79 DINA agents accused of participation in Calle Conferencia I

Mario Zamorano Donoso

Jorge Muñoz Poutays

Magistrate Miguel Vasquez from the Santiago Court of Appeals has issued an indictment against 79 former DINA agents for their participation in the abduction of seven dictatorship opponents: Mario Zamorano Donoso, Jorge Muñoz Poutays, Uldarico Donaire Cortés, Jaime Donato Avendaño, Elisa Escobar Zepeda, Lenin Díaz Silva and Eliana Espinoza Fernandez, as well as the murder of Víctor Díaz López, all victims of Calle Conferencia I. The clandestine operation targeted MIR and Communist party militants with the intention of destroying the clandestine opposition to Pinochet's  dictatorship between May 1976 and January 1977.


Uldarico Donaire Cortes

Jaime Donato Avendano



Mario Zamorano Donoso, Communist Party member, was detained during an operation which lasted from April 30 to May 6, 1976 from a house in Santiago, which was under DINA observation and its inhabitants forced to cooperate in the clandestine operation in the hope of luring Communist Party members to the dwelling. Zamorano was detained on May 4 and transferred to Villa Grimaldi.
On the same day at 21:00,   Jorge Muñoz Poutays was detained and also transferred to Villa Grimaldi.



Elisa Escobar Cepeda

Eliana Espinoza Fernandez

Uldarico Donaire Cortez and Jaime Patricio Donato Avendaño were detained by DINA on May 5 and transferred to Villa Grimaldi.

Elisa Escobar Cepeda, also a Communist Party member, was detained on May 6 and transferred to Villa Grimaldi.

On May 9 1976, DINA agents detained Lenin Díaz Silva, who was transferred to Villa Grimaldi from where it is assumed that he was disappeared. Eliana Espinoza Fernandez was detained on May 12, 1976 and transferred to Villa Grimaldi.


Victor Diaz

Lenin Diaz Silva

The detention of Víctor Díaz López occurred on May 12 1976. DINA agents detained the Secretary General of the Communist Party and transferred him to Villa Grimaldi for interrogation and brutal torture. He was later taken to DINA's extermination centre Cuartel Simon Bolivar, where he remained for a few months prior to his murder and disappearance. Díaz was asphyxiated, his corpse packed in two big bags and strapped to metal rods ready for transfer to Pedelhue, lifted onto a Puma helicopter to be deposed in the sea, in an undisclosed location. Details regarding the detention of Víctor Díaz at Cuartel Simon Bolivar have been narrated by former DINA agent and aid to Manuel Contreras Jorgelino Vergara Bravo, protagonist of Javier Rebolledo's book 'La danza de los cuervos: el destino final de los detenidos desaparecidos'

Below is a list of former DINA agents charged with the crimes.
01. Manuel Contreras Sepúlveda
02. Pedro Espinoza Bravo
03. Carlos López Tapia
04. Miguel Krassnoff Martchenko
05. Ricardo Lawrence Mires
06. Jorge Madariaga Acevedo
07. Eugenio Fieldhouse Chávez
08. José Fuentealba Saldías
09. Hugo Clavería Leiva
10. José Soto Torres
11. Raúl Soto Pérez
12. Juan Carlos Escobar Valenzuela
13. Jerónimo Neira Méndez
14. Héctor Briones Burgos.
15. Pedro Mora Villanueva.
16. Roberto Rodríguez Manquel.
17. Leonidas Méndez Moreno.
18. Jorge Andrade Gómez.
19. Nelson Herrera Lagos.
20. Juan Morales Salgado.
21. Jorge Sagardía Monje.
22. Héctor Valdebenito Araya.
23. Federico Chaigneau Sepúlveda.
24. Bernardo Daza Navarro
25. Sergio Escalona Acuña
26. Guillermo Ferrán Martínez
27. Gladys Calderón Carreño
28. Elisa Magna Astudillo
29. Heriberto del Carmen Acevedo
30. Emilio Troncoso Vivallos
31. Claudio Pacheco Fernández
32. Jorge Díaz Radulovich
33. Orlando Altamirano Sanhueza
34. Eduardo Cabezas Mardones
35. Jorge Escobar Fuentes
36. René Riveros Valderrama
37. Jorge Pichunmán Curiqueo
38. Orfa Saavedra Vásquez
39. Celinda Aspe Rojas
40. Teresa Navarro Navarro
41. Berta Jiménez Escobar
42. Adriana Rivas González
43. Jorge Arriagada Mora
44. Pedro Bitterlich Jaramillo
45. Eduardo Oyarce Riquelme
46. Guillermo Díaz Ramírez
47. Ana Vilches Muñoz
48. Italia Vacarella Gilio
49. Jorge Manríquez Manterola.
50. Orlando Torrejón Gatica
51. José Manuel Sarmiento Sotelo
52. Manuel Obreque Henríquez
53. Gustavo Guerrero Aguilera
54. Eduardo Garea Guzmán
55. Juvenal Piña Garrido
56. Rufino Jaime Astorga
57. Luis Lagos Yáñez
58. María Angélica Guerrero Soto
59. Sergio Castro Andrade
60. Manuel Montre Méndez
61. Pedro Gutiérrez Valdés
62. Claudio Orellana de la Pinta
63. Joyce Ahumada Despouy
64. Hiro Álvarez Vega
65. José Miguel Meza Serrano
66. José Ojeda Obando
67. Carlos Bermúdez Méndez
68. Víctor Manuel Álvarez Droguett
69. Eduardo Reyes Lagos
70. Marilin Silva Vergara
71. Hernán Sovino Maturana
72. José Friz Esparza
73. Carlos Miranda Mesa
74. Camilo Negrier
75. Orlando Inostroza Lagos
76. Carlos López Inostroza
77. José Seco Alarcón
78. Lionel Medrano Rivas
79. Juan Suazo Saldaña

Asociación Ilícita: los archivos secretos de la dictadura

This book review was first published in Chileno here.

Asociación Ilícita: los archivos secretos de la dictadura
Carlos Dorat & Mauricio Weibel
Ceibo Ediciones, 2012

Through now revealed secret government documents, Asociación Ilícita: los archivos secretos de la dictadura details the extent of the far-reaching reign of terror imposed by Augosto Pinochet's dictatorship. Ramona Wadi reviews.


Re-enacting Chile’s dictatorship history is an arduous task, undoubtedly hindered by Augusto Pinochet’s insistence upon oblivion and legally sanctioned by the enacted impunity laws. Seeking to annihilate memory by imposing a reign of persecution, torture, disappearances and exile, the struggle to delegitimize the leftist struggle degenerated into Pinochet’s obsession to legitimise his dictatorship. Evidence compiled by authors Carlos Dorat and Mauricio Weibel reveals a sinister collaboration extending beyond the secret network Dirección de Intelligencia Nacional (DINA) and later Central Nacional de Información (CNI), involving ministries, embassies, diplomats, the FBI, the Vatican and right wing Latin American governments.

Asociación Ilícita: los archivos secretos de la dictadura (Ceibo Ediciones, 2012) examines documents which for some reason, failed to be destroyed by the CNI in 1988 prior to the transition period. The documents, detailing extensive correspondence on behalf of Pinochet, are mainly attributed to Manuel Contreras Sepulveda, Odlainer Mena, Humberto Gordon and Hugo Salas, proving the extent of collaboration between various governmental and international bodies, as well as incursions to divert civilian attempts to shed light upon Chile’s reality. From El Plan Condor to inscribed orders from Pinochet requesting the detention of socialist opponents, terror and diplomatic strategy comprise the analysis of what the authors term ‘a catalogue of horror and intolerance’.

September 11, 1973 unleashed the neoliberal experiment upon Chile, supported by the US which was, in Kissinger’s words, unwilling ‘to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide from themselves’. Following an initial purging of socialism in Chile, the published documents in this book reveal how political strategy, in collaboration with the Vatican, was aiming to install Pinochet as an icon of freedom and anti-communist struggle. Apart from the well known targeting of Communist Party and Movimiento Izquierda Revolucionario (MIR) militants, the military advocated a complete dismantling of social movements, student organisations and embarked upon restricting the Church’s activities. With regard to the latter, correspondence with the Vatican illustrates the alignment of the church oligarchy with Pinochet’s dictatorship, as opposed to priests working in the country who, contrary to what had occurred in other countries, aligned themselves with the left. While the Vatican urged priests to adhere solely to ceremonial roles, Cardinal Raul Silva Henriquez had abandoned the designated conservative role in favour of exposing dictatorship atrocities through the Vicaria de la Solidaridad. Part of the political strategy against human rights groups was to seek invalidation of exposed atrocities by citing Marxist infiltration.

A brief overview of DINA establishes an ideological framework attributed to Jaime Guzman, who fostered a counterinsurgency programme based upon combating Marxism and seeking the annihilation of social movements from the political scene. As DINA’s power intensified, counterinsurgency became central to the stability of the dictatorship, lending the state a channel through which to intensify diplomatic efforts with other right wing governments and repressive bodies, in order to present a formidable opposition to organisations expressing their outrage at the widespread violence. Documents relating to Operaciones Epsilon reveal that former head of DINA, Manual Contreras, was authorised to give orders to various ministries. An 11 page document relating to the assembly of ‘Comision Interamericana de Derechos Humanos’ sought to ‘neutralise worldwide accusations of human rights violations in Chile’, instead proposing an emphasis of human rights disputes in Vietnam and the Soviet Union, among other countries. The neutralisation of any verbal opposition against the dictatorship was to be met with an open and clandestine psychological campaign, in order to preserve Chile’s ‘image’ from any possible ‘discrediting and spreading of false information’.

The political threat was personified in particular by the clandestine Communist Party and MIR, who waged armed resistance against the dictatorship and suffered great losses due to persecution and disappearances of many militants, including the notorious Operacion Colombo. The book states that, according to research carried out by renowned author Manuel Salazar, Contreras had been compiling information about political leaders of leftist organisations since Salvador Allende’s presidency. Related documents published in this book and stamped as confidential outline the activities of several left wing leaders, including Victor Diaz and Luis Recabarren.

‘The problem of human rights’ constituted a major problem for the dictatorship, as it relentlessly sought to portray any internal or external criticism as tarnishing the image of Chile. Despite the extermination of socialist leaders, subsequent regrouping of MIR, Movimiento de Acción Popular Unitario (MAPU) and other left wing groups gave rise to an initiation of protests against the dictatorship, with people demanding the return of their exiled relatives. Hundreds were massacred by the CNI, as the military was deployed to the streets in an effort to stifle dissent. As the dictatorship faced the most difficult years of its era, Guzman advocated an ideology shifting towards permanent military rule.

The authors describe the oppression as methodical – indeed the documents reveal statistical data of ‘terrorist activity’ and ‘manipulation of conduct’. The constant preoccupation and compilation of data enabled the dictatorship to enact legislation according to the circumstances, in order to ensure a continuation of impunity. A trend of state terrorism is easily gleaned from the documents produced in the book, as well as the analysis provided by the authors. The ‘Caravan of Death’, the ‘Plan Condor’, which was carried out in collaboration with other Latin American countries, ‘Operacion Colombo’ – also known as the Case of the 119, ‘Operacion Epsilon’ and the collaboration with the US regarding ‘the distortion of Chile’s truth in favour of Marxism’ gave rise to the tracking of dissidents' and exiles' activity abroad, in order to prevent the possibility of the formation of a government in exile. Embassies were also authorised to keep copies of any published material relevant to Chile, in particular reports concerning human rights violations. The exercise was described as ‘censorship of negative information’. However, the dictatorship’s targeting of any person suspected of harbouring leftist sentiment, even through association not related to political activity and irrespective of nationality, led to disclosure of torture practices in international media. The case of Sheila Cassidy – a British doctor suspected of having offered medical assistance to Pinochet’s opponents led to international outrage, which in turn the dictatorship tried to stifle by refusing to issue working permits for journalists travelling to Chile in order to report on human rights. State organisations were also forbidden to comment about Chile without prior permission granted through formal official channels. At least 761 journalists were prohibited from reporting about human rights violations in Chile and their details were included in the dictatorship’s archives.

Hostility against the media was enhanced by the fact that culture – an integral part of Allende’s campaign and perhaps synonymous with the nueva canción movement, was not to be stifled. Inti Illimani and Illapu, together with other singers in exile such as Angel Parra, Isabel Parra and Patricio Manns maintained their political stance and disseminated their convictions through music. The literature of Ariel Dorfman and Antonio Skarmeta was banned in Chile, as was the political thought of Eduardo Galeano and Karl Marx.

Perhaps the significance of this book lies in the fact that it is yet another sliver in Chilean memory elucidating the callous ideology behind the committed atrocities. By analysing this archive of documents, Dorat and Weibel have succeeded in reassembling the fragments of the dictatorship, most importantly eliminating the gap between the experienced violations and the dictatorship laws which ravaged the lives of thousands of Chileans.

Book Review. His Hands Were Gentle: Selected Lyrics of Victor Jara

This book review was first published in Irish Left Review here.

His Hands Were Gentle: Selected Lyrics of Victor Jara
Smokestack Books, 2012
http://www.smokestack-books.co.uk

His Hands Were Gentle: Selected Lyrics of Victor Jara (2012) captures a spectrum of lyrics which explicitly portrays social upheaval and the struggle against injustices. Victor Jara’s poetry resonates with memory and history woven into relics of resistance and triumph, culminating into an unfinished poem narrating the decadence of the dictatorship and initiated annihilation of socialism.

Thirty nine years after his death, Victor Jara remains a symbol for the Chilean left. Joan Jara’s foreword to the book shifts between memory and exile, explaining the commitment towards imparting Victor’s legacy in the aftermath of his murder. Living a constant battle against the right wing’s coveted practice of oblivion when confronted with dictatorship atrocities, Joan reiterates that Chilean justice is hampered by secrecy and impunity.

A founding member of the nueva canción movement together with Isabel Parra, Angel Parra, Rolando Alarcon and Patricio Manns, Victor gave constant support for Salvador Allende’s Unidad Popular political campaign. Epitomised by songs such as El Pueblo Unido Jamas Sera Vencido and the ubiquitous hymn of Venceremos, Allende’s campaign amalgamated social struggle and culture into a popular movement. Nueva canción served as a medium of expression for the left wing and, following Allende’s electoral triumph, many musicians travelled abroad as ambassadors for Unidad Popular.

This collection portrays Victor’s tenacity to challenge inequalities which, at times, manifested themselves into atrocities. Born in Lonquen, Victor witnessed and experienced the ramifications of poverty, finding solace in music and later conducting extensive research in folk music. Songs such as Canción del minero (Miner’s Song) and Plegaría a un labrador (Prayer to a Labourer) assert the indignity of exploitation with regard to human labour and natural resources. The helplessness exhibited in Cancion del Minero is transformed into a yearning to defeat the oppressor in Plegaría a un Labrador – unity embracing revolution and hope. Acknowledging armed struggle as a possible means to achieve dignity is implied in the last verse – evolving from solitary lament into social consciousness.

Victor pays homage to Miguel Angel Aguilera in El alma llena de banderas (Our Hearts are Full of Banners). A communist and member of Brigada Ramona Parra, Aguilera was killed during a street demonstration in Santiago in 1970. Victor contrasts the inspiration of Aguilera with the traitorous attitude of his murderers, stating “In the hiding place of rich murderers/ your name will stand for many names/ The one who burnt your wings as you flew/ cannot put out the fire of the poor.”
Preguntas por Puerto Montt (Questions about the massacre of Puerto Montt) earned Victor the rancour of right wing sentiment after singing the song at a boys’ secondary school in 1969. The song is addressed to Mr Perez Zujovic, the Minister of Interior who ordered a massacre upon a peasant community occupying a stretch of wasteland in Puerto Montt. Ninety one peasant families were attacked by 250 armed police, leaving 11 dead and many injured. The youngest victim was a nine month old child.

A particularly poignant song, Manifiesto (Manifesto) articulates Victor’s testimony as a singer, reaffirming his dedication to alleviate and revolt against violations. “My guitar is not for killers/ greedy for money and power,/ but for the people who labour/ so that the future may flower.” Victor’s declaration of “… a man who will die singing/ truthfully singing his song” was no vague metaphor but an assertion of his loyalty towards the people and a premonition of his own fate. The song is reminiscent of El Aparecido (The Apparition), dedicated to Che Guevara a short while before he was ambushed and murdered by CIA trained troops in Bolivia.

On the day of the military coup, Victor Jara was taken prisoner along with other workers and students barricaded inside the Technical University. Estadio Chile, Victor’s last poem, was written during his brief imprisonment at the stadium, which was transformed into the first detention and torture centre during Augusto Pinochet’s dictatorship. Written on scraps of paper and smuggled out of the stadium by a detainee who was later released, Victor inscribed what would be one of the initial endeavours in memory narrative, describing the brutality of the dictatorship. The incomplete poem describes the terror inflicted upon the 5,000 detainees in the stadium, documenting the soldiers’ beatings and psychological torture inflicted upon the prisoners. “One dead, another beaten as I could have never believed/a human being could be beaten/ … one jumping into nothingness,/ another beating his head against a wall,/ but all with the fixed look of death.”

Despite efforts to reveal the identities of officers responsible for Victor’s murder, most details are shrouded in secrecy and strengthened by oblivion and impunity. The Armed Forces of Chile refuse to reveal information which would further investigations into Victor Jara’s murder. In May, a documentary entitled Quien Mato a Victor Jara? (Who Killed Victor Jara?) revealed the name of Pedro Pablo Barrientos Nuñez as the lieutenant who allegedly pulled the trigger on Victor. Barrientos has been living in Florida since Jose Paredes, an ex-conscript, was indicted for his role in Victor’s murder and refuses to return to Chile. Other officers refuse to collaborate, since the impunity laws of the dictatorship still govern Chilean society.

This poetry collection furthers Victor’s testimony of political turmoil in Chile, the years of Salvador Allende’s Unidad Popular when metaphors transcended the realm of illusion, and the initiation of the subsequent US aided military coup. The figure of Victor Jara has, throughout the years, become synonymous with the fight for justice despite the repression of dictatorship relics still governing Chilean society. An endeavour which strikes against impunity and oblivion, His Hands Were Gentle imparts a revolutionary consciousness, ensuring that the cry of “ni perdon, ni olvido” (neither forgiveness, nor oblivion) enters the realm of internationalism.

A Victim of the Prince? Article published in History Today

A link to my article published in the May Issue of History Today, discussing the life and murder of nueva cancion singer Victor Jara. http://www.historytoday.com/ramona-wadi/victor-jara-victim-prince 

Destroying the Ability to Think Historically in Chile

This article was first published in Upside Down World here.

The decision to remove the term ‘military dictatorship’ from Chilean primary school textbooks has been revoked, following the resignation of Alejandro Goic, a member of the National Council of Education (CNED). In his resignation letter to Minister of Education Harald Beyer, Goic cites discomfort at having to work with former Central Nacional de Informaciones (CNI) member Alfredo Ewing Pinochet, stating “there were people who have a vision of historical events that I do not share… I am surprised that there are people who, after 40 years, still believe that there was no military dictatorship in Chile.” 

However, reinstalling the term “military dictatorship” remains a superficial change without reference to the military coup or human rights violations. Historian Alberto Harambour from Diego Portales University explains the dynamics of Chilean politics and relics of Pinochet’s dictatorship which threaten to separate a new generation of Chileans from historical memory.

Ramona Wadi: Can you explain how Pinochet's laws regarding education continue to enforce discrimination on Chilean society?

Alberto Harambour: The combination of State terrorism and neoliberal reform radically transformed Chilean social life. From property regimes to sociability, from schools to pensions, municipalizing primary and secondary education, as well as the shift in tertiary education funding meant the increase of segregation. It was accompanied by housing policies that displaced poor communities to the periphery, dislocating networks of solidarity. As those policies have not been transformed by the transitional democracy, they have resulted in a direct relation between social class and quality of the education. As counties (municipios) fund their own schools, wealthy counties have relatively better schools. Besides, wealthy people pay extremely high prices for relatively good primary and secondary education in private schools, while the rest of society gets, generally, a public education that does not allow them to get into good, selective universities.

RW: The decision to change terminology from “military dictatorship” to “military regime” is reported to have originated during Michelle Bachelet's presidency. Can you elaborate further about the 2009 General Education Laws and how this change in Chilean memory was approved during a left-wing presidency?

AH: It does not seem to me that the change was officially defined by then. However, there were severe contradictions in the Ministry of Education throughout the Concertación governments. I did experience an attempt of censorship while working on a textbook by year 2000. There was an oral instruction about avoiding the use of the word dictatorship for any period of Chilean history. Same about State terrorism. We had a tough time discussing it. Same happened to other historians, working for other publishing houses. At the same time, though, there was a wide transformation in programs and contents starting in the mid 1990s. Its results, though, are relatively small in terms of producing a culture of human rights respect, or true democratic generations.

RW: Is having people implicated in Pinochet's dictatorship serving in prominent positions in Chilean politics creating a culture of impunity to enhance oblivion? What, in your opinion, is strengthening oblivion in Chile?

AH: Oblivion has been resisted by decades, from below and from the margins. Official politics of memory did have a strong impact, since the early 1990s with the publication of the Truth Commissions Informs. It was the capture of Pinochet in London (by then, a designed senator) which prompted a radical shift in terms of public opinion and human rights violation. The Concertación government did everything to temperate right-wing discontent, and bring back the former dictator. A banner in Universidad Católica by that time read “The shame of the Government is the happiness of people”. There was a clear sense that Concertación was operating so as to keep the pace of the pacted transition. And it did divorce many people who had been up to then acquiescent with the limitations of Concertación. Later on, Lagos and Bachelet played conflicting roles. On the one hand, they had been victims of the dictatorship. On the other, they kept criminals as high ranking officers in the Armed Forces, and strengthened the neoliberal policies, despite their own promises about moving leftward from the post-dictatorship political scene. They did not though. Again, on the one hand, that reinforced popular allegiances to Concertación. On the other, though, they became similar to right-wing politicians. In fact, it was a right-wing entrepreneur who, for the first time, won a presidential election since 1958. Under Pinera an unexpected result, it seems to me, there has been a growth in the opening of themes that were silenced for 20 years.

RW: Following Alejandro Goic's resignation, it seems there has been a decision to review and possibly re-introduce the mention of military dictatorship in textbooks without referring to the coup or human rights abuses. What implications does this decision entail?

AH: The decision is a minor one. The transformation of the plans and programs for primary and secondary schools continues, and its reach is really troublesome. It is destroying the recognition of complex processes and the ability to think historically which was expanded in the last 20 years, in favor of an old-style concept of history. In 2012 we will see a permanent discussion on this, basically because the several objections raised by specialists have not been considered by the Ministry and the National Council of Education. In what can be defined as heritage of the Dictatorship, even an officer who has been accused of crimes against humanity participated in this controversial decision.

RW: How do you think a mention of dictatorship without discussion of torture and violations will affect children whose only narrative of such abuses would be through verbal recollection of those who suffered?

AH: It has demonstrated to be ineffective to produce a people conscious of its rights, respectful of the memory of the victims and the dignity of the survivors. It seems that the term “human rights” in the early 1990s opened a certain path that is, by now, exhausted. It does not express, under the rubric “human rights violations”, anything but an abstraction, necessary as it is. But in a country where dozens of thousands of citizens were subjected to the experience of terror it is necessary to replace abstractions with concrete narratives – something those who grew up under the dictatorship were saturated with. As a history professor, I am critical of my own way of referring to those processes. Politically it may be constructing to identify the dictatorship as a terrorist regime - at a certain level. But in terms of political consciousness, as incarnating a non-negotiable commitment with human dignity, it seems that we must be more explicit in letting the students know what they have not been taught.

RW: In which manner will memory narrative and language be altered through this practice of oblivion in a new generation?

AH: Besides what I just said, it is social mobilization which provides the main vehicle for social, language, political and intellectual transformation. Many of the assumptions which today appear as obvious were unthinkable a year ago, such as the demand for free public education. That was part of the leftist practice for decades, but it is only now that it appears as possible, a manifestation of a wish. Even in terms of academic formation, it seems that the students learned in a year of permanent strikes what they could not grasp during lectures. Considering this achievement, in contrast with the conformity of the Concertación decades, it does explains to a certain extent why some leaders of the students movement consider that the movement was born with them. There has been, out of reduced circles, a small transference of political experiences and memories.

Ramona Wadi is a freelance writer living in Malta. Visit her blog here.

Chile's Government Wages War on Historical Memory and Truth

This article was first published in Upside Down World here.
In his public ‘Letter to Chileans’ in 1998, Augusto Pinochet sought to reinforce oblivion by portraying the dictatorship as a memory of salvation from socialism, generating a justification amongst right wing sympathizers of the dictatorship. Prominent historians issued a ‘Manifesto of Historians’ in the newspapers, which challenged the portrayal of the coup as a legitimate military intervention which allowed the perpetrators to disassociate themselves from the atrocities committed under the dictatorship.[1]

The practice of countering memory by oblivion has been innovatively applied to the Chilean primary education system. The Minister of Education, Herald Beyer, approved a change in the primary education curriculum[2], stipulating that from the first through the sixth year of education, the term ‘military dictatorship will be obliterated from students’ history, geography and social sciences textbooks, to be replaced with ‘military regime’. Beyer, who was involved in Pinera’s presidential campaign, also formed part of the committee drafting the Ley General de Educacion (LEG)[3] during Michelle Bachelet’s presidency. According to a report in La Nacion, human rights lawyer and member of the Chilean Communist party Hugo Gutierrez is quoted as saying, "I have a document stating that at the time of former President Michelle Bachelet several universities were proposing the elimination of terms such as military dictatorship and human rights in education, to be replaced with 'essential rights'.”[4] The decision is due to be reviewed after it sparked an intense furore amongst Chileans.

The reason given for using ‘military regime’ in reference to the 1973 – 1990 era was, according to Beyer, to give a more general view of what happened in Chile. According to El Mostrador[5], the proposal states the necessity of imparting “different versions of what happened in Chile, the breakdown of democracy and subsequent restoration in the end of the 20th century, considering the different experiences of people during this time and the current consensus on the value of democracy.”

The decision to manipulate history and memory through primary education is reminiscent of Pinochet’s calls for practicing oblivion ‘to move forward’ and reinforces Chile’s split memory – vanquishing those who suffered by suffocating any possible mention of atrocities committed during the dictatorship. The decision sparked both outrage and acquiescence. Carlos Larrain of Renovacion Nacional[6] defended the National Council of Education and the Ministry of Education’s decision, saying that “... historical situations are subject to interpretation.” Larrain denied the existence of the dictatorship and stated that Chilean history should be taught “in a respectful manner”; also that Marxist socialism abused the concept of culture for political ends. Elizabeth Lira, from the National Council of Education stated that the change is “legitimate, since the government is formed of 50 percent of people who supported Pinochet.” A self-declared Pinochetista, Ivan Moreira from Unión Democrata Independiente (UDI), declared that eliminating the term ‘military dictatorship’ from the text books is “more just”. [7]

In an article published in El Quinto Poder[8], professor and historian Alberto Harambour expounded upon the ramifications of this controversial decision. Coercing language into neutrality translates into intentionally decreasing the power of vocabulary. This restriction, combined with the intention to eradicate the reality of Pinochet’s dictatorship, creates a violation of a person’s right to memory.

The shift from military dictatorship to military rule is an effort at raising a generation of people within the concept of oblivion. Politically, the term ‘military rule’ displaces blame, making it easy for students to view the soldiers as the sole perpetrators of violence while conveniently providing society with a euphemism for the dictatorship.

As Harambour states in his article, forcing students to deny any existence of the dictatorship threatens the stability of Chilean society – students are indoctrinated through the education system, lessening their social consciousness while damaging their right to creativity and memory. The decision will also serve to alienate young students from the generation who witnessed and endured horrors which the current government, through various methods, seeks to stifle while showing leniency towards many perpetrators of injustice who still wield power in Chile.

Amongst the National Council for Education members responsible for the curriculum changes is former CNI agent, General Alfredo Ewing Pinochet, who according to Gutierrez, was also head of the Chilean Army’s Intelligence. Gutierrez denounced Ewing Pinochet’s involvement in the issue as a conspiracy, stating that the inclusion of this former officer in educational matters “invalidates any reinterpretation of national history; particularly anything related to the dictatorship.”[9]

Vice President of Partido Radical Socialdemócrata (PRSD), Patricio Tombolini, accused the government of intentionally eliminating “Chile’s darkest historical period.”[10] Tombolini reiterated that students had the right to know about torture, concentration camps, human rights violations, genocide and exile. Instead of being ascertained that such atrocities must never happen again, the government has chosen to stifle 17 years of military dictatorship.

Senator Eduardo Frei of Democracia Cristiana (DC) also accused the government of attempting to change the collective memory of Chilean Society.[11] Frei’s father, former President Eduardo Frei, died during the dictatorship's tenure, enforcing his son’s belief that he was assassinated.

Echoing Alicia Lira, President of Agrupacion de Familiares de Detenidos Desaparecidos (AFDD), who described the changes as “a serious offence to the victims of state terrorism.” [12], Lorena Fríes, National Institute of Human Rights Director, expressed concern about the lack of transparency surrounding the decision to change the terminology. The political move is significant as it deviates from the formation of citizenship and the exercise of human rights as “...democracy implies knowing what happened during the dictatorship.”[13] Fríes added that negating the military dictatorship’s existence is a central theme for the institute, which strives to promote the education of human rights.

Since Jan. 5, an open letter to Minister Harald Beyer has been circulating online, garnering 5,000 signatures so far from civilians opposed to the elimination of dictatorship terminology. The letter calls on Beyer to retain the definition of Pinochet’s era as dictatorship, briefly citing the brutal repression, torture and extermination carried out by DINA and CNI “beyond all legality and ethics”. The letter deems the negation of the dictatorship as absurd (a view endorsed also by Chilean historian Gabriel Salazar) and an educational blunder which “prevents students from properly distinguishing the characteristics of dictatorship and democracy; a deficiency which hurts their civic education...What cannot be accommodated is the denial or trivialization in the curriculum of a fact as obvious and painful as the existence of a dictatorship in Chile between 1973 – 1990.”[14]

Senator Guido Girardi[15] has called for a special session in Parliament, hastening to add that “a minister who is an accomplice and wants to hide the fact that human rights were violated in Chile cannot remain Minister of Education.” He added that while the Council of Education may have made a mistake, an endorsement by the minister accepting the denial of human rights violations is unacceptable. [16]

In the latest developments, several Chilean students protested in Santiago against the attempt to eradicate the memory of the dictatorship. An organizer of the demonstration stated, “We wanted to make this public intervention to protest the Ministry of Education’s decision to change the meaning of what was experienced during the dictatorship period”. [17] The march ended, appropriately and significantly at Londres 38 – a detention and torture center during Pinochet’s dictatorship

Notes:

[1] Reckoning with Pinochet by Steve J Stern. Duke University Press, 2010

[2] http://www.cooperativa.cl/ministro-beyer-justifico-el-cambio-de-dictadura-por-regimen-militar-es-mas-general/prontus_nots/2012-01-04/122346.html

[3] http://www.cooperativa.cl/harald-beyer-asume-la-cartera-de-educacion/prontus_nots/2011-12-29/150144.html

[4] http://www.lanacion.cl/gutierrez-miembro-de-consejo-que-saco-palabra-dictadura-es-un-ex-cni/noticias/2012-01-05/142413.html

[5]http://www.elmostrador.cl/noticias/pais/2012/01/04/polemica-por-decision-del-mineduc-de-cambiar-el-termino-dictadura-por-gobierno-militar/

[6] http://www.elmostrador.cl/noticias/pais/2012/01/08/larrain-afirma-que-uso-de-concepto-%e2%80%9cdictadura%e2%80%9d-en-textos-escolares-resulta-%e2%80%9cpeyorativo/

[7] http://www.elmostrador.cl/noticias/pais/2012/01/04/polemica-por-decision-del-mineduc-de-cambiar-el-termino-dictadura-por-gobierno-militar/

[8] http://www.elquintopoder.cl/fdd/web/educacion/opinion/-/blogs/contra-la-historia-el-ministerio-de-educacion-y-el-final-de-la-dictadura;jsessionid=1B25CA1BFA867F709F2C6885C9BF3D88

[9] http://www.elmostrador.cl/noticias/pais/2012/01/05/el-paso-por-la-cni-que-complica-al-representante-de-las-ffaa-en-el-consejo-nacional-de-educacion/

[10] http://www.elmostrador.cl/ahora/2012/01/04/radicales-acusan-al-gobierno-de-blanquear-la-historia-al-llamar-gobierno-militar-a-la-dictadura/

[11] http://www.elmostrador.cl/noticias/pais/2012/01/04/frei-dc-dice-que-las-dictaduras-no-se-pueden-cambiar-por-un-decreto-de-ley/

[12] http://ilovechile.cl/2012/01/06/chile-change-curriculum-pinochet-controversy/44048

[13] http://www.elmostrador.cl/noticias/pais/2012/01/05/lily-perez-lo-que-hubo-en-chile-fue-una-dictadura/

[14] https://sites.google.com/site/dictaduraporsunombre/

[15] http://www.guidogirardi.cl/temas-del-dia/citaran-sesion-especial-del-senado-por-cambio-de-%e2%80%9cdictadura%e2%80%9d-por-%e2%80%9cregimen-militar%e2%80%9d-en-textos-escolares/

[16] http://www.indh.cl/lorena-fries-recibe-a-parlamentarios-y-manifiesta-su-rechazo-a-cambio-de-dictadura-por-regimen-militar-en-textos-escolares

[17] http://www.elmostrador.cl/noticias/pais/2012/01/12/marchan-contra-reemplazo-de-la-palabra-dictadura-en-libros-de-historia/

Dictatorship Relics in Chile: Paying homage to Miguel Krassnoff Martchenko

This article was first published in Upside Down World here.
In another event which exposes the reality of Chilean society’s split memory, an homage to former Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional (DINA) officer Miguel Krassnoff Martchenko was described as an exercise in freedom of expression by mayor  of Providencia Christian Labbé, in turn prompting outrage and protests from human rights and activist groups in Chile since its announcement.

On November 21, Labbé organised a book launch for the 4th edition of right wing historian Gisela Silva Encina’s Miguel Krassnoff: Prisoniero Por Servir a Chile (Miguel Krassnoff: A Prisoner for Serving Chile). A letter from Krassnoff[1] was read during the event, in which he described his incarceration as ‘illegal, illegitimate and unconstitutional’. Hundreds of activists and relatives of tortured victims gathered to protest the event, some holding placards stating “I don’t forget, nor forgive”. Others turned up with photographs of tortured, assassinated or missing relatives. Protestors hurled eggs and stones in the direction of Club Providencia, resulting in clashes between opposing groups and the use of force and tear gas against protestors by the Chilean police. Earlier that day another indictment was issued against Krassnoff, charging him and three other DINA officers with the kidnapping of Newton Morales Saavedra in 1974.[2]

A message relayed by one of President Sebastian Piñera’s assistants stated that while the President was unable to attend, he wished the event success, bearing in mind that “Krassnoff is a representative symbol of the 1973 – 1978 era.”[3] Following the protests, Piñera issued a retraction, saying the initial message was not his and there was no way his government would have participated in such an event.

Krassnoff was sentenced to 144 years in prison in 2006 for over 20 counts of crimes against humanity. A graduate of the School of the Americas (SOA) and renowned for anti-Marxist sentiment, Krassnoff took part in the September 11, 1973 military coup d’état which ousted President Salvador Allende. Having been in charge of DINA’s Brigada Halcon, Krassnoff was at the helm of Pinochet’s secret service which kidnapped, tortured and assassinated members of Movimiento de Izquierda Revolucionaria de Chile (MIR) – who had formed a paramilitary resistance against Pinochet’s dictatorship. Those arrested were taken to Villa Grimaldi and Londres 38, torture complexes which operated from 1974 to 1978.

According to Stern (Reckoning with Pinochet: The Memory Question in Democratic Chile 1989 – 2006) 4,500 prisoners were tortured from 1974 – 1976; including 205 disappearances. Survivors of torture recount extreme atrocities committed against prisoners. Sheila Cassidy, a British doctor living in Chile at the time of the coup, was arrested and tortured with electric shocks on the accusation of medically treating a Pinochet opponent. Paul Hammer[4], a law student arrested on suspicion of membership in a left-wing paramilitary group states he was beaten, shocked and brought to the verge of suffocation. Another torture survivor of Villa Grimaldi, Pedro Matta[5] was arrested in 1975 and taken to Villa Grimaldi. His extensive research sheds light on the methods and manner of torture.

Prisoners who refused to become collaborators for DINA were kept standing for long hours in tiny cells, torturers submerged the prisoners’ heads in putrid water, others were subjected to the shattering of limbs, performed by a guard who would drive a vehicle over the victim’s legs. Sexual abuse and torture against women was particularly sadistic, which included rape, using animals to sexually abuse women and the burning of genitals. Influential prisoners who refused to succumb to the interrogator’s demands were usually anesthetised, taken on board a helicopter and thrown into the ocean. This elimination of opponents was also affirmed by Cassidy.

Labbé, a personal friend of Krassnoff since their time at the (SOA)[6], so far remains unscathed by the law. A former body guard of Krassnoff, he later formed part of Brigada Halcon, given the duty of instructing guards in torture methods. Reiterating that he allowed the use of Club Providencia each time there was a commemoration pertaining to the Pinochet era, Labbé considers the event as honouring part of Chile’s history. Notwithstanding his role in Villa Grimaldi, Labbé continues to enjoy the authorities’ support and has contested council elections, retaining his place as Mayor since his first campaign.

Despite the testimonies from survivors and reports drawn up by the Valech and Rettig commissions; Chilean society remains split over the dictatorship era. According to Krassnoff’s declaration in the letter read during the book launch, “the military coup didn’t happen. It was a legitimate military intervention.” Once again, memory and blame are displaced. Pinochet’s initial declaration to allegations of human rights abuses, “Sometimes democracy must be bathed in blood” was mellowed through the years into a mission of refuting evidence of torture and murder through the discrepancy oblivion, as he stated in 1995, “The only solution to the issue of human rights is oblivion.”

As evidenced from Gisela Silva Encina’s blog[7] about Krassnoff, Pinochet supporters are in denial of the history of human rights abuses, assassinations and disappearances. Echoing a quote from Krassnoff, “I am a soldier who has been transformed into a persecuted politician.” Encina states that Krassnoff was the victim of lies and that no evidence incriminating Krassnoff was brought forward. Indeed, Dr Patricio Bustos, Head of Servicio Medico Legal, testified that he was tortured by Miguel Krassnoff[8], and that Krassnoff never used a pseudonym to conceal his identity[9]. The testimonies of victims were dismissed as memory manipulation. Encina’s blog also portrays the protestors as criminals attacking Pinochet supporters, thus necessitating the use of force on behalf of the police. Chile’s laws do not deem the celebration of genocide as a crime; therefore once again, victims and their relatives have been subjected to a travesty of justice.

However, the memory of the oppressed refuses to relinquish its stand. Lorena Pizarro, president of Agrupacion de Familiares de Detenidos Desparecidos (AFDD), condemned the homage[10], stating it portrayed Chile as a state which sanctions terrorism, as well as opening an avenue for a repetition of state terror. Alicia Lira, president of the Agrupacion de Familiares de Ejecution Politicos (AFEP) denounced the homage as an affront to memory and an example of the impunity which Piñera’s government is unwilling to counter, since many officers from the Pinochet era remain in authoritative positions.[11] On behalf of the AFDD, Pizarro is suing Labbé[12], demanding to know whether public funds were used to finance the event.

At a time when Chile is experiencing a surge in protests, notably the students’ protests demanding quality and free education, the event elicited responses from political figures. Head of Senate Guido Girardi denounced the homage[13], calling it “a tribute to torture, assassination and rape” and challenged Piñera to take measures against allowing Labbé to run for council elections in 2012. [14] “It is not possible that public authorities honor torturers and murderers … It is not democratic that your party supports a militant who has incurred faults that go against the constitution and the law … Labbé should be prevented from reapplying for office as he clearly has not responded as democracy demands.”

Notes:

[1] http://miguelkrassnoff.blogspot.com/2011/11/carta-del-brigadier-krassnoff-leida-en.html

[2] http://www.lab.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1154:homage-to-a-criminal-in-chile&catid=65:news&Itemid=39

[3] http://www.biobiochile.cl/2011/11/17/gobierno-califica-de-lamentable-error-apoyo-inicial-al-homenaje-a-ex-agente-dina-miguel-krassnoff.shtml

[4] http://peoplesworld.org/villa-grimaldi-chile-s-memorial-to-victims-of-torture/%20Paul%20Hammer

[5] http://thelegacyproject.com/acmatta.html

[6] http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=140065

[7] http://miguelkrassnoff.blogspot.com

[8] http://www.elmostrador.cl/noticias/pais/2011/11/22/%E2%80%9Cnos-tiraron-desnudos-amarrados-a-un-somier-metalico-con-aplicaciones-de-electricidad%E2%80%9D/

[9] http://www.elmostrador.cl/opinion/2011/11/25/yo-estuve-alli-no-hubo-empate/

[10] http://www.londres38.cl/1937/w3-article-92796.html

[11] http://afepchile.cl/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=363:afep-frente-a-homenaje-al-criminal-krassnoff-qno-permitiremos-que-se-pretenda-borrar-de-la-memoria-colectiva-el-horror-y-la-traicionq&catid=1:ultimas&Itemid=71

[12] http://www.londres38.cl/1937/w3-article-92800.html

[13] https://nacla.org/news/2011/12/1/homage-criminal-chile

[14] http://ilovechile.cl/2011/11/25/evening-news-6/40508

My review of Reckoning with Pinochet, published in Upside Down World at http://upsidedownworld.org/main/chile-archives-34/3053-book-review-memory-and-justice-in-democratic-chile “My father had breakfast every day with General Pinochet during four years...I cannot understand that General Pinochet could say today ‘I have no idea’,” stated Manuel Contreras Valdebenito in 1999, whose father was head of DINA, Chile’s intelligence services during Pinochet’s dictatorship. By then, a division in loyalty had started to occur between Pinochet and his secret police DINA (Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional).During Pinochet’s brutal dictatorship, violence was implemented as a means of annihilating all socialist and Marxist support in the country. Death and disappearances, torture and exile were common occurrences. A vital factor aiding the regime’s tenacity was the population’s subsequent silence. Fear and terror had created a long, temporary absence of vociferous socialist support, and the definition of justice had been mangled and manipulated by the absence of a memory made public.Two particular memory frameworks prevail through the book Reckoning with Pinochet – The Memory Question in Democratic Chile, 1989 – 2006 (Duke University Press, 2010), described by author Steve J. Stern as emblematic memory and loose memory – the social memory and the personal memory. Although they stand in contrast, it is by blending both concepts that the memory becomes national; the memory of Chile. Personal accounts of torture, disappearances, murder and exile sustain the social experience, which in turn creates a framework that is capable of combating the memory oblivion of the right.Reckoning with Pinochet delves into the memory question and the process through which memory became an essential part of Chilean culture. Drawing on the obvious split of loyalties within Chilean society, Stern vividly portrays the memory of both sides, bringing to light a conclusion which, despite the obvious, has the tendency to remain cloistered in a realm of its own. Despite the propaganda of democracy, Pinochet’s rule was a brutal dictatorship which resorted to extremes to annihilate any evidence of socialist or communist support. Yet, due to the flaws inherent in the subsequent transition to democracy, there still remains a segment of the population which perceives Pinochet as a saviour, and therefore defines atrocities as a method of preserving Chile from ruin. While the socialists perceived the pre-1973 years as the prologue to adversity, supporters of Pinochet drew upon Allende’s presidential term as the disaster prior to deliverance. What the right eliminates from memory is obviously the reality of Pinochet’s brutal massacre of Chileans and other atrocities that render an individual split from his humanity.In its essence, memory can be elusive – a series of certainties that differs according to the recollections of people. At a distance, the repression of the Pinochet dictatorship in Chile may be perceived solely as a fragment of the country’s history, not having been burdened with a legacy of death, torture, disappearances and exile. As the book draws on the memory of people, grassroots organisations, elites, truth commissions and judges, it becomes evident that the memory of Chile is strong enough to be sustained beyond its borders. With the rupture of silence, the atrocities committed during the dictatorship became translated into an experience of that particular era in Chilean history, documented both for Chile and for the rest of the world.Throughout the years of transition, Pinochet argued in favour of memory oblivion, describing the concept as “mindful silence as a positive good.” Memory had created a conflict on both sides out of the quest for truth and justice. Patricio Aylwin’s Convivencia law was aimed at shattering the silence that shrouded the era of torture and oppression, thus giving an outlet to narrations of brutality. In the wake of evidence starting to seep out, the military and the Right had “adjusted to the documented factual truth of memory as rupture.” By displacing responsibility for the committed atrocities, Pinochet and the right wing had justified their detachment from the process, and even from culpability. The memory transition at best seemed fragmented. Pinochet sought honour and amnesty. Aylwin was pressing for political stability and ethics, while victim survivors were clamouring for justice. The transition satisfied nobody, yet it was through this period that grassroots activists ascertained the legacy of terror would not be ignored. As testimonies started to emerge from the truth commission’s investigations, the memory oblivion encouraged by Pinochet was relegated to its own irrelevance within the context of the oppressed people’s quest for memory truth. Stern also presents memory as an experience. Whilst the culture of oblivion shelters the middle class from the moral obligation of affirming state violence, thus clashing with the concept of human rights, the memory framework of the socialists is dependent upon exposing atrocities in order to reach a semblance of salvation. The rupture of silence was essential in order to create a framework that portrays the injustice inflicted on Chilean supporters of Salvador Allende, activists within the Unidad Popular and other people who had a socialist background to bring about a relative consciousness that sustains itself from within the confines of history. In due course, other media and creativity sources sprang up, conveying the social memory of the oppressed to the Chileans as a nation. The memory quest for justice remained replete with obstacles from the past, as Pinochet’s legacy loomed over any shattered frontier. In a letter addressed to Chileans in 1998, Pinochet stresses that he never sought power and was trapped by a communist conspiracy. The actions of embedding past realities in the present was unacceptable to the right wing which, in its futile efforts to preserve the culture of oblivion, persevered in a wave of disassociation negation, fabricating a reality that diminished the essence of justice.As the truth emerged, Allende was once again reaffirmed as the leader of marginalised people. A sentiment which had to be sheltered during Pinochet’s reign had once again manifested itself in the loyalty of the people. This was a memory totally independent of justice and its manipulations.Pinochet was finally deemed unfit to stand trial due to dementia, a relic of another fallacy of justice. Responsibility was never legally acknowledged or declared through a trial. Findings state that the scale of torture during Pinochet’s dictatorship was massive and it was also a ‘policy of the state’. Thus, Chile’s memory remained an inconclusive metaphor, blemished by tragedy and the ambiguous process that was supposed to pave the way through democracy.

My review of Reckoning with Pinochet, published in Upside Down World at http://upsidedownworld.org/main/chile-archives-34/3053-book-review-memory-and-justice-in-democratic-chile

“My father had breakfast every day with General Pinochet during four years...I cannot understand that General Pinochet could say today ‘I have no idea’,” stated Manuel Contreras Valdebenito in 1999, whose father was head of DINA, Chile’s intelligence services during Pinochet’s dictatorship. By then, a division in loyalty had started to occur between Pinochet and his secret police DINA (Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional).

During Pinochet’s brutal dictatorship, violence was implemented as a means of annihilating all socialist and Marxist support in the country. Death and disappearances, torture and exile were common occurrences. A vital factor aiding the regime’s tenacity was the population’s subsequent silence. Fear and terror had created a long, temporary absence of vociferous socialist support, and the definition of justice had been mangled and manipulated by the absence of a memory made public.

Two particular memory frameworks prevail through the book Reckoning with Pinochet – The Memory Question in Democratic Chile, 1989 – 2006 (Duke University Press, 2010), described by author Steve J. Stern as emblematic memory and loose memory – the social memory and the personal memory. Although they stand in contrast, it is by blending both concepts that the memory becomes national; the memory of Chile. Personal accounts of torture, disappearances, murder and exile sustain the social experience, which in turn creates a framework that is capable of combating the memory oblivion of the right.

Reckoning with Pinochet delves into the memory question and the process through which memory became an essential part of Chilean culture. Drawing on the obvious split of loyalties within Chilean society, Stern vividly portrays the memory of both sides, bringing to light a conclusion which, despite the obvious, has the tendency to remain cloistered in a realm of its own. Despite the propaganda of democracy, Pinochet’s rule was a brutal dictatorship which resorted to extremes to annihilate any evidence of socialist or communist support. Yet, due to the flaws inherent in the subsequent transition to democracy, there still remains a segment of the population which perceives Pinochet as a saviour, and therefore defines atrocities as a method of preserving Chile from ruin. While the socialists perceived the pre-1973 years as the prologue to adversity, supporters of Pinochet drew upon Allende’s presidential term as the disaster prior to deliverance. What the right eliminates from memory is obviously the reality of Pinochet’s brutal massacre of Chileans and other atrocities that render an individual split from his humanity.

In its essence, memory can be elusive – a series of certainties that differs according to the recollections of people. At a distance, the repression of the Pinochet dictatorship in Chile may be perceived solely as a fragment of the country’s history, not having been burdened with a legacy of death, torture, disappearances and exile. As the book draws on the memory of people, grassroots organisations, elites, truth commissions and judges, it becomes evident that the memory of Chile is strong enough to be sustained beyond its borders. With the rupture of silence, the atrocities committed during the dictatorship became translated into an experience of that particular era in Chilean history, documented both for Chile and for the rest of the world.

Throughout the years of transition, Pinochet argued in favour of memory oblivion, describing the concept as “mindful silence as a positive good.” Memory had created a conflict on both sides out of the quest for truth and justice. Patricio Aylwin’s Convivencia law was aimed at shattering the silence that shrouded the era of torture and oppression, thus giving an outlet to narrations of brutality. In the wake of evidence starting to seep out, the military and the Right had “adjusted to the documented factual truth of memory as rupture.” By displacing responsibility for the committed atrocities, Pinochet and the right wing had justified their detachment from the process, and even from culpability.

The memory transition at best seemed fragmented. Pinochet sought honour and amnesty. Aylwin was pressing for political stability and ethics, while victim survivors were clamouring for justice. The transition satisfied nobody, yet it was through this period that grassroots activists ascertained the legacy of terror would not be ignored. As testimonies started to emerge from the truth commission’s investigations, the memory oblivion encouraged by Pinochet was relegated to its own irrelevance within the context of the oppressed people’s quest for memory truth.

Stern also presents memory as an experience. Whilst the culture of oblivion shelters the middle class from the moral obligation of affirming state violence, thus clashing with the concept of human rights, the memory framework of the socialists is dependent upon exposing atrocities in order to reach a semblance of salvation. The rupture of silence was essential in order to create a framework that portrays the injustice inflicted on Chilean supporters of Salvador Allende, activists within the Unidad Popular and other people who had a socialist background to bring about a relative consciousness that sustains itself from within the confines of history. In due course, other media and creativity sources sprang up, conveying the social memory of the oppressed to the Chileans as a nation.

The memory quest for justice remained replete with obstacles from the past, as Pinochet’s legacy loomed over any shattered frontier. In a letter addressed to Chileans in 1998, Pinochet stresses that he never sought power and was trapped by a communist conspiracy. The actions of embedding past realities in the present was unacceptable to the right wing which, in its futile efforts to preserve the culture of oblivion, persevered in a wave of disassociation negation, fabricating a reality that diminished the essence of justice.

As the truth emerged, Allende was once again reaffirmed as the leader of marginalised people. A sentiment which had to be sheltered during Pinochet’s reign had once again manifested itself in the loyalty of the people. This was a memory totally independent of justice and its manipulations.

Pinochet was finally deemed unfit to stand trial due to dementia, a relic of another fallacy of justice. Responsibility was never legally acknowledged or declared through a trial. Findings state that the scale of torture during Pinochet’s dictatorship was massive and it was also a ‘policy of the state’. Thus, Chile’s memory remained an inconclusive metaphor, blemished by tragedy and the ambiguous process that was supposed to pave the way through democracy.