March 2000
Ecuador's military coup
In Ecuador, mass demonstrations by the indigenous movement against
widespread poverty and corruption culminated Jan. 21 in a coup by a section
of the military, forcing President Mahuad from office and suspending
congress. A three-man junta declared itself in power for two days. One of
the three was the head of the Confederation of Indigenous Nations (CONAIE)!
But then Vice President Noboa took over as president and congress returned,
and now the oligarchy is governing again as if nothing had happened. It is
proceeding with plans for an Economic Transformation Law that includes
dollarization and yet more austerity for the poor.
The country's main union federation, the Unitary Workers Front (FUT), held
protests against the proposed law the week of Feb. 21. CONAIE continues to
demand the dissolution of congress and the judicial system in favor of a
Peoples Parliament and elected judges, but it may have lost some of its
popular support as a result of its role in the failed coup.
One Ecuadoran writes: "Our poor country will probably have a very
authoritarian government now. In other countries where neo-liberalism was
applied, the use of force was indispensable. I hope the indigenous movement
will do things better next time they try to make a change in the
government. Hopefully they will use their power to get more space for
democratization and participation, rather than falling for the trickery of
the military like they did this time. The military wants an excuse to
repress them; some people even think the military planned for the coup to
fail. The indigenous movement has lost support as a result. Some people are
even saying the government should have killed some of them. I don't want to
tell the indigenous movement what to do, but they are in a strong position
to pressure the government and should not let themselves be tricked out of
their power."
Ecuador's coup sounds an echo of Latin America in the 1950s-1980s, when
military dictatorships repressed, tortured and killed workers and
revolutionaries all over the continent. What is remarkable in the year 2000
is the indigenous movement's alliance with the military. Just three years
ago, the Ecuadoran masses forced out another president who was corrupt and
imposing worse and worse austerity. That time, Congress selected a new
president from among its ranks (ignoring the woman vice-president), and
nothing changed. What were the indigenous leaders thinking this time, that
military dictatorship is the "lesser evil" (don't they remember their own
military dictatorship in the 1960s?), and that a few million dollars thrown
their way could change the economic condition of the millions of indigenous
people living in dire poverty? Where was the Left during the mass protests,
and did it present an alternative to a military takeover?
In Austria, Nazi-admirer Joerg Haider's anti-immigration party recently won
enough votes to enter the government by promising to shake up the corrupt
and undemocratic coalition that has ruled that country for three decades.
Some people are calling him "a breath of fresh air." As different as these
countries and events are, they put front and center the question, what
alternative is there to the way society is organized now, and what kind of
overthrow of this society is needed to get us there?
Whereas U.S. government ideologues want us to believe there is no
alternative to existing society, people around the world never stop
fighting for change. What is scary about the Ecuador and Austria events is
that they suggest the only alternatives to capitalism are military
dictatorship or fascism. It seems we are in grave danger of losing the
concept of a socialist alternative altogether.
-Anne Jaclard
| 
