Wrong Solution Is Guatemalan Solution : Washington Looks to Military As Saviors; That’s One Thing They’re Not

Long before the onset of the recent political violence in El Salvador and Nicaragua, Guatemala was embroiled in a persistent guerrilla war. Now, even as things seem to be calming down elsewhere in Central America, there is every indication Guatemala’s bloodshed will continue. Worse, there are troubling signs that the U.S. government may be getting more deeply involved than it should be.

Guatemala’s first known guerrilla activity of any significance began in 1961, seven years after the CIA helped overthrow a civilian government that Washington felt was too cozy with the Soviet Bloc in those Cold War days. The military regimes that ran the country for the next 25 years were so repressive that everywhere in Latin America the term “Guatemalan solution” is used to refer to the brutally efficient counterinsurgency methods used by Guatemala’s 55,000-man army to keep a restive Indian population in line.

The scorched-earth tactics work--but only to a point. Every few years there’s a revival of guerrilla activity in Guatemala, inevitably followed by an upsurge in repression by the military and right-wing vigilantes.

The bloody cycle is on another upswing as the country prepares for presidential elections in November. Guerrilla attacks have been recorded in 14 of the country’s 22 provinces this year, up from a handful three years ago. And it’s commonplace, again, to find the mutilated bodies of political activists scattered about Guatemala City every morning.

From the U.S. perspective, the only good thing about this ongoing tragedy is that Washington has been largely uninvolved since 1976, when Guatamala’s generals stopped taking U.S. military aid because they didn’t like the accompanying human-rights lectures. Even Ronald Reagan’s Administration kept such aid to a minimum. So it’s worrisome to read reports from U.S. correspondents in Guatemala, including The Times’ Kenneth Freed, that Washington now sees the military as the best alternative to the troubled government of outgoing President Vinicio Cerezo Arevalo.

A Christian Democrat, and the first freely elected civilian president Guatemala has had in 20 years, Cerezo has been a disappointment. His government is rife with corruption; some officials have been suspected of links to drug traffickers.

Under such circumstances, U.S. officials can be forgiven for admiring the cold efficiency of Guatemala’s army and preferring it to messy civilian rule. But in the long run it’s a mistake. Since 1954, more than 100,000 people have died in Guatemala’s violence and another 40,000 have disappeared. Just since 1980, 14 priests have been murdered. If the bloody aftermath of 1954’s coup teaches us anything, it’s that the Guatemalan military doesn’t need more than a wink and a nod from Uncle Sam to engage in some appalling behavior. The last thing the Guatemalan generals should think is that anyone up here actually approves of how they do business.