Military Review

Why is the death of Videla interested in the press less than the death of Pinochet? ("", France)

Why is the death of Videla interested in the press less than the death of Pinochet? ("", France)Although this Argentine soldier was at the head of a dictatorship, at the hands of which ten times more people died than in Chile, the circumstances of the upheavals, the repressions and the real power of these two people differed radically from each other.

Both were military and had a mustache. Both seized power after coups d'état. On their hands is the blood of the opposition, whom they tortured to death. They both tried to judge. Despite the sometimes strained relations, they both worked together and received help from the French military in a vile war against their own people. The first one was Augusto Pinochet: he ruled Chile with an iron fist from 1973 to 1990 a year. After being questioned in law enforcement, the dictator died in his bed in December 2006. The second was Jorge Videla ...

he was even more violent than Pinochet's dictator in Argentina from 1976 to 1981 the year when he was replaced by another putsch general. He was tried, convicted, pardoned, then tried again. 17 May Videla died in his prison cell.

In 2006, the death of Augusto Pinochet was written on the front pages of newspapers and talked in all issues News. They remembered the oppositionists driven to the stadiums, Allende’s death in the presidential palace on September 11, 1973, massacres, torture of Victor Jara and death in exile of Pablo Neruda, whose circumstances are still not completely clear.

At the same time, the European and French press squeezed out just a few lines about the death of Jorge Videla, although the repression in his country was much more severe than in Chile: the number of dead and missing as a result of the repression in Argentina is estimated at almost 30 000 against "all" 3 000 in Chile. These monstrous figures say a lot about the cruelty of the Argentine regime, which, by the way, lasted only seven years, unlike Chile, where Pinochet left the presidency only in 1990, but later became the commander of the ground forces.

What is the reason for such a different attitude to these two people? The reasons are more than enough. One of the main, no doubt, is that Pinochet died without answering for his crimes.

In 1998, he was temporarily under house arrest in the UK: Spanish judge Baltasar Garzon (Baltasar Garzon) issued an international arrest warrant for a former dictator on charges of crimes against humanity. Margaret Thatcher visited him and called the man "who brought democracy to Chile." At the same time, she completely forgot that he began the path with the destruction of this very democracy. A year and a half later, he was released back to Santiago for health reasons.

Silent repression

An expert on the region and author of a wonderful book on Latin American dictatorships Alain Rouquié offers a number of other explanations.

The first is that the coup d'état in Argentina 1976 of the year (occurred three years later after the Pinochet putsch) was directed against a criminal government led by Isabel Peron and Jose Lopez Rega, nicknamed "sorcerer" ( Alain Roquier calls him "someone like Rasputin"). The detachments of the death of the government even then killed and tortured the opposition, and its economic policy drove Argentina to a standstill.

The coup d'état of 1976 passed without clashes and mass arrests of oppositionists. In addition, on coming to power, the statements of the junta sounded encouraging. “The junta declared that it wants to put an end to the aggression of the ultra-left and death squads by Peron,” explains Alain Rookier. - I saw myself represented by a moderate politician. His rhetoric sounded so convincing, and coups d'état became part of the political landscape in Argentina so long ago that the left favored it. The illusion was so strong that even the Argentine Communist Party initially expressed support for the junta’s moderate leaders. ” Thus, the coming to power of Videla was perceived in Argentina and other states much better than the coup d'état of Pinochet.

However, in reality everything turned out differently. Behind the tough, but moderate facade of Videla’s power, there was a ruthless policy of eliminating the opposition, which was carried out without fanfare, unlike in Chile, where the opposition was driven to stadiums. Thousands of dead and missing people, the opposition members who were taken away by plane, were drugged and thrown into the sea, children of women tortured to death passed into the families of military men ... The list of crimes is frighteningly long.

In Chile, repression was carried out in the most centralized manner, and the whereabouts of detained people usually became known. In Argentina, everything was assigned to a group of officers who received carte blanche for actions in a particular region, could torture and eliminate oppositionists, and their places of “work” were usually kept secret. “The policy was clearly aimed at dispersing forces. The right hand does not know (and does not want to know) what the left hand is doing, ”says Alain Rookier.

Face junta

In addition, if Pinochet consistently eliminated all his rivals and became the undivided master of the country, the Argentine dictatorship was a real junta with representatives of the three types of troops (land army, air force, fleet), and Videla - just her face. Further, in 1981, Viola came to take his place, whose place then moved to Lacoste and Galtieri.

Seel cannot be called the real dictator of Argentina compared to who Pinochet, Franco and Salazar were in their states. He was only the "official representative" of the dictatorship, which showed unprecedented cruelty under the cover of moderation and got rid of him five years later. “In the end, we can say that there is nothing particularly interesting about his death in prison,” says Alain Rukier.

All this, no doubt, explains such a different media approach to the coverage of the death of Pinochet and Videla. The first embodied the dictatorship, while the second was only her face.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. fisherman
    fisherman 31 May 2013 16: 40 New
    In Chile, a military coup was organized against the socialist Allende
    and in Argentina there was no communist alternative. There was a struggle between two bourgeois clans. Everything that happened in the world and was in the outline of the confrontation in the Cold War, all of this was attached great importance. The USA and the West were obsessed with victory over the USSR and did not shy away from anything. By the way, our time is no better. At stake is the power of the dollar and to stay on top of power, the United States does not disdain anything. All the worst is yet to come!

    ... at the same time, the worst for the USA
    1. sergo0000
      sergo0000 31 May 2013 18: 38 New
      Quote: fisherman
      ... at the same time, the worst for the USA

      God bless your words! smile
    2. mivmim
      mivmim 1 June 2013 06: 00 New
      "... at the same time, the worst for the USA"
      Hurry up.
  2. Rattenfanger
    Rattenfanger 31 May 2013 19: 23 New
    The casket just opens -double standarts... One "though a son of a bitch, but our son of a bitch" (c). And Pinochet decided that he could afford to think and act independently, guided exclusively by the interests of the old. And immediately became an outcast.
    To make it clear what a policy of double standards is based on the example of historical figures:
    1) Everyone knows that Ivan the Terrible is a terrible fanatic, tyrant, tyrant, maniac, etc., etc. The fact that he was one of the smartest people of his time is important. The main thing is that he bathed in blood. The West is known as Ivan the Terrible.
    He executed, suppressing separatism and trying to eradicate the unnecessary liberties of the state for the boyars of 3,5 people. I do not presume to evaluate, just a bare fact.
    2) Enlightened Geyropa. Charles No. 9. Bartholomew’s Night. Cut only in Paris to 30 thousand. The monarch personally shot from the musket at the Huguenots rushing along the Senna embankment. The slaughter continued throughout the country for more than a month. Has anyone heard his name become a household name?
    3) Small Britain. Oliver Cromwell. 60000 executed in England, Ireland and Scotland. Yes, and with Charles the First, it somehow seemed awkward ... winked However, in the history of the UK is considered a positive character, a progressive politician.
    But: the first was an Asian barbarian-Muscovite, and Karl and Cromwell were enlightened gay men, their own on the board.
  3. individual
    individual 31 May 2013 19: 33 New
    History fact:
    In 1998, Augusto Pinochet was temporarily under house arrest in the UK: Spanish judge Baltasar Garzon issued an international arrest warrant for a former dictator on charges of crimes against humanity. Margaret Thatcher visited him and called him the man "who brought democracy to Chile." However, she completely forgot that he began the journey with the destruction of this very democracy.
    I draw attention to UK's false democracywhere it is constantly argued that the judiciary is separate from the executive branch.
    After Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher visited the criminal Pinochet and her resume on "Democrat" Pinochet, he was released back to Santiago for health reasons.
  4. Pilat2009
    Pilat2009 31 May 2013 20: 06 New
    Quote: Rattenfanger
    3,5 thousand people

    Quote: Rattenfanger
    to 30 thousand.

    Quote: Rattenfanger
    60000 executed

    Small on the background of Lenin, Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot
    1. Rattenfanger
      Rattenfanger 31 May 2013 20: 08 New
      Oh how! And how much did Stalin execute?
      1. sergaivenski
        sergaivenski 31 May 2013 20: 51 New
        Dictators are dictators !!! You can control bayonets, but you cannot sit on them (!) !!!
        The age of dictators is short-lived !!!
        1. Rattenfanger
          Rattenfanger 31 May 2013 21: 35 New
          For the bloody dictator Stalin, the old people are still ready to tear up Union Jack. Apparently, they scared them, poor fellow. And they did the impossible, in peaceful life and in war, not because they sincerely believed in their cause, but because the back of the NKVD detachments.
        2. Bear52
          Bear52 1 June 2013 00: 32 New
          The age of dictators is short-lived !!!
          Very true, comrade! I recommend your post to everyone who comrade Dzhugashvili calls a dictator! drinks good soldier
      2. sterx20072
        sterx20072 31 May 2013 21: 19 New
        100 five hundred miles, you do not know!
        1. Rattenfanger
          Rattenfanger 31 May 2013 21: 30 New
          Yeah, yeah, "bloody gebnya, pizza millions innocent," and all that. yes
      3. Samminosh
        Samminosh 31 May 2013 23: 43 New
        Like a half billion.
        It is necessary to ask Lev Natanovich
    2. Felix200970
      Felix200970 31 May 2013 23: 28 New
      Quote: Pilat2009
      Small on the background of Lenin, Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot

      Means of production have changed. Productivity of labor has grown. wassat
  5. Pilat2009
    Pilat2009 31 May 2013 21: 58 New
    And for fun, you compare how much the population was before 37 and after 50
    here either Stalin or Hitler, and you can write off to any
    Quote: Rattenfanger
    For the bloody dictator of Stalin, the old people are still ready to break into Union Jack

    We have such a trait - the more we are bullied, the more we love the mockers. What kind of hostage syndrome, have you heard of this? This is when the hostage after a while begins to feel sorry for the person who captured him, almost love and justify
    1. Rattenfanger
      Rattenfanger 1 June 2013 06: 09 New
      We have such a trait - the more we are bullied, the more we love mockers.

      This, I'm sorry, you need to contact a sex therapist.
      As for the "Stockholm syndrome": it arises in a state of severe shock, for its occurrence, interpersonal relations with a pronounced dominance are necessary, etc. This is an absolutely incorrect comparison. Or do you think that Joseph Vissarionovich personally walked and frightened the population of the USSR at night?
      And for fun, you compare how much the population was before 37 and after 50
      here is either Stalin or Hitler,

      Or Hitler? You didn’t try to read a history textbook? It is written Russian in white about the losses of 27-28 million people suffered by the country during the course of Hitler’s aggression.
      But still: the first population census was carried out in the USSR in 1937. The population of the country was, God forbid, memory, about 162 million people. Then they annex the territories of Western Ukraine and Belarus and "sproeaters" -about 23 million. After which the country loses 7 million combatants and 21 million civilians in 41-45 years. Plus the famine of 46-47. However, at the beginning of 1951, according to the State Statistics Service, the population was about 180 million.
      Output? Blood tyrant Stalin and his henchman Beria raped the whole country, causing a surge in fertility?
      From 1921 to 1954, the number of prisoners amounted to 3 million 770 thousand people. Including 760 thousand were exiled and deported from the country, 640 thousand were sentenced to the Navy.
      In the United States, there are currently over 2,1 million people in prison. The bloody clique of the Bushist-Obamist, right?
      1. Firstvanguard
        Firstvanguard 8 July 2013 20: 24 New
        Plus car you dear Rattenfanger !! fellow
        For the answer essentially without snot and verbiage drinks
  6. Black
    Black 31 May 2013 22: 08 New
    Well, no one writes to another "colonel" either ...