Taxpayers fund violence, war
By: Sam Holley-Kline
Issue date: 12/7/09 Section: Opinion
What do former Chilean general Raul Iturriaga Neumann, former Guatemalan dictator Efraín Ríos Montt and former Lt. Col. Domingo Monterrosa of El Salvador's infamous Atlacatl Battalion have in common? They have all been responsible for thousands of deaths, implicated in numerous human rights abuses and trained at the U.S. military-operated School of the Americas.
Though the school is now officially the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation, few seem to call it that. The school offers mostly the same courses and is even housed in the same building. Founded in 1946 to help professionalize Latin American militaries, the school obstinately fostered democracy, cooperation and peacekeeping throughout Latin America until its official "dissolution" in 2001.
The actions of the most famous graduates stand in clear contrast to its stated mission. During the El Mozote Massacre, perpetrated by the School of the Americas-trained Atlacatl Battalion, for example, nearly the entire population of the village of El Mozote was obliterated. Men were tortured, women raped and infants bayoneted.
Of course, not all graduates committed atrocities. Why should a school be held accountable for the actions of its graduates? The United States Army's Officer Candidate School certainly does not attract the same attention the School of the Americans does in spite of the fact that William Calley, convicted of ordering the 1968 My Lai Massacre, was a graduate.
The difference in degree of responsibility between the Officer Candidate School and the School of the Americas is clear. There is no evidence to suggest, for example, that anyone was ever taught when and how to violate human rights in the Officer Candidate School.
Certain passages from declassified manuals used at the school from 1987 to 1991 speak for themselves. For example, "the CI [counterintelligence] agent could cause the arrest of the employee's parents, imprison the employee or give him a beating as part of the placement plan of said employee in the guerrilla organization." That employee's worth "could be increased by means of arrests, executions, or pacification." The Assistant to the Secretary of Defense himself concluded that these manuals contained objectionable material and lacked "doctrinal controls."
Though the school is now officially the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation, few seem to call it that. The school offers mostly the same courses and is even housed in the same building. Founded in 1946 to help professionalize Latin American militaries, the school obstinately fostered democracy, cooperation and peacekeeping throughout Latin America until its official "dissolution" in 2001.
The actions of the most famous graduates stand in clear contrast to its stated mission. During the El Mozote Massacre, perpetrated by the School of the Americas-trained Atlacatl Battalion, for example, nearly the entire population of the village of El Mozote was obliterated. Men were tortured, women raped and infants bayoneted.
Of course, not all graduates committed atrocities. Why should a school be held accountable for the actions of its graduates? The United States Army's Officer Candidate School certainly does not attract the same attention the School of the Americans does in spite of the fact that William Calley, convicted of ordering the 1968 My Lai Massacre, was a graduate.
The difference in degree of responsibility between the Officer Candidate School and the School of the Americas is clear. There is no evidence to suggest, for example, that anyone was ever taught when and how to violate human rights in the Officer Candidate School.
Certain passages from declassified manuals used at the school from 1987 to 1991 speak for themselves. For example, "the CI [counterintelligence] agent could cause the arrest of the employee's parents, imprison the employee or give him a beating as part of the placement plan of said employee in the guerrilla organization." That employee's worth "could be increased by means of arrests, executions, or pacification." The Assistant to the Secretary of Defense himself concluded that these manuals contained objectionable material and lacked "doctrinal controls."
Be the first to comment on this story