14 families, not one manEffort to imitate NicaraguaUS tried to prevent socialism before the fact rather than removing it after the revolution

NICARAGUA AS THE MODEL

Salvadoran effort to follow Nicaraguan example

Popular revolution from below

Armed insurrection when the people would participate

ANDERSON AND WOOD

Wood: Civil War

Comparative Perspective with South Africa

Anderson Failed revolutionary

insurrection

Comparative perspective with Nicaragua

WOOD O

N EL S

ALVADOR

HE STO

RY SHE T

INSURRECTION

Revolutionary effort to remove the 14 families

Who were supported by a brutal military

Which was funded by the US

1980-1992

Revolutionary effort lasted about 12 years

Modeled on successful Sandinista revolution which triumphed July, 1979

Gradual effort by FMLN to conquer the country militarily

As FSLN had done in Nicaragua Started in North 4 fronts converging on Managua Military defeat of Somoza’s National Guard

DIFFERENCES FROM NICARAGUA

United States was paying closer attention

14 families more coherent and a more difficult target

Funding from US for military

Funding from Nicaragua, Cuba and everywhere else for FMLN

FAMOUS DEATHS

Death of Archbishop Oscar Romero

Movie: Romero (Raul Julia)

Death of 4 nuns, including lay missionaries, one young woman college age

Book: Roses in December Did this also become a movie?

DISCUSSION

This is where Liberation Theology was key

Liberation Theology influenced different national clergy communities differently

Influential in: Chile Salvador Nicaragua

Not influential in Argentina

Bergoglio (Argentine

Church more

generally)

ChileanChurch(record keeping

Romero (speakin

g out)

Taking up arms

Protection of combatents; nonviolent

participation

Speak out at home

Travel, speak out

Shelter to all, arms

THESE E

VENTS B

ROUGHT

RNATIO

EGINNIN

RNATIO

NAL ACTO

INTERNATIONAL ATTENTION

US funding became international scandal

Brutality of military became target of investigation by Amnesty International

Congress ultimately cut funding to Salvador unless and until human rights violations declined

SALVADOR WAS NOT NICARAGUA

Some people participated but most did not

Repression was more severe and more effective

Wood estimates in her case study areas that 60% did not join the insurrection

Nicaraguan percentages were much higher

STANDOFF: NEITHER SIDE WON

FMLN could not defeat the fortified Salvadoran military

Salvadoran military likewise could not defeat FMLN

Economy is absolute shambles

The whole point of 14 families (get rich) was lost by the devastation of continuous war

STANDOFF

Where the rich (through the military) made the people afraid for the lives

The people made the rich unable to work, unable to grow their crops, unable to live in the countryside

LONG-TERM TRAJECTORY

This situation appeared poised to endure indefinitely

Neither side prepared to back away

Neither side controlled El Salvador

Wood calls this contested sovereignty

1992 PEACE A

CCORDS

TERVEN

TION O

TERNAT

IONAL A

PEACE AGREEMENT

Brokered by United Nations

Input from Amnesty International and other human rights watch organizations

US agreed to peace accords but was not trusted to broker accords – not an impartial actor

AGREEMENT

Both sides would stop fighting

Elections with participation by FMLN

Elections would be repeated and all parties allowed to compete

Results would be respected

ELECTIONS: LONG-TERM

First elections: victory by right

Next elections: victory by center

2011 elections: first national victory by FMLN

Also contested at local level

FMLN victory in San Salvador

Growing control at local level

COLLINS ON EL SALVADOR

Agreement NOT to investigate human rights violations

Agreement NOT to use the judiciary domestically

No investigation of the truth

No Truth Commission

No Trials of Military

SALVADORAN M

MOVE ON

FUNDAMENTA

L BASIC

SALVADORAN S

AS TO IG

NORE WHAT

APPENED

NO INVESTI

MILITA

RY BEHAV

O INVESTI

CS TOW

ARD POPU

CURRENT SITUATION

This situation has not changed

Elections gave victory to right at first

Then to the Center

And now, in 2011, FMLN has won the presidency for one term

ELECTORAL CONTEST

Rotation in power at national level

Gradual gain of seats by FMLN in legislature

Gradual gain of mayorships in local elections

HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION:

Unchanged across all these electoral contests

There has been no Kirchner-style effort to re-open the books

Even the FMLN in office has not moved on the judiciary

Peace accords are now 21 years old

ATE IS

HE SALV

ADORAN STO

CAN ANYT

HING B

E DONE?

IF SO, W

CATH C

ON EL S

ALVADOR

INTERNATIONAL ACTORS

Lack of initiative from domestic actors

Primary power to ARENA

FMLN as legitimate actor and political party

UN: peacekeeping and mediation

Then technical assistance

PDDH: UN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTSDenounce

Advise

No enforcement capacity: similar to role of Courts in older democracy

1994-97

Impunity preserved

Clean slate

INTERNATIONAL REPORT

Filed with recommendations

Absolutely rejected by those in power (ARENA)

FRAGILITY OF PEACE

Peace accords seen as fragile

Had been achieved upon assumption of no trials

This perception continued for many years

Was this perception correct?

1993 AMNESTY LAW

Passed on year after Peace Accords

Right in power

FMLN only just gaining toehold as legitimate political actor

FORD V GARCIA

One of four cases

Came to jury trial

Jurors unaware of context and history

Defendants found not guilty

NETWORKING AMONG HROS

Extensive contacts

Could potentially act together if domestic context changed

To date courts have shown no willingness to find anyone guilty

INTERNATIONAL PERCEPTIONS

How is Salvador seen in the community of nations?

Does the government care about pariah status?

ARENA did not

Perhaps the FMLN will

SOUTH A

STOP-OFF EN ROUTE TO INDIA

Cape Town

Dutch East India Company

First white toe-hold in Africa

These Europeans began to settle, in and around Cape Town.

But they came to stay

GENERALITIES

Distance to South Africa

Frequent flyer miles

Stop-offs for gas

Apartheid

EUROPEAN INFLUENCE

Dutch: Afrikaners

Afrikans = derivative of Dutch

British: also a major language

Multiple African languages

THE BOERS

Dutch term for white South African natives

Roots in S. Africa reach back more than 400 years

They do not consider themselves Europeans

Some blacks do not consider them Africans

They consider themselves Africans

ATTITUDES TOWARDS BLACK SOUTH AFRICANSBoth groups racist

Both wished to lay claim to South Africa

Wealth of the territory

Differences between two groups

Cecil Rhodes

THE BOER WAR

Won by Britain but aftermath left greater power with Afrikaners

Some people think this was the beginning of apartheid

APARTHEID

Official system of legalized racism

Placing the races apart: apartheid

Gradually became more rigid and brutal

Criminal regime vs regime of criminals

The Power of One

SYSTEM OF HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS

Black Africans eventually forced to live outside main cities

Bus passes to allow domestic travel for blacks

Restricted hours

Poverty: provided low cost service (maids and gardeners) for whites

Brits as slightly more cosmopolitan

Afrikaners as more rural people, ranchers, farmers

BRITISH – DUTCH TENSION

COMPARE TO US SOUTH

We have been called an unofficial apartheid system

What would you put here?

black codes, restricted travel

Jim Crow

blacks not counted as full person

blacks as property

blacks as maids

ECONOMIC ADVANTAGES OF SYSTEM

Whites lived very nice life-style

High level of development in African context

Universities and scientific research

SOCIAL SERVICES FOR BLACKS

Separate

But some services

Better health and longer lives

Population explosion

ECONOMIC PROTEST VS GREATER REPRESSIONGradually increasing black South African

opposition

White South Africans responded with repression

British descendants largely NOT in political control

an in-between group

a neutral language

Hostility, protest, repression in upward spiral

WOOD ON SOUTH AFRICA

Protest gradually made economy unviable

Comparison with El Salvador

Wealthy and middle-class Boers found themselves unable to continue to make money

African National Congress as protest group/revolutionaries

Never became a successful revolution

1980’S INTERNATIONAL ACTORS

US and Europe invested in South Africa

International pressure to divest

International human rights organizations

S Africa as international pariah

DOWNFALL OF APARTHEID

1990 agreement by Boers to allow open elections

Agreement by ANC to lay down arms and abandon insurrectionary struggle

International rejection of South African system

International boycott

Domestic initiative with strong international pressure and support

FIRST ELECTIONS

1994: several years later

First open election in which blacks ran and voted

Mandela victory

Subsequent white victory

New ANC victory

Disappearance of white party: they do not have the votes

Blacks are vast numerical majority

CONTEMPORARY SYSTEM

Parliamentary system

Problem of the single party

Role of Mandela

CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS

White flight and declining opportunities for whites

Low educational level for blacks: cannot fill white jobs, at least not yet

CONTEXT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES

Nature of these crimes

economic system

actual violent acts (Biko, many others)

Soweto repression

Domestic actors:

Some awareness of need to redress past

Disagreement over how

International actors

AN EXTRA-INSTITUTIONAL JUSTICE PROCESSDecision NOT to conduct trials through judicial

system (blacks did not trust that system)

Decision to search for truth but also grant amnesty

Truth-telling by perpetrators would produce amnesty

Failure to tell the truth could remand offenders to trials through legal justice system

INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT

Extensive attention, support and acclaim abroad

International press attention

CHARGE FOR TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION

Find the truth

Record what happened

Search for forgiveness

Telling one’s story

Make everything public

INTERNATIONAL EXAMPLE

Considerable internal soul searching

what happened and what was wrong

what should be done

social healing

retrospection

RELIGIOUS OVERTONES

Key role for domestic leadership

Mandela as voice for forgiveness

Had spent 30 years in jail so he was practicing what he advocated

Also Desmond Tutu: Protestant Bishop

advocated forgiveness and path toward self-healing and letting go. (Different from Menem)

THIS PROCESS WORKED – SORT OF

In South Africa today you can hardly find anyone who says they supported apartheid

Transition to majority rule (which is black rule) has been remarkably peaceful

Nation in movement toward democracy which has many problems

Vast animosities and large-scale violence have not occurred

WHAT IS LEFT UNDONE?

Economic question:

TRC largely addressed gross human rights violations

Did not address the economic system and the extent to which blacks may be permanently behind whites in skills.

This is a class situation and all countries have it. It is perhaps worse in South Africa

WILSON’S PERSPECTIVE

Most observers have praised the South African result

Wilson is a dissenting voice.

For that reason we are reading his book

WILSON ON SOUTH AFRICA

TRC EMPHASIZED RESTORATIVE JUSTICEAND SOCIAL HEALING

Emphases:

finding the truth

truth over justice

telling one’s story (among victims)

acknowledgement

forgiveness if possible

forsake revenge

REAL GOAL WAS NATION-BUILDING

With emphasis on modern nation state, civic rule, elected government and a multi-racial national community

Africa is a world of tribes where the national state is a foreign concept imposed by Europeans. It does not fit in Africa.

ANC SACRIFICED BLACK INTERESTS

To gain a nation

To gain white support/agreement/inclusion

Nation over justice

FOUR YEARS OF NEGOTIATION

White National Party (NP) and the black party African National Congress (ANC)

Neither side could win (remember the argument of Wood)

If struggle continued infrastructure would be even more damaged than it already was. Nation might never rebuild.

Why continue to fight?

WHITE POSITION

We built this nation

This is the most advanced and civilized nation in all of Africa (and this is true)

We built the universities, highways, hospitals, park system, agriculture and industry (including diamond mines)

In black hands this nation would still be a wreck like the rest of Africa

WHITE POSITION CONTINUED

If not for our organized energy you (blacks) would not be inheriting the most advanced nation in the continent

Moreover, you have us to thank for your own health. Without our health care system the black population explosion would never have happened and we would not be where we are today

We will not be endlessly punished for the apartheid regime.

APARTHEID WAS WRONG

We acknowledge now that apartheid was wrong

The violence used to maintain the system was wrong

We are willing to end apartheid and bring blacks into government, indeed into control of government

But we will not submit ourselves to endless trials. We agree to end the system. We do not agree to be punished for it.

WHITE ATTITUDES TODAY

Today in South Africa

no one supports apartheid

no one ever supported apartheid

how did this system ever get started if no one wanted it?

ANC RESPONSE

If that is your attitude, we don’t like it

But we accept it

ANC GOALS

Democracy

allow national elections

allow the ANC as a legal party

allow blacks to vote for the ANC

allow majority opinion to determine the electoral victory (parliamentary system)

respect the outcome Human

rights

MANDELA WANTED A NATIONAL STATE

Controlled by the majority of citizens

Respected by the international community

Relying upon and using the institutions of state used in all democracies

OUTCOME: 1994 ELECTIONS AND OTHERSTRC was then a negotiated parliamentary

solution

Came out of the elected parliament that held ANC, NP, and IFP representatives

TRC came into being in 1995

Carried out its work over four years

Ended by late 1998

BETRAYAL OF THE AFRICAN PERSPECTIVEBlack African leaders of the ANC

betrayed what their black African supporters really wanted in order to achieve peace with whites and build a nation

Nelson Mandela: political leader

Desmond Tutu: spiritual leader

INKATHA FREEDOM PARTY

This is the Zulu Party

Associated with eastern South Africa and far removed from Cape town

History of violence

Used extensive violence in the struggle

CHANGE IN INKATHA APPROACH

Initially resisted Mandela leadership and goals

Eventually accepted TRC goals

Also had a lot of their own reason NOT to have trials of human rights violators

WILSON: WHAT BLACK AFRICANS WANTED Revenge

Forgiveness is a Christian concept

These people are not Christians

This was a foreign-imposed set of goals and values

RESULT

Africans in urban ghettos did not accept this outcome

Vigilante justice carried out by individuals

People knew who did what and the neither forgot nor forgave

Particular violence against blacks who had been hired as thugs by the white police. These people had to move out of their neighborhoods or ended up dead

BLACK SOUTH AFRICANS FEEL DISSATISFIEDThey do not want to tell their story

They do not want to forgive

They want revenge, death to perpetrators

They are willing to carry it out themselves

This has become a major issue in South Africa

This is where it began and this is why it began

LIMITS TO THE TRC

Acknowledgment that original mandate was too large

1990-1994 was too long to investigate

Could not write a complete history (in fact, this is the task of scholars and historians, not of government, much less of a special commission)

Result is patchy, ended by time frame and end of money not by natural point of closure (also true in Argentina)

THIS WILL NOT DO

Quote from p 56

Discovered extensive violence by IFP against blacks

Never fully rectified

Can it ever be fully rectified?

SOLUTION WORKED FOR SOME

Some truth uncovered

Some lies rectified

Some people satisfied

But many were not. Perhaps most were not?

THE AFRICAN ETHIC

Revenge, vengeance and retribution

Vengeance comes from the failure of state institutions

Impunity is incompatible with human rights

Amnesty and forgiveness have undermined peaceful coexistence in South Africa

P 161: Description of revenge and its role in society

P 162: revenge, vengeance, retribution

OTHER LEGAL INSTITUTIONS

Local town hearings

People’s Courts

These are tribal institutions that go back to pre-white African heritage

They are not recognized by the state

WHO IS CORRECT HERE?

Wilson has raised important issues

TRC had limits

Many remained dissatisfied

DISCIPLINARY DIFFERENCES IN PERSPECTIVEThe perspective of politicians

build a state

And of theorists (Guttman and Thompson)

The perspective of an anthropologist

Wilson is trained to do grassroots research

Focus on micro picture and not on larger national picture

WILSON’S PERSPECTIVE IS TIME-BOUND

Looks at immediate aftermath of establishment of new democracy

Looks at TRC years (1995-98)

Looks at most raw and conflictual years

What would he find now?

ROLE OF LEADERSHIP

Mandela as a forgiving personality

Suffered as much as many and had personal reasons for vengeance

Forwent his own desire and needs for vengeance

Tutu’s rhetoric (Wilson would say this was unnatural and not native to Africa)

WHERE DO YOU STAND ON SOUTH AFRICA?

WHICH COUNTRY DID BEST AND WHY

WHICH COUNTRY DID WORST AND WHY?

WHAT ABOUT THE UNITED STATES?

QUESTIONS

Are we in the clear?

Or do we have human rights issues to confront?

YOUR ANSWERS

No and no.

History?

slavery/aftermath

Japanese internment

native americans

education

DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS SPECIAL TOPICS CPO 4306.

Documents