(en) Anarkismo.net: Paraguay and the parliamentary coup in the eyes of anarchists (ca, it)

We set the resistance and the appropriate response at the time, as this allows self-manage
the fights, autonomise response to conflict, asamblearizar analysis and decision making
for resistance and, through them, breaking the mark of the Colorado political culture ie
break the political practices of patronage, dependency and sale of offices. A serious
resistance will make fundamental changes in political culture and social Paraguay,
breaking with custom functional oligarchical domination that affect us today. ---- Who
take seriously the resistance are hampered by timid sector and focused on the left
electoral calculation, which assumes verbal resistance, but practically immobilized. ----
Since assuming the Lugo government in August 2008 this process of change has resulted,
among other things, in a calm social unrest, reduced social mobilization, increase the
profits of financial and real estate speculators and multinationals of agribusiness, and a
sustained policy of criminalization of social movements in struggle, going so far as to
militarize some areas of the country, with the excuse of the emergence of a "guerrilla"
who kidnapped a cattleman.

However, the Lugo administration involved a change in the political dynamics of the
country and via the executive came to strengthen a new player in the political arena: the
progressive left. This left-liberalism managed to increase its links with the popular
sectors through program management and social and cultural projects, which gave a
visibility concern to the two traditional parties (both right: the liberal and red) of the
forthcoming elections (2013). Particularly worrying for the Liberal Party as an
interesting part of the leadership base and a half, established an alliance with the
progressive left.

The threat of impeachment as a tool to get Lugo's exercise of executive power was constant
since the early days of President Lugo, while the government tried to combat this threat,
in general, two ways: control social unrest and expand the right governing coalition,
incorporating parts of the Colorado party government, social control was through the
classic mechanisms of progressive governments use: combination of negotiation and
co-optation to repression intensive. The presence in managerial and executive decision in
leftist activists and leaders, and leaders of NGOs, the government allowed to hold a fluid
exchange of views with the social movements and organizations, make them part of the
project management and provide them resources to carry out initiatives and proposals in
the social sphere, while in areas of health and other social areas, massively joined
leaders or social partners, strengthening the link with grassroots organizations.
Repression took two main ways: one, indirectly, it was through political parties called
left or progressive systematically around their bases and not to criticize and not
interfere with mobilization "process" and the second route, directly, was criminalize the
social movements that appear more "radical", linking the alleged "terrorist" named EPP, a
sort of guerrilla emerged in the north of the country, with origins and development is not
very clear, very well used to justify a harsh crackdown on peasant movements in the area.

The combination of both factors caused a stagnation of the social movements that lasted
all was Lugo.

Moreover, red prebendal culture as a form of politics was not successfully fought by the
left and the progressives in power. With few exceptions, corrupt practices and the
Colorado prebendarias on which settled its relations election, were reproduced by the left
in power, some of these practices being leaked to the press right who used it to label the
left of corrupt in an effort to wash your face right, so far the quintessential
representative of corruption. So much so that even the practice of herding (bring crowds
to rallies and demonstrations in exchange for some monetary compensation or food) were
also used by the left.

At this stage, given the slaughter of Curuguaty (Friday June 15, 2012) in which 11
peasants and 6 policemen were killed in a shootout initiated by the police. The police
deaths, according to witness statements peasants, were due to "friendly fire", all but
one. The killing was exploited by the right-wing press (almost alone in the country) to
blame the farmers, calling them murderers, criminals and terrorists, this without having
done any research, moderately serious about the facts.

The left fell into a stupor, the government only accepted the police version (functional
media strategy the right to criminalize farmers fighting for land) and peasant movements
took the initiative and act in solidarity in the field to help to the landless peasants
who were being persecuted, repressed and imprisoned in the area.

Since then, there was a strain on the left who wanted to move between sectors in
solidarity with the peasants killed (including police, children of farmers) and to stop
the attack of the press toward criminalizing peasants fighting for land. This immobility,
originating in the political calculus and the (logical) fear that infused the press,
allowed that there was no immediate response to the media siege against the peasant
movement, specifically less organic sector of the landless, the National League camp
assistants.

In this scenario, we focus on anarchists actually show solidarity through social
mobilization in response to attack by the press and the right and break the fear that
reigned in the environment. Some achievements we had in that way, despite the pressures
that left some part of the militancy exercised to not leave the role of spectators of
events. Just 4 days after the killing, a Monday, we perform the first act of solidarity in
the city of Asunci?n, mobilizing and unifying spirit. Unit because it corresponded, for
links and participation, the Marxist left active part in solidarity and mobilizing because
we knew that the cost of inaction would always be higher for people who immobility not
give us any security in the right prejudiced conviction and repressive.

Then came the parliamentary coup. This situation was very complex anarchists raised, while
we did not want it confused with support for the government of Lugo. Our approach was the
same as for the Massacre of Curuguaty: solidarity and mobilization. We saw that the only
way to stop the advance of the right (and violence on the poor and popular in the country)
was mobilized and out into the streets and there is no better known as the example, we
were in the square of Congress from the first moment of the impeachment of Lugo. During
the two days of the trial remained in the square, trying to help deploy creativity, action
steps and take care thinking of resistance is time.

Even at this critical time, much of the left did not quite measure up, spreading rumors,
intranquilizando lxs protesters, trying to control lxs opinions and giving speeches as
erratic cope. So much so that when the time of closing the trial, with the conviction of
Lugo, the police attacked people strongly mobilized. So bad was the preparation and care
to the people that people escaped from the tear gas and rubber bullets in a stampede,
risking your own life and others. No preventive measures were taken where appropriate and
circulating information was dispersed and controlled, thus giving strength to the rumors.
Betting every effort to sustain the myth Lugo, the leftist leaders present at the Congress
Square, late the night of impeachment planted the hope that Lugo would come to stand there
by the Paraguayan people. But Lugo stepped down as president on television and in the
street people heard the radio broadcast. The disappointment was that three seats that had
been delayed a day and half full, be emptied in less than an hour.

The feeling of defeat on the left was such that the next day many people who arrived at
dawn to the square, to resist, he found a picture that made them mourn: the absolute
abandonment.

On Saturday, first day of the coup government resulted in a struggle against the fence
self-managed communication. Undertaken by members of the media, both TV and radio public
resistance came true in the public TV, located in downtown Asuncion. A dozen people began
to resistance and the call to support and be part of the fight was done through text
messages and cell phone calls. In an hour I could count about 300 people so far who
started the open mic program, threatened with censure from the night before. That first
moment of struggle, with the microphone amplifying the words of resistance to whoever
wanted, was really a perfect work of resistance and self-management. We were modest part
of that and so we are proud of modesty. Subsequently, given the magnitude that was taking
the resistance in the public tv, political parties tried to prosecute, control and direct
this action. It deployed a "security group" acted aggressively as internal police. It also
tried to control the expression and what people say, banning assemblies in that place
(which had started as an open meeting and autoconvocada) and posters or written to depart
from the slogans stipulated as prudent. At the same time gave strength to the slogans and
the same figure luguistas Lugo.

The resistance effort was intended to be directed to the left, which extended the front
guasu (wide) to the right linking the coup dissidents and liberal parties colorado, while
trying to take a broader social base, calling also to organizations This social extension,
now called Front for the Defense of Democracy. Since the formation of this front,
everything was attempting to centralize and control the expression of people in what was
the block of public TV. Just in the middle of next week is that the fighting could spill
over the block, starting rallies in the country and city. Intermittent protests mass
meetings in general.

An interesting aspect is that the resistance given by the FDD and the former government
luguista called "peaceful" or civil disobedience. In practicality this resistance is
reduced to a half-mobilization at all times where you try not to bother anyone to not be
labeled as "violent" with which the actions (or rather inactions) of the FDD and former
cabinet Lugo have become functional standardization and reassurance that the coup
government wants to impose, in full agree facet of economic laws and decisions that favor,
further, to the transnational corporations and speculative capitalism. The speech
nonviolent civil disobedience and then appears meaningless and wrong in their purpose: no
real resistance as social conflict assumes no loaded in the coup parliamentary and does
not use the conflict to strip the bottom and against the people repressor the coup
government. Prima today the electoral calculation.

We set the resistance and the appropriate response at the time, as this allows self-manage
the fights, autonomise response to conflict, asamblearizar analysis and decision making
for resistance and, through them, breaking the mark of the Colorado political culture ie
break the political practices of patronage, dependency and sale of offices. A serious
resistance will make fundamental changes in political culture and social Paraguay,
breaking with custom functional oligarchical domination that affect us today.

Who take seriously the resistance are hampered by timid sector and focused on the left
electoral calculation, which assumes verbal resistance, but in practice immobilized or
mobilized only in terms of raising figures and candidates in secret, even at the cost the
disrepute into which are falling.
Affinity Group "The Street"


Asuncion, 03/07/2012

Related Articles:

Coup Refletindo or not Paraguai Bruno Lima Rocha [Castilian]
http://www.anarkismo.net/article/23340
Some thoughts after the coup in Paraguay A revolutionary anarchist
http://www.anarkismo.net/article/23243
Paraguay, Honduras another in the making? Fionuala Cregan Interview with Jos? Antonio
Guti?rrez D. http://www.anarkismo.net/article/23360
The Mirage Paraguayan Ra?l Zibechi http://www.anarkismo.net/article/23280
Lugo, EU and Carlos Fazio imperial web http://www.anarkismo.net/article/23244
Paraguay, a long-planned coup Pablo Stefanoni http://www.anarkismo.net/article/2323

Bron : a-infos-en@ainfos.ca

Paraguay, another Honduras on the making? Interview with Fionuala Cregan

On 29th June we interviewed Fionuala Cregan on the Paraguayan crisis, its background and
the Latin American context in which it takes place. She is based in Argentina and works
with the Latin America Regional Office of Church World Service. She has also written for
the Irish Times on Paraguay and has extensive research on the impact of agribusiness on
Paraguayan peasants' lives. The views expressed here are her own. We hope that this
interview will give a better insight into the developments in that country. ---- 1. Some
people, in fact most Latin American leaders, have deplored the ?destitution? of Lugo as a
thinly veiled coup with a constitutional disguise. The Vatican, Spain and Germany, on the
other hand, have stated this is a constitutional process and as such should be respected.
What is your view on the recent political crisis in Paraguay?

It took just 24 hours for the Paraguayan parliament to kick out democratically elected
President Fernando Lugo. He was given neither time nor space to defend himself. This is in
violation of due democratic process and thus amounts to a parliamentary coup. For this
reason, Paraguay has been suspended from the regional trading bloc MercoSur as well as
from the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), a union modelled on the EU focused on
regional integration.

It does not come as a surprise that certain European countries have not condemned the
coup. The Vice President, Federico Franco, who was immediately sworn in as President is
supported by and represents the interests of large rural estate-owners and the business
and industrial chambers. Paraguay - a small landlocked country in South America ? is the
fourth largest producer of soy in the world much of which is exported to Europe for use as
biofuel and animal fodder. The extension of the agricultural frontier for soy cultivation
has lead to the eviction of hundreds of thousands of small scale farmers or campesinos
from their land and has created a major land crisis. While Lugo was not able to resolve
this crisis, he opened up spaces for dialogue with the campesino sector and attempted to
find solutions. This was not well viewed by large estate owners or soy production
companies and they have been waiting for an excuse to oust the President and replace him
with one favourable to their interests and those of European investors.

As for the Vatican, it has never supported Lugo as it regards him as a dangerous ?Third
World Bishop? linked to the philosophy of Liberation Theology. This theology which
interprets the teachings of Jesus as liberation from unjust economic, political, or social
conditions grew in South America during the 1960s and was very soon condemned by the
Vatican which excommunicated a large number of priests who practised this theology. The
Vatican attempted to prevent Lugo running for President in 2008 ? as a result of which he
resigned from his role as Bishop and continued his Presidential campaign. The Catholic
Church in Paraguay was one of the first organizations to congratulate the de-facto
President Franco.

2. The Parliamentarians in Paraguay have expressed shock and outrage at the Curuguaty
massacre. Was this an exceptional event in class violence in Paraguay?

The death of 6 policemen and 11 campesinos in Curuguaty and wounding of 50 more is a
deplorable event. However, in my opinion, it does not represent class violence. This is
the label that was created by the right wing pro business media in Paraguay and used as a
justification for the subsequent ousting of President Lugo.

As mentioned, the extension of the agricultural frontier for soy production has had a
profound impact on campesinos many of whom now find themselves landless and forced in to
the urban slums of the capital Asuncion or into occupying land that is not in use and
demanding land redistribution.

Curuguaty is a city in Eastern Paraguay near the Brazilian border. The violent events of
15 June took place in a estate belonging to land owner Blas Riquelme ? a former colleague
of dictator Alfred Stroessner who ruled from 1954-1989 ? and today closely linked to the
Colorado Party, owner of a supermarket chain and lucrative investments in livestock.
During the dictatorship he illegally expanded his estate to appropriate 2000 hectares of
fiscal land ? in other words land that belongs to the Paraguayan State. It is this piece
of land that a group of landless campesinos were occupying and demanding its return to the
State.

On 15 June a group of special police forces, on the request of Blas Riquelme and with an
eviction order from a judge and state prosecutor, arrived at the estate. On the way they
were ambushed, supposedly by the campesinos, and a battle ensued leading to 17 tragic deaths.

The police were members of an elite force who had been trained in Colombia on counter
insurgency techniques. Many ask how could this specialised force have fallen in to a trap
such as this? Had the Police intelligence service been sabotaged? Was it all a perfectly
staged event to criminalize campesinos and oust President for his supposed incompetency in
managing these events and for having dialogued with this ?criminal? sector?

According to Paraguayan Journalist Idilio Mendez ?The plan was to criminalize, to provoke
extreme hate for Campesino Organizations, in order to force campesinos to abandon the
countryside and leave it for the exclusive use of agribusiness. Events in Curuguty are
part of a slow, painful process of ?De-campesinisation? of the Paraguayan countryside
which directly threatens the food sovereignty of the Paraguayan people.?

3. Many people have said that at the heart of this coup are the land owners and their
powerful multinational allies in agribusiness? could you give us some background to the
rural conflict and to the current state of land concentration in the country?

Paraguay is one of the most unequal countries in the world. 85 per cent of the land is in
the hands of 2 per cent of landowners the majority of whom have mansions in Miami or Punta
del Este, bank accounts in fiscal paradises and maintain strong ties with the agribusiness
industry, including US giant Monsanto, and are linked politically to the two main
political parties in Paraguay the Colorados and Liberales. It is these people who control
the Paraguayan Parliament and who ousted President Lugo. One of the first steps taken by
the new Minister for the Interior was to cancel the Protocol for dialogue with Campesinos
who occupy land.

4. Has there been any significant resistance in Paraguay to these new developments? Do you
think that a campaign of national resistance can be in place? Franco was speaking of
preventing a ?civil war??. How deep do you think is this crisis?

There has been resistance from social movements in Paraguay but these movements are not
yet strong enough to provoke the levels of resistance seen in other Latin American
countries following coup attempts.

Paraguay lived through one of the longest dictatorships in Latin America with 60 years
under Stroessner which was followed by a democratic dictatorship under Strossner?s allies,
the Colorado Party. The election of Fernando Lugo as President in 2008 was the first ever
break with Colorado rule and marked the first true opening up of spaces for civil society
and social movements.

However Lugo lacked the political will or courage to implement any of his campaign
promises of agrarian reform. He opened up dialogue ? but there were few changes in the
lives of thousands of landless campesinos and indigenous people who felt that Lugo played
too much to the interests of the right.

As a result social movements became divided with some continuing their support for Lugo
and others focusing on construct their own political movements. These internal divisions
explain the lack of a stronger resistance on the streets of Paraguay these past few weeks.

5. Do you think Paraguay is another Honduras on the making?

There are many similarities. Both are small countries dominated for centuries by a
powerful elite who are not afraid to spill blood to defend their interests, where the
United States has a vested geopolitical interest with important military bases in both and
where civil society has suffered a long history of repression. Zelaya in Honduras and Lugo
in Paraguay represented the first fledgling steps towards social justice ? and the elite
responded with brutal force. Since the coup in Honduras 3 years ago, this country is now
one of the most dangerous places in the world to be a human rights defender.

The difference however lies in Paraguay?s location in South America where its powerful
neighbours Brazil and Argentina are lead by left leaning Governments and who alongside all
other governments in the region have condemned the coup and taken concrete political
measures against Paraguay. The de-facto government of Federico Franco will not be able to
act with the same impunity as Lobos in Honduras. In addition even before the coup, there
were elections scheduled for 2013. Both national and regional dialogue and political
negotiating in this process, as well as the reunification of social movements will be key
to ensuring that Paraguay does not become another Honduras.

Pictures at: http://www.anarkismo.net/article/23360

Peasants occupy land in Curuguaty

The State response: a peasant massacred

Another peasant massacred

Dead bodies pile up in the local hospital

Bron : a-infos-en@ainfos.ca