Divided, tense, polarized: these are some of the adjectives heard in Chile to describe the political climate in the run-up to September 11, when the country will mark 50 years since the military coup that overthrew Salvador Allende in 1973.
The tensions have been evident in all spheres of society, from the government – where the Ministry of Culture, in charge of the commemorations, has had three headlines, and the presidential adviser for these matters had to resign in July -, to Congress, who had a critical session in August in which the right and the extreme right supported the parliamentary declaration that five decades ago, a few days before his overthrow and death, accused Allende of breaking the constitutional order.
While they made their adherence public, representatives of the left and the ruling party left the room or showed photos of people who disappeared during the dictatorship, and asked for “justice, truth, not impunity.”
Social networks also reflect the great abyss that separates those who justify the coup led by Augusto Pinochet of his detractors and of the thousands of victims he left behind.
Days after the commemoration, the parties still had not managed to agree on a joint declaration. And not even last week, at the presentation of the National Plan for the search for disappeared persons, it was not possible to bring together the leaders of the entire political spectrum.
What is happening in Chile 50 years after the coup?
“Unfortunately this commemoration is not being used as an auspicious moment to reflect on our recent historyour pains, learning, lessons, recommendations and proposals for the future”, he states in an interview with BBC Mundo Hugo RojasPhD in Sociology from the University of Oxford and Professor of Human Rights at the Alberto Hurtado University in Santiago.
Rojas collaborated in 2004 with the “Valech Commission”, created by former President Ricardo Lagos to identify people detained and tortured by agents or people in the service of the State under the military regime, and contributed to matters of probity in the first government of Michelle Bachelet (2006-2010).
He is the author of the bookPast Human Rights Violations and the Question of Indifference: The Case of Chile” (2022) described by the British publisher Palgrave MacMillan Cham as “the first scientific analysis of indifference to systematic and massive violations of human rights in a polarized society”.
How have you seen the days prior to the commemoration of 50 years?
I thought that this could have been a moment to look at ourselves as a society and recognize the tragedies, the deep wounds that we have in Chile and try to understand them.
But since these truths, these wounds, are not known by all of society, it has not been possible to learn about these matters, nor to build a consensus.
I think the most serious thing is that in Chilean society there is no culture of human rights.
I studied a national survey in my doctoral thesis and concluded that in the country only 38% of adults have a commitment to human rights and transitional justice (which is how the United Nations describes the processes and mechanisms to address the consequences from a past of large-scale abuse).
There is 28% who, on the other hand, are hostile to these concepts, and then we have two other very interesting groups.
16% who are clearly indifferent: they don’t want to know, it bothers them to talk, they don’t want to ask. And another 18% who are ambivalent: they pay attention to some things, they are interested in their children receiving education at school about what happened in the dictatorship, for example, but they do not agree to finance a law on memorial sites.
They are people with contradictions.
What consequences does that have?
It explains why we have taken so long in Chile to settle accounts with the past, and in the process of transitional justice.
If we have important achievements (in truth, reparation, memory, justice and guarantees of non-repetition), it is because they have been activated by a group of the population that gives it importance. But several major challenges also remain.
And among this group, the most committed are the victims and their families, who have had the collaboration of some more sensitive people or some political leaders who have put their demands in the public debate.
What I want to convey is that there are sectors of our society that are uncomfortable with the commemoration of 50 years, which has made it very difficult for them to open a conversation, because they believe that there are too many people who could complain, claim and consider it inappropriate.
These are the usual difficulties for those of us who try to work on transitional justice in Chile. Sometimes we succeed in convincing, but most of the time we fail.
You also mentioned that there is a lack of knowledge about what happened
I see that the socialization processes about what happened during the dictatorship have failed.
Because you have to invite people to learn about something that is painful. And people, out of a self-defense and protection mechanism, avoid this information, which can be disturbing.
The skill lies in finding the mechanisms to communicate these issues. I also believe that we have to be more creative, and that is a challenge for cinema, literature, and journalism, because we also have to ensure that these issues enter popular culture.
When you speak from anger, from the complaint, you do not achieve the expected objective. You have to find ways to talk to the indifferent, the ambivalent, without changing the channel.
And also speak to those nostalgic for the dictatorship, and above all to their sons, daughters, grandchildren. That was achieved by Germany successfully.
What would you highlight about the work that was done in Germany?
In Germany, after the war, there was a need to reflect on the sense of guilt, that what had happened was not only the work of the Nazis, but that there was something that encompassed the whole of society. That although criminals were one thing, society was another thing: what happened to us?
That is a reflection that we have not had in Chile: what happened to us, why as a society we failed with the breakdown of our democracy, for years we did not live under the rule of law and we did not recognize human rights. That is a powerful reflection.
When you admit guilt, you have to clarify what happened, let the truth be known. May that truth be present.
In Germany there are more than 70,000 bronze sidewalk plaques representing “the stone I stumbled over”, and they are installed outside places where a person was arrested or executed.
We don’t have those things in Chile. There are very few exceptions.
There will be those who will wonder why take the blame for events in which they did not participate, for events that occurred when they were not even born.
For Germany it is a public matter. And it is seen as an intergenerational issue. For us in Chile this is a private matter, private for the victim and private for the perpetrator.
That is a big difference. Because when you assume the issue as a public matter, you have to study it in schools, you have to analyze it seriously, you have to see what happened; in the case of Germany, see the origins of antisemitism.
Here in Chile there is no transmission of cultural reflection in schools. And besides, we deal with taboos.
How heavy is the lack of information about what happened?
That could have been a conversation this year. What incentive do people have to break the pacts of silence? None.
In South Africa they were told, “perfect, we are going to grant you amnesty if you go and testify in public, with your face uncovered, and show repentance, and explain the facts, explain your participation, if you apologize to the victims and the peoples of South Africa, we will We are going to forgive you, and we are not going to put you in jail.”
They opted for that path, because they wanted the truth to be known and for the people who committed the crimes to ask for forgiveness.
We opted for these matters to stay in court. And there are the judges, who also need more resources to resolve these 2,040 pending human rights cases… Or else, the Chilean solution would be one of biological impunity, because the accused, the defendants, and the victims and their families are going to die more direct will also die.
In Chile it would be good to discuss legally and politically what incentives can be offered for people to deliver the information they know.
What has been different in this commemoration of 50 years in relation to previous anniversaries?
It has been different.
When he was 30 years old, in 2003, President Ricardo Lagos gave a speech called “There is no tomorrow without yesterday”, where he proposed a roadmap with specific goals: he announced the creation of a commission on political prison and torture, because he recognized that For the first 13 years of the transition, the issue of victims of torture had not been addressed by the State. It wasn’t easy. Pinochet was being investigated by Judge (Juan) Guzmán.
The scenario changed in 2013, when President Sebastián Piñera governed, for 40 years. But although perhaps the State’s way of reflecting was weak, it was very active in civil society.
There were important television series on the subject, publications began to appear, journalistic investigations, more sentences had been handed down, there was more material.
I thought that in 2023 we would continue in this trend. We already had the Museum of Memory, the National Institute of Human Rights, but now we find ourselves frozen. We are walking on tiptoes.
What does it mean?
I think we were knocked out by the (2019 social) outburst, and we’re still trying to figure out what happened. That explosion, that rebellion was traumatic for many sectors of society…
Then the pandemic froze us. And then a constituent process begins that has not worked.
We failed in our first attempt and I am not optimistic about the second, because today the polls show that the majority of the population would be rejecting a proposal for a new Constitution that we still do not know about.
I think Chilean society is disoriented, we don’t have a clear direction. What is the country project, what are the basic rules that bring us together?
We are knocked out. We are having a hard time standing up. We get dizzy. And that coincides with the commemoration of 50 years. A dizzy society prefers not to talk about this because it is not ready.
Do you think it was some kind of “perfect storm”?
More than a perfect storm, we are in a whirlpool with diverse currents that leave the public perplexed.
How do you see the figure of Pinochet 50 years from now? A CERC MORI survey indicates that the number of those who believe there was a reason for the coup rose from 36% in 2003 to 16% in 2013, and again to 36% in 2023
I think that the figure of Pinochet is increasingly rejected, because it has become known I understand more than he did. In reality, the Pinochet sectors are increasingly smaller.
The support for his figure is not the majority and has been reduced over the years of the transition. He started with 44% support in the 1988 plebiscite, and that figure has been decreasing.
Another thing is that, in a feeling of helplessness, of being faced with a whirlwind, it is said that a strong, authoritative figure is needed, to bring order. That could be growing and the figure of someone with power may be becoming more attractive.
Pinochet cannot be reborn, but it could be that someone with a similar profile should be sought. That has me worried.
In short, is there more division before the age of 50 or is it the usual division?
We continue to be divided between those who attach importance to human rights, those who prefer not to talk, and those who unfortunately justify what happened under the dictatorship.
Have all the years of transition failed to change that?
No, and Chilean society continues to segment itself. It is not an inclusive society. It is full of invisible barriers where there are no conversations between those who think differently.
We are not taught from school to dialogue with respect and tolerance in spaces of difference. So the like congregate in schools, universities, companies and spaces where diversity and difference are valued are shrinking.
Any sign of hope?
I think that hope could start if a transversal agreement is reached to write a Constitution that makes sense to the majority of citizens.
I hope that a regulatory framework is achieved in which Chilean society agrees. That one group does not impose it on another.
The government has just launched the National Search Plan for victims of forced disappearance under the Pinochet regime. How do you think it will impact the atmosphere of the commemoration?
This announcement was very important. And one of the valuable things is that it was participatory work with family associations. Relatives have been able to give their opinion, meetings were held throughout the country to strengthen the plan.
The search is essential for a society. We should all support finding the remains. All sectors.
Do you think this will be part of President Boric’s legacy?
Yes, and it is very important. It will be part of his legacy, but the power of the plan will depend on the willingness of all sectors to contribute to making it successful.
This work requires political leadership to invite civil society to be a part, because we are all going to have to look in the mirror and ask ourselves: “How am I contributing to finding these remains that have not been found?”
I applaud that this has been announced.
Remember that you can receive notifications from BBC News World. Download the latest version of our app and activate them so you don’t miss out on our best content.
- Do you already know our YouTube channel? Subscribe!
See original article on BBC