Political Violence And The Authoritarian State In Peru

The Shining Path was one of the most brutal insurgencies ever seen in the Western Hemisphere. Political Violence and the Authoritarian State in Peru explores the devastating effects of insurgent violence and the state's brutal counterinsurgency methods on Peruvian civil society.

Between 1980 and 1994, Peru endured a bloody internal armed conflict, with some 69,000 people killed in clashes involving two insurgent movements, state forces, and local armed groups. In 2003, a government-sponsored “Truth and Reconciliation Committee” reported that the conflict lasted longer, affected broader swaths of the national territory, and inflicted higher costs, in both human and economic terms, than did any other conflict in Peru’s history. Of those killed, 75 percent were speakers of an indigenous language, and almost 40 percent were among the poorest and most rural members of Peruvian society. These unequal impacts of the violence on the Peruvian people revealed deep and historical disparities within the country. This collection of original essays by leading international experts on Peruvian politics, society, and institutions explores the political and institutional consequences of Peru’s internal armed conflict in the long 1980s. The essays are grouped into sections that cover the conflict itself in historical, comparative, and theoretical perspectives; its consequences for Peru’s political institutions; its effects on political parties across the ideological spectrum; and its impact on public opinion and civil society. This research provides the first systematic and nuanced investigation of the extent to which recent and contemporary Peruvian politics, civil society, and institutions have been shaped by the country’s 1980s violence.

Tamara Feinstein investigates the bloody Shining Path conflict’s effect on the legal Left in late-twentieth-century Peru, illustrating the catastrophic impact state and insurgent violence can have on the growth and resilience of democratic political actors during times of war. In this engaging historical study, Tamara Feinstein chronicles the late-twentieth-century Shining Path conflict and argues that it significantly contributed to the rupture and disintegration of the noninsurgent legal Left in Peru by deepening preexisting divisions and eradicating an entire generation of leaders. Using a combination of oral histories, archival documents, contemporary media accounts, and participant observation of commemorations, Feinstein maps the trajectory of the Peruvian Left’s rise and fall by analyzing two emblematic human rights cases that occurred at the Left’s zenith and nadir: the state-based violence of the 1986 Lima prison massacres and the 1992 Shining Path assassination of leftist shantytown leader María Elena Moyano. The lessons found in The Fate of Peruvian Democracy reach beyond Peru to connect with other Latin American countries. Peru’s story illustrates the difficulties of accumulating political force during times of violence, underscores how struggles for self-defense can complicate ideological stances on violence, and helps explain the unevenness of the resurgence of the Left (the so-called “pink tide”) in Latin America in the twenty-first century. The book contributes to debates on memory and human rights in Peru and Latin America where divisions over how to remember the war retraced the fault lines of earlier debates over democracy and violence.

Under what conditions is democracy stable? What forces undermine or reinforce democratic institutions in Latin America? This book suggests answers to these questions in the context of Peru. It identifies the micro and macro causes that explain the gradual breakdown of democracy in the period between the 1980 transition from authoritarian rule and the 1992 suspension of the Constitution and closure of Congress by President Alberto Fujimori. Similar self-coups were subsequently threatened in Bolivia, unsuccessfully attempted in Guatemala and actively considered in Brazil.

Using a framework that highlights how societal and international factors have shaped state capacities, Philip Mauceri examines Perus volatile politics in the countrys move from a developmentalist state to neoliberalism. He explores the challenges to state authority during the military regimes reformist experiment, arguing that they were intensified in the 1980s by poor planning and limited policy choices. He then examines how social and international conditions have influenced the Fujimori regimes attempt to retool the state along neoliberal lines. }Using a framework that highlights how societal and international factors have shaped state capacities, Philip Mauceri examines the volatile politics in Peru from the Velasco through the Fujimori regimes as the country has moved from a developmentalist state to neoliberalism.Dr. Mauceri begins by reassessing the reformist experiment of the Peruvian military regime (19681980), arguing that it led to the development of unexpected challenges to state authority, both from new social actors and international financial organizations. During the 1980s, these challenges intensified, made even worse by poor planning and limited policy choices. The author then argues that the attempt by the Fujimori regime, backed by a neoliberal coalition, to retool the state indicates the degree to which state capacities are determined by social and international conditions. Mauceri also gives special attention to the relation between changing state power and social control. Separate chapters on the evolution of a Lima shantytown and the Shining Path examine how changes in state-society relations have had impacts at the grassroots level.

Latin American opinion surveys consistently point to Peruvian citizens' deep distrust of their elected rulers and democratic institutions. The 2011 presidential and legislative elections in Peru, along with the regional and municipal polls of the previous year, showed once again the degree of political fragmentation in contemporary Peru and the weakness of its party system. Fractured Politics examines the history of political exclusion in Peru, the weakness of representative institutions, and the persistence of localized violent protest. It also evaluates the contribution of institutional reforms in bridging the gap between state and society, including Peru's Law on Political Parties, administrative decentralization, and the experience of the Defensoría, or ombudsman's office. The chapters, by leading scholars of Peruvian politics, emerge from a conference, held in 2009 in Saint Antony's College Oxford. Julio Cotler, from the Instituto de Estudios Peruanos (IEP), was the keynote speaker.

When Peru's APRA - one of the oldest and most controversial political parties in Latin America - came to power in 1985, expectations were high for the new government, and in part because a decade of economic decline and social crisis had discredited both the military and the right as alternatives. APRA did manage an unprecedented consensus for two years. But a sudden shift in strategy to confrontational rhetoric and authoritarian tactics led to policy stagnation, economic collapse, and a surge of reaction and political violence from extremes of the left and right. Rather than playing the role of the strong centre, APRA acted as a catalyst for the polarisation process. The party's sectarian and authoritarian strains, coupled with the increasingly erratic behaviour of its once-popular young leader, Alan Garcia, created damaging and perhaps irreparable divisions between the party and the rest of society, and between society and polity more generally.

And recommendations -- The sources and scope of violence in Peru -- The judiciary -- Penal conditions -- Congressional investigations of human rights abuses.