Argentina's "Dirty War"
The "Dirty War" is the period between 1976 and 1983 when Argentina was ruled by an authoritarian military dictatorship. The term "Dirty War," Guerra Sucia in Spanish, describing this period in Argentinian history is often rejected by human rights groups today, as it implies the notion of justified and necessitated action amid war. This implication, that war was underway in Argentina, is entirely false; The "Dirty War" describes the systematic persecution of Argentinian citizens by their own government, using unlawful and cruel methods. General Rafael Videla, the dictator during the "Dirty War," persecuted his own people using terrorist tactics including abduction, torture, and murder. 1,5. Even today, the effects of this period can be felt. Very little literature and evidence exist today from this period because of the fearmongering and censorship enacted by the Argentinian leadership 1. While many of the primary perpetrators of this horrific event have been tried under the current Argentinian judicial system, many still feel that proper justice has not been served. As Sam Furguson writes in his book The Disappeared: Remnants of a Dirty War, "But the trial is as much about the 'symbols of the dictatorship' who created an 'Argentine Auschwitz' as it is about the individual crimes enumerated in the charging papers" 1.
In the 50 years leading up to the "Dirty War," Argentina experienced nine military coups and the oversight of more than twenty different political leaders between 1930 and 1976 5. This period of substantial political instability spans all of World War II and extends into a significant portion of the Cold War. While Argentina remained neutral throughout the majority of WWII, it was the location of refuge for many sympathizers of Nazi Germany. These refugees brought with them anti-Semitic sentiments, further contributing to Argentina's instability. In the aftermath of World War II, the Cold War arose between the United States and the Soviet Union. The primary cause for this conflict was the ideological incompatibility between the Soviet communism and the American capitalism 2. In this context, Argentina was used as a proving ground for these competing ideas.
In September 1975, a proposition was passed under the guise of opposing the leftist guerrilla threat, directing the military to eradicate "subversion" 5. With this proposition, the military expanded its anti-leftist efforts to the point of terrorism. These actions were conducted to eliminate anti-capitalist ideals that had been circulating and had caused the initial guerrilla attacks. Contributing to this hostile and tumultuous environment were the remnants of World War II ideals. Argentina harbored a vast number of Jews who immigrated over the century leading up to the outbreak of the "Dirty War." Following the conclusion of WWII, sympathizers of Nazi Germany brought with them their anti-Semitic sentiments that resonated with the extreme right-wing. This religious tension and continuation of World War II ideological differences led to the Jews and leftists being scapegoats for any problem Argentina faced 5. In this light, Jacobo Timerman, a prisoner of the Argentinian dictatorship, summarized the mindset of the leadership as the following: "World War III had begun; the enemy was left-wing terrorism; and Argentina was the initial battleground chosen by the enemy." 5.
Prior to the military takeover that ushered in the "Dirty War," political instability in Argentina reached a breaking point as leftist groups conducted guerrilla attacks across the country. These leftist warriors attacked "Robin Hood-style," stealing food and other necessities to distribute in impoverished areas in hopes of raising public support 5. Nearing 1970, the attacks from the left became directed towards military personnel and right-leaning politicians. Fearing another world war, José López Rega though the Argentinian president at the time, Juan D. Perón, formed the Alianza Anticommunista Argentina (or Argentine Anticommunist Alliance, AAA) to neutralize the leftist action 5. The AAA was a "death squad" 5 sanctioned by the president to eliminate the leftist insurrectionists, or anyone harboring ideology different than capitalism. It also laid the foundation for the "Dirty War," as the violence sharply increase in the year following. In July 1974, the AAA drastically increased its activity and ferocity against the left's terrorism following Perón's death. As a result, support for the Argentinian leadership dwindled until the military coup d'état on March 24, 1976 5.
This military coup on March 24, considered necessary due to the excessive AAA violence and their terroristic methods, sought to restore order and structure to Argentina. The first program proposed to remedy the situation Argentina faced was El Processo de Reorgananización Nacional (The Process of National Reorganization) 5. It proposed the swift and decisive eradication of those opposing the new leadership, so that order could be reinstated. With this, the Argentinian military had complete control over the nation and all its inhabitants 5. Within months, the military dictatorship was persecuting and heavily suppressing the Argentinian public. The approach was order through overwhelming terror, where no one would dare oppose the leadership. In a speech to the public, the figurehead of the dictatorship, Rafael Videla, spoke on imposing justice and reaffirming liberty. Taken in conjunction with his speech months earlier where he expressed his willingness to protect the nation no matter the cost, Videla forbode a grim and bloody future to come 5. With this, Videla ushered in the "Dirty War" of Argentina.
The "Dirty War" was characterized by the Argentinian dictatorship using state terror to suppress political dissidence and maintain control. Instead of solely relying upon legal measures for unifying the nation, the military dictatorship chose to make use of extralegal, clandestine repression. As Thomas C. Wright explains, the leadership justified its actions as necessary to combat the subversion from the left. This justification enabled the dictatorship to commit numerous human rights violations, including but not limited to abductions, torture, and murder 5. This violence was used to intimidate the Argentinian people into submission and eliminate any semblance of political opposition.
One extralegal repression tactic used by the military dictatorship extensively during the "Dirty War" to rid the nation of any perceived threats was forced disappearance. These forced disappearances include the kidnapping, exile, and murder of Argentinian citizens. Tens of thousands of Argentinians were abducted by the military, with 62% happening in the dead of night and witnessed by another. There was nothing secretive about these disappearances. In fact, the Argentinian officials would deliberately call attention to themselves to amplify the terror felt by those nearby 5. Once abducted, the victims were taken to the Argentinian equivalent of concentration camps, the location of which was and still is unknown. These camps were deliberately concealed to further enhance the fear felt by neighbors and loved ones, who had no way of knowing whether the individual was alive 1. An estimated 380 of these concentration camps were scattered throughout Argentina, sometimes in plain sight. As former prisoner recounts, "I could hear people walking by cars and buses passing, life going on as usual, with us disappeared in a concentration camp. We were in the world but not part of it, alive in the realm of death" 5.
The dictatorship would justify these actions as only occurring to leftist dissidents and threats to the stability of Argentina, although the definition of "leftist dissident" had expanded throughout the "Dirty War." Students, journalists, intellectuals, and anyone suspected of harboring dissident intentions was now included under the umbrella of "left dissidence" 5. Marguerite Feitlowitz emphasizes that language itself was a tool of repression used by the military, using euphemisms and other verbiage to obscure their actions and further dehumanize the victims 3. These atrocities were permissible under the authoritarian regime of military dictatorship, as the definition of "subversive action" was vague. This manipulation of the definition facilitated and normalized the violence committed by the military.
Beyond physical means of controlling and suppressing the Argentinian population, the military regime made extensive use of fear. Sam Ferguson describes the universal presence of forced disappearance altering the social atmosphere, seeding distrust within communities, and encouraging silence and self-censorship for fear of being another victim 4. The military dictatorship was able to easily maintain extreme level of fear and terrorism because the Argentinian people were self-policing and self-censoring, too afraid of becoming next among the disappeared.
The effects of these atrocities can be felt today and shape the narrative around Argentinian history. Although democracy was instated in 1983 and many of the state-sanctioned terrorists persecuted, there are lingering questions of proper justice, accountability, and remembrance. Brennan remarks that the absence of physical evidence and trauma inflicted upon the surviving victims complicates the recovery from this event, both nationally and individually 1. Acknowledging the mechanisms by which the Argentinian military was able to instate petrifying fear on a national level, as well as the consequences of the extreme oppression felt by the Argentinian people, is essential to understanding Argentinian history and recognizing the long-term effects of state-sponsored terrorism on a society.