|
In his Stages of
Economic Growth, Walt W. Rostow describes a development process for
Third World countries that come into our orbit: they become gradually
like us, with advanced industrial technologies and democratic
institutions. The Dominican Republic offers an earthy illustration of
the reality of development processes under U.S. auspices. It is an
especially apt and relevant case for this reason: with and after the
invasion of 1965 the U.S. reasserted effective control over that small
country and has thoroughly dominated its politics and economics. Given
the absence of any threatening counter forces, we can say that in the
Dominican Republic the flow of events surely must have been in
conformity with the desires of the U.S. foreign policy leadership.
It will be recalled
that the U.S. invaded the Dominican Republic in 1965 to prevent the
displacement of the relatively benign fascist regime of Donald Reid
Cabral by the Constitutionalist regime of Juan Bosch, who had been
overthrown by a military coup in 1963-without eliciting any U.S.
intervention to save him and his brief experiment in democratic
government. The rationalization by Lyndon Johnson and his spokesmen,
alleging an imminent threat of Communism, were convincingly shown by
Theodore Draper and others to have been a hypocritical cover for a
positive preference for fascism over a less reliable and less
controllable democratic reformist government. The invasion of 1965
reestablished a firm U.S. grip on the island. As Bosch put it in June,
1975, "This country is not pro-American, it is United States
property." What then have been the main characteristics of the
Dominican model of Third World development, as seen in a country under
close U.S. surveillance and control?
The first
characteristic has been extensive and systematic terror. In the
Dominican Republic, Guatemala, and Brazil, three client fascist
systems that came into being with explicit U.S. connivance, by a
strange coincidence pare-military "death squads" quickly made their
appearance and went on a rampage against political dissenters, petty
criminals, and sometimes purely arbitrary victims. Amnesty
International called special attention to "the numerous political
assassinations carried out by Death Squads (such as the notorious La
Banda) that have been openly tolerated and supported by the National
Police. In 1970 it was alleged that there was one death or
'disappearance' every 34 hours. In July, 1971, Norman Gall alleged
that in the post-1965 era, the number of political murders in the
Dominican Republic exceeded that of any comparable period under the
monstrous Trujillo. Gall noted further that
The Santo Domingo
newspaper El Nacional last December. 30 filled a page and a half of
newsprint with the details of 186 political murders and thirty
disappearances during 1970. The Dominican terror resembles the current
wave of political killings in Guatemala...in that the paramilitary
death squads are organized by the armed forces and police, which in
both cases over the years have been given heavy U.S. material and
advisory support.
Gall went on to note
that the essential function of political terror in the Dominican
Republic has been to control the slum population, "which was the main
force that defeated the Dominican military in the 1965 revolution."
The Wall Street Journal reported on September 9, 1971 that "the
conservative Catholic Church hierarchy has condemned the
'institutionalization' of terror." The Journal also claimed that the
opinion was widespread in the Dominican Republic that the United
States was behind the paramilitary death squads. Whether or not this
specific allegation was true, the Journal observed that "the embassy
has done nothing publicly to dissociate itself from the terror. The
U.S. continues to provide substantial aid, training, equipment, and
arms, to the Dominican police and army."
Since 1971 the rate
of killing has slackened, but political assassinations continue and
the incarceration and torture of political prisoners still plays a key
role in maintaining stability. Amnesty International recently stated
that "precise, detailed and consistent information...indicates that
practices amounting to serious violations of human rights are still
going on: the arbitrary arrest, kidnapping, and assassination of the
regime's political opponents; the removal of certain political
prisoners to isolation in provincial jails and military forts;
deplorable prison conditions, ill-treatment and police brutality
inflicted on many detainees...and the continued detention of prisoners
once their sentences expire.
The U.S. State
Department, on the other hand, in its 1978 Human Rights Report to
Congress, finds a "substantial reduction in incidents of military and
police repression," a working "constitutional democracy," and "over a
dozen political parties...officially recognized and freely active
although the 1974 elections were marred by some incidents of military
intervention on behalf of the President's reelection." On this last
point, the Washington Office of Latin America notes that "the State
Department demolishes its own argument. Official recognition means
little and political parties are not really free if the military acts
against them during an election. Harassment of opposition forces has
not ceased, despite Balaguer's claim to have ordered the military to
remain neutral. In the fall of 1977, as pre-election campaigning for
1978 was beginning, a local headquarters of the social democratic
opposition party PRD was burned to the ground and a PRD official,
Samuelo Santan Melo, was murdered. Subsequently, of course, the
military intervened more comprehensively to avert Balaguer's defeat in
May, 1978, seizing the ballot boxes and arresting or driving
underground many leaders of the PRD, before pressure from both the
Dominican elite and the Carter administration eventually forced the
military and Balaguer to allow a transfer of the presidency to Guzman.
A wealthy landowner himself, Guzman would not have been running at
all, and would not have been allowed to take office, if he had posed a
threat of serious reform. The military and its external sponsor assure
that the new PRD operates within a very narrow boundary of policy
actions. ~ 56 All the more reason then for the State Department to be
pleased with the progress of the Dominican Republic, to be reassured
by the promises of its leaders, and to find that this client state
deserves the funds still allocated to it for military assistance.
A second
characteristic of the Dominican Republic model is widespread venality.
Alan Riding wrote in 1975 that "the blatant corruption of military and
civilian sectors of the government is spreading bitterness among the
urban masses, whose wages have been held down despite high inflation
rates since 1960. The military and police in this client state are
numerous and well taken care of. According to Riding, one method
whereby Balaguer retained control was "by openly allowing senior
officials to enrich themselves. With official salaries of $700 a
month, for example, most of the country's 37 generals live in huge
modern houses, drive limousines, and own cattle ranches."
More recently, Jon
Nordheimer wrote that
"Corruption among
the generals is almost as legendary as is their ineptitude. In the
first place there are about twice as many generals-around 40-as there
should be for the size of the military forces. Generals are promoted
on the basis of family, friendship and business connections...It is
common knowledge that Lieut. Gen. Juan Beauchamps Javier, Secretary of
State for the Armed Forces, owns a $300,000 yacht in partnership with
a Dominican businessman and that Maj. Gen. Neit Nivar Siejas, the
commander of the national police, is part owner of a major Santo
Domingo hotel and gambling casino."
A recent report to
the Securities and Exchange Commission by Philip Morris showed: (1) a
$16,000 payment to a Dominican tax official for a favorable tax
ruling; (2) the payment of $ 120,000 to various Dominican legislators
for passage of a law that would give Philip Morris a privileged
position in the Virginia tobacco line; and (3) monthly payments of $ I
,000 by Philip Morris to Juan Balaguer himself. The president of a
presumably independent state taking payoffs from a private foreign
business firm would seem rather sensational, but this passed off
virtually unnoticed in the United States. Gulf & Western made $
146,000 in "questionable" payments through foreign subsidiaries in
1976, and although the distribution of those payments was not revealed
by the SEC, the usefulness of such a lubricant in the Dominican
Republic and G & W's large place there rouses plausible suspicions.
U.S. firms get
business done in the Dominican Republic not only by payoffs but by
putting important people on their payrolls and by building both
personal and financial ties to the local elite. Thus in the mid-1970s
the brother of the important Director of Tourism was a vice president
of G & W's sugar-producing subsidiary in the Dominican Republic. G & W
is also reported to have established "cordial relations" with General
of the Police Tadeo Guerrero, who was active in the destruction of the
last strong independent union in the sugar business.
Gulf & Western is
the largest private landowner and employer in the country, with some
8% of all arable land, mainly in sugar, owner of a large resort
complex, and with investments in some 90 Dominican businesses. G & W's
annual sales are larger than the GNP of the Dominican Republic, and
while it does not by itself control the country, its size, internal
connections, and the background support of the external sponsor of
Dominican subfascism, give the company a great deal of leverage and
might even justify the designation of the Dominican Republic as a
"company country. Its rapid expansion within the Dominican Republic
since 1967 has been a result, in part, of the great profitability of
its sugar operations and an 18% ceiling on profit repatriation.
A potential
competitor to Gulf & Western's large seaside resort at La Romana, M.
Wayne Fuller, ran into a steady series of obstacles in the early 1970s
from the Tourism Office in importing supplies and obtaining tax
concessions supposedly available to foreign enterprises. In April,
1975, a government decree was signed expropriating Fuller's beach-land
property-for use as a public park-helped along possibly by the fact
that the president of another G & W subsidiary was an advisor to the
Dominican Republic Park Commission. This decree was rescinded when
Fuller mobilized his forces, including various army officers and
Balaguer himself. In brief, foreign interests are exceedingly powerful
as they curry and buy favor and mobilize their elite cadres, with whom
they jointly dominate and loot this small dependency.
A third
characteristic of the Dominican model has been a radical sweetening of
conditions for foreign business and a strong reliance on foreign
investment for national development. As in Greece under the Colonels'
regime of 1967-1973, great stress has been placed on tourism and
investments related to tourism (resort hotels, airport development).
An Investment Incentives Law of 1968 removed any restrictions on
foreign ownership, extended generous tax and duty exemptions to new
investments, and guaranteed capital and profit repatriation. U.S.
companies have swarmed into agriculture, food processing, mining,
banking and hotel and resort complexes. In 1969 G & W became manager
of a large tax-free zone adjacent to G & W's Cajuiles golf course. One
of the many Dominican Republic ads in the New York Times- funded in
good part by "contributions" from foreign companies in the
country-notes that companies settling within the G & W free zone "are
given special duty free import and export privileges. They are granted
a 10-year tax-free status." The reporter Michael
Flannery describes
the G & W "free zone" in the following language:
"Shotgun-toting
customs agents and national police man check points at entrances to
the free zone, which is surrounded by a high chain-link fence topped
with multiple strands of barbed wire...CNTD [National Confederation of
Dominican Workers] and visiting officials of the AFL-CIO charged that
the zone had the air of a "modern slave-labor camp." They said the
carefully controlled access was designed not only to prevent
smuggling, but to thwart efforts to organize the workers into unions
that would force an improvement in conditions."
A fourth
characteristic of the Dominican Republic model, related to the
preceding, is effective government pacification of the labor force, a
crucial requirement for an appropriate "climate of investment." As
noted above, the systematic police terror since 1965 has returned the
large urban proletariat and sub-proletariat to the desired state of
passivity, and the countryside has been more easily kept in line by
periodic violence and threats. The Dominican Republic advertisement
section in the New York Times of January 28, 1973, has a heading
entitled "Industrialists Dream of Chances Like These," featuring the
low, low wage rates, running between 25 and 50 cents an hour. The ad
stresses the role of the law in fixing hours and wages and allowing
the free import of foreign technicians. There is no mention of any
trade unions, but employers will properly read between the lines that
unions have been broken and pacified (with the assistance of George
Meany and the AFL-CIO). Of special interest is the regular use of
government troops and police to break up independent unions. The
agricultural union Sindicato Unido, which operated the fields now
owned by G & W was broken by police action in 1966 and 1967, and a
number of its leaders, including the union lawyer Guido Gil were
arrested and killed by the forces of law and order. Another major
foreign enterprise, Falconbridge Nickel, also successfully broke a
union with army and police assistance in 1970. A Wall Street Journal
report of September 9, 1971 states that "when a union attempted to
organize construction workers at a foreign-owned ferronickel mill
project last year, Mr. Balaguer sent in the army to help straighten
things out. While the soldiers kept order, the contractors fired 32
allegedly leftist leaders...The strike was broken in eight days."
Matters had not changed much in the mid-70s. An ad hoc human rights
group that visited the Dominican Republic in 1975 reported that
"working people have been prevented by nearly every conceivable means
from forming and joining trade union organizations." A union
organizing effort in the G & W free trade zone in the mid-1970s was
broken with the help of the police in arresting, jailing, and
deporting labor organizers, and with the use of "troops in full combat
gear armed with submachine guns" to break up organizing meetings.
Flannery states that:
"Officials of the
Dominican labor ministry told organizers that-contrary to the paper
guarantees of the republic's laws-workers would not be allowed to form
a union in the industrial free zone."
On the matter of
labor unions, the 1977 State Department Human Rights Report has the
following "information": "Labor unions are permitted to function and
numerous labor unions exist including some associated with opposition
parties, but under some government controls." That exhausts that
topic.
In containing unions
and rendering them docile the Dominican elite has had the steadfast
support of the top echelons of the AFL-CIO, which has long cooperated
closely with the CIA and international business firms in this unsavory
operation. Its arm CONATRAL actually helped destroy the pro-labor
Bosch regime in 1963 and has steadily supported its totalitarian and
anti-labor successors."' Presumably their blind hatred of Communism
and radicalism in general has led Meany and his close followers to
sell out systematically the interests of labor in the Dominican
Republic and in other U. S. satellites. Meany and some other labor
bosses actually have a more direct interest in the pacification of
labor in the Dominican Republic. Meany, his number two man Lane
Kirkland, Alexander Barkan, director of COPE, the AFL-CIO political
arm, and Edward J. Carlough, president of the sheet metal workers, all
are stockholders in the 15,000 acre Punta Cana resort and plantation
in the Dominican Republic. In order to clear the ground for this
enterprise designed for the Beautiful People a large numbers of
squatters were evicted by the army.
A fifth
characteristic of the Dominican model, following naturally from the
preceding, is the sharp deterioration in the well-being of the bulk of
the population. In serving the interests of a traditional and
expatriate elite, the Dominican Republic has been turned into a
tourist and industrial paradise, with a "25-cent minimum wage rate and
hard-working peaceful labor" [sic: translated, no threat of strikes
from any independent unions], and with four tax free zones "filled
with manufacturers of brushes, brassieres, batteries, electronic
devices, wigs, undergarments, components and consumer goods." The
effects of the 1965 counterrevolution and the installation of the
Dominican Republic model on income distribution and welfare were
summarized by the Wall Street Journal (9 September 1971) as follows:
"The middle and
upper classes are better off, as are the lower classes lucky enough to
have jobs. But work is scarce; the poor are poorer and more numerous.
"Per capita income is about the same as before 1965, but it's less
equitably distributed," a foreign economic expert says. He estimates
per capita income at $240-three times that of Haiti but half that of
Cuba... Most of the 370 young women who work at La Romana earn 30
cents to 40 cents hour last year...Malnutrition is widespread. Says
George B. Mathues, director of CARE in the Dominican Republic: "You
see kids with swollen bellies all over the country, even here in Santo
Domingo." Food production is hampered by semi-feudal land tenure. At
last count, less than 1% of the farmers owned 47.5 % of the land,
while 82% farmed fewer than 10 acres... Land reform has moved with
glacial speed...Most Dominican children don't go beyond the third
grade; only one in five reaches the sixth grade. "
G & W acknowledged
in 1978 that cane cutter money wages had not kept up with inflation in
the years since 1966,'75 and there is other evidence to the same
effect, which suggests a probable further absolute fall in the real
income of the majority and a further shift toward inequality in income
shares. There is also evidence that the nutritional deficit of the
Dominican majority is huge. Michael Flannery cites a report which
states that in 1972 "a mere 11 percent of Dominicans drink milk, 4
percent eat meat and 2 percent eat eggs. Fish are plentiful in the
waters off the island, but draw better prices in other markets. So,
few Dominicans include fish in their protein-poor diet."
In the Dominican
Republic we see the working out once again of the familiar
repression-exploitation-trickle-down model of economic growth. The
export-oriented agriculture is, as is common throughout the empire,
displacing an already underemployed peasantry and rural work force,
increasing the mass of dispossessed and malnourished. The unemployment
rate has been extraordinarily high, on the order of 30%-40%.'79 The
mass of the population has been entirely excluded from any
opportunities for economic advancement, education, or political
participation. The large majority as in Brazil, Indonesia, or the
Philippines, is a cost to be minimized and a threat to be contained.
The process of development observed here is acceptable on the
assumption implicit throughout the empire-that only the welfare of the
local and expatriate elites need be taken into account. The decline in
the welfare of the majority, their exclusion from any power
whatsoever, and the cultural degradation of the Dominican Republic,
are obviously beside the point. "Stability" has been brought to the
country, and from the perspective of U.S. investment opportunities,
the Dominican Republic deserves the glowing description of a U.S.
Embassy report describing it as a "little Brazil" and "one of the
brightest spots in Latin America."
|