EDITORIAL Weapons dubious prize for Latin
democracy
Now let's see if we've got this right. Since Chile is making so
much progress in its moves toward democracy, it has earned the right to
purchase millions of dollars of the United States' most advanced,
death-inflicting jet fighter airplanes.
The Clinton administration last week reversed a policy established
in 1978 when the Carter administration imposed a ban on sales of the most
advanced U.S. weapons because of human rights concerns.
In recent years, however, the Pentagon and the nation's military
contractors have pressed the White House to lift the ban, citing movement
toward democracy.
The logic of this new policy would have it that spending these
many millions on advanced weaponry is precisely what the majority of the
Chilean people, basking in their new democratic powers, want of their
government.
Sorry if we missed the plebiscite.
Indeed, there was no vote. Had there been one, we suggest most
Chileans might have voted for, say, greater access to health care or better
education for their children or, perhaps, better housing conditions.
Reports out of Latin America last week cited no groundswell for
this policy shift outside military circles. More toys for the generals.
Others expressed great concern that pressure would now build in
other Latin American nations to upgrade their weapons, sparking a new arms
race.
Argentinean generals, in particular, were described as gleeful.
They have long wanted more sophisticated weapons and are now getting in line to
bring their lists to Washington.
The big winners were the U.S. arms manufacturers who stand to make
billions more in this reopened market. The Chilean purchase of two dozen F-16s
comes to a nifty $400 million. The Lockheed Martin Corporation, which produces
the F-16s, and McDonnell Douglas had lobbied hard to lift the ban.
How ironic that the Clinton administration should cite democratic
reforms in Latin America as paving the way for the policy shift. Increasingly,
U.S. policy makers in both parties have perverted U.S. democracy by allowing it
to be purchased outright by special interest groups.
The arms industry contributed $10.8 million to political causes
during the 1996 campaigns. The 78 House representatives and 38 senators who
signed letters asking Clinton to lift the ban received more than $1 million
from PACs controlled by Lockheed Martin, McDonnell Douglas and the major F-16
subcontractors. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, one of the leaders of the drive to
lift the ban, received $27,000 in PAC money from the F-16 manufacturers. Lee
Hamilton, ranking House Democrat, received $18,500.
Yes, government works -- but it works best for those wealthy
enough to buy it in support of their own financial interests.
National Catholic Reporter, August 15,
1997
|