CONADEP military coup of 1976 1974: The agony of the Peronist government Perón's death left unchecked the set of forces that had coexisted conflict under his leadership. It is true that the rift between Peronist factions had reached a point of no retum by July 1974. But it is also true that Peron's death deprived the government of a legitimate and acceptable driving by all of Peronism, which could reshape the political and social arrangements to ensure governance of the country. Instead it had a tentative address his widow, accompanied and advised by the increasingly influential Minister of Social Action and Perón's private secretary, Jose Lopez Rega. 
(pictured Hector Campora presents outgoing President Alejandro Lanusse in 1973)
addition to the presidential, the other factor of power within the government was syndicalism . The unions felt relieved of the commitments made taken in 1973 and set about undoing the political design painstakingly assembled by Peron. Shortly after Peron's death, the CGT leadership passed into the hands of unionists who believed that the labor movement was to enter the political season opened with the death of President free from old commitments to the government. The new commitments that the new leadership negotiated with the government pointed to the reformulation of Incorporation and the posting of union leaders and political opponents of the ruling CGT.
Peron and his wife Isabel Martinez when they assumed the presidency of the Republic of Argentina on October 12, 1973
The granting of the social covenant renegotiation triggered the resignation of Gelbard. This reorganization of the government, López Rega was the height of their power and strengthened the union bureaucracy coincided with an upsurge of violence.
| 
| mid-1975, Perón set of agreements that had been articulated and constituted the core of his project of political institutionalization, had failed and the country seemed to walk aimlessly. The arrival of Celestino Rodrigo (pictured above left) to the Ministry of Economy further exacerbated the problems. With the support of Lopez Rega, (photo left) Rodrigo took a number of measures, known as the "Rodrigazo"-devaluation of the peso by 100% and 160%. 181% increase in the price of gasoline and 75% in transport prices, and o-after similar measures, which had the immediate effect of an acceleration of inflation and a political crisis. The political crisis culminated in the Rodrigo displacement and Lopez Rega, caused by a successful general strike called by the CGT. |
 |
Isabel Peron's government temporarily moved away , which was in the hands of Senate President Italo Luder (pictured right). Economy Minister, Antonio Cafiero, supported by the CGT, tried unsuccessfully to control inflation. Isabel Peron's return to the presidency, the internal crisis of Peronism, the intensification of political violence, and lack of cooperation, in many cases open opposition of big business and the military, the government removed all support base.
A knock announced
The economic slippage, political violence and the evidence of the breakdown of government opened the breach through which military expenditures returned to the government. On March 24, 1976 the military junta, composed of the commanders of the three weapons, Jorge R. Videla (Army) Emilio E. Massera (Marina) and Orlando R. Agosti (Aeronautics) - overthrew the government of Maria Estela Martinez de Peron and opened what he called "Process of National Reorganization." This new military intervention was different from previous ones.
Masera-Videla-Agosti
Representatives of the Three Armed Forces
The 1966 coup had resulted in a sustained government, ultimately, by the Forces Armed in 1976 the government was exercised directly and at all levels Armed Forces. As the new president, General Jorge R. Videla, 25 May 1976:
"The armed forces were not heeded. As a result and foreseeing the inevitability of the crisis, were prepared to deal with this situation and the Armed Forces as an institution were an institutional response to a crisis also institutional. "
The military government proposed root transform society in Argentina. It was not simply to correct an economic policy to defeat the guerrillas or to resolve a constitutional crisis. It would have been enough for some changes in constitutional law. The military junta that was in question was the existence of a nation. To resolve this crisis, then had to "rearrange" the society in Argentina, in a "process" that he had "time" but "objective."
This "reorganization" was a concrete expression: political and social repression, dismantling the foundations of industrial economics and authoritarian exercise of power. Finally culminated in the military defeat in the Falklands War.
illegal repression, which had its heyday between 1976 and 1978 - was one of the basic features of the military government. The illegality was not so only because it was conducted by a de facto government but because even violated the law established by that government. Repression, carefully planned, organized and directed by the highest levels of political and military, was at the same time, illegal. Recipients were not only members of the guerrilla organizations committed to armed struggle, but extended to a set of social and political actors with no direct links with the guerrilla organizations.
Decree No. 6 of the military junta suspended "the political activity of political parties at national, provincial and municipal levels." The law ordered 21,261 n.0 "temporarily" suspended the "right to strike, as well as that of any other measures of force, unemployment, work interruption or decreased performance or conditions in any way affect the production, by both workers and employers and their respective associations or organizations. "
The clandestine methods of repression included the kidnapping and detention in clandestine centers, we verified the existence of more than three hundred ", torture and, in most cases, execution. The junta introduced the death penalty. But legally it did not apply outside the law. As a result, there was the legal form of the forced disappearance of people, about ten thousand cases tested, although some estimates triple that figure, "including people arrested and secretly executed by security forces. The consequences of repression also included the vast majority of people who lived in a climate of fear of censorship.
Despite its pretense of consistency and firmness, the military government was gone from its origins by deep internal divisions, resulting largely from the particular translation into the action that took the decision to take the government institutionally. The general principle that ensured the participation of the three forces in the government was the distribution of public administration at all levels and modalities-national, provincial, municipal, state enterprises, universities, equally. Each force, or more precisely, the officer corps of each force, was left with a third of public office. This decision, which revealed the nature of relations between forces, characterized by a deep mistrust also marked a difference between the government of "Process" and the previous military interventions, which have a larger weight of civil servants in public administration.
Between 1976 and 1981, the vast majority of senior public administration was in the hands of officers of the Armed Forces. This hampered the functioning of the state, mainly because each officer fell under two heads: his superior in the hierarchy of public administration and senior military. This dual dependence contributed to the fragmentation of the state in multiple units which enjoyed de facto autonomy, with the predictable effects of corruption. Furthermore, the same institutional and legal order of the government of "process" was characterized by inconsistency and arbitrariness. As highlighted the repressive action, the military government did not comply with the laws he himself had dictated.
Legal status, Underground State
"The state was affected even more deeply. The so-called National Reorganization Process led to the coexistence of a terrorist state underground, in charge of law enforcement, and other visible, subject to rules established by the revolutionary authorities themselves but their actions subjected to some legality. In practice, this distinction is not maintained, and illegal state was corroding and corrupting the conj Unto the state institutions and its own legal structure.
dark The first question was where real power lay, as though the country's political tradition was strongly presidential system, since the control unit was always one of the principles of the Armed Forces, the authority of President-at first the first among their peers, and then not even that-was diluted and subjected to constant scrutiny and limitation of the heads of the three weapons. "LUIS ALBERTO ROMERO
Brief Contemporary History of Argentina (1994)
Economics During the Military Government
The military government's economic policy was decided and implemented for five years by Jose Alfredo Martinez de Hoz. Minister of Finance between 1976 and 1981. Martínez de Hoz concentrated enormous power, which allowed him to make decisions profoundly transformed the operation of the Argentinian economy and society. The economic program that Martinez de Hoz had the country on April 2, 1976 was inspired liberal and postulated the need to move from an economy of speculation to production, through encouraging competition and limiting the role of state in the economy. These objectives were not achieved. By contrast, the result of the economic policy of Martinez de Hoz was an explosive growth of financial speculation and a dramatic fall in productive activities.
Initially, the military government took a series of stabilization measures, which were supported by the Fon-International Monetary Fund and foreign private banks to control inflation, reduce the fiscal deficit and balance the external sector. It devalued the currency, reduced public-sector deficit largely freezing wages, and external financing was obtained. Economic policy had a strongly anti-labor bias: it suspended the right to strike and reduced employee participation in the GDP (gross domestic product).
After controlling the open with Rodrigazo crisis, the economic team was defined and forward two main dimensions: economic opening and liberalization of financial markets.
The opening of the economy was the opening of the domestic market to foreign competition, not to promote the export of domestic production. The main instrument of this policy was the reduction of import tariffs. Subsequently, the overvaluation of the peso is high on this measure, which seriously compromised the productive activity, also affected by high interest rates.
financial market liberalization was After the release of the interest rate and authorization for the operation of new banks and financial institutions. However, the State, who resigned from the controls, guaranteed fixed-term deposits taken by private financial institutions.
In 1978 the military government established a pattern change, known popularly as the "little board" - which determined a monthly devaluation of the peso. This devaluation was decreasing and tends to zero. The stated aim of this measure was to control inflation. This objective was not achieved. Instead, what was a strong speculation fostered a large amount of money placed in the short term favored by the abundance of dollars on the international market, based on the existence of high interest rates and the state guarantees on the repurchase price of dollars.
Some words and phrases commonly used at the time - 'free money', 'bike', 'give me two "- account for the characteristics of a period of artificial prosperity and financial speculation.
financial euphoria contrasted with the behavior of the productive sector, pressured by debt. The industrial sector, in particular, suffered a radical change, including a fall in production, a decrease of labor employed and the closure of many plants.
The scheme of Martinez de Hoz erupted in 1980, with the help of the collapse of major financial institutions, among them one of the largest private banks, and the state ended up taking over the liabilities of failed banks.
The World Cup of 1978 was held in Argentina and had the strong support of the military dictatorship
In 1981, the overall Viola replaced as president Videla, and Martinez de Hoz was also replaced. In that year, the economic collapse came at the end. The government announced a devaluation of 400%, while inflation was running at 100% annually. This devaluation took unpayable dollar debts of private firms. The state nationalized the debt, which increased the public debt.
Despite its liberal nature, the economic policy of Martinez de Hoz included a considerable expansion of the state's role in the economic sphere. This was partly the decision of the military leadership to maintain the orbit state-owned enterprises whose boards, on the other hand, were occupied by soldiers. Also during this period increased public investment. Many public works were executed by private contractors and some state enterprises privatized part of its activities-what is called "privatization peripheral" -. In the latter case, the outsourcing of tasks included search and exploitation of oil and materials repair work and maintenance of roads in the railways, the provision of telephone equipment, collecting waste and maintenance of public lighting in the city of Buenos Aires. Some of these activities was forming a powerful group of state contractors.
Other areas of growth in government spending were the nationalization of private enterprises in difficulty, as the Company Italo Argentina de Electricidad and the Southern Company, and the remarkable expansion of military spending.
In 1978, the border conflict with Chile in the Beagle Channel area was about to unleash war. The armed forces were retrofitted with a view to confrontation and mobilized troops to the border. The war was prevented by the mediation of Pope John Paul II.
Between the opening and war
The bursting of the economic program agreed with the change of president. The weak domestic bid winner in the senior military leaders was General Roberto Viola, Chairman of the Board appointed commanders in September 1980. Viola, who took office in March 1981, proposed changing the orientation economic policy and find a political solution to the military regime. This was due to attempt to change the perception of a fraction of the Army of policy failure Martinez de Hoz and the need to seek new allies. Viola divided the Ministry of Economy in five portfolios, in order to "depersonalize" economic policy, a majority of civilians joined the cabinet, led to a rapprochement with the owner-named sectors of industry leaders representing rural and industrial ministries Agriculture and Industry, and initiated a dialogue with trade unionists and politicians.
This attempt to find new bases of support for the military regime failed. In the political arena, the opening was coolly received by the main political forces, who doubted the representativeness of Viola within the armed forces and therefore the viability of its policy. In July 1981, was the Multiparty-organized by the Radical Civic Union and comprising parties
Justicialista Intransigente Christian Democratic Movement and Integration and Development ", in order to offer a political bloc unified "force tending to restore democratic institutions and offer the country, temporarily, a proposed solution to the national emergency. "
However, the decisive opposition to the project came from the home front Viola military. This opposition was expressed as a power struggle between the junta and the president, which led to the displacement of Viola, in December 1981. His replacement was Gen. Leopoldo F. Galtieri. (Pictured above)
Galtieri sought to restore the image of authority military government and resume the liberal orientation of economic policy, which was in the hands of a new economy minister, Roberto Alemanno (picture left). Tightened relations with political parties and the unions, which in turn also hardened their opposition. A mass rally sponsored by the CGT-Brasil, the militant wing of trade unionism, as distinct from the CGT-Azopardo, more conciliatory, "the March 30, 1982, was severely repressed. But the magnitude and character of the mobilization showed that the social and political opposition had grown up.
Three days later, the military regime in 1978 had led the country to the brink of war with Chile, shunned by the mediation of the Pope began his final stage, with the military occupation of the Falkland Islands.
The Falklands War
On 2 April 1982 the government forcibly occupied the Falkland Islands. Occupation, although it originated in a decision taken in secret by a few people and not properly calibrate its military and political consequences, had broad popular support.
b
The government figured that the recovery of the Malvinas would solve their political problems in a time when the direction of military experience is compromised. At first, this seemed possible. But the government had underestimated the response of Britain and also believed that the United States, whose main ally was just Great Britain, Argentina would support action.
The British reaction, largely driven by domestic political reasons- was hard. Margaret Thatcher's government decided to send a powerful fleet and military forces to retake the islands. The United States, after the failure of the mediation of General Haig, who attempted that the Argentine government accepted resolution 502 United Nations troops withdraw from the islands, strongly supported its main ally.
The military government decided to strictly control the dissemination of news about the political and military conflict, and created a climate triumphalist not correspond to the actual course of events.
piano in the policy International Argentina received the accession of the countries of Latin America and the Non-Aligned Movement, but was isolated from the Western powers. A desperate attempt by the Argentine government to change its alliances and enlist the support of the USSR was also unsuccessful. Militarily, the British power and the organization exceeded the chaotic and improvised device Argentine military. On June 14, 1982, the Argentine military commander in the Falklands surrendered to the British commanders.
... On June 15, 1982, Argentine troops surrendered to the English. The Falklands war was over. Also beginning the end of military dictatorship. (Photo: Archivo General de la Nación)
From Carter to Reagan
Relations between Argentina and the United States during the "Process" crossed two distinct Atapas. In the first, the United States government was in the hands of James Carter, the Democratic Party, which made the defense of human rights a priority in Latin America. This approach led to a permanent conflict with the Argentine government that systematically violated human rights. The change of administration, when Republican Ronald Reagan replaced Carter resulted in a change of policy towards Argentina. Reagan, who was seeking allies for its foreign policy, he found an enthusiastic adherent Galtieri, willing to align Argentina with U.S. foreign policy and military intervention in Central America. The U.S., meanwhile, lifted the sanctions that the Carter administration had imposed on Argentina. Galtieri, enthusiastic praise Americans and ignorant of the relative importance of allies United States, meant that this support will translate into a benevolent neutrality in the conflict to start thinking with Britain. 
Given the military conditions of conflict and control of information by government, military defeat was both inevitable and unexpected. One of its main consequences was the immediate breakdown of the military government. Galtieri resigned, Navy and Air Force withdrew from the Board and the commander of the Army appointed a new president, Gen. Reynaldo Bignone. (pictured right)
Source: Historia Argentina Luchilo-Roman-Paz
b 
