21st Century Civil-Military Relations in El Salvador

Christine Wade has an op-ed in The Globe and Post about Nayib Bukele's civil-military disaster in El Salvador.

While the delicate situation is still evolving, one thing remains clear: Bukele is playing a dangerous game. In 1992, at the end of El Salvador’s 12-year civil war, the government and FMLN rebels pledged to resolve their conflicts through peaceful means. While certainly imperfect, that pledge has held for 28 years. 

Much of that success can be attributed to placing the military under civilian control and depoliticizing its role. Involving the army and police in a dispute between civilian institutions not only violates the letter and spirit of the 1992 peace accords but attacks the very foundations of Salvadoran democracy.

In El Salvador we're seeing 21st century civil-military relations and it isn't pretty. Bukele's running around taking selfies and the military is professing its political allegiance to him via Twitter. "Democracy" is redefined to be "whatever the president thinks is good for the people." Many Salvadorans support his actions, because he's just shoving things down the legislature's throat for the good of the people. The idea that the military is an apolitical and non-deliberating body is a stupid 20th century concept.

I am glad to see the U.S. Ambassador condemning all this. I do worry, though, that the real policy makers in the White House love what Bukele's doing.

One other point. Christine writes the following:

Heralded by many Salvadorans as the “first post-war” president, it now seems the post-war president needs to heed lessons of the past.

I agree with this, but it makes me feel old. I am the old guy complaining about the youngster and his selfie stick, with his newfangled ideas about bringing a few of his heavily armed friends into Congress to threaten them on God's behalf. I am old enough to remember the debates about the army's optimal role in a democracy, and how sending them directly into the legislature tends to send the wrong message about your commitment to democracy.