Demanding Democracy: Reform and Reaction in Costa Rica and Guatemala, 1870s-1950s 9781503616271

Citation preview

Demanding Democracy REFORM AND REACTION IN COSTA RICA AND GUATEMALA, I870S-I950S

DEBORAH

J. YA.SHAR

Deinanding De1nocracy REFORM AND REACTION IN COSTA RICA AND GUATEMALA, I870S-I950S

STANFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS STANFORD, CALIFORNIA

Stanford University Press Stanford, California © 1997 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University Printed in the United States of America CIP

data appear at the end of the book

Stanford University Press publications are distributed exclusively by Stanford University Press within the United States, Canada, Mexico, and Central America; they are distributed exclusively by Cambridge University Press throughout the rest of the world.

To John Gershman

Preface

Two Central Americans have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for their attempts to replace authoritarian rule with democracy. Oscar Arias Sanchez, then president of Costa Rica, received the prize in 1987 for his diplomatic efforts to negotiate an end to the civil wars raging in Guatemala, El Salvador, and Nicaragua. Rigoberta Menchu Tum, an indigenous Guatemala peasant leader, received the same award in 1992. Honored for her role in organizing peasants and promoting indigenous rights, she emerged as a symbol of the ongoing fight against political and economic violence in Guatemala. Arias and Menchu are an unlikely pair. The former president and the indigenous peasant organizer highlighted diplomatic and grassroots efforts to secure a space for democracy. By demanding democracy, they gave voice to those seeking basic political, social, and economic freedoms denied to so many in the Central American isthmus. But in demanding democracy, this pair also highlighted the demands of democracy. For indeed, democracy demands, among other things, a military subordinated to civilian rule, universal respect for political rules and institutions, and the creation of spaces for effective and meaningful political participation. Through diplomacy and organizing, Arias and Menchu demanded institutional changes and met the challenge of effecting these changes in the face of authoritarian reactions. If Arias's and Menchu's actions and words made clear the duality of demanding democracy, their countries of origin embodied the widely divergent types of experiences that could emerge in the process. Costa Rica

viii

Preface

has sustained Latin America's oldest political democracy in the postwar period. Founded in I 948, Costa Rica's contemporary political democracy has maintained competitive and honest political elections, has no centralized standing military, and has largely respected human rights. When Latin America's other political democracies gave way to military rule in the I 96os and I 970s, Costa Rica maintained its democratic practices and institutions. Guatemala, on the other hand, has experienced the region's most egregious human rights abuses at the hands of the military. Arguably, it has sustained the region's longest-standing and most brutal postwar experience with authoritarian rule.* Against a shared historical legacy of colonial rule, the contemporary differences between Costa Rica and Guatemala appear all the more striking. How can one begin to explain why these two small countries could emerge with such radically divergent and enduring political regimes? It is this central question that has consumed me intellectually and politically for the past decade. While the examples provided by Arias and Menchu prove inspiring, this study puts forth the idea that even exemplary leaders such as these are largely insignificant to an explanation of why some countries are democratic and others are authoritarian. Historical legacies, coalitions, and the politics of reform have proven far more consequential, as this study will argue.

If individual actions cannot explain the founding of enduring democracy and authoritarianism, individuals did prove immensely important in sustaining, encouraging, and challenging me in the process of writing this book. The life of an author is quite solitary. Nonetheless, as I finish this work I am struck by the extraordinary collective effort that has gone into its making. The process of researching and writing has generated colleagues, friendships, and perhaps even some foes. I warmly thank those who have provided their time, insight, and goodwill. The intellectual terrain charted by David Collier, Ruth Berins Collier, and the late Gregory Luebbert first inspired me to undertake this project. They carried out interrelated projects addressing the comparative historical and structural origins of regime development and state-society relations in Latin America and Europe. With their encouragement, I decided to compare the origins of Guatemala's repressive state-labor rela*Mexico's hybrid electoral-authoritarian regime has endured longer than any other Latin American regime. However, it was established prior to World War II, has not achieved Guatemala's level of human rights abuses, and has largely subordinated the military to civilian rule.

Preface

IX

tions and authoritarian rule with Costa Rica's more open state-labor relations and political democracy. In the process, I developed a passion for researching Latin American politics and a comparative method for doing so. As always, the greatest process of learning and growth took place, however, in the field during a year and a half of research in Guatemala, Costa Rica, and Mexico, followed by three additional but shorter research trips. I extend my deepest gratitude to the activists, politicians, and friends who so generously offered their time, opened up their homes, and shared their political analyses and/or personal experiences. I especially thank those who offered a measure of sanity in Guatemala, amidst the repression and the fear embedded in daily life. And I am indebted to all of the people I interviewed, some three, four, and even five times. I also thank Marta Samayoa and Virginia Mora, along with the staff at the Guatemalan and Costa Rican national archives and hermerotecas, who assisted me in gathering endless lists of material and scouring close to a decade of newspaper sources. Most of these people would most likely disagree with statements made in this study, as they would most likely distance themselves from me politically. On my return, I benefited greatly from the working group Democracy and Development Association (DADA). At various stages, DADA included John Gershman, Michael Gorges, Andrew Gould, Ollie Johnson, Karen Kampwirth, Deborah Norden, Robin Silver, Arun Swamy, and myself. DADA provided a supportive and challenging arena for exchanging war stories about research and writing on diverse parts of the worldCentral and South America, Western Europe, and South Asia. As friends and colleagues, they painstakingly read different parts of what then was a dissertation and consistently posed thought-provoking questions and critiques; they only occasionally moaned about the length of the chapters and the obscurity of the prose. Victor Hugo Acuna, Gabriel Aguilera Peralta, Robert Rltes, Nancy Bermea, Judith Biewener, Robert Bullock, Isaac Cohen, Javier Corrales, Grzegorz Ekiert, Peter Evans, Cindy Forster, Jonathan Fox, Daniel Goldhagen, Jim Handy, Raymond F. Hopkins, Fabrice Edouard Lehoucq, David McCreery, James Mahoney, Hector Perez-Brignoli, Mario Samper, Mina Silberberg, Theda Skocpol, Arturo Taracena, Paul Thomas, Edelberto Torres Rivas, and Robert Williams also commented on research designs, chapters, or talks. Their collegiality and insight were cricial as I revised my argument and rewrote the book. I extend particular thanks to Jorge I. Dominguez, John Gershman,

X

Preface

Peter A. Hall, Peter Kingstone, Margarita Melville, Barrington Moore, Jr., Maria Victoria Murillo, and Timothy R. Scully, who carefully read and commented on the entire manuscript in one form or another. Their incisive and stimulating critiques helped place this study in sharper comparative perspective, to tighten the argument, and to make it better than it otherwise would have been. Their comments, individually and collectively, challenged me to move this manuscript in new directions and encouraged me to travel down new roads-not all of which I was able to take. Research abroad was generously supported by a Fulbright grant administered by the Institute for International Education, two travel grants offered by the Center for Latin America Studies at the University of California, Berkeley, a Phi Beta Kappa grant extended by the U.C. Berkeley chapter, and the Samuel P. Huntington Fund of the Center for International Affairs at Harvard University. The Centro para Investigaciones Regionales de Mesoamerica (CIRMA) in Antigua, Guatemala, and the History Department in San Pedro, Costa Rica, graciously provided affiliations and access to their resources while I was conducting research. A Graduate Opportunity Fellowship from the University of California, Berkeley offered generous assistance as I was writing the dissertation. The Center for International Affairs at Harvard University supported me as I revised the manuscript for publication. I was aided in this process by two excellent researchers. Anna Dahlstein and Hilary Burger conducted research with great persistence, wisdom, and humor. I also thank The Helen Kellogg Institute for International Studies at the University of Notre Dame for its support at the final stages of this project; in particular, Caroline Domingo for lending her ear as I worked through the final revisions and Caroline J. Richard for lending a hand as I tracked down final sources. Debra-Lee Vasques and Jim O'Brien provided invaluable assistance in the last days of proofing and indexing. Unless stated otherwise, all translations are my own. Muriel Bell and Ellen F. Smith at Stanford University Press were professional and generous as they ushered the manuscript through its various stages. I greatly appreciate their expertise, encouragement, and humor. I also thank the reviewers of this manuscript for their invaluable comments and suggestions. To my parents, Audrey and John Yashar, I owe my commitment to education and love of politics. They have together highlighted the importance of blending a commitment to work and community, family and self. In turn, my siblings Beverly, Susan, Gail, and Stephen have, by their examples, demonstrated that one can choose different paths with

Preface

xi

the same strength of character, creativity, dedication, and determination. And to Zachary Yashar Mesberg, Rachael Yashar Brown, Alexander Yashar Mesberg, and Leah Yashar Brown, I thank you for reminding me with your every birthday that life goes on and that indeed it is due time that I finished this book. John Gershman saw more sides of this book than he or I care to remember. He has traveled with me intellectually as I wrestled with this material, geographically as we bounced around the globe, and emotionally, as is required in these long endeavors. His political commitment inspired me. His curiosity challenged and encouraged me. His humor reminded me of the importance of mixing hard work with laughter. And his insight made this a much better book than it could have been otherwise. I dedicate this book to him. D.J. Y.

Contents

Figures, Maps, and Tables Acronyms I.

Introduction

XV

xvii I

PART I. THE LIBERAL AUTHORITARIAN PERIOD, I870S-I940S 2.

Between Building States and Agricultural Export Markets

29

PART II. THE DEMOCRATIC AND SOCIAL REFORM PERIOD, I940S-I950S

3.

Demanding Democracy

4·

Addressing the Social Question

5.

Organizing Labor

IOI

PART III. FROM REFORM TO REACTION: DEMOCRACY VERSUS AUTHORITARIANISM

6.

From Opposition to Regime-Founding Coalitions

7.

Enduring Regimes

2I2

xiv

Contents Notes

235

Bibliography

279

Index

309

Figures, Maps, and Tables

Figures Figure I. Overview of Political Trajectories in Guatemala and Costa Rica from the I82os to the I990s

8

Figure 2. Social Conditions and the Potential for Regime Change

17

Figure 3. The Evolution of Guatemala's Reform Political Parties from I944 to I954

99

Maps Map I.

Central America

Map2.

Guatemala, Showing Provinces and Major Towns

xxii

Map3.

Costa Rica, Showing Provinces and Major Towns

xxiii

Table I.

Comparative Data on Costa Rica and Guatemala

6

Table 2.

Attributes of State-Society Relations in the Liberal Periods of Guatemala and Costa Rica, I870-I940

32

Guatemala's Coffee and Cochineal Exports by Value, I867-7I

37

xxi

Tables

Table 3·

xvi

Figures, Maps, and Tables

Table 4·

Estimated Percentage of Population Voting in Guatemalan Presidential Elections, I86S-I94I

43

Tables.

Estimated Number of Members in Costa Rica's Army and Police, I870-I940

SI

Table 6.

Costa Rican State Revenues, I866-9o

52

Table y.

Estimated Percentage of Population Voting in Costa Rican Presidential Elections, I872- I940

s6

Table 8.

Gross Domestic Product in Guatemala, I930-44

92

Table 9·

Scope and Target of Democratic and Social Reforms in Costa Rica (I94I-48) and Guatemala (I944-54)

I03

Table IO. Customs Revenue in Costa Rica, I934-45

II6

Table I I. Selected Trade Figures for Guatemala, I946- 54

I35

Table I2. Party Strength in the I948 Costa Rican Constituent Assembly

I8S

Table I3. Percentage of Vote Won by Party or Bloc in Costa Rican Legislative Elections, I953-90

219

Table 14. Percentage of Vote Won by Party or Bloc in Costa Rican Presidential Elections, I 9 53-90

219

Table IS. Presidents and Governing Juntas in Guatemala, 1954-85

224

Acronyms

AFL CIO CIT CTAL ILO IRCA UFCO UFSCO

American Federation of Labor (U.S.) Congress of Industrial Organizations (U.S.) Confederaci6n Interamericana de Trabajadores Confederaci6n de Trabajadores de America Latina International Labor Organization International Railways of Central America United Fruit Company United Fruit Steamship Company

In Guatemala AEU AFG AGA AGIG CACIF CAN CAO CCIG CEUA CGTG CNCG CNUS

Asociaci6n de Estudiantes Universitarios Alianza Femenina Guatemalteca Asociaci6n General de Agricultores Asociaci6n General de Industriales de Guatemala Comite Coordinador de Asociaciones Agricolas, Industriales y Financieras Central Autentica Nacionalista Central Aranista Organizada Comite de Comerciantes e Industriales de Guatemala Comite de Estudiantes Universitarios Anticomunistas Confederaci6n General de Trabajadores de Guatemala Confederaci6n Nacional Campesina de Guatemala Comite Nacional de Unidad Sindical

Acronyms

XVlll

CTG

cue DAN FPL FRCT FSG IGSS IIN

INFOP MDN MLN PACs PAR PC PGT PID PIN PR PRG PROG PS PUA RN SAMF STEG USAC VD

Confederaci6n de Trabajadores Guatemaltecos Comite de Unidad Campesina Departamento Agrario Nacional Frente Popular Libertador Federaci6n Regional Central de Trabajadores Federaci6n Sindical de Guatemala Instituto Guatemalteco de Seguridad Social Instituto Indigenista Nacional Instituto de Fomento de Producci6n Movimiento Democratico Nacional Movimiento de Liberaci6n Nacional Patrullas de Autodefensa Civil Partido de Acci6n Revolucionaria Partido Comunista Partido Guatemalteco del Trabajo (communist party) Partido Institucional Democratico Partido de Integridad Nacional Partido Revolucionario Partido de la Revoluci6n Guatemalteca Partido Revolucionario Obrero de Guatemala Partido Socialista Partido de Unificaci6n Anticomunista Renovaci6n Nacional Sociedad de Auxilio Mutuo Ferrocarrilero Sindicato de Trabajadores de Educaci6n de Guatemala Universidad de San Carlos Vanguardia Democritica

In Costa Rica AD CCTRN CEPN CNP CP

CSCRN

Acci6n Dem6crata Confederaci6n Costarricense de Trabajadores Rerum Novarum (Rerum Novarum) Centro para el Estudio de los Problemas Nacionales (Centro) Consejo Nacional de Producci6n Costa Rican communist political party, whose name changes from Bloque de Obreros y Campesinos to Partido Vanguardia Popular (PVP) in I943· Confederaci6n de Sindicatos Costarricenses Rerum Novaru1n

Acronyms

CTCR

cu

IDECAFE JOC PD PLN PRN PRNI PSD PUN PUnN PUSC PVP

Confederaci6n de Trabajadores de Costa Rica Coalici6n Unidad Instituto de Defensa del Cafe Juventud Obrera Cat6lica Partido Dem6crata Partido Liberaci6n Nacional Partido Republicano Nacional Partido Republicano Nacional Independiente Partido Social Dem6crata Partido Union Nacional Partido Unificaci6n Nacional Partido Unidad Social Cristiana Partido Vanguardia Popular; also referred to as communist party (CP)

xix

,_,_

.....u"">-< Q.)

s

-