Peru: State Department speaks

["Chris, London" <100423.2040@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Despite the hilarity of contributions to the l'st recently,
I shall resist the temptation to join in and instead push things
as far as I can towards addressing the real issues of conflict.

I therefore in all seriousness submit as witness for the prosecution,
the testimony of none other than the US State Department.

I hope this puts an end once and for all to any idealist epistemological
assumptions about the Peru debate. There is no pure source of evidence.
That does not mean there is not a truth actually existing in the
lives and struggles of the people of Peru, that we can gradually understand
better. And in order to do so, as democrats if not as marxists, we should
be prepared to look at all sources of information.

The precondition is an intelligent awareness of the class, economic, political
and ideological position from which the information is written. And what better
than the evidence of the US State Department, closest perhaps of all
bodies in the world to being the executive committee of the world bourgeoisie.

Far from the evidence being worthless, it is therefore most valuable.
In the instalments posted below, note how much the possibly rather liberal
leaning authors, give absolutely damning evidence of the oppressive
nature of the Peruvian regime. Note too the passing reference to
"extreme" economic liberalisation.

Note the claims for a *relative* reduction in the armed activity of
the PCP, without of course any sympathetic analysis of whether or how the
PCP might have modified its tactics in the face of experience.

Statements of PCP crimes against human rights are merely summarised, without
comparable clarification of the soundness of the evidence. Although I personally
have little doubt that torture would be used at times in the course of
armed struggle, particularly by people who had themselves been tortured
and knew loved ones or comrades who had been tortured, it is not clear
why a death through a slitting of the throat is listed as evidence
of torture and not just of evidence of extra-judicial execution, in  a
peasant society.

The overall effect of the report is therefore to give evidence of
unacceptable practices by the revolutionary forces in summary form, and
a lot of detail about the unacceptably oppressive activities of the government
in using a sledgehammer to crush them.

The report does not give any advice as to whether international finance
capital should withold its substantial funding of the Fujimori regime
until these unacceptable continuing human rights abuses are resolved.
Therefore it could be argued to be an instructive piece of evidence from
a body who needs to be able to appear reasonably authoritative about
facts, but whose class position is to prefer the internationalising
of bourgeois (buergerlich) democratic rights in order to
legitimise the internationalising of capital,
but which will do little to make the one a precondition for the other.

The report could be the basis for a civilised and sympathetic discussion
between a representative of the US State Department and President Fujimori
about how very difficult the situation is, and their mutual hopes of it
improving. Meanwhile the capital will flow.

I am posting the 60K document in 8 portions:

Introduction

Section 1 Respect for the Integrity of the Person parts a-c
Section 1 parts d-g

Section 2 Respect for Civil Liberties

Section 3 Respect for Political Rights

Section 4 Governmental Attitude Regarding International and
Nongovernmental Investigation of Alleged Violations of Human Rights

Section 5 Discrimination Based on Race, Sex, Religion, Disability,
Language, or Social Status

Section 6 Worker Rights


Chris B, London.



BTW
The report also includes a lot of references to AIDS. I hope this
will put in better context this question on which IMO Michael Luftmensch
rightly challenged the statement forwarded by PCP
supporters as lacking in credibility on a very important subject.

While I am somewhat more willing to give the benefit of the doubt to
PCP in general than Michael is, I would like once again to express
appreciation for how I feel he has tried to work with me
in putting a framework of objective reference to the dramatic controversies
about Peru. As he rightly says this is not ultimately about siding with
one particular party or another, but trying to use marxism to get a
better understanding of the stormy events in a large swathe of countries
on the edge of the main world imperialist markets.


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---