WORLD —-

Uruguay shakes 11-year dictatorship

The results of the first nation-wide
elections in Uruguay last Nov. 25, fol-
lowing 11 years of vicious dictatorship,
are according to the Frente Amplio (Broad
Front — a coalition of Communists,

. socialists and left forces) a “‘great victory
for the Uruguayan people’.

Although the elections did not signify
the total collapse of the dictatorship, the
Frente Amplio points out that years of
political, popular and working class
pressure finally compelled the dictator-
ship to sit down at the negotiating table
with representatives of the political par-
ties which opposed the regime.

Among the concessions won were the
holding of the elections themselves, and
the promise by the dictatorship to pro-
gressively release political prisoners,
signifying the fact that the road towards
the democratization of Uruguay “had at
last become real.”

As the Frente Amplio points out, the
“electoral campaign itself was held ‘‘in
conditions of abnormality’’. First, it
began without the Frente’s participation;
the demands of the other political parties
opposed to the regime and the massive
working class and popular demonstra-

tions forced the dictatorship to allow the
coalition to contest the elections. The
ban on the Frente Amplio was lifted on
July 26, giving it barely four months to
organize its campaign.

Among the other ‘‘abnormal condi-
tions”’ of the electoral campaign were the
existence in the country of a great
number of political and trade union pris-
oners; the fact that 600,000 Uruguayans
were in exile — many with sentences still
hanging over their heads; the banning of
certain political parties (the Communist
Party, for one) and political figures; li-
mited freedom of association; no press

freedom, and the ongoing repression of -

the dictatorship ‘“‘which continued to jail
and torture people’’. :
Shortly before the ban against the
Frente Amplio was lifted, its president,
Gen. Liber Seregni, was released after 10
years of imprisonment. His release
came, says the Frente Amplio, following
“resistance against and confrontation
with the dictatorship, and the demand for
the freedom of trade union and political
prisoners that had developed inside
Uruguay from the first day of the coup
d’etat, accompanied by international

solidarity, without which the liberation
of thousands of patriots who fought for
peace and freedom would have been al-
most impossible’’. Although no longer

detained, Seregni was prohibited from .

at

himself standing as a candidtate in the
elections.

The results of the elections — won by
the Colorado party — express one very
important fact: the immense majority of
people voted for the candidates and par-
ties which throughout most of the years
of dictatorship clearly opposed the mili-
tary regime.

The four political collectives ‘‘which
led the battle against the regime — the
Nacional and Colorado parties, the
Frente Amplio and the Civic Union — and
which made this position a basic point of
reference throughout their campaigns
were the great victors in these elec-
tions”, the Frente Amplio points out.

In terms of popular vote, the Colorado
party won 744,999; Nacional: 634,166;
and Frente Amplio 412,925. Translated
into seats for a 40-member senate and
99-member chamber of deputies, results
were: Colorado: 13 and 41; Nacional: 11
and 26; Frente Amplio: six and 21; Civic

. for a “‘general and unrestricted amnesty |

Union: one seat in the chamber of de-
puties, none in the senate.

As the Frente Amplio points out, ‘‘an-
other aspect of the electoral results is the

growth of the left throughout the coun- |

try, with the left gaining almost a third

more votes than it did in the last elections |)

in 1971.

‘Given that one of the principal objec-
tives of the 1973 coup d’état was un-
doubtedly the destruction of the left and
particularly of the Frente Amplio, its elec- —

toral strength can be seen as one dimen- |

sion of the failure of the dictatorship.” _
One cloud still hanging over Uruguay —

is the ongoing retention and new deten- ||

tion of political prisoners. Although great
progress has been made in the direction

of democracy, the period up to March 1, |é

when power is to be transferred to the

elected civilian authorities, is still ex- |

tremely dangerous for the remaining |
political prisoners, and democrats in
general.

This is why Uruguay's democratic and —
political organizations have been calling —

for all political prisoners’’, and for inter- |
national support for this demand. A}

Kampuchea coverage shows &
cynical role of Big

The news of fresh outbreaks of fighting in the western

Media

*

Ve :

borderlands of Kampuchea is a grim reminder that the
40-year struggie for the liberation of Indochina is not yet
completely over.

A coalition of ‘‘rebel’’ forces, dominated by the geno-
cidal Khmer Rouge and supported by the CIA and Chi-
na, continues to plague efforts to revive and reconstruct
the long-suffering nation of Kampuchea (Cambodia).
They are opposed by Kampuchean and Vietnamese
troops who are gradually driving them out of the
country.

Ten years after the ‘‘end’’ of the Indochina war, the
last bloody battle is still being fought. It would have been
over long ago, if not for the guns, money and supplies
being pumped in by the U:S. and its ally China, and for
the diplomatic support the Khmer Rouge is receiving
fram a variety of western nations, including Canada.

Most appalling, however, is the cynical and hypo-
critical role of the Big Media. In their rush to identify
with the ‘‘anti-communist resistance’, they have de-
liberately obscured one of the most monstrous episodes
in modern, history.

Even in the context of Indochina’s long and agonizing
ordeal, the pain of Cambodia has been particularly
acute.

After all that has happened, it is hard to believe that
just 15 years ago, Cambodia was a peaceful, stable,
neutral state which had managed for decades to stay out
of the wars that raged around it. In March 1970, how-
ever, Cambodia’s good fortune ended abruptly, when a
CIA coup ousted the titular head of state, Prince Noro-
dom Sihanouk, and put a U.S. puppet Lon Nol, in his
place. :

Within days of the coup, U.S. and South Vietnamese

- troops invaded the tiny land, allegedly searching for

_ **Viet Cong sanctuaries”’ (they never found any). All of
the developed arts of ‘“‘counterinsurgency’’ were con-
centrated upon Cambodia: carpet bombing, defoliation,
search-and-destroy, pacification. In an inferno of war
and famine that lasted until 1975, more than one million
Cambodians perished.

During the last terrible months of Lon Nol’s dictator-
ship, as Khmer Rouge rebels closed on the capital,
Phnom Penh, the United States prolonged the refugee-
swollen city’s agony by continuing to ship in guns and
ammunition. Thousands starved to death in the siege;
Lon Nol, with American help, absconded to the Philip-
pines with the national gold reserves. Finally, on April
15, 1975, the staff of the U.S. embassy packed up and left
Phnom Penh. Two days later, the Khmer Rouge entered
the city in triumph.

The hopes of liberation were cruelly cut short. The
victorious Khmer Rouge was dominated by a sect of
fanatical Maoists who aimed to eliminate all of the
‘‘corrupting’’ influences of modernity, and transform
Cambodia into an agricultural utopia.

8 e PACIFIC TRIBUNE, JANUARY 30, 1985

News.
Analysis

Fred Weir

Almost overnight the cities of Cambodia were reduced
to ghost-towns, their populations marched — at gun-
point — into the countryside.

Pol Pot, the Khmer Rouge leader, later bragged to a
journalist about the ‘‘success’’ of this experiment. He
said: ‘‘The population displacement policy was our most
important policy after April 17, 1975. In implementation
of this policy we liquidated all opposition forces and
controlled the country at 100%. The city people, once
scattered in the countryside, could be subjected to con-
trol by the basic strata and the co-operatives; they would
all become peasants’’.

During the three-year Khmer Rouge ‘“‘experiment’’,
an estimated 2-3 million Cambodians died: murdered,
starved, or worked to death.

Tens of thousands of Cambodian refugees fied to
Vietnam, where they were allowed to organize for the
eventual liberation of their country. Meanwhile, the
Khmer Rouge, facing a famine created by their own

horrendous policies, began to stage ‘‘food raids’’ into

neighboring countries.

Between 1976 and 1978, the Khmer Rouge launched
innumerable such raids into Thailand, a U-S. client-
state. They clashed repeatedly with Thai troops. This,
combined with news reports of Khmer Rouge atrocities
inside Cambodia, led many public figures in the West to
declare that ‘“‘something ought to be done”’ about Pol Pot
and his genocidal regime. (Today all of this is, of course,
conveniently forgotten).

The most ferocious assaults were aimed against Viet-
nam. Bloody Khmer Rouge incursions eventually be-
came such a serious problem that tens of thousands of
civilians had to be evacuated from a broad strip around
the ‘‘Parrot’s Beak’’ area of the Vietnam-Cambodian
border. This, together with the mass influx of refugees,
put an intolerable strain on Vietnam’s own war-
shattered resources.

In December, 1978, the Khmer Liberation Army
(composed of Cambodians who had fled to Vietnam),
backed by Vietnamese troops, marched into Cambodia
and drove out the Pol Pot regime. The astonishing speed
with which the whole operation was accomplished was
eloquent testimony — if anyone needed it — to the
universal unpopularity of the Khmer Rouge inside Cam-
bodia.

en wee

Khmer Rouge troops flee across Thailand border: Ha
by their people, adopted by the West.

Pol Pot fied to Thailand where, instead of being
rested for his crimes, he was allowed to regroup
forces and launch a guerrilla war against his homela
The United States — which had only recently
nounced the horrors of his regime as ‘‘an example
what happens under communism’’ — embraced hilt
providing guns, supplies, and diplomatic support. T
is savage irony in the fact that the most prodigiol’
mass-murderer since Adolf Hitler is today a paid ef
ployee of the CIA.

The U.S. has invested considerable effort in creatifle
two feeble ‘‘anti-communist’’ guerrilla movements, 0
of which is led by the now-pathetic figure, Prim
Sihanouk. (There is irony here too: Sihanouk is the m
the CIA overthrew in 1970; today they tout him as
“‘legitimate’’ ruler of Cambodia). These groups, 2”
though they are tiny and weak, artificial creations,
ceive the lion’s share of media attention.

It is the Khmer Rouge, however with its 40,000 fan
cal fighters, that utterly dominates the rebel ‘‘coalition
When Canada and other Western nations extend dipl&”
matic recognition — all of the ‘‘anti-communist”’ double
talk notwithstanding — it is the Khmer Rouge, still led 5)
Pol Pot, that we are endorsing. And the millions of U
taxpayers’ dollars that annually flow into Indochina,
going to reward and encourage Pol Pot in his ambition ®
retake Cambodia and finish the monstrous job he start

Meanwhile, every impartial reporter who has visite¢
the new People’s Republic of Kampuchea, has note!
that life is gradually returning to the country. Basic
vices, health care and education are being resto
Freedom of worship, freedom of movement, freedom !
marry and have children — all denied under the Khm@
Rouge — are part of the fundamental law of the ne¥
Kampuchea. Hunger and disease are gradually be
eliminated. ’

But the destruction of war, and the spectre of Khm
Rouge terror still remain — courtesy of the CIA, C
and, not least of all, the Government of Canada. —