Argentina's defeat in the Falklands has sparked a profound political crisis. Rafael Runco argues that the Argentinian mass movement has its best opportunity since the 1976 coup to struggle against the military junta.
Argentina is facing one of the most dramatic moments of its history. The irresponsible attitude of the government led by Galtieri involved the country in a war which the Argentinian working class and democratic people did not want. Argentina clearly has a rightful claim to the Malvinas islands based on historical facts: they were part of the country during the Spanish domination in Latin America and they continued to be so after independence, until Britain seized them in 1833. For the last 17 years the Argentinian people as well as the United Nations, the Organisation of American States and the non-aligned countries have been pressurising the Argentinian and British governments to settle this old dispute peacefully. Because of these internal and external pressures, taking into account the reactionary nature of the Argentinian government, any sensitive person should condemn the actions of the military junta over this issue; the choice of tactics and the opportunity to fight for national objectives always have to be adapted to the objective conditions (international correlation of forces) and to the possibilities of victory (which is not only influenced by the military capacity but also, and especially, by internal cohesion and a leadership in whom the people have put their confidence).
Who can object to the legitimacy of Panama's claim over its canal, or Cuba's claim over Guantanamo? But do these legitimate demands justify the outbreak of a conflict which would threaten world peace? Or should we consider the Argentinian government to be 'more patriotic' than those who are consistent in their anti-colonialist claims without risking the present and the future of their people?
From this point of view, Galtieri's adventure in the South Atlantic was doomed to be a failure from the start. However, Britain has neither the right nor the moral aptitude to condemn this action. The British Government, posing as a victim, reacted strongly to 'punish' the 'aggressors', but who punishes the immeasurable colonialist aggression of Britain towards the Third World? Her allies, imperialist powers like her?
The Government
The military junta, revealing one of its fascist features (the use of chauvinism as a political instrument) compromised its future in a desperate adventure in order to overcome the difficulties of continuing in power. The economic bankruptcy, the increasingly strong popular struggle, the international isolation and the political fissures in the armed forces had forced Galtieri's government into a defensive position, and it was necessary for him to find a social basis which would give strength to his feeble administration. He and his followers thought that by exploiting the strong anti-imperialist and anti-colonialist feelings of the Argentinians they would get support for all the government's policies. They also thought that the weak, decadent British imperialism would not reply strongly and that the United States would be at least neutral in a conflict which involved Reagan's greatest supporters in the counter-revolutionary war in Central America. A complete failure has resulted from such speculations: Margaret Thatcher, who in the middle of her own social storm also needed to do something to divert attention from British internal problems, realised that she would be able to manipulate the situation to unify Britain behind her unpopular government. The Reagan administration, having to make a decision, did not hesitate to choose its traditional ally, a fundamental gear in NATO's machinery. On the other hand, the Argentinian people stood up not only to defend what has always been regarded as part of their territory but also to repudiate the armed forces.
The Empire
The Argentinian armed forces want to make their country the 'South Africa' of Latin America. Their direct intervention against the peoples of Bolivia, El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua, as well as the major role they have been playing in the terrorist co-ordination between the reactionary governments in South America, show that they have put themselves in the position of custodians of imperialist interests in the continent. Considering themselves harmed by the human rights policy of the Carter administration, which they regarded as 'soft', the Argentinian military proclaimed themselves the saviours of 'Christian Western Civilisation'. With Reagan, the bilateral relationship between the US and the Argentinian junta had improved, and the military thought they might have a free hand to carry out their South Atlantic adventure.
The United States has strategic military bases in Patagonia (the southern region of Argentina) and before 2 April Costa Mendez, as Argentinian Minister of Foreign Affairs, had secret talks with the American ambassador in Buenos Aires, Harry Schlaudermann, to negotiate the installation of a US navy base in the Malvinas. This offer and the close ties between Argentina and the Latin American lobby in Reagan's administration made Galtieri think that the United States would look on their actions favourably. This desire was shown by the fact that while the Argentinian troops were landing in Port Stanley, the Argentinian embassy in Washington was giving a party in honour of Jeanne Kirkpatrick, US ambassador to the United Nations.
But the servile attitude of the Argentinian armed forces towards imperialism did not allow them to realise that they were incapable of acting independently beyond the supervision of their masters. Although it is true that there is some antagonism and competition between imperialist countries, in this case the United States and Britain, they are united by the basic idea of their existence, Third World countries, their neo-colonies, exist to be exploited by the multinationals, to expand their markets, generate profits and control strategic areas. Fundamentally they are united to plunder underdeveloped countries; this is a strategic partnership. Meanwhile the military exist to be the servants of imperialism, administrators of its profits and repressors of the people who fight to be free from its domination. The military and imperialism are tactical partners. The Argentinian armed forces have learned their lesson: being the custodian of imperialism does not mean having an equal share in the great society. Who could imagine that all imperialist countries would have doubts in deciding whether to support Argentina or Britain? All of them have joined together to defend the interests of Britain although Argentina had previously been a 'good fellow'.
The People
The Argentinian workers' movement, in an indication of its deepening struggle, has once more demonstrated publicly and massively against the dictatorship. United by the slogan 'Peace, Bread and Jobs' thousands of Argentinians mobilised on 30 March in every main city of the country. They were led by the CGT (the semi-legal Argentinian TUC). Despite the rarified atmosphere in the country because of the worsening of the negotiations between Argentina and Britain over the Malvinas, the Argentinian people did not follow the warnings of the dictatorship to 'show a united country in view of the development of the crisis in the South Atlantic', and they went onto the streets. The victory of the people was categorical; despite the repression (a total of 2000 people were detained and one worker was killed in Mendoza City) it was the biggest demonstration against the dictatorship since the coup d'etat in 1976. It showed that the people are no longer afraid of the terrorist repressive methods of the armed forces and that only the workers have the initiative and are able to lead the struggle against the fascist junta.
In that atmosphere of deep political turmoil the Galtieri government decided to [illegible] the Malvinas islands. On 2 April a huge propaganda campaign, coordinated from the headquarters of the Junta and the Department of the Press Secretary of the Presidency, was unleashed [illegible] Argentina. By exploiting the historical claim of the Argentinian people, the reactionary government declared itself the defender of Argentina's sovereignty and tried to unify the country behind the armed forces to give some legitimacy to the dictatorship. The response was outside their calculations. More than one hundred thousand people went onto the streets of Buenos Aires to celebrate this historical event. But at the same time this demonstration was nothing more nor less than the continuation of the popular repudiation of this dictatorship: the slogans from that very first [day were] 'Malvinas yes, Government no', 'The Malvinas are Argentinian, The Armed Forces aren't' and 'The Malvinas are Argentinian, so are the Disappeared People'. What should have been a movement of support for the government rapidly became not only an invaluable experience of anti-colonialist and anti-imperialist struggle but also a move against the dictatorship. The Argentinian people took the defence of the territorial sovereignty into their own hands but framed it in the context of the defence of popular sovereignty. For these reasons they supported the recovery of the islands, and even its military consequences in the face of the British Government's over-reaction, while at the same time criticising the commanders of the armed forces for not being able to reach a peaceful solution.
The Future
Whatever the military result of the war, the government of the armed forces would have fallen. Now it has happened. Galtieri has gone and the junta has collapsed. The armed forces are divided and for the first time since the coup the army is in government alone. Even the army is divided. General Bignone, the new President, and General Nicolaides, the new Army Commander, are not heading the government because they have managed to unify the army but because they were next in line. There is a layer of young officers, at a secondary level, who have long criticised the economic policy followed since 1976 as a sell-out to foreign interests. They have a more nationalistic project which they want to negotiate with the politicians.
This struggle within the army and the armed forces as a whole over what form of government they should opt for will continue in the coming months. The present government is provisional. The situation inside Argentina will remain unstable because it will be impossible to force the Argentinian people to reverse the process they have put into action. Having taken advantage of the greater possibilities for political organisation in the country, the Argentinian working class and democratic people are now better organised than at any time since the coup d'etat. As they mobilised against what they saw as the continuation of a long series of acts of aggression by Britain against Argentina, the working class initiated a process of recovery of its political and union structures.
Argentina, as a nation, has gained on the international front on this issue, having won support from all the Third World and socialist countries and revolutionary organisations everywhere. The short-sighted attitude of the imperialist countries in trying to punish Argentina has produced a regrowth of anti-imperialist feelings worldwide, even in some capitalist governments such as those of Spain and Venezuela. Internally, the Argentinian people have won a political battle against the dictatorship. The new government has to deal with a higher stage of popular organisation and the strikes and demonstrations will continue. The death squads will keep working too but the people are now in the streets and won't be easy to turn back.
But the lack of a revolutionary organisation which fully represents and leads the Argentinian working class, and is recognised by the workers as their party, prevents this extraordinary situation linking up to a revolutionary situation. The people will support all moves towards democracy. They will support all moves which promise the freedom to allow their organisations to recover, the exiles to come home, and human rights to be restored. The danger at this moment will be that, lacking a revolutionary organisation, the outcome of this popular struggle will be a Peronist/Radical Party front which will gain mass support in elections but will, of course, fail to carry through its election programme.
The Argentinian neo-capitalist model needs the full support of imperialism to survive, and any new bourgeois government — even one with a 'popular mask' — will have to resume the traditional role of Argentina in the world division of labour by suppressing the struggle for freedom and democracy of the people of Argentina. Only a socialist government would be a real challenge to the imperialist domination.
For these reasons it is essential to support any attempt at democratic change in Argentina, but at the same time being aware that only the mobilisation and improvement in the organisation of the working class and democratic people will be the assurance of a real victory of the anti-colonialist and anti-fascist struggle, stepping forward towards the battle for socialism.
RAFAEL RUNCO is a survivor of the Argentinian death squads and currently a political refugee in this country.