"Monsignor Romero lives in the hearts of the people," chanted the crowd as it processed through the heart of San Salvador toward the Metropolitan Cathedral, while a military helicopter hovered overhead. Close to 10,000 Salvadorans, many of them from the country's poorest communities, joined in the "pilgrimage for peace and democracy" on March 24 to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero.
The march was the first public expression of its kind since the guerrilla offensive in November, and it demonstrated once again that the Salvadorans are a resurrection people. The human rights situation had sharply deteriorated in the wake of the offensive, as Salvadoran government forces stepped up their campaign to silence their perceived enemies. What little political and democratic opening existed before the offensive was effectively slammed shut. And the government-imposed state of siege (which remained in effect until mid-April) made the work of the church and other humanitarian institutions virtually impossible.
Yet the "popular movement" for peace and justice in El Salvador, which the government did everything in its power to decapitate following the offensive, will not stay down. Like the lyrics express in the most popular song for peace in El Salvador ("The Blue Sombrero"), the people are still pursuing "the fruit of those who have fallen." And they will "push forward the sun to bring about the dawn."
Representatives of the National Debate for Peace in El Salvador, which called for the Romero procession, did not ask the government's permission to hold the event, as required under the state of siege. They simply announced beforehand that it would take place and invited members of the armed forces to participate as "citizens."
After the state of siege was extended for the fourth time on March 8 (this time specifically restricting the right of free association), a coalition of 23 campesino organizations immediately vowed to challenge the restriction. "We must protest the economic measures and the setbacks to agrarian reform," they said. "We are ready to face the consequences."
Many of the popular organizations, whose offices were ransacked and militarized by the government following the November offensive, have only recently been able to reopen their doors. After a fourth-month military occupation, the Christian Committee for the Displaced of El Salvador (CRIPDES) formally reopened its San Salvador office on March 12. CRIPDES Vice-President Tomasa Ruiz attributed the return of their ransacked offices to "North American pressure."
While some religious leaders remain in exile, many religious leaders have returned to El Salvador to be with the poor and displaced they are committed to serve. Despite continuing death threats while he was in exile in Guatemala, Lutheran Bishop Medardo Gomez returned along with his family to El Salvador March 17 to "initiate hope among my people."
"There is a campaign to destroy hope, especially the hope of the churches to serve the poor," Gomez told our U. S. religious delegation just two days after his return. "Our role is to help the churches strengthen that faith and hope, by means of the Word of God to resolve our differences. This war is destroying us—in our work, our homes, our churches."
Gomez and other religious and humanitarian workers acknowledged that the government had stopped its campaign of open persecution against them, but emphasized that the repression has simply taken different forms. "It's not so open, so declared," said Gomez. "Now it is done much more carefully." Several humanitarian workers said Salvadoran authorities continued to spy on them at their homes and offices. And the government still holds control of some offices and materials stolen in November.
Still, the door to change has been pried open. But this is not due to any conversion experience on the part of the Salvadoran authorities, says Gomez. "This is all due to the work that you outside of the country have done on our behalf," he told the visit-ing delegation. "Because of this I have been able to return. Because of your solidarity, I am alive."
The solidarity of international church people and others in recent months, symbolized by the large international presence during the week of the Romero commemoration, has clearly made a difference for those working for peace and justice in El Salvador. But the resolve, the courage, and the faith of these people—many of whom have suffered imprisonment and torture at the hands of the Salvadoran authorities—are unmistakable.
PERHAPS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT and hopeful development in El Salvador in recent months (aside from the historic agreement between the government and the FMLN rebels to begin U.N.—mediated negotiations) is the emerging role of the National Debate for Peace. Initiated two years ago by the Catholic archdiocese of San Salvador, a growing number of representatives of the different sectors of Salvadoran society—religious, academic, labor, business, popular organizations—are part of a continuing dialogue on peace, social justice, sovereignty, and development.
The Permanent Committee for the Debate concluded at a meeting last fall that in order for the above conditions to be fully realized, a process of "true democratization" would need to take place. This would require: "complete respect of human rights and an end to the repression" (including dismantling the death squads); "submission of the military to civilian authority"; "unrestricted freedom of expression"; an electoral system that guaranteed the "pluralistic participation of political parties and respect for the will of the people"; and an "efficient, independent, and impartial judicial system."
The permanent committee has drafted and distributed a number of documents in eluding these and other recommendations (including a strong call for negotiations) to the government, the military, and the FMLN. But the biggest obstacle to peace remains the military. According to Edgar Palacios, a Baptist minister who serves as a general coordinator for the National Debate for Peace, the military hasn't taken any of its proposals seriously. "They [the military] have only taken seriously not wanting to negotiate," Palacios told Sojourners last December.
Things have changed—at least on the surface. President Alfredo Cristiani appointed a representative of the armed forces to join the government's negotiating team at the round of talks scheduled for early May. And the military high command issued a statement promising to support "national reconciliation, the conquest of peace, and the full realization of the democratic way of life."
But whether the military is really willing to enter into negotiations seriously, beneath the surface and behind closed doors, remains to be seen. Many fear that any involvement by the military in the negotiation will prompt a surge in right-wing violence. In a communique released in early March, death squads demanded the freedom of the eight military men charged in the November murder of six Jesuits and their coworkers and threatened the lives of all involved in the case. "No military man has been, or should be, subjected to any law of the Republic," the statement read.
Meanwhile, Cristiani has made remarks recently that indicate his lack of real power to control the death squads and the military. He told reporters in Venezuela on March 30 that the death squads would exist "as long as the FMLN exists." And Cristiani admitted earlier that same week that he's "not confident" an army colonel accused of ordering the murder of the Jesuits will be convicted, referring to Col. Guillermo Alfredo Benavides.
The admission by the president raises new questions about who is in control in El Salvador. "The murder of the six Jesuits was a coup attempt by the extreme Right over the moderate Right," Robert White, former U. S. ambassador to El Salvador, told a Georgetown University audience in Washington, D.C. "Cristiani has in effect stated that the coup has succeeded—the killers of the six Jesuits will never be convicted."
MANY OBSERVERS IN EL SALVADOR and in the United States don't believe the military will be willing to make serious concessions or reforms (including submission to civilian control) without pressure from the U. S. government—for example, a significant cut in military aid. The steady flow of U.S. funds prompted the military to build its own bank, and many high-ranking members have reportedly begun investing in shrimping and other profitable industries.
"The war has become big business, " said Monsignor Gregorio Rosa y Chavez, the auxiliary bishop of the Salvadoran Catholic Church. "As long as it is profitable, there will be no interest from some sectors in ending the conflict."
William Leogrande, a longtime analyst of U.S. policy in Latin America, agrees. "It will take the United States sending a strong signal that it is not willing to finance the war indefinitely," Leogrande told Sojourners.
How strong a signal the Congress—and the Bush adminstration—is going to send will be determined in the coming weeks. In what has been widely hailed as the most significant challenge to U.S. policy in El Salvador in years, the House Foreign Affairs Committee voted in late April to immediately cut U. S. military aid to El Salvador in half. (The provision, part of the foreign aid supplement for Nicaragua and Panama, was expected to be voted on by the full House sometime in the first half of May. If it passes, it would then be discussed as part of a House-Senate conference.)
Meanwhile, the administration has been scrambling to maintain a "bipartisan policy" of continued military aid in the face of impending cuts. But observers on Capitol Hill told Sojourners that the growing momentum to cut aid has begun to chip away at the administration's longtime intransigence on the aid question.
WHILE THE MUCH-AWAITED negotiations with the personal involvement of U.N. Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar get under way, the National Debate for Peace in El Salvador has been meeting to formulate just exactly what it is that it wants from the negotiations, and what kind of society it desires. Representatives from more than 100 "social forces" gathered in San Salvador March 23 (despite the state of siege) to discuss the negotiations and the future of their country.
At the March 23 assembly, the Debate affirmed the need for serious negotiations, as opposed to simply another round of "dialogue" without any resulting agreement. And it outlined five themes it feels should be treated in the negotiations, the priority being "purification and restructuring of the Armed Forces to make them subordinate to civilian power and respectful of human rights." The Debate also resoundingly voted for a complete cut-off of all U.S. war-related aid to El Salvador, and identified the U.S. government as "one of the greatest obstacles" to the negotiation process.
The Debate now hopes to be able to present its recommendations at the negotiating table along with the FMLN and the government.
"We want to give content to their negotiations, to give them meaning," Palacios told Sojourners. "Because the FMLN and the government need to understand and take into account what the other sectors of their society are proposing. The problem is not just a military problem; there are the political, economic, and social aspects as well."
While the role of the Debate in the most recent round of negotiations has not been spelled out, it does appear that it will have a voice. One of the seven points articulated in the negotiating agreement announced April 4 acknowledges the "important role" of the political parties and "other existing representative organizations in El Salvador," and calls on the government and the FMLN to "maintain adequate and standing information and consultation mechanisms with these parties and social organizations."
The Debate is one of the most genuine democratic movements in Latin America. And whether or not it is recognized at the national and international levels could determine the success of the negotiations—and whether the poor majority of Salvadorans will ever be able to live in dignity, free from repression.
"Each country needs to make its own history, " a representative to the Debate told Sojourners. "And much of what happens here will depend upon our methods, the type of struggle we carry out. But it will also depend upon the massive participation of the people, and upon the kind of international solidarity we receive."
Brazilian Bishop Pedro Casaldaliga, in San Salvador for the Romero commemoration March 24, sees what is happening in El Salvador as part of a "democratic revolution." "But not a democracy that is imposed on us, not a liberal bourgeois democracy," he told Latinamerica Press. "But a popular, participatory democracy; an economic, social, cultural, technological democracy; a Latin American democracy."
The question remains whether the United States is prepared to allow a "Latin American" democracy to take hold. The entire region—and the world—will be watching to see.
Brian Jaudon was news editor of Sojourners when this article appeared. Bill Dexheimer and Josie Beecher assisted in transcription and translation of interviews conducted in El Salvador.
Got something to say about what you're reading? We value your feedback!