[A-List] Ekvator

Fri Dec 6 01:31:01 MST 2002

Bu Gutierrez' i belki hatirlarsin. 2000 Ocak' da ayaklanan
yerliler meclise girdiklerinde onlarin yanina gecen albay. Ilgini
ckerbilir dusuncesiyle gonderiyorum.

Selamlar,

Sabri

++++++++++++++

Original article is at:

http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/12/1546742.php.

Ecuador-Lucio Gutierrez opens a new revolutionary stage
by JC Sunday December 01, 2002 at 03:08 PM

Ecuador

Ecuador - Lucio Gutierrez victory opens a new revolutionary stage
By Julian Costas

The final results of the Ecuadorian elections have meant the
victory of the left-supported candidate Lucio Gutierrez.
Abstention which reached 33% in the first round, went down to
28.8% in the second round, in which Gutierrez received 55.5% of
the votes. His opponent, the right wing billionaire and banana
magnate Alvaro Noboa, the richest man in the country, has been
defeated despite having spent massive amounts of money in his
campaign. Noboa stood on his own, outside of the traditional
bourgeois parties, and tried to offer an image of being "against
the system" and used all sorts of demagogic promises trying to
fool the country's poor. He combined this with strident
denunciations of Gutierrez as a Communist and a coup organiser,
with the aim of winning the support of the most backwards and
reactionary layers of society. Despite all he only got 45.5%.
This result is a further indication of the shift to the left and
the recovery of the popular movement that we are witnessing in
the whole of Latin America.

As was the case with Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, Gutierrez has come
to power pushed by the most oppressed and exploited sections of
society in Ecuador, that are in this way trying to change their
situation, having already tried in several occasions through mass
mobilisations in the last few years. The new government will,
from the very beginning, be subjected to the pressure of the
masses on the one hand, demanding that it solves the pressing
problems of poverty and social injustice the country is faced
with, and on the other hand, to the pressure of imperialism
(through the IMF, the US government and the Organisation of
American States) and of the Ecuadorian ruling class. These are
already taking positions in Parliament, the state apparatus and
even within government in order to push him in the opposite
direction and ensure the maintenance of the current policies
which have forced 60% of the population into poverty and a large
section of the people to emigrate. It is completely impossible to
conciliate these two sets of opposite interests and this will
necessarily lead to a new heightening of the class struggle.

Who is Lucio Gutierrez?

Contrary to what the media constantly repeat, Lucio Gutierrez is
not a "coup organiser Army officer". He is a former colonel who,
during the January 21 revolution in 2000, under pressure from the
mass movement, entered into conflict with the then president, the
right wing Jamil Mahuad. Instead of obeying his orders of
charging against peasants and workers who were filling the
streets of Quito, he joined the revolutionary forces together
with some of his fellow officers and many of the rank and file
soldiers. After the revolution was de-railed popular pressure
forced his release. He resigned from the Army and following
Chavez's steps he founded a political party, together with the
officers who participated in the revolution with him, so that he
could stand in the elections, under the name of Patriotic Society
January 21.

In Parliament, Gutierrez has the support of his own Patriotic
Society January 21 and of the peasant and Indian leaders of
Pachakutik-Nuevo Pais, an organisation which could be described
as the political front of the CONAIE (the main organisation of
Ecuadorean Indians which led the January 2000 revolution). Both
parties have 17 members of parliament and are therefore in a
minority, but they also have the support of the 3 MPs elected by
the Maoist Popular Democratic Movement (MPD), which had its own
lists for the parliamentary elections and supported Gutierrez for
the presidential elections.

The new president has stated that his aim is not to polarise and
divide society, but rather to reach a grand national partnership.
In this respect, the former colonel has included in his team,
together with a number of former army officers which compose his
Patriotic Society and some known leaders of the Indian and
peasant movement, the President of the Private Banking
Association, Mario Canessa, in a gesture aimed at appeasing big
business. He has also made statements disassociating himself from
Chavez, recognising that there are common elements between the
processes in Venezuela and Ecuador, but making it clear that he
will not have a confrontational attitude towards the employers
and that the social climate will be different. He forgets that at
the beginning Chavez also included sections of the Venezuelan
ruling class in his government and even within his own Patriotic
Pole.

The cause of the current clash between revolution and
counter-revolution in Venezuela is not Chavez's alleged
radicalism or intransigence but the crisis of capitalism
internationally and in Venezuela which forces the capitalists to
increase their attacks on the working class and leaves less and
less room to apply even the most moderate social reforms. Chavez
government, as it is under the pressure of the masses and also
relies on these for support, is not only not able to carry out
the policies that imperialism needs but represents a risk factor
for the capitalists. It is pushed by the masses to the left and
could either be overtaken by the revolutionary movement or even
be forced to move further to the left. It was precisely the
revolutionary movement of the masses what kept him in power
defeating the counter-revolutionary coup of April 11.

Gutierrez's programme

In his programme, Gutierrez proposes a whole series of measures
which would mean an important step forward for the Ecuadorian
workers and youth. Amongst these, there is an increase in old age
pensions, a universal social security system for the poor, extend
and improve health an hospital cover, distribute free food and
school material to children from poor families and extend and
improve the educational infrastructure in order to eradicate
illiteracy. He has also promised the building of houses for the
people in government-owned unused land and the provision of cheap
credit for self-building of houses and to small producers. These
proposals, and the hopes of millions of youth, workers and
peasants in Ecuador for a thorough-going social change, for an
end to corruption, for the return of their family members who
have been forced in their hundreds of thousands to emigrate to
other countries, that there will be land, food an work for all,
and that there is an end to social injustice, are what has
guaranteed Gutierrez's victory.

But even in order to carry out these reforms, to maintain and
widen them Gutierrez will have to clash with the parasitic and
corrupt Ecuadorian oligarchy and with imperialism. The country's
foreign debt has reached now 11.3 billion dollars and despite all
the sacrifices imposed on the working masses of Ecuador this has
only been reduced by 200 million frm its peak in 1999. As we said
earlier, even the outgoing president, Noboa, has denounced that
the IMF, as a condition for releasing a new line of credit which
would allow the country to pay for part of the debt, has demanded
further wage cuts and attacks on the living conditions of the
masses. Noboa and Gutierrez have agreed to negotiate this new
credit jointly with the IMF, but it does not seem likely that the
IMF demands are going to change fundamentally.

Another aspect of Gutierrez's programme is to rejoin the OPEC in
order to be more protected from fluctuation in oil prices (the
country's main source of hard currency), the promotion of certain
crops and a plan of public infrastructure in order to create
jobs.

His position on the foreign debt has been to call for the IMF and
the World Bank to have an understanding attitude and to exchange
part of the debt for social investment projects. But it would be
foolish to expect a caring attitude on the part of the IMF
vampires, which are after all an imperialist agency serving the
interests of the multinationals.

The only way in which the new government would be able to face
the country's problems and fulfil even the most moderate reforms
in its programme is to get the necessary resources. These
resources are there, in the vaults of the big banks, Ecuadorian
and foreign-owned, the multinationals (particularly oil
companies) and the big latifundia. The nationalisation of these
sources of wealth which is produced through the hard labour of
workers and peasants, but which is concentrated in the hands of a
handful of capitalists who decided when, where and how these
wealth is invested, would be the only way to improve the
conditions of the masses of the people in Ecuador.

If these wealth was under the control of workers and peasants it
would be possible to democratically plan the economy in order to
solve the problems of the country: to eradicate illiteracy and
hunger, put an end to poverty and to guarantee the return of all
those who have been forced by hunger and unemployment to
emigrate, as Gutierrez has promised.

No solution under capitalism

A section of the leaders of Pachakutik-Nuevo Pais and of
Gutierrez's own movement think that this can be achieved under
capitalism and by collaborating with some sections of the ruling
class. They seemed convinced that there is no alternative to
capitalism and that the economic recovery that the country has
witnessed in the last two years (after the collapse of 1999 and
the 2.3% recovery of 200, in 2001 the GDP grew by 5.6% and in
2002 by 3.5%) would give them enough margin to rule without the
need to clash with the ruling class.

Gutierrez has declared that he is prepared to maintain the
dollarisatio of the economy but with some socially friendly
modifications, like a reduction of VAT to 10%. He has also said
that he will not privatise publicly owned companies, as the
capitalists are demanding, but that he is in favour of
introducing private management in order to make them more
profitable. In every country where these methods have been tried,
they have in fact been a preparation for privatisation and have
not benefited workers at all.

The truth is that the improvement in the macro-economic
indicators of the country, apart from being very small and not
having benefited the masses, has not got sound basis and cannot
be maintained for too long. After the massive collapse in 1999 it
was only normal to have certain recovery, but in order to
generate employment and overcome the massive destruction of
wealth of the last few years, the Ecuadorian economy would need
to experience high rates of growth for a number of years. The
world economy is clearly heading for a recession but has done so
in slowly and that has allowed for a certain recovery in Ecuador.
However the two main factors which have contributed to this
economic growth (which is already slowing down in 2002) have been
oil exports and, most importantly, the money sent back home by
immigrant workers, whose numbers have multiplied in these years
of crisis. This is now the second source of wealth in the country
even more important than the exports of bananas and other
agricultural products and only surpassed by oil exports. This is
a clear indication of the weakness of the Ecuadorian economy.

Against the framework of the US recession which will have an
impact in the whole of the world economy and the crisis in the
rest of Latin America, the Ecuadorian economy will be one of the
hardest hit. The increase in unemployment in the US and Europe
(many Ecuadorian immigrants are based in Spain) will hit first
the weakest sections of the class, amongst them migrant workers,
which will reduce their ability to send money back home. The
general fall in investment will put an end to Gutierrez's dreams
of attracting foreign investment. The Ecuadorian capitalists, a
weak and parasitical class, will find that in order to compete in
the world market they would demand lower wages and cuts in social
spending. This is particularly the case since the dollarisation
of the economy puts them in a very uncompetitive position.

Revolution and counter-revolution

In these conditions the heightening of the class struggle, of the
clashes between the workers and peasants who have put Gutierrez
in power and the capitalists that pressurise him not to break the
limits of the capitalist system, will be inevitable. The new
president will have to choose: either to base himself on the
popular support he has to carry out a programme which benefits
the interests of the majority of the people, something which
means to attack the interests of the rich and clash with them; or
to disappoint the masses and allow the ruling class to go on the
offensive after having discredited his government.

The perspectives in Ecuador are the same that we are already
witnessing in Venezuela: a decisive clash between revolution and
counter-revolution. It is likely that Gutierrez will be forced,
sooner or later, to take measures which will enrage the
capitalists. In any case his own movement will be divided in
class lines and if he does not shift to the left others amongst
his supporters will.

Gutierrez will be faced with a Parliament in which he has no
majority, this is another of the arguments used by many of his
collaborators in explaining the need for agreements with sections
of the ruling class and to proceed slowly. The capitalists know
this and some of their parties, like the PSC, have already said
that although they will remain in the opposition they are open to
dialogue and negotiations as long as the government guarantees
its respect to the "basic principles of democracy". For them this
means respect to their ownership of the banks, the land and the
big industries, and as a result their right to continue
exploiting and oppressing the workers. Other sections of the
ruling class, like the populist PRE seem to be prepared to
participate in a coalition government.

This represents the "embrace of the bear" for the left, since it
is clear that such an agreement would only be used to paralyse
the government elected by the people and as an excuse for a its
shortcomings. The masses of the people who support Gutierrez, and
particularly those sections which are more to the left, will have
to draw conclusions from what is already happening with the
Bolivarian revolution in Venezuela, and start to organise a
revolutionary mass current which can offer a leadership and a
Marxist alternative to the workers and peasants in the
revolutionary process which will inevitable open in Ecuador in
the next period. The experience of the Ecuadorian revolution of
January 2000 is also very enlightening as to the need to fight
for a leadership which can lead the revolutionary movement to the
taking of power.

The January 2000 insurrection

The decision of the right wing Jamil Mahuad government to
dollarise the economy at the end of 1999 meant a massive attack
to the living standards of the masses which had already been
hardest hit by the economic crisis the country had been in since
1998. In 1998 the economy fell by 0.4% and in 1999 a further
7.3%. In those years, the peasants (mainly the Indian peasants
led by the CONAIE) and the workers (mainly in the oild industry,
transport and teachers) had forced the government, through mass
struggle, to withdraw a number of IMF-imposed adjustment plans.
The ghost of the 1997 insurrection, when a social explosion
forced the exile of the then president Abdala Bucaram, was
haunting the ruling class which feared that the use of the army
against the masses could have the effect of further radicalising
the movement. Mahuad had already tried to use the army to stop a
number of peasant mobilisations with not very good results.

But the deep economic crisis and the need to win back the
initiative from a forward going popular movement finally
convinced the government to go for a decisive clash. Further to
the announcement of the dollarisation of the economy the
government decided to face the wave of popular mobilisations with
repression, arresting worker and peasant activists, and
announcing that there would be no concessions. This had the
effect of further radicalising the movement, and in this occasion
we saw the emergence of "people's parliaments" in different areas
of the country which finally unified into a national people's
parliament which was defying the legitimacy of the official
bourgeois parliament and its government.

These popular parliaments were the expression of the will of the
masses for a revolutionary change and to organise their own
democratic power structures alternative to those of bourgeois
power. It was only because of the lack of a mass revolutionary
party with a socialist programme that the process did not end up
in the complete replacement of bourgeois state apparatus by a
government of the workers and the oppressed based on
representatives elected by the people themselves and with the
right to recall. Sine such a mass Marxist point of reference was
lacking the people's parliaments and particularly the national
parliament of the people were led by middle class layers or
reformist leaders who did not have as a perspective a
revolutionary transformation which would have put the banks,
monopolies and the land in the hands of the people. The leaders
of the movement defended the need to reach a grand national
agreement to get rid of corrupt and "anti-national" politicians
and businessmen and replace them for others who would be more
honest and patriotic.

The strength of the movement was show by the fact that in just
one day, January 21, 2000, the mass uprising took over power from
the bourgeois government and put it squarely in the hands of the
leaders of the peasants of the CONAIE. The Army was split and a
section of officers, led by the now president Gutierrez, decided
not to obey the orders to shot on the people and joined the
revolution. A junta was formed composed pf Antonio Vargas, then
the leader of the CONAIE, Lucio Gutierrez, representing the army
officers supportive of the revolution, and a third member
representing the judiciary.

But the bourgeois put pressure so that the representative of the
army would be replaced by general Mendoza, someone who was more
under their control, and finally so that the Junta would transfer
power back to the then vice-president Noboa.

The bourgeoisie took power back but did not smash the revolution

Finally the ruling class, taking advantage of the vacillation of
the revolutionary leaders, went on the offensive, showing clearly
how all sections of the bourgeoisie in Ecuador have the same
interests and their only aim is to maintain and increase their
profits and privileges on the basis of the exploitation of the
majority of the population. They proceeded to dollarise the
economy, put Gutierrez and the other colonels in jail (though
after a few months they were forced by popular pressure to
release him after he had agreed to resign from the Army), etc.

The leaders of the CONAIE and the leaders of the trade unions had
power in their hands and did not take advantage of the
opportunity to start the transformation of society. But, despite
the fact that the revolution was derailed the bourgeoisie was not
able to smash an behead the revolutionary movement of the masses.
This is a decisive factor which has played a key role in the
situation in Ecuador since, and without which we could not
understand Gutierrez's election victory and its meaning for the
developing of the Ecuadorian revolution.

The bourgeois government of Gustavo Noboa has carried out
policies against the people but has not been able to implement
fully the policies which the oligarchy and imperialism are
demanding, since it has been faced with mass mobilisations of
workers, peasants and students. Just a few months ago Noboa
publicly recognised that he could not reach an agreement with the
IMF because the conditions attached to the new line of credit
meant a massive attack on wages and conditions which he felt
unable to apply.

The vanguard which has emerged from the process of increased
class struggle from the end of the 1990s and which organised the
revolution in 2000 is still present, growing and drawing
conclusions from all these events and from the processes which
are taking place in neighbouring countries like Venezuela,
Argentina or Brazil. This process will be further accelerated
with the election of Gutierrez and the inevitable clashes between
the classes that will take place.

For a socialist alternative

The dead end of the Ecuadorian capitalism is what forces the
capitalists to increase their attacks against the working class
and means that even the shy and moderate reforms proposed by
Gutierrez enter into contradiction with the interests of the
capitalists and imperialism.

The Pachakutik movement and the Gutierrez's Patriotic Society
have a minority of 17 MPs but they also have the leadership of
the Indian and peasant movement, and the People's Democratic
Movement (the election platform of the Maoist PCMLE) which also
supported Gutierrez has another 3 MPs and a strong influence in a
number of unions and the students movement.

The more left wing sections of these organisations and the
student, worker and peasant activists - in this organisations or
outside of them - who have been at the forefront of the struggles
over the last few years, can have no illusions in the corrupt
bourgeois politicians of the PSC and the PRE. No section of the
ruling class (particularly those who now disguise themselves in
sheep clothes in order to join the new government) will tolerate
real fundamental change in Ecuador. They will try to derail any
attempt at social transformation and will firmly keep the reigns
of power. As long as they can do it through parliamentary means
and through the other bourgeois institutions they will, but if
the struggle of the people goes further they will not hesitate in
using repression. The example of Venezuela is clear in this
respect.

We must demand that the left wing leaders and members of
parliament, the leaders of the peasant and trade union
organisations, make no agreements with the bourgeoisie. They must
adopt a socialist programme based on the mass mobilisation of the
people in the streets to carry out the measures that the people
of Ecuador need: the nationalisation of the banks, the
multinationals, the oil and the latifundia, repudiation of the
foreign debt, etc.

The January 2000 revolution shows that if a programme like this
was posed in a bold manner, hundreds of thousands of peasants an
youth would rally enthusiastically to it, and even sections of
the middle class and the army -as happened in January 2000- would
join the working class. The power of the ruling class is much
less than what is reflected in its parliamentary majority, and
would be weakened even further with a revolutionary mobilisation
of the masses. Such a movement will take place sooner or later,
whether Gutierrez calls for it or the crisis of capitalism and
the attacks of the ruling class forces the masses into it.

The sooner preparations start the bigger the chances of victory.
The left wing leaders must organise mass meetings of workers and
peasants, the election of committees based on freely elected
representatives and with the right to recall, so that they can
lead and organise the process of social change which the people
has demanded in this elections. This is also the best way to
organise the fight back against the inevitable attempts of the
bourgeoisie to prevent it.

But in the last analysis the only thing that can guarantee
victory is that the most active and advanced activists in the
movement get organised to struggle for these ideas and carry out
this struggle armed with the ideas of Marxism.

The revolution in any Latin American country, particularly in a
small one like Ecuador, is linked to the fate of the revolution
in the rest of the continent. A successful revolution in Ecuador
could only succeed in a decisive way by spreading to the rest of
the continent: Venezuela, Colombia, Brazil, Peru, etc.

The working class in Ecuador, in the same way as the working
class in Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina and the rest of the
continent is entering a decisive period, one which will be marked
by revolution and counter-revolution. In this period the workers
will have many opportunities to reclaim the ideas of genuine
Marxism and carry out the revolutionary transformation of
society.

November 26, 2002