'Peace Plan' gauged by antiwar activists

Scan page 5

On Dec. 4, 1987, the San Francisco branch of Socialist Action sponsored a forum titled "The Central American Peace Plan and the Antiwar Movement."

The three speakers were Mike Davis, Northwest regional coordinator of the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (CISPES); Leslie Simon, a representative of the Nicaraguan Information Center; and Carl Finamore, national antiwar director of Socialist Action. We are reprinting below excerpts from their presentations.

Mike Davis:

The peace plan reflects a very positive thing, which is that the "low-intensity-conflict" strategy of the United States is being defeated by the people of Central America.

And I think that's the most important thing about the peace plan. Its final outcome will reflect the strength of the revolutionary movements in Central America.

In terms of El Salvador, the actual letter of the peace plan was primarily negative in the sense that it was aimed at delegitimizing the armed struggle in all of Central America. Specifically in El Salvador, it equated the FDR/FMLN with the contras-which cannot be done even in terms of international law.

For instance, according to international law, there are questions of controlling territory. The contras say they control half of Nicaragua, but nobody really believes it. Everybody recognizes that the FMLN controls at least a third of El Salvador and has significant influence in another third.

To really understand how this peace plan is being viewed by the revolutionary movement in El Salvador, you have to understand the moment that the movement is facing. There has been a real sense that the movement in El Salvador has been through a weak period and is gaining some strength. But the reality is much more positive.

The FMLN recognized the fact that just simply by building up a sophisticated army, you're not going to be able to overthrow the government of El Salvador. And they had to change their strategy back to the strategy they had developed in the 1970s of developing tighter links with the people and incorporating all of the population into fighting the war.

The combination of political work with the real crisis the country was facing economically-exacerbated by the war—allowed for the development of a huge mass movement, which has now been consolidated under the National Unity of Salvadoran Workers (UNTS), of about a half-million members.

The movement in El Salvador needs concrete international support. This translates into money and people.

Another thing that really needs to happen is pressure for human rights in El Salvador. Next, we need to promote the legitimacy of the FMLN/FDR. We must invite FMLN/FDR speakers to our forums and demonstrations. • Next, we need concrete mobilizations around El Salvador, which is not simply the "other part" of Central America that some day will need to be dealt with. El Salvador has a revolutionary movement that is about to win and which is going to face a real danger of direct U.S. intervention.

These are the fundamental things the movement has to take on if we want to counter the Reagan adminiration's attempt to use the turn it to our favor.

Leslie Simon:

For the first time, I think there is a real likelihood that the "official" aid sent by the U.S. government will be cut off... Unless something very major happens between now and January, the votes [in Congress] are not there.

A real discussion is developing about a containment policy in Nicaragua that is going to attempt to destroy the revolution politically and economically in a more "legitimate" way—whether by giving more money to the opposition parties in Nicaragua, or whether by escalating the economic hardships on the Nicaraguan people by a quarantine, blockade, or whatever it may be.

People in Nicaragua are very tired of the conditions they have lived under for the past seven years—a worsening economy year after year, scarcity of food, and so on.

If people believe that the threat [of armed conflict] is taken away, and if economic hardship continues, there will be more and more people discontented and saying, "Maybe it really is the problem of the Nicaraguan government. They don't know how to handle the economy."

And that leads to what we can do. As Mike said for El Salvador, the need for true economic support, true 4h:80srs.. ......

Leslie Simon material aid, is probably going to be one of the most important aspects of our job in the upcoming period.

Nicaraguans are going to need a lot of support from the international community in order to sustain their economy as they begin to rebuild the country.

Carl Finamore:

The U.S. government has not been able to invade Nicaragua because of the opposition it would face inside Nicaragua and throughout the world. The United States had to use an inadequate mercenary army. It couldn't send more advisers to El Salvador for the same reason.

The government sees the anti-intervention sentiment of this country as a powder keg. Seventy percent of the American population is opposed to contra aid.

And a new factor exists. Seven percent of the population is unemployed, 1.2 million are so-called discouraged workers, and 20 percent of the workforce is part-time labor—many of whom would prefer full-time jobs.

The stock-market crash adds dramatic focus to the reality of deteriorating living standards for working people. They are not going to tolerate more and more erosion in their standard of living while imperialism asks them to go fight wars overseas.

There is a growing practical understanding among American workers that they have much in common with the fight of sweat-shop workers in Central America and other countries where North American plants are running away to.

We got a glimmer of these links last April 25, when 20 or so international-union presidents put their names on the dotted line to mobilize against intervention in Central America.

These top union officials didn't support April 25 because they had changed their bureaucratic and conservative character. William Wynn, for example, president of the United Food and Commercial Workers union, was one of the officials who endorsed the protests. But Wynn has signed more concessionary agreements than any other human being in labor history.

These union officials are on the hot seat because their members are growing more restive under the "one-sided class war" waged by the employers. The union tops must appear to be responding to the runaway shops and deteriorating living conditions in order to retain some credibility.

A shift in policy Arias, Duarte, and the rulers in Guatemala and Honduras—the signatories of the Central American peace plan—are also on the hot seat. The contra war and repression in El Salvador threaten to polarize all of Central America.

The peace plan, in my opinion, denotes a tactical shift in policy by capitalist leaders in Central America. These rulers are urging the U.S. capitalists to shift more attention to negotiations as a less volatile method of exerting pressure on Nicaragua.

After initially hesitating, most ruling-class politicians in Washington, D.C., have now fully grasped the value of the negotiations stance. Negotiations have been used to divert attention away from the hotly contested contraaid issue, thus defusing the powerful anti-intervention The peace plan also provides valuable cover for the United States to demand concessions from Nicaragua. The FSLN has already been pressured to conduct quasinegotiations with the contras for a cease-fire through the reactionary intermediary Cardinal Obando Bravo.

The U.S. government also gained a step on the anti-intervention movement by trying to convince world opinion that Nicaragua should "democratize" before there is a cut-off of contra aid. "Democratize" means making political concessions to the ex-Somocista contra leaders.

"Democratization" is a code-word for giving the contras a foothold in Nicaragua that they have been All photos by Joe Ryan Socialist Actior Carl Finamore unable to win on the battlefield. And now, the contras are coming in with a preposterous claim that they control almost half of Nicaragua!

For self-determination The Nicaraguans have been pressured to sign this agreement because of the economic devastation caused by the war.

If a thief has a gun to your head, you must negotiate— and compromise. But you don't want your next-door neighbors to be yelling, "Compromise, compromise, sign the peace treaty!"

You want them to say, "Get out!" The thief has no right to negotiate with that homeowner for a piece of property.

All the neighbors, that is all the supporters of Nicaragua, should be maintaining our stance for selfdetermination—the United States has no right to negotiate the political affairs of other countries.

And this includes Arias and the other signatories of the peace plan. What gives them the right to dictate terms to the Nicaraguans?

I don't agree that contra aid will be cut off soon because of pressures of the peace plan. The U.S. will stop contra aid when it is forced to do so by a massive political campaign of public protests in combination with the continued determination and bravery of the Nicaraguan people.

The way to do that, in my opinion, is to put the focus on the criminal-the U.S. government—and its support to the contras.

Return to what the anti-intervention movement does best. Mobilize thousands to demand self-determination, an end to contra aid, and an end to all aid to the repressive Duarte regime in El Salvador.

I think that the movement lost a step, lost its focus, got disoriented and created a few illusions that a wing of this government (Democratic Party liberals) has grown exhausted by the war and thinks it's time to cut off contra aid, This is a dangerous illusion. Keep mobilizing and keep the pressure up. We shouldn't concede an inch. SOCIALIST ACTION JANUARY 1988 5

----- pull-quotes -----

OCA CT