Peru INTEREST GROUPS
Alberto K. Fujimori
Courtesy Embassy of Peru, Washington
The Military
The military in Peru has traditionally played an
influential
role in the nation's politics, whether directly or
indirectly.
Prior to the 1968 revolution, the military was seen as
caretaker
of the interests of conservative elites, and its
involvement in
politics usually entailed the repression of "radical"
alternatives, particularly APRA. An APRA uprising and
brutal
military retaliation in Trujillo in 1932 initiated a long
period
of violence and strained relations between the two. As
late as
1962, when General Ricardo Pérez Godoy led a military coup
to
prevent Haya de la Torre from becoming president, the
military
was willing to resort to extraconstitutional means to
prevent
APRA from coming to power.
By 1962, however, it was evident that the military was
no
longer solely the preserver of elite interests, and that
it was
increasingly influenced by a new military school of
thought, the
National Security Doctrine, which posited that development
and
social reform were integral to national security. The
Advanced
Military Studies Center (Centro de Altos Estudios
Militares--
CAEM) in Lima was a proponent of this philosophy in the
1950s and
1960s. In addition, the Peruvian military's involvement in
fighting guerrilla uprisings in the southern Sierra in the
mid1960s gave many officers a first exposure to the destitute
conditions of the rural poor, and to the potential unrest
that
those conditions could breed.
Thus, the military's 1968 intervention was far from a
typical
military coup. Rather, it was a military-led attempt at
implementing far-reaching economic and social reforms,
such as
the Agrarian Reform Law of 1969 and the Industrial
Community Law
of 1970. The military's lack of understanding of civil
society,
demonstrated by its authoritarian attempts to control
popular
participation through a government-sponsored social
mobilization
agency, the National System for Supporting Social
Mobilization
(Sistema Nacional de Apoyo a la Mobilización
Social--Sinamos),
was largely responsible for the failure of its reforms.
When the
military left power in 1980, it left a legacy of economic
mismanagement, incomplete reforms, and a society more
radicalized
and politicized than when it had taken over.
Yet, the military's revolutionary experiment changed
the
image of the institution, as well as its own views about
the
benefits of direct government control. It was, at least
for the
foreseeable future, immune from direct intervention in
politics.
It was no longer seen, however, and no longer perceived
itself,
as a monolithic conservative institution, but rather as
the
institution that had attempted to do what no political
force had
been able to do: radically transform the nation's economy
and
society. Its failure may have strengthened the voice of
conservatives within its ranks, but it retained the
awareness
that social reform and economic development were critical
to
Peru's social stability and ultimately its national
security. And
as keeper of national security, it, more than any other
force in
the nation, was constantly reminded of this by the
presence of
the SL and other insurgent groups.
The large proportion of the country under state of
emergency
rule, coupled with the military's desire to fight against
the SL
unconstrained by civilian control, had understandably
created
tensions between successive civilian governments and the
military. As in the case of several other transitions to
democracy in Latin America, the Peruvian military took
precautions to protect its institutional viability and to
increase its strength vis-à-vis civilian government. From
the
outset, the Belaúnde government was forced to accept
certain
conditions set by the military pertaining to budgetary
autonomy
and states of emergency. Nineteen days before the
surrender of
power to the Belaúnde administration, the military passed
the
Mobilization Law, with minimum publicity in order to avoid
civilian reaction. The law enabled the military to
expropriate or
requisition companies, services, labor, and materials from
all
Peruvians or foreigners in the country at times of
national
emergency. These times included cases of "internal
subversion and
internal disasters." In addition, because the Belaúnde
government
failed to take the SL seriously until it was too late, the
government defaulted to the military in the design and
implementation of a counterinsurgency strategy.
The García government began with a different approach.
García
fired three top generals responsible for civilian
massacres in
the emergency zones, and in a blow to traditional
budgetary
autonomy, halved an air force order for French Mirage
jets.
However, García's image suffered a major blow after he
personally
gave orders for the military to do whatever was necessary
to put
down a revolt of the SL inmates in Lima's prisons in June
1986,
resulting in the massacre of 300 prisoners, most of whom
had
already surrendered. As the government lost coherence and
as
economic crisis and political stalemate set in, pressure
on the
military subsided, and its de facto control over the
counterinsurgency campaign increased.
Because the Fujimori government had no organized
institutional base, it was in a difficult position
vis-à-vis the
military. Although the military had no desire to take
direct
control of the government, it indicated the one scenario
that
would force it to intervene--if no one were running the
state.
Even at the height of the APRA government's crisis, when
President García was in virtual hiding in the government
palace,
the military could rely on APRA to run the state. If a
similar
loss of control by President Fujimori occurred, there
would be no
such institution with a stake in running the state, a
scenario
that might force the military to act. Fujimori had clearly
made a
point of building strong support in one sector of the army
and in
return seemed to be backing increased independence for the
military in the counterinsurgency war.
A good example of the military's independence was the
passage
of Decree Law 171, which stipulated that military
personnel in
emergency zones were on active duty full time and
therefore could
only be tried in military courts, which try only for
neglect of
duty and not for offenses, such as murder or torture. In
addition, the government exacerbated tensions with some
sectors
of the military in September 1990 by refusing to sign a
US$93-
million aid agreement with the United States that included
US$36
million in military aid. The Fujimori government felt the
accord's coca eradication policy did not sufficiently take
economic development into account. Some within the armed
forces,
which in general were desperately short of funds, felt
that the
government should take what it could get. In May 1991,
Fujimori
conceded to both United States and Peruvian military
pressure and
signed the accord.
In short, the situation under Fujimori was one of de
facto
military control, not just of the emergency zones, but of
the
areas of government that the military perceived to be its
domain.
Demonstrative of the military's increasing influence over
certain
areas of government was the fact that the Ministry of
Defense and
the Ministry of Interior were both headed by generals.
Data as of September 1992
|