Political Violence and Trauma in Argentina. Antonius C. G. M. Robben

Чтение книги онлайн.

Читать онлайн книгу Political Violence and Trauma in Argentina - Antonius C. G. M. Robben страница 13

Political Violence and Trauma in Argentina - Antonius C. G. M. Robben The Ethnography of Political Violence

Скачать книгу

Aires and cultivated an internal democracy which maintained an active participation of the rank and file in union politics. Attempting to prevent the Peronist union establishment from dominating the newly founded auto industry of Córdoba, the Aramburu government had granted in 1956 the union rights of the IKA auto workers to the tiny garage mechanics union SMATA (Sindicatos de Mecánicos y Afines del Transporte Automotor), and not to the Peronist UOM metal workers union (Unión Obrera Metalúrgica). The embattled UOM in Córdoba adopted therefore a more hard-line, intransigent position than both the Buenos Aires UOM and the UOM union central.29

      The SMATA auto workers union in Córdoba pursued a line relatively independent from the national union centrals. Peronists commanded only a small majority in SMATA, and had to tolerate a critical communist presence. SMATA succeeded in raising the number of shop stewards on the work floor and organized open assemblies at which workers could express their opinions. Various governments did not succeed in preventing the politicization of the auto workers. Grass roots participation forged the workers’ identification with the union and with each other. This solidarity would become crucial in the considerable crowd mobilizations of 1969.30

      The bloc of Independents, a group of unaffiliated unions not subject to the Peronist union centrals, played a pivotal role in Cordoban union politics. Many members were anti-Peronists with strong Radical, socialist or communist sympathies. The bloc stood under the inspired leadership of Agustín Tosco, the secretary-general of the light and power workers union Luz y Fuerza. Despite a membership of less than three thousand members, the union occupied a strategic position in Córdoba because of its ability to cut off the city’s power supply. The militancy of the electricians can be attributed to their grass roots involvement in union issues cultivated by Tosco and the inability of the union centrals to assume control over the Cordoban working class. The prominence of the Independents in Cordoban labor politics prevented local Peronist unions from slipping into the soft-line strategies of the Buenos Aires unions, and made Luz y Fuerza spearhead an uncompromising position towards the government.31

      So, at the beginning of the 1960s, there were two major currents in the Peronist labor movement: intransigents and integrationists. The intransigents were mainly based in Córdoba. They were more prone to take to the streets to lend force to their demands, and were ready to enter into loose alliances with non-Peronist Independent unions to further their interests. The intransigent union leaders were not averse to pragmatic negotiations to achieve concrete gains, but did not give in entirely to the integrationism of the Buenos Aires-based union centrals.

       Peronism Without Perón

      In control of the majority of the Peronist workers, the integrationist union leaders in Buenos Aires began to acquire political aspirations. Augusto Vandor, the leader of the powerful metal workers union, succeeded in placing unionists on the provincial election slates. The resounding victory on 18 March 1962 of Peronist candidates in nine provinces, including the province of Buenos Aires, triggered the downfall of the Frondizi government.32 The armed forces did not tolerate a Peronist victory, let alone the return of Perón to Argentina. The elections were annulled on 19 March, and Frondizi was arrested on 29 March. José María Guido was sworn in that day as head of the transitional government. General elections were held on 7 July 1963.33

      The 1963 elections were won by Arturo Illia of the Radical Party (UCR) with only 25 percent of the total vote because the proscribed Peronists cast blank votes en masse.34 In the eyes of many Peronists Illia lacked the legitimacy to lead the country, while the union leaders feared his desire to cut their clientelism and improve the internal union democracy.35 The opposition to Illia’s government began with nationwide Peronist demonstrations on 17 October 1963 to commemorate the Day of Loyalty and proclaim a popular mobilization. The protesters demanded new general elections, the withdrawal of all repressive measures, an embargo on the export of capital, extensive nationalizations, and the return of Perón.36 Perón had declared on New Year’s eve of 1963 that he would return to Argentina before the end of 1964. Economic and political demands merged again. The political climate added increased credibility to the slogan “Perón returns” (Perón vuelve) which began to appear on street walls throughout Argentina. A massive rally was held at Plaza Once on 17 October 1964 attended by more than one hundred thousand people. On the economic front, almost four million workers participated in the occupation of eleven thousand factories during seven operations between 21 May and 24 June 1964.

      Ironically, it was Perón’s attempt to return to Argentina which provided Augusto Vandor with an opportunity to displace him from the pinnacle of the Peronist movement.37 Perón tried to enter Argentina on 2 December 1964 but the Argentine military asked the Brazilian authorities to deny him free passage. Perón was ordered to disembark in Rio de Janeiro, and forced to await the return flight to Madrid.38 The failure of Operation Return gave Vandor an important political victory. He had demonstrated his unfailing loyalty by accompanying Perón on his ill-fated trip, and could now return to Argentina with the laurels of his heroism.

      Vandor tried to use his newly gained prestige to consolidate his political influence in the Peronist movement during the March 1965 congressional elections as he maneuvered his candidates into the key tickets of the Peronist Unión Popular. When the votes had been counted, there were seventy seats in the House of Representatives for Illia’s Radical party UCR and fiftytwo seats for the Unión Popular.39 For the first time since 1955, Peronists returned to Congress, now under the tutelage of the UOM leader Augusto Vandor. The victory would be short-lived because a military coup on 28 June 1966 deposed President Illia and brought retired General Juan Carlos Onganía to power.

      The Onganía dictatorship proclaimed the beginning of the Argentine Revolution which sought to consolidate the nation’s moral and spiritual values, jump-start the stagnant economy, improve labor relations, and uphold the ideals of dignity and freedom which were the patrimony of Argentina’s Christian and Western civilization.40 These ideals were implemented by closing Congress, dissolving the political parties, and dismissing the Supreme Court.41

      The coup was initially welcomed by the principal union leaders José Alonso and Augusto Vandor because the Onganía government suspended many measures of the Illia government intended to curtail the political power of the labor unions.42 The Cordoban union leader Tosco stood practically alone in his condemnation of the military takeover, while Vandor and Alonso were prominently present at the swearing in ceremony.

      The first blow to the unions came in August 1966 when the government imposed obligatory arbitration on labor conflicts and denied collective bargaining and the right to strike.43 In line with the hitherto successful hit and negotiate strategy, Alonso and Vandor organized strikes. In Córdoba, auto workers went on strike and the Independent union leader Tosco organized work stoppages. The Onganía government, on the instigation of the National Security Council (CONASE) headed by General Osiris Villegas, responded with surprising harshness. Unions were placed under the control (intervenido) of inspectors-general, bank accounts frozen, and strikes and street demonstrations prohibited. In 1967 there were only six strikes in Greater Buenos Aires, in which no more than 547 workers participated.44

      In the two years following the defeat of the union protests, the union leadership disintegrated into a collaborationist, a participationist, and a combative bloc. The collaborationists, headed by Juan José Taccone and Rogelio Coria, were willing to submit workers to the government’s tutelage. Instead, Vandor and Alonso wished some degree of participation in the collective negotiations with the government to bargain for more favorable labor conditions. Finally, the combative union leaders condemned the accommodating attitude of the other two blocs and demanded a return to active resistance. In their opinion, the pact between labor, government, and capital had led the labor movement away from the class struggle and the pursuit of a socialist revolution. The combative unionists provoked a breach within the CGT union central in March 1968 and formed the CGTA (Confederación General de Trabajo de los Argentinos),

Скачать книгу