The two faces of ARENA

Flores against democracy

The maturity of a political leader and his compromise with the democratic regime cannot be easily measured if it is not done through a rigorous observation of his behavior. In these matters, it is not enough to have a declaration of good intentions. Every political official has to prove his or her democratic vocation regardless of the position he occupies, either inside the government or inside the opposition.

When a politician controls the power of the state –supposing that he is doing it in a legitimate way, that is after wining the elections-, he has the option to rule with exclusivity, without considering the opposition or, simply without abandoning the legitimacy that the elections have given him, to look for a conciliation and respect the adversaries. The mature politicians who know that their political triumphs should not be an excuse to overlook the temporary character of every political representation work under this last perspective. The electorate can make a different decision in the next election. And, theoretically, no one enjoys to be treated with the same harshness that they have treated others. On the contrary, when the political leaders hide behind the alleged legitimacy of their good electoral results to ignore the claims and the demands of the opposition, there is no doubt that this is an anti-democratic attitude. This is not about administrating the country in a team, as many politicians like to declare before the critics about treating the opposition with respect. This is about remembering that the majority reached in a democratic system is not an absolute majority. Those who now have the majority of votes, tomorrow this majority can turn into just a few votes. In this sense, their behavior because of the power that they have in their hands should not contradict this principle that invites them to treat the opposition with respect.

When a politician belongs to the opposition, his behavior should be at the height of his compromise with democracy. He should know how to wait patiently, how to disagree in an intelligent manner, and how to decently carry on with the institutional role that the rules of the democratic game assign him. As long as he works with decorum and a sense of political prudence, he will not only receive the consideration of the citizens in the future, but he will also contribute to strengthen the performance of the democratic institutions.

A political regime needs certainties and loyalty from its actors. And the best proof of loyalty that a politician who belongs to the opposition can give is his unrestricted respect for the rules of the democratic game. Every regime has a mechanism to report the procedures, the dimensions, and the limits that have to be established for those who control the power of the state, as well as to make the necessary decisions. To respect these rules, even when the decisions of the officials are not compatible with the convictions of others, is the best proof of loyalty to the regime and the best sample of political maturity that the politicians can give when they belong to the opposition.

It is necessary to wonder if in El Salvador the politicians have behaved according to the golden rules of the democratic game. The answer could be simple if you consider the fact that ever since the Peace Accords were signed the regime has managed to survive, the answer could be positive. It would be a clear signal of the commitment of the different actors with the new Salvadoran democracy. However, the persistence of the regime does not prevent us to indicate that there are certain behaviors that have become a threat against a democratic institutional performance. This article will examine the behavior of one of the key actors of the country’s present political life, in order to show the danger that menaces the Salvadoran democracy.

President Francisco Flores is a clear example of a person who is not willing to completely adjust himself to the requirements of the democratic system’s performance. For a period of time, thanks to the collaboration of the PCN, his party held the power to make the decisions in the Legislative Assembly. They ignored the opposition, and would not even notify the opposition –especially not the FMLN- about the most controversial decisions that would have a critical effect on Salvadoran population. His arrogance and his will to exclude the opposition during the earthquakes of 2001 prove it. Another example is how he did not consult the opposition about the implementation of the economy’s dollarization project.

That is how, when he has the power to do so, Flores behaves like an authoritarian tribe chief that underestimates his adversaries. His disdainful way to treat the opposition, especially the FMLN, says plenty about his adhesion to the principles of the relative majority of democracy. His legislative majority established an arrogant environment and the imposition of certain mechanisms to interact with rest of political actors. Flores has demonstrated that he does not understand the need to establish a dialogue with his detractors. He loses his temper before the smallest critic, and he interprets this sort of opinions as an evil conspiracy project orchestrated against him.

As it could have been expected, he who did not know how to contain himself during the times of a “political bonanza”, has not been able to deal with the calamities of finding himself in the opposition. The present situation of ARENA, as far as his relation with the Legislative Assembly goes, says plenty about the characteristic ineptitude of its confrontations with the other parties. The minority position that the Flores administration occupies in the congress is nothing new. What is new is that the former allies have turned their backs on the President, accusing him precisely because of his arrogance and because he does not have much capacity to understand the sensibility of his allies.

This is how, before the uncomfortable position of finding themselves in a minority that is not docile, Flores and many of his ministers seem to be hysterical. As a consequence of this, the President behaves himself as an authentic obstacle for the democratic institutional performance. His last interventions published by the press about the violence in the country confirm this consideration. Flores has intervened in several occasions, not only to demand the immediate adoption of his “Iron Fist” plan, when the name itself is an affront for the Legislative Assembly. Theoretically, this is an organ created to debate the problems and a trustee of the popular sovereignty; however, the President also announced his intention to implement his polemic plan regardless of the opinion of those congressmen who would not agree with it.

Flores has decided to ignore the constitutional precept of the separation and the autonomy of the state’s powers. The Legislative Assembly, the main victim of the governmental attack, has been vilified despite its constitutional duties. Flores forgets that one of his obligations is to guarantee an efficient institutional performance. His only purpose is that his party wins the next presidential elections. He sacrifices the stability of the country’s institutions in order to seek the welfare of his party.

The situation of the agricultural sector

According to the declarations of the Minister of Agriculture, Salvador Urrutia, the agricultural activity has developed itself in an acceptable manner during the first half of this year. For this official, despite the difficult economic situation in the national and the international fields, the country has experienced a slight improvement in relation with the situation of the last year. The existence of a favorable weather, characterized by the precipitation and the increase in the international prices of several exportable farm products are factors that have improved the situation.

Among the different agricultural activities, it would be necessary to mention those that stand out because of its performance: the sugar cane agricultural industry, and the cultivation of the basic grains. In the case of the sugar cane, by the end of the plague period back in April, the cultivation obtained was better than last year’s. This is reflected in an increase by 2.3% in the production of sugar. The cultivation of the basic grains for the second semester of the year seems to be encouraging, because of the rhythm that the rain keeps in the national territory.

Unfortunately, despite the improvement of the prices in the international market, the coffee production is not as dynamic as it was during the last years. The value of the exportation of the “golden grain” had a steep fall between March and June of this year. It went from $15.5 million to $9 million during that brief period of time. However, in reference to the last year, the income of the exportation for the first semester increased by 1.8%. It seems that the national situation, specifically because of the appearance of the plague and the seizure of several haciendas, has not contributed to improve the performance of that industry.

In any case, for Urrutia, the positive advances in the agricultural field have taken place “from the perspective of the productivity level”. The president of the Industrial and the Agricultural Chamber, Mario Salaverria, supports this opinion saying that during this season they managed to obtain an average result of 215 pounds of sugar per each ton of cane.

Despite the improved agricultural performance during the first semester of the year, the participation of this sector has become smaller as far as the structure of the GNP is concerned. This is a serious problem, since the sector uses a considerable part of the Salvadoran labor force, and the tendency to reduce the agricultural production affects the work of thousands of farm laborers. A look at the statistics indicates that in 2001 and 2002 the agricultural production together with the hunting activities, the forestry, and the fishing represented an average of 9.0% of the year’s GNP.

The poor performance of the agricultural sector during the last years can be explained, partly, because of the little support provided by the state. In 1978, the agricultural and cattle raising sector received 1.0% of the ordinary budget as a percentage of the GNP. In 2000, the same area received only 0.3%. This situation shows that the state plays a small role when it comes to benefit those people that depend on the agricultural and the cattle raising activities.

Another important piece of information is connected with the evolution of the credit for the agricultural sector. In 1978, this sector received $59.5 million, and this represented 27.0% of the amount of credits granted in that year. In 2002, it received $323.7 million, which only represent 7.0% of the credits granted during that period. As it is evident, despite that the credit granted to the agricultural sector was much higher in 2000, it is only a very small fraction of the total of credits granted by the national banking system.

The apathy showed by the state, and the low levels of the private investments have not contributed to strengthen and activate the agricultural sector. The government, fundamentally focused on the services and the financial activities, has neglected a sector that is essential to satisfy the nutritional needs of the population. As for the private sector, the lack of bland credits for the farmers promotes a feeling of insecurity to invest in the agricultural activities. All of these factors create an environment of rural poverty, and are added to the destruction of the environment, and the considerable percentage of migrations from the country to the city or to foreign lands.

The free trade agreement with the United States
For the government of ARENA, the solution to the crisis of the agricultural sector is to establish a free trade agreement with the United States. Through such project, the agriculturists would find their way into a market of hundreds of thousands of Salvadorans who live in that country. This can be true at a certain point. However, in order to foresee the possible consequences of a free trade agreement, it is important to consider the activity of the negotiations among the representatives of both countries.

During the last few meetings, the United States has not seemed interested to discuss the issues connected with the agricultural products that do not seem attractive for it. This is how the American government, an expert on negotiations of this sort, intends to push its pressure to the limit and establish its commercial preferences in the countries of the region. During the last agricultural discussion, with uncertainty and fear, the representatives of the Central American region presented a list of several products that they wanted to export to the United States. It is necessary to observe the reaction of the American representatives, who will probably adopt a defensive attitude as far as the agricultural subject is concerned.

No one can ignore the fact that a negotiation of that nature does not only generate the departure of agricultural products to the North American market. It also generates a massive arrival of products of the same kind at the local market. In other words, in the North American market, as well as in Central American, the agricultural products are subjected to a competition, in which the low prices and a better quality are the factors that determine what agricultural sector will manage to improve itself in the long term. That is why it is necessary to wonder if the agricultural products of the country (and the ones of the Central American region) are ready to be sold at lower prices and to be produced with a better quality. Even if the Salvadoran government, through the Ministry of Agriculture and Cattle-Raising, is making an effort in that direction, the achievements are still incipient.

The situation of Mexico must be an alert signal for Central America. In fact, the perspective for the growers of the basic grains in that country is not that encouraging. A considerable amount of the farmers have left their lands and traveled to the city of Mexico, increasing the contingents of unemployed people. This situation is in fact related to the American negotiation strategy. Those people responsible for designing the aforementioned strategy imposed importation fees, and a number of sanitary requirements –which were convenient for them- to the Mexican agricultural products. It should not seem strange if the American negotiators, in the case of Central America, use the same tactics along with the respective damage that this attitude brings against the farmers of El Salvador and the rest of the countries of the area.