The El Salvadorian Civil War: Was US Involvement really necessary?

Kevin X Herrera History of Latin American & Caribbean Spring 2014

1

The El Salvadorian Civil war was fought between the years of 19791992. It was a conflict between the military-led government of El Salvador and the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN), a coalition or umbrella Organization of five left-wing guerilla groups.1 Many historians agree on the fact that the war would have never lasted so long if the United States government had not intervened. The government was able to continue its efforts against the FMLN with help from the US, which had begun supporting the government with financial and military aid as soon as the war started. 2 Was the United States justified in providing financial and military aid to the El Salvadorian government? This was always the question that was lingering around the citizens of the United States back then, and also several historians of that time, and more years to come. There are on going debates as to whether the US was right in doing so, but many agree on the fact that because the US got involved, communism was not able to spread further. The overall consensus for this argument is, that yes, the US was indeed correct in backing the El Salvadorian government, although thousands upon thousands were killed in the process and many human rights were violated. In the end, about 75,000 people died as result of the civil war between 1980 and 1992. Most of these people were civilians in the wrong place at the wrong time. Historians agree on the fact that the tipping point towards the civil war was that a coup on October 15, 1979, led to the killings of anti-coup protestors by the government as well as anti-disorder protestors by the guerillas.3 By January 1980,
1

Armstrong, Robert, and Janet Shenk. El Salvador, the Face of Revolution. Boston: South End, 1982. Print. Pg#159 2 Armstrong and Shenk, pg#160 2

the left-wing organizations united to form the Coordinated Revolutionaries of the Masses (CRM) and a few months later the left-wing armed groups united to form the United Revolutionary Directorate (DRU) which, following its merging with the Communist party in October 1980, was renamed the FMLN.4 The main causes of why these anti-government guerilla groups came about were because of the tensions between the higher classes of El Salvador and the lower classes. In the late 1880s, coffee became a major cassh crop for El Salvador, bringing in about 95% of the countrys income. However, this wealth was only confined within 2% of the population.5 As a result, in 1932, Augustin Farabundo Marti formed the Central American Socialist Party and led peasants and indigenous people against the government. In response, the government supported military death squads that killed anyone who even looked Indian or may have been supporting the uprising. 6 The killings left more than 30,000 people dead and Marti was eventually arrested and put to death, and years following, the FMLN was formed (under his name), because he started the revolution. With these tensions becoming a huge problem within El Salvador, the United States saw the FMLN rebels as communist supporters. They accepted some weapons from Cuba and had the verbal support of Cuban leader Fidel Castro. As said by historian, Maureen Kane, of University of Maryland, the United states saw this as a threat because acceptance of any Cuban support was viewed as acceptance of Soviet
3

Kane, Maureen. "Civil War in El Salvador." Civil War in El Salvador. N.p., Dec. 2002. Web. 8 Apr. 2014. 4 Kane 5 ibid 6 ibid 3

support.7 She believes that this provided the United States with the opportunity to intervene and support the El Salvadorian Government with money in order to cease the spread of the guerilla groups.8 As said by ex coworker of North American Congress on Latin America (NACLA), an organization founded in 1965 to examine U.S. policy toward Latin America, Janet Shenk, and co author of El Salvador: The Face of Revolution Americans fought to end the US aid to El Salvadors government and argued that America was pouring money into an organization that committed immense violations against human rights. 9 During the height of the war, the US sent about, on average, 1.5 million dollars daily to the government . It even went as far as people going to El Salvador and holding signs saying Stop US Aid near military bases that was occupied by the United States because of this flooding of money into the government. Some historians say that the US choose to remain ignorant to the violations in order to justify its actions in Central America. Many argued that America had no business in Central America as many regional countries, including El Salvador, were ripe for internal unrest.10 Although, the United States did temporarily suspend funds to El Salvador after the rape and murder of the churchwomen in 1980. The only reason US began to support El Salvador again was because of the growing socialist support in Nicaragua, so that encouraged President Reagan to reactivate support for El Salvador. He believed that if the views of socialism continued to grow, it would

Kane ibid 9 Armstrong and Shenk, pg#165 10 ibid #pg166

7 8

eventually reach the borders of United States.11 More Americans began to support the governments decision to intervene when President Ronald Reagan stated What we see in El Salvador is an attempt to destabilize the entire region and eventually move chaos and anarchy to the American border. 12 Kane states that she agrees with the fact that the United States supported the government, because if the United States had not done so, there was a very high probability that communism would have spread to all of central American countries. During the time of the uprising of the civil war, there was already apparent growing socialist support in Nicaragua and this pushed Reagan to reactivate support for El Salvador.13 Also, as said by Mike Allison, associate professor in the Political Science department at the University of Scranton in Pennsylvania, is that most people dont know that the FMLN was supported by the Nicaraguan government, and that without the help of the Soviet support, Cuba and Nicaragua wouldnt have been able to fuel the FMLN with new weapons and strategies to fight the El Salvadorian government, but they did not receive as much help from these governments as did the El Salvadorian Government received from the US. 14 In his blog, he states that he to, does agree with the United States in providing El Salvador with aid because the FMLN were only growing bigger in numbers, and started to gain support from Costa Rica and Mexico as well. 15 The FMLN benefited tremendously from the opportunity

ibid #pg168 Kane. 13 ibid 14 Allison, Mike. "El Salvador's Brutal Civil War: What We Still Don't Know." Opinion. N.p., 1 Mar. 2012. Web. 10 Apr. 2014. 15 Allison,Mike.
11 12

to use Managua and Havana (Capital of Nicaragua and Cuba) for meetings of its General Command. 16 The FMLN was able to move weapons and personnel in and out of the country undetected via the Gulf of Fonseca and Nicaragua. 17 Their soldiers trained and received medical care in both countries and many family members sought sanctuary abroad for the duration of the conflict to avoid falling victim to the governments death squads. 18 Allison states that because the FMLN were increasing and getting support from several other governments, that the US had no choice but to give aid to the military of El Salvador to fight off the guerillas. 19 Paul P. Cale, currently a senior program manager for SOCOM programs at Exelis, but in the past was a Director of Special Operations and Faculty Instructor, United States Army War College at U.S. Army, states, that in order for America to justify its involvement with the El Salvadorian Army, they had to talk with the American citizens and state this war will not be another Vietnam.20 He says that in order for the military aid to happen, the United States needed to teach the El Salvadorian Government on how to be a professional military that respected human rights. 21 It took several years to do, but this had to be done in order to fight back the FMLN. He states that without the United States teaching the El Salvadorian government on how to fight properly, they would have never been able to resist the brutal attacks of the FMLN. What Americans found when they arrived in El Salvador was an army without direction

Allison,Mike. ibid 18 ibid 19 ibid 20 P. Cale, Paul. "The United States Military Advisory Group In El Salvador." - Opinion. N.p., 1 Apr. 1996. Web. 5 Apr. 2014. 21 P.Cale, Paul
16 17

and with little inclination to deal with the reality of the situation (war).22 They could be characterized as a force of 11,000 without a mission and sought enjoyment by abusing civilians.23 The American MilGroup was the mechanism that tried to help the Salvadorian government remold itself in a more positive image. The MilGroup provided three things: material, training and advice that were necessary for the army to change its mission focus.24 Cale is basically stating that the United States Army sent a group of military officers and troops to help train the military of El Salvador in order to better itself and be stable within itself to fight back. So, without the help of the United States in the El Salvadorian Army, El Salvador would have completely fallen into the hands of communism and maybe, end up like a second Cuba. Creating a new military would prove to be difficult. The Salvadoran government was on the verge of collapse, in the early 1980s, while the Army was on the verge of being defeated by the FMLN.25 Without the military and economic assistance the FMLN may have taken over the country. The United States tied its military aid and economic assistance directly to the issue of human rights.26 If President Reagan could not tell the American people that the state of human rights was gradually improving in El Salvador, Congress could force the American aid to be halted.27 Leaders within the MilGroup were able to effect change in the army by leveraging the possible cessation of military aid to El Salvador.28

P. Cale, Paul ibid 24 ibid 25 ibid 26 ibid 27 ibid 28 ibid

22 23

Cale also has a counter-argument for why the United States shouldnt have intervened. He states that what was happening in El Salvador was none of their business.29 He also says that El Salvador would have eventually stop the FMLN from taking over, but the result would have been that the civil war would have lasted much longer, and many, many more lives would have been taken in the process. Also, that it seemed unlikely since the government was close to crashing.30 Although this was not a smart way to handle it, he states that El Salvadors military was probably capable of stopping the FMLN but it would be risky in doing so.
31

So all in all, most historians and professors and critics agree that the US intervention in the El Salvadorian government was justified in every single aspect. The United States gained an ally during the civil war of El Salvador and helped reshape a collapsing government and Army. The United States also proved the fact that intervening in El Salvador would not result in another Vietnam. The United States, and the El Salvadorian military helped stop the spread of communism into the whole of Central America and basically defeated the idea of communism into the citizens of central America. Very few to any scholars agreed that it was unjust for the United States to aid the tiny country of El Salvador and had no real argument on why the US shouldnt have.

Today, the US currently sends about 30-35 million dollars annually to El Salvador To help them boost their economy and grow in todays global economy. Whether the US P. Cale, Paul ibid 31 ibid
29 30

was right or wrong in supplying aid to the government is still being debated today, but most scholars would agree that it was the right thing to do.

10