Download PDF of this full issue: v13n3.pdf (6 MB)

Central America Another Vietnam

By Pete Zastrow

In 1961, James T. Davis, 25,of Livingston, TN, was killed in Vietnam, the first American advisor to die in that war; when asked, his father did not know where Vietnam was. Fourteen years later, as Liberation Front troops seized Saigon, and after 57,000+ American military personnel had died, few if any remembered the name of the first to fall.

Fourteen years from now, after how many deaths of American troops, will anyone remember the name of Lt Commander Albert Schaufelberger III, the first American to die in El Salvador?

It's been rapid-fire news from El Salvador, Honduras and Nicaragua, the three Central American countries which corral much of thee attention from Reagan and his cronies. So rapid is the new that before one event can be seen against the backdrop of Central American policy, another event pushes it off the front page and into the cubbyhole reserved for Central American affairs "experts".

What to think when the government of Nicaragua says that three American diplomats are actually CIA and are trying to poison the Sandanista government's foreign minister? (The answer is probably that they were trying to do just that—a couple of years ago it would have sounded insane, but since then we've heard about CIA plans to poison Castro's cigars or his beard.)

What to think when the U.S.? (No one tries to say this was anything more than spite.)

What to think when 110 Green Berets arrive in Honduras to train 2400 El Salvadorian troops. (The U.S. government can get away with this ploy because combat troops in Honduras don't count as part of the Congressionally limited numbers of troops in El Salvador?but they sure are close by.)

What to think when the U.S. supported government of El Salvador says it may not have enough U.S. bucks to be able to afford promised election but might have to hold off awhile? (There are loud denials from Washington, but this is probably what'll happen.)

And, at the hub of this spinning wheel of events, there's the death of an American advisor in El Salvador, apparently at the hands of anti government forces. It sounds a lot like early Liberation Forces raids on U.S. forces at rest during the early days of U.S involvement in Vietnam—spraying a movie theatre with machinegun fire, for instance.

With the barrage of activity, however, it's still worthwhile to take a quick step back in order to see what, overall, is happening in the area. While details vary, the basic facts are the same: all three countries suffer from a history of exploitation by their own rulers (Samoza and his crew most recently in Nicaragua, the famous "7 families" in El Salvador) with considerable support and prompting from the U.S. government over a period of decades. U.S. companies (notably, United Fruit) made billions while the people who did the work made barely enough to scrape by. Hunger was and is a fact of life; poverty is another. For centuries the land belonged only to the rich and the very rich, though there has been parceling out of land in Nicaragua, much talk about it in El Salvador (to keep the U.S. public and Congress happy) and no great change in Honduras. For years, the area has been ripe for revolution because the entrenched power structure would allow no other method of change.

All this is far cry from Reagan version of Central American where the primary—if not only—source of trouble is neither hunger nor poverty, but the evil clutches of the Communist in Nicaragua (who support the antigovernment struggle in El Salvador) and the Communist in Cuba (who support the government of Nicaragua) and, finally the Communist in the Soviet Union (who supply and pull the strings on Castro's Cuba). Prodded by UN Ambassador Jean Kirkpatrick and a flock of other Neanderthal advisors, Reagan has even replaced his right-wing Central American advisors and ambassadors to Central American countries with people described as "team players," a definition which suggest that they will, under no circumstances, report or see anything which Reagan and his crew don't wish to hear.

Don't forget that this is a President who could summarize the experience of the Vietnam War by calling it a "noble cause." Seen through the Presidential blinders, Central American policy has a tradition which goes back to Vietnam and before: simply, it's to stop the Commies, no matter where or how or what it takes. If someone else's kid gets killed in the process, that's unfortunate but "noble." And should such a death occur, we will redouble our resolve and march straight down the road to Hell that we've set for country. Again.

That 'again' is what gives Vietnam vets a vital role in the early warning system concerning Central American. If you see a disaster headed your way, you can either warn people to get out of the way or you can stick your head in the sand. In Central America there are consistent and unmistakable replays of the experience of Vietnam.

For different vets different incidents will set off the fatal echoes of Vietnam. Perhaps it's the El Salvadorian recent military "pacification program" called "Operation Well-Being." "Winning Hearts and Minds" blinks like a neon sign.

Or there's an interview with General Nutting, just departed as U.S. Commander in Central America: "The guerilla will persist as long as he thinks he has a chance of succeeding through violence and intimidation. But when he is convinced he can't succeed, he'll fold his cards and turn to acquisition of political power by democratic means." Makes it hard not to recall some of the rosy and optimistic predictions and justifications for increased aid to Vietnam in the early days of that war by the wise military sages.

For me the memory of Vietnam came through strongest when El Salvador's provisional president Alvaro Magana, visiting Washington towards the end of June to beg, borrow or steal whatever he could take home with him, said he could see "no possibility of U.S. troops in El Salvador.... We don't need it. With enough military aid we can handle the situation ourselves." How many self-serving statements from Vietnamese presidents like Theiu or Ky or Diem played on whatever the U.S. political climate happened to be to concoct the most suitable lie in order to get as much as possible? Here we go again!

For vets the job is to make as much noise as possible each time policies, words, ideas, phrases, acts are repeated—in short, to point to each similarity between U.S. activities in Central America and U.S. activities in Vietnam. Few Americans—left, right or political center—have any interest in repeating Vietnam, which is one of the reasons why Reagan and his apologist devote so much time and energy to point out the differences between today's ventures in Central America and the 1960's ventures into the Southeast Asian swamp.

Of course there are differences and we cannot defeat our own case by refusing to notice that Central America is a lot closer to the U.S. than Vietnam (which means, among other things, that U.S. forces and supplies are only hours away from any of the Central American countries), or that there are other significant differences. But the poverty in an attempt to have the right to decide their own futures— and the U.S. government doing all that it can to defeat that hope—it's all the same. We can't afford to forget. And we can't afford to let others forget.

No More Vietnams—U.S. Out of Central America

—Pete Zastrow
National Office VVAW