OWC report no.21-El Salvador-NGOs Via NY Transfer News * All the News That Doesn't Fit OWC CAMPAIGN NEWS - distributed by the Open World Conference in Defense of Trade Union Independence & Democratic Rights, c/o S.F. Labor Council, 1188 Franklin St., #203, San Francisco, CA 94109. Phone: (415) 641-8616 Fax: (415) 440-9297. Visit our website at: http://www.geocities.com/owc_2000 OWC REPORT BACK No. 21 (El Salvador, NGOs) IN THIS MESSAGE: 1) Interview with Salvador Duarte, retired general secretary of the National Transport Workers Union of El Salvador and currently coordinator of the Workers' and Peasants' School (Escuela Obrera y Campesina) of El Salvador 2) Document No. 1: "Imperialism and NGOs" - excerpts from article by James Petras, professor of sociology at the State University of New York at Binghamton ******************** 1) Interview with Salvador Duarte, retired general secretary of the National Transport Workers Union of El Salvador and currently coordinator of the Workers' and Peasants' School (Escuela Obrera y Campesina) of El Salvador [Note: Salvador Duarte, retired general secretary of the National Transport Workers Union of El Salvador, was one of the keynote speakers at the November 1997 Western Hemisphere Workers Conference Against NAFTA and Privatizations (WHC). Since that time, he has been an active supporter of the WHC Continuations Committee and its campaigns. [When the call was issued for the Open World Conference, Brother Duarte was one of its early endorsers. He had planned to attend the OWC; in fact, all travel and lodging arrangements had been made. But on account of the powerful nationwide strike in El Salvador of the social security workers and doctors, Brother Duarte was compelled to stay back, as he was a central organizer of the national strike support coalition. [Following the partial victory registered by the strike, Brother Duarte contacted the OWC Organizing Committee to file a report on the strike and its lessons for the workers' movement internationally. Alan Benjamin, on behalf of the OWC Organizing Committee, interviewed Brother Duarte for the OWC Report Back series.] ---------- Question: Tell us about the recent strike of the workers at the Social Security Institute (ISSS) of El Salvador. Salvador Duarte: The Social Security Institute is an important institution in our country. It provides free healthcare and social security coverage to all organized workers in El Salvador. The conflict began in 1998, when the Institute director at the time, Mario Julio Castillo, made a commitment to the union - the STISSS - to raise wages within six months totaling 97 million colones (or US$12 million). It was a written agreement. But in 1999, when the new government took over in El Salvador, a new Institute director, Ana Wilma de Escobar, was put in charge. The new director now said that the Institute could not afford to pay out these wage increases; it would go broke. The Labor Minister was called upon to intervene, but he refused to do so. The unions then took the issue to the National Legislative Assembly, which voted that the unions must get their wage increases. It was now up to the President to settle the matter, but he vetoed the bill and returned it to the National Assembly. At this point the National Assembly could have overriden the Presidential veto. The initial vote in support of wage increases was close to the two-thirds majority needed to override. But the Deputies didn't even attempt a new vote. In this situation, the social security workers appealed for solidarity. Many of us responded to their appeal. We felt this was a vital struggle as it was a fight not simply over wages and working conditions; it also encompassed the fight against an effort to privatize the hospitals. On November 10, 1999, the 11,600 social security workers voted to strike. During the first two weeks, 221 workers were fired with the full authorization of the Labor Tribunal, which, under pressure from the government, had ruled that the strike was illegal. The authorities claimed that the union had not abided by all the provisions of the country's labor laws before going out on strike. It is important to note that in El Salvador workers have the formal right on paper to strike, but in reality there is such a tortuous and lengthy procedure to file for strike authorization that in reality all strikes are illegal. Given this new situation, the doctors of the Social Security Institute - organized in the SIMETRISS union - decided to walk off their jobs to support the workers. And they added a new demand - that two hospitals on the chopping block, the Roma and Amatepec hospitals, not be privatized. This added a new dimension to the fight. The doctors pointed to the precedent of the Hospital Zacamil, which, once privatized, witnessed a large increase in user fees. It was now also a struggle to defend free healthcare. Immediately a Comando Unitario (or strike support coalition) was formed, involving the striking union and countless union and community organizations and activists across the country. Our first mass actions were in December. We took to the streets, organizing marches, rallies and press conferences. In mid-December we held a mass demonstration of 50,000 people - something our country had not seen since the early 1980s. But the government refused to budge; it refused to open a dialogue with the striking unions. This only strengthened the resolve of the strikers and their supporters. On March 8, exactly four days before the national elections - a new demonstration took place with more than 60,000 participants. A big breakthrough occurred the following day - that is, three days before the national elections - when all the organized doctors in the country - not only those at the ISSS - issued a statement that unless the strikers' demands were heeded, they too would join the strike. When the ex-officers and medics at the Colegio Medico pledged their support for this statement, the government immediately backed down. It called for the formation of five national commissions to negotiate and resolve the strikers' demands. The unions met with the government representatives and reached an agreement. The government announced the following measures: (1) It would not privatize the Roma and Amatepec hospitals, (2) It would remove all co-pays at the Zacamil Hospital, and (3) the question of wage increases and the reinstatement of the 221 fired workers would be referred to the Supreme Court. =46ollowing this agreement, the strike was lifted. Question: Isn't there a danger that the wage increases and the reinstatements will be abandoned once the public spotlight is removed from this struggle? Salvador Duarte: Absolutely. In fact, 11 STISSS workers initiated a hunger strike to insist on the reinstatement of their fired co-workers. But the union did announce publicly that if the wage increases are not instituted and if the strikers aren't reinstated, they will go back out on strike. Question: What conclusions do you draw from this struggle? Salvador Duarte: For decades our trade union movement has been fragmented. The unions that were formed by the AFL-CIO's American Institute for Free Labor Development (AIFLD) in the 1950s and '60s were always on the side of the government, against the workers. Other unions formed by the ICFTU and ORIT have also supported the right-wing policies of the government. But there is a "recomposition" under way in the trade union movement. With this strike, we were able to take a first major step toward rebuilding a fighting trade union movement. And we were able to forge new alliances with community organizations. This has re-energized the workers' movement in El Salvador. Question: Tell us about the new labor school you have started: the Escuela Obrera y Campesina. Salvador Duarte: The school was founded in 1998. Its purpose is to train a new generation of unionists and activists about labor organizing, but also about the big political picture. We have seminars, for example, on the repercussions of "neo-liberalism" for the international labor movement, on the question of labor rights and labor codes, human rights, U.S. economic and military policy, the role of NGOs, reflections on the war in El Salvador, and the list goes on. Question: As you know, one of the questions that was discussed at the Open World Conference was the role of the Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). I was curious about the kinds of discussions you have held in your school on this matter. Salvador Duarte: This is not a minor question. Heavily funded NGOs have proliferated in El Salvador during the last period. The large majority of them have close ties to the government and to the major international financial institutions that are imposing the anti-worker austerity policies. The NGOs are everywhere - taking money for hurricane relief work, organizing community-based groups in the shantytowns and in the maquiladora "free trade" zones. The large bulk of the NGOs are out to domesticate the labor and popular movements. They never speak out against repression, against privatization, against the Structural Adjustment Plans. Take the maquilas (or sweatshops), for example: The NGOs form all sorts of women's clubs, but they strongly oppose the unionization of these super-exploited women. They are used to disorganize the movement and to buy off the labor and community leaders. Our school has discussed an important text on this matter by a renowned U.S. scholar, James Petras, titled "Imperialism and NGOs in Latin America." We strongly recommend that everyone concerned about the independence of the labor movement read this article. [See excerpts from Petras's document below.] We don't, however, lump all NGOs into the same sack. There are some progressive NGOs that have taken the side of the people. We have invited these organizations to participate in our discussions, which they have done. Question: You had wanted to participate in the OWC. Why was this important to you? Salvador Duarte: We have reached some firm conclusions about this so-called "neo-liberalism" and globalization process that is devastating Latin America and the rest of the world. We are convinced that no trade union in any one country alone can take on this beast. We have to unite this fighting force across borders. And we know that the U.S. labor movement -- the U.S. working class -- is key. They must be part and parcel of this revitalized and fighting movement against globalization. We need more conferences such as the OWC to exchange experiences and to discuss the conclusions we have reached. We need a lot more dialogue. We need to build common actions and create a loose structure to promote mutual solidarity. We need to take steps, patiently but firmly, toward building this new internationalism. We, the international working class, are the majority. But global capital is better organized and more conscious of its class interests. It is a master of the divide-and-rule strategy. It is a master of strategies aimed at co-opting and domesticating the labor movement. It can use repression, on the one hand, and it can use the carrot to buy off and corrupt the trade union leaders, on the other. We, in turn, must unmask their devious schemes in order to arm ourselves politically. The bosses have their own organizations to push globalization. They are called the United Nations, the WTO, the IMF and World Bank. We need to take steps toward creating our own independent international working class organization. Question: What can workers in the United States and elsewhere do to support your efforts. Salvador Duarte: Our Escuela Obrera y Campesina has virtually no money. We would like to be able to buy some computers so that we can produce our materials and so that we can exchange information with workers internationally. So if any of your supporters has some old computers or money for computers and modems, we would greatly appreciate this assistance. [Note: Please contact the OWC at or at (415) 641-8616 if you would like to assist the Escuela Obrera y Campesina in any capacity.] *************** 2) Document No. 1: "Imperialism and NGOs" - excerpts from article by James Petras, professor of sociology at the State University of New York at Binghamton By JAMES PETRAS [Note: The following excerpts are taken from an article by James Petras, titled "Imperialism and NGOs in Latin America," which appeared in the December 1997 issue of Monthly Review. The author teaches sociology at the State University of New York at Binghamton and is co-author of the book Neoliberalism and Class Conflict in Latin America (Macmillan, 1997). These excerpts are published here with the permission of the author.] By the early 1980s the more perceptive sectors of the neoliberal ruling classes realized that their policies were polarizing the society and provoking large-scale social discontent. Neoliberal politicians began to finance and promote a parallel strategy "from below," the promotion of "grassroots" organization with an "anti-statist" ideology to intervene among potentially conflictory classes, to create a "social cushion." These organizations were financially dependent on neoliberal sources and were directly involved in competing with socio-political movements for the allegiance of local leaders and activist communities. By the 1990s these organizations, described as "nongovernmental," numbered in the thousands and were receiving close to four billion dollars world-wide. =8A Neoliberalism and the NGOs There is a direct relation between the growth of social movements challenging the neoliberal model and the effort to subvert them by creating alternative forms of social action through the NGOs. The basic point of convergence between the NGOs and the World Bank was their common opposition to "statism." On the surface the NGOs criticized the state from a "left" perspective defending civil society, while the right did so in the name of the market. In reality, however, the World Bank, the neoliberal regimes, and western foundations co-opted and encouraged the NGOs to undermine the national welfare state by providing social services to compensate the victims of the multinational corporations. =8A The NGOs became the "community face" of neoliberalism, intimately related to those at the top and complementing their destructive work with local projects. In effect the neoliberals organized a "pincer" operation or dual strategy. Unfortunately many on the left focused only on "neoliberalism" from above and the outside (International Monetary Fund, World Bank) and not on neoliberalism from below (NGOs, micro-enterprises). A major reason for this oversight was the conversion of many ex-Marxists to the NGO formula and practice. Anti-statism was the ideological transit ticket from class politics to "community development," from Marxism to the NGOs. =8A Typically, NGO ideologues counterpose "state" power to "local" power. =8A The counterposition of state and local power has been used to justify the role of NGOs as brokers between local organizations, neoliberal foreign donors (World Bank, Europe, or the United States) and the local free market regimes. But the effect is to strengthen neoliberal regimes by severing the link between local struggles and organizations and national/international political movements. =8A So while the neoliberals were transferring lucrative state properties to the private rich, the NGOs were not part of the trade union resistance. On the contrary they were active in local private projects, promoting the private enterprise discourse (self-help) in the local communities by focusing on micro-enterprises. The NGOs built ideological bridges between the small scale capitalists and the monopolies benefiting from privatization - all in the name of "anti-statism" and the building of civil societies. =8A The important political point is that the NGOs depoliticized sectors of the population, undermined their commitment to public employees, and co-opted potential leaders in small projects. =8A In practice, "non-govermental" translates into anti-public spending activities, freeing the bulk of funds for neoliberals to subsidize export capitalists while small sums trickle from the government to NGOs. In reality non-govermental organizations are not non-governmental. They receive funds from overseas governments or work as private subcontractors of local governments. =8A NGOs shift people's attention and struggles away from the national budget and toward self-exploitation to secure local social services. This allows the neoliberals to cut social budgets and transfer state funds to subsidize bad debts of private banks, and provide loans to exporters. =8A [T]he NGOs foster the neoliberal idea of private responsibility for social problems and the importance of private resources to solve these problems. In effect they impose a double burden on the poor who continue to pay taxes to finance the neoliberal state to serve the rich, but are left with private self-exploitation to take care of their own needs. NGOs and socio-political movements NGOs emphasize projects, not movements; they "mobilize" people to produce at the margins but not to struggle to control the basic means of production and wealth; they focus on technical financial assistance of projects, not on structural conditions that shape the everyday lives of people. The NGOs co-opt the language of the left: "popular power," "empowerment," "gender equality," "sustainable development," "bottom-up leadership." The problem is that this language is linked to a framework of collaboration with donors and government agencies that subordinate practical activity to non-confrontational politics. =8A The structure and nature of NGOs, with their "apolitical" posture and their focus on self-help, depoliticizes and demobilizes the poor. They reinforce the electoral processes encouraged by the neoliberal parties and mass media. Political education about the nature of imperialism and the class basis of neoliberalism, the class struggle between exporters and temporary workers, are avoided. =8A [T]he NGOs create a political world where the appearance of solidarity and social action cloaks a conservative conformity with the international and national structure of power. It is no coincidence that as NGOs have become dominant in certain regions, independent class politics has declined, and neoliberalism goes uncontested. The bottom line is that the growth of NGOs coincides with increased funding under neoliberalism and the deepening of poverty everywhere. =8A The basic philosophy of the NGO intellectuals is to transform "solidarity" into collaboration and subordination to the macro-economy of neoliberalism, by focusing attention away from state resources of the wealthy classes toward self-exploitation of the poor. But, while the mass of NGOs are increasingly instruments of neoliberalism, there is a small minority which attempt to develop an alternative strategy that is supportive of anti-imperialist and class politics. None of them receive funds from the World Bank, European, or U.S. governmental agencies. They support efforts to link local power to struggles for state power. They link local projects to national socio-political movements, occupying large landed estates, defending public property and national ownership against multinationals. They provide political solidarity to social movements involved in struggles to expropriate land. They support women's struggles linked to class perspectives. They recognize the importance of politics in defining local and immediate struggles. They believe that local organizations should fight at the national level and that national leaders must be accountable to local activists. Conclusion Local struggles over immediate issues are the food and substance that nurture emerging movements. NGOs certainly emphasize the "local," but the crucial question is what direction local actions will take: whether they will raise the larger issues of the social system and link up with other local forces to confront the state and its imperial backers, or whether they will turn inward, while looking to foreign donors and fragmenting into a series of competing supplicants for external subsidies. The ideology of NGOs encourages the latter. =8A [T]heir activities do make an impact in diverting people from the class struggle into forms of collaboration with their oppressors. To justify this approach, NGO ideologies will often invoke "pragmatism" or "realism," citing the decline of the revolutionary left, the triumph of capitalism in the East, the "crisis of Marxism," the loss of alternatives, the strength of the United States, the coups and repression by the military. This "possibilism" is used to convince the left to work within the niches of the free market imposed by the World Bank and structural adjustment, and to confine politics to the electoral parameters imposed by the military. The pessimistic "possibilism" of the NGO ideologues is necessarily one-sided. They focus on neoliberal electoral victories and not on the post-electoral mass protests and general strikes that mobilize large numbers of people in extra-parliamentary activity. =8A Marxism offers a real alternative to NGO-ism =8A not the hierarchical "solidarity" of foreign aid and collaboration with neoliberalism, but class solidarity, and within the class, the solidarity of oppressed groups (women and people of color) against their foreign and domestic exploiters. The major focus is not on the donations that divide classes and pacify small groups for a limited time, but on the common action by members of the same class, sharing their common economic predicament, struggling for collective improvement. source - Open World Conference ================================================================= NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us 339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org e-mail: nyt@blythe.org ================================================================= nytcamer-04.27.00-20:54:55-757