Despite his retirement as head of the Chilean armed forces, General Pinochet remains a controversial figure both in Chile and internationally. Part of the mystery of Pinochet is the extent to which he is still hated and yet the extent to which he survives politically. Below you will find the views of three experts on Chile and on Pinochet.

Disparity and Senator Pinochet
Professor Osvaldo Sokol teaches economics at the University of Chile. In his view, the bloc of nine unelected seats in the Chilean Senate Pinochet controls in effect enables him to block any real attempt by the elected government to totally dismantle the authoritarian institutions that were erected during the years of Pinochet’s dictatorship. Sokol believes that the democratic forces that negotiated the peaceful transfer of power in 1989 really had no choice but to agree to Pinochet’s demands. But this has left the current centre-left government of Chile unable to proceed with some of the social and economic reforms it would otherwise need to introduce in order to provide more assistance to the nation’s growing proportion of poor people.

Today, Sokol notes that despite the economic boom, Chile has a very bad rate of income distribution. While absolute income per capita has more than doubled in the last 10 years, the gap between rich and poor has widened considerably. In Chile, about 10 to 15 per cent of the population is very well off, and has no hesitation about flaunting its wealth. On the other hand, the poor and very poor form a majority of the country’s people. Unless this serious economic disparity is addressed by government action, Sokol believes, then Chile’s future is very uncertain. But any attempt to pass social and economic reforms that would raise the living standards of Chile’s impoverished people will almost certainly be blocked by Pinochet’s senators. For this reason, Sokol thinks that Chile’s democratic transformation and economic progress, impressive as they may be, are still both woefully incomplete and in desperate need of further reform.

Divisiveness and Senator Pinochet
Pamela Constable is a journalist who covers Latin American politics for the Washington Post. In her view, Chile today is a far more modern and politically stable society than it was when Pinochet seized power in 1973. But despite the changes that have occurred, it remains a deeply divided society, with people holding very different views about the Pinochet dictatorship and its legacy for Chile. Any national consensus, she believes, is still many years away. Despite his departure from the army command, Pinochet continues to symbolize the importance of military institutions and hierarchies. Chile’s armed forces remain loyal to him personally, and he returns their trust by ensuring that none of those responsible for human rights abuses during the dictatorship will ever have to face criminal charges for them. While many Chileans bitterly resent this, Constable believes that the country’s democratic political leaders have accepted Pinochet’s continuing influence on Chile’s affairs as a necessary evil. They fear that any political instability arising from a confrontation with the military might jeopardize Chile’s ongoing prosperity. But for the many who have been left behind while the economy has grown, this does not offer much consolation.

Deprivation, Democracy, and Senator Pinochet
Ariel Dorfman is an author and playwright who fled Chile after the 1973 coup and now teaches at Duke University in the United States. He once referred to Pinochet as “that man whom I detest above all people on this earth.” Dorfman is ambivalent about Pinochet’s departure as Commander-in-Chief. On the one hand, he rejoices in the fact that this one-time dictator no longer exercises military control over the country. But on the other, he is bitter and resentful that a man who betrayed the elected president who had named him to his command can assume a new position as senator-for-life after committing so many crimes against democracy. To Dorfman, even Chile’s undisputed economic progress during the Pinochet years cannot justify or mitigate these abuses. After all, he notes, Hitler’s Nazi regime in Germany was also able to promote economic growth, but that fact can hardly be used to condone or minimize its other horrific policies. In Dorfman’s view, Chile’s economic miracle has come at the expense of workers whose rights have been trampled on, and poor people who are living at levels of deprivation far worse than anything that existed in the country prior to Pinochet’s takeover. He also wonders whether the economic boom is really sustainable without political honesty and accountability.

Dorfman narrowly escaped arrest and almost certain death on eight separate occasions before he left Chile and went into exile in the U.S. In his view, this fortunate destiny has imposed on him the sometimes onerous burden of speaking out for those thousands of Chileans who lost their lives after the coup. The books and plays he writes, and the films he now produces in association with his two sons deal mainly with themes of political repression and the defence of human rights and democratic values. Although he frequently visits his homeland, he sometimes feels that he is less welcome there than General Pinochet is, and this troubles him deeply. To Dorfman, the real evil that someone like Pinochet embodies is not the terrible deeds he committed. Instead, it resides in the fact that he, as a bad person, was able to make others who were basically good do things of which they were later ashamed. And until the unlikely day that Pinochet expresses regret and seeks repentance for the horrors he visited on his country, Dorfman says he can never forgive or forget.

Follow-up Discussion
1. What insights are you able to gain about the current economic, social, and political situation in Chile after reading the statements of these three experts?

2. Despite the strong views toward Pinochet of each of the experts quoted above, each expresses a certain ambivalence toward the political situation surrounding Pinochet. Describe these circumstances and explain why they suggest the power that Pinochet still holds in Chile.