In 1973, the people of Chile ousted the majority Marxist government of Salvador Allende, which was in the process of dismantling that country's traditional democratic system and imposing a totalitarian economic and political regime upon its people.
Now, in 1986, Chile is again in trouble. This time, forces opposed to the government of General Augusto Pinochet--ranging from centrists to avowed communists--are attempting to destabilize the government and bring it down.
Unfortunately, the U.S. government appears to be assisting in this destabilization effort, indicating that we may have learned nothing from our earlier experiences in destabilization in places such as Iran and Nicaragua. For the Reagan administration to repeat the failures of the Carter administration would be ironic indeed.
The current U.S. role, in which Ambassador Harry Barnes appears to be a key figure, ignores both the long-run best interests of the people of Chile and our own larger interests in the region. It ignores, as well, Moscow's longstanding goal of gaining control of Chile, something it came dangerously close to achieving in 1973.
A democratic constitution
It is important to remember that the people of Chile are now living under a constitution that they themselves overwhelmingly endorsed in a free election.
In her book Chile: The Crime of Resistance, the respected French author Suzanne Labin reports that:
The plan for the constitution was drawn up over
a period of five years by a commission of 30
constitutional jurists presided over by former
President Alessandri's ex-Minister, Mr. Enrique
Ortuzar, and graced by a sociologist of the highest
distinction, Mr. Jaime Guzman. ... It provides for a
presidential government, the president to be elected
for an eight-year term by universal direct suffrage,
and with the French proviso that if no candidate
obtains an absolute majority in the first ballot,
the two who get the most votes go forward for a second
ballot. ... The draft constitution provides for a
legislature with two elected chambers; a completely
independent judiciary; a referendum for questions
which can be answered by a yes or no, the right to
call one belonging either to the president or the
parliamentary majority; and wide powers for local
governments. It provides for the neutrality of the
armed forces, to who, however, the right of
...
Read Full Article
|
