[Peace-discuss] Fmr US Amb. W. Walker @NYT: Salvador has right 2 pick FMLN, free of US threats

[Robert Naiman]

https://twitter.com/naiman/statuses/428915490790965248

"Former US Ambassador William Walker: El Salvador voters have right to
elect FMLN, free from US threats"

Don't Fear El Salvador's Leftists
WILLIAM G. WALKER. New York Times. January 30, 2014
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/31/opinion/dont-fear-el-
salvadors-leftists.html?_r=0

WASHINGTON -- On Sunday, El Salvador will hold elections for a new
president. In Washington, some on the right are raising alarms that the
party of El Salvador's onetime leftist guerrilla army, the F.M.L.N., will
win re-election, with a former guerrilla commander as the new president.
The drumbeat started early this month when Elliott Abrams, who oversaw the
Reagan administration's Central America policy during El Salvador's civil
war, warned in The Washington Post of the dangers of an F.M.L.N. victory.
He cited the party's connections with the Colombian leftist movement FARC,
and accusations of its involvement in the drug and arms trades. Other
conservatives have echoed his warning. Implicit is a threat that if
Salvadorans make the wrong choice, America will reduce its support.

>From 1985 to 1988, I worked closely with Mr. Abrams at the State
Department. I respect his honesty, but I believe he is wrong in this case.
I travel often to El Salvador on business. I have seen how much the
country, and the F.M.L.N., have changed in the 22 years since the war ended
in 1992. I believe those spreading fear are stuck in the past.

I served as the American ambassador during the final three and a half years
of the war, and the first months of peace. I know well how grisly that war
was; the State Department protected me with Delta Team security, believing
I was high on the F.M.L.N.'s hit list. But a lasting peace was negotiated
in 1992, and in 2009 the F.M.L.N., relying on the ballot box, fairly won
the right to govern.

That year, the party chose Mauricio Funes, a television journalist, as its
candidate, precisely to reassure voters that the F.M.L.N. would not
reignite old conflicts. But presidents are limited to one term, and after
five years of mixed reviews, the F.M.L.N. has nominated Salvador Sánchez
Cerén, who is considered a far more orthodox F.M.L.N. representative, as
its flag-bearer. His campaign promises a more rigorous, but lawful and
peaceful, effort to address the F.M.L.N.'s core issues -- the corrosive
inequality and social injustice that underlaid the civil war.

It is not my place to assess the merits of Mr. Sánchez Cerén. This is 2014,
not 1992. He and his party have earned a fair chance to let El Salvador's
voters decide. The peace agreement 22 years ago ended one of the bloodiest
civil wars in Latin American history. On one side was a right-wing
government that had used every tool at its command, including American
assistance, in a vain effort to crush the F.M.L.N. insurgency. Both sides
used terror, but government forces and civilian right-wing militias were
among the most promiscuous by far. Few Salvadorans can forget the bodies,
the disappearances, the torture of loved ones carried out by
American-supported security forces, all in the name of defeating Communism.
But in the aftermath, F.M.L.N. perpetrators who were judged to be
terrorists were placed on blacklists by the United States, while right-wing
terrorists seldom were. Even today, most former F.M.L.N. commanders remain
ineligible for American visas while right-wing terrorists are seldom so
identified. A similar imbalance between left and right characterizes the
accusations of corruption and criminality.

In 1992, there were understandable concerns regarding the intentions of the
F.M.L.N. Salvadoran voters gave Arena, the party of the right, three
successive victories. But now, after five years in power, the F.M.L.N. has
played down leftist rhetoric and has come to realize -- enthusiastically and
publicly -- that El Salvador needs to work with the United States to
confront its problems. Lawlessness, corruption, poverty and narcotics
trafficking all worsened during the years of Arena rule, and little was
done to improve the lives of the poor.

So when Americans demonize former F.M.L.N. commanders like Mr. Sánchez
Cerén, either for their activities during the war or for accepting
assistance from the Castro regime or from the political heirs of
Venezuela's Hugo Chávez, they are making a big mistake. The Salvadoran
people view Venezuelan assistance as a blessing. American assistance has
dwindled, even though an estimated one-fifth of people born in El Salvador
now live in the United States. Salvadoran migrants send home $4 billion or
so in remittances each year -- 90 percent of it from the United States.
These payments account for more than 16 percent of El Salvador's gross
national product, more than any other source. And narcotics trafficking,
gang violence and money laundering are problems all shared with the United
States. We should welcome the F.M.L.N.'s statements of good faith and
cooperate with it.

Mr. Abrams did get one important point right: Corruption, criminality and
violence all undermine democracy. That is what makes Central America a hot
spot posing a threat to our national security. Do some in the F.M.L.N. wish
the United States ill so long after the war? Yes. Are some engaged in
corruption? Certainly. But in both cases, the same could be said of some
players on the right. So should the United States pay close attention to
this election? Yes. But we should not fear the prospect of another five
years of F.M.L.N. rule.

I am neither predicting, nor advocating, an F.M.L.N. victory, though polls
suggest it is likely. But Salvadorans must be able to make their choice
free of veiled suggestions that one or another outcome will lead to a
worsening of United States-Salvadoran relations. If the majority deem an
F.M.L.N. victory better for them than the alternatives, we must respect
that choice.

William G. Walker, a retired career diplomat, was the United States
ambassador to El Salvador from 1988 to 1992.

-- 
Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
(202) 448-2898, extension 1
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20140130/122ce003/attachment.html>