A custom made concept

The future of the strike at the ISSS

The doctors and the workers of the Salvadoran Institute of Social Security (ISSS, in Spanish) are about to begin with their fifth month of strike against the privatization of the health services. The strike began in September 2002, and its gone through different stages. From a certain social acceptance, which at some point could have been interpreted as popular support, the strikers are now moving in a less firm ground, closer to a feeling of exasperation. The population now seems tired and indifferent. This article will try to respond to why did the movement of the doctors apparently failed.

To study this case it is necessary to examine the evolution of the movement of the health sector. When the strike began, the doctors counted with a great amount of popular support. A considerable part of the population was sure that it was the best way to be against the Flores administration, which has no limits when it comes to privatization. Back then, the demonstrations had plenty of support. Even the people who usually demand the medical services were willing to make certain sacrifices to oblige the president to end with his project of reforms.

However, by November, things began to change drastically. What seemed as a victory for the doctors against the government, soon was turned into the beginning of the end. The Decree 1024, demanded by the doctors as the first step to end with the strike, and which was finally approved by the Legislative Assembly, unleashed the furor of the right-wing sector, which prepared a discredit campaign against the doctors. The derogation of the Decree 1024 was approved, and the doctors were made responsible for the intensity of the conflict. The official sectors accuse them for being the puppets of a macabre plan elaborated by the left-wing sector. The attack of the government began with the militarization of the health centers.

At this point, it is difficult to know what is the percentage of the services that are now normally granted at the social security units, how many workers have been fired, or how many doctors have walked away from the strike. What is clear is that the government is about to defeat the members of the union who now do not even appear in the papers often enough, in the context of an intense political campaign. That is why the future of the strikers seems compromised, and the government feels that it can evade the negotiations that were previously arranged. The government counts with the support of most of the news media. In addition, from a political perspective, there is no threat at sight. ARENA believes that the results of the next elections will let it remain as the first political force of the country.

In such context, there is no doubt that the workers and the doctors of the social security are now in the worst moment of their dispute with the Flores administration. Some of them have honestly accepted their weak position. The secretary of the medical union declared in an interview with one of the morning newspapers that his only wish was that their efforts and sacrifices to stop the privatization of the public health system were acknowledged some day. In summary, his only hope is that the next congress reactivates the discussion about the ISSS. However, why did the movement of doctors failed?

About this subject, it is necessary to make a few considerations. Apparently, the doctors failed with their strategy to face the government. They based all of their tactic in the approval and the promulgation of a decree that would forbid the privatization of the public services of health. However, when they asked for a certain number of basic guarantees to go back to work, the government accused them for being intransigent and for disrespecting their original demands. Their main error was that they did not design a strategy that would include some guarantees for the workers on strike, along with the negotiation about the decree. There is no doubt that, in this issue, the doctors were a little naïve.

Nevertheless, as it has been proved in the governmental strategy related to the problem of the health sector, there was never an actual political disposition to resolve the problem. During the first days, Francisco Flores seemed willing to have a flexible negotiation, so he would not tarnish the image of the Central American and the Caribbean Sports Games. That is why he thought he had the responsibility to pay attention to the pressure of the doctors. In addition, the Flores administration wanted to take advantage of the sports events to start with the pre-electoral campaign of ARENA. Therefore, back then it would have been not clever to leave the doctor’s strike affect the image of the government. In addition, it was not convenient to oppose to the negotiation, mostly when the elections were on its way. However, since the government found a certain number of empty spaces in the strategy of the doctors, the ideology people of ARENA did not take long to turn the situation upside down. The doctors were accused of following the game of the opposition and for being an obstacle for the solution of the public health system’s problem.

Finally, a question that remains unanswered is related with the possible effects of a probable defeat of the doctors, especially because of the future protests that the social organizations might plan. It can be easily noticed how fast the government managed to confuse the movement of the doctors. With political strategies of a low quality and an aggressive media campaign made by the influential right-wing sectors, they have managed to impose their perspective. This backhand will have, as it might be evident, an important effect over the national political life. The possibility to achieve the survival of the independent social organizations (those that are not subjected to the decisions of the political parties that oppose to their existence) is now far away. The doctors tried to stay away from the left-wing political forces in the beginning, while the latter showed its sympathy for their movement. However, in the end, they were pushed into the arms of the left-wing sector, there rests the dream about counteracting the governmental attack against them.

On the other hand, such situation has to invite us to reflect about the need to end with the polarization of the country’s political life. With the right-wing sector’s attack to consummate the defeat of the doctors, it is not clear how they can avoid the radicalization of the social movements. The social organizations have no other choice but to become a part of an extreme in order to resist the pro-governmental sectors. ARENA and its allies have made it clear that they are not willing to give up an inch of space for the other sectors of the society. From this moment on, the message is that there is not one incentive for those who would want to negotiate and stay away from the extremes. This situation will introduce the end of the conflict at the ISSS.

The Free Trade Agreement and the Salvadoran agricultural sector

The negotiation process of the Free Trade Agreement (TLC, in Spanish) between the United States and Central America has started in the Costa Rican capital. It seems to be clear that the American negotiators will not include the delicate issue of the subsidies for the agricultural sector, despite that the host country has asked them to reconsider that subject. They have also made public the different opinions about the impact on the Salvadoran agricultural sector.

One of the most relevant positions is the one of the Agricultural and the Industrial Chamber of El Salvador (CAMAGRO, in Spanish), which presents a series of aspects that have acted against the sector they represent. The Chamber expressed that a series of commercial policies against the agricultural activities of the rural areas have been implemented. In addition, it invites the future mayors and congressmen to get involved in the search of solutions to improve the conditions in which the inhabitants of the rural sector live.

On the other hand, the Minister of Agriculture and Cattle-raising Activities said that the Salvadoran agricultural sector must be prepared to take advantage of the opportunities that the TLC will bring for the Salvadoran farmers. He said that a change of mind would be necessary for a productive transformation, as well as to get a specialism in the cultivation of tropical fruits and vegetables, among other activities.

During the last decade, the Salvadoran agricultural sector, played a less important role in the formation of the GNP, and the levels of productivity dropped during the last five years. This, the product of the economic reform implemented in the early nineties, caught the attention of those farmers that have more resources, who were encouraged to obtain a larger amount of profits through a new channel (such as the privatization of the banking system). The small producers were left in the field. Now that the transition has taken place, the axis of accumulation of capital that rested over the agricultural sector has been transferred to the sector of services (mostly the financial services), leaving the agricultural sector outside of the important economic activities.

The present government, in relation to the Free Trade Agreement between the United States and the Central America, sees the opportunity to reactivate that sector as long as they know how to take advantage of the North American demand for the different agricultural products of El Salvador. However, it would be important to make a few considerations to see the possible consequences that such agreement would bring for the national agricultural sector.

To establish a commercial connection with the United States in a more direct way could lead our economy to depend even more from the American agricultural products. From all of the region’s countries, only El Salvador presents an agricultural deficit with the United States, even now that the Salvadoran market is not completely open for the American producers, a goal of the free trade agreement.

The North American agricultural sector has a great productive capacity and, as any other country of the developed world, it goes through a continuous crisis of overproduction. That is why a free trade agreement seems like an opportunity to export the agricultural products that are not demanded in the local market. This can have a negative effect over the Salvadoran farmers; those who grow the basic grains could be seriously affected. For instance, a considerable amount of Mexican farmers is being affected by the Free Trade Agreement of North America (TLCAN, in Spanish).

However, something completely opposite could happen: the free trade agreement between both countries could generate the necessary exchange to produce an agricultural surplus between the United States and El Salvador. In realistic terms, nevertheless, El Salvador cannot go through an automatic productive conversion –a theoretical perspective of the present international commerce model-, since the farmers would need a considerable amount of money for such conversion, and this would basically include the new technology and more experience.

Even if the productive conversion were achieved, it would not be an automatic success. A successful experience with the production of tropical fruits and vegetables and its exportation will have to compete with the prices and the quality of the Mexican producers in the American market.

In addition, such specialism would not be so feasible if we consider what the Agricultural Commission of the Chamber of Congressmen from Mexico stated, seven years after the TLCAN had been established. The Commission expressed that “Most of the farmers who produce fruits and vegetables have not been beneficiated by the TLCAN, as it has been stated through the official advertisements. In general terms, it is only a small group of farmers who have had access to the North American and the Canadian markets and who have had a chance to improve their expectations” (Arroyo Picard, 2001). This shows that, in a way, a process of commercial negotiation with the United States that intends to be successful in the agricultural environment, is a very difficult process.

To leave the local agricultural sector in the hands of the free trade does not make much sense. Not even the economically developed nations with a larger productive capacity have allowed that sector to work under a free-market logic, where there are no subsidies and where all the farmers carry with all the expenses of the production.

To implement an economic policy, the Executive power must consider the impact of the commercial policy on the agricultural sector. It should also consider the possible effect that a free trade agreement with the United States will have over the agricultural sector and on the rural areas.

The Salvadoran government, given the special situation that the agricultural sector is going through, must consider a particular debate about its particular problems. Just like the countries that have a higher level of development consider the specific features of that sector, the government should reconsider its position about the agricultural issue and the serious implications that the free trade agreement would have for the rural area.

This issue could have an important effect over the society, just like the President of the Inter-American Dialogue, Peter Hakim, explained when he declared that “there will be those who will definitively move from less profitable areas to the more profitable areas. I hope that the governments will provide some kind of training and a net of security for those who are affected. If they do not do that, it will be a tragedy. There is no doubt that the small farmers will have to move away from their lands” (The New York Times,01-19-2003, page 7).

In summary, the population must be looking forward to the results of the negotiation, observing all of those elements that could have an effect over the national agricultural sector, since it is the basic element to assure the nutrition of any society.