US Apology to Latin America?

President Obama is on to El Salvador as part of his three-country trip to Latin America. During his visits, Obama has tried to compare the Latin American transitions to democracy with those that today he hopes are taking place across the Middle East and North Africa. Unfortunately, once you start to do that, people start asking what the US did to help Latin America, and Brazil, Chile, and Brazil in particular, take part in that transition.

The sanitized version is that the United States "helped" all three countries, more so in Chile and El Salvador than Brazil, move from military rule to electoral democracy. Sorry, but it's also a little long since I needed a break from grading and it is spring break.

Chile
In 1980s Chile, the US helped the No Coalition defeat General Pinochet's plebiscite on extending his term in office. We also made it clear that we would not accept any effort on his part to go back on his word to step down should he lose the plebiscite.

However by focusing on US efforts in the late 1980s, it covers up our government's role in overthrowing Salvador Allende and the political, economic, and intelligence support we provided to the military government led by Pinochet.

Brazil
In Brazil, I am not really familiar with any significant US support that helped bring about the transition from military to civilian government in 1985. Neves and other civilian politicians seem to have successfully convinced the military to voluntarily surrender office without much coordination or assistance from the US. (Correct me if I am wrong.). US support was more significant in bringing civilian government to and end during the April 1, 1964 military coup that removed Goulart from office.

Like Allende nine years later, Goulart was removed by a military that deemed his too far left. While the US played an active role in Allende's removal, our role in Brazil was more one of encouragement and diplomatic cover. We met with the plotters in the months before the coup and gave them our blessing. We also began to move assets into play should they need our assistance, but none was required. We had also funded opposition candidates in the early 1960s and late 1950s (not unlike Chile), but to little effect.

El Salvador
Finally, in El Salvador, the US was helpful in pressuring or reassuring the Salvadoran military and economic elites that a negotiated settlement to the war between the state and the FMLN was in their best interests. This was mostly in 1991. During the 1970s and 1980s, the US helped to arm and train a Salvadoran military to defeat the Marxist-Leninist Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front.

The army that we supported was engaged in a highly-indiscriminate campaign of violence against anyone perceived as a threat to the security of the Salvadoran states. The victims included campesinos, priests, nuns, teachers, workers, pro-democracy and agrarian reform activists and, of course, guerrillas. They were all labeled terrorists, subversives, or communists.

While repression of the nonviolent opposition would continue throughout the 1980s, it was worse in the cities between 1978 and 1981/1982 and in the countryside thereafter. From my reading of the situation, the US continued to encourage the military to respect human rights to the extent possible as long as it did not get in the way of defeating the communists. When they continued to violate human rights (which was frequently), we provided political cover for the regime. However, the 1989 massacre of the Jesuits notwithstanding, the military was a better trained and more respectful military by the end of the 1980s.

On the civilian side, we were mistrustful of the military and civilian moderates in the October 1979. (This was El Salvador's last chance to avoid a civil war. Romero would be assassinate four months later and Reagan would come to office in January 1981. Most civilians had also given up hope for serious reforms after the coup and then Romero's death.) The US then pushed Jose Napoleon Duarte of the Christian Democratic Party as a political component to the counterinsurgency war. However, for a variety of reasons, Duarte lost power to ARENA and Alfredo Cristiani who then entered into negotiations with the FMLN. (I know I skipped a lot).

With this history, what's sort of apology could the US offer?

1. We are proud that we assisted Brazil, Chile and El Salvador in their transitions to electoral democracy in the 1980s and 1990s. (Then duck all questions about our efforts to undermine or overthrow democracy, prop up dictatorship, and support human rights abuses - this seems to be the path Obama has taken).
2. We regret our contribution to the violence that unfortunately characterized the region's transition from military rule to civilian rule and then go to point 1. Vague enough and makes it sound as if everyone was equally responsible. 
3. We are proud of our defense of democracy and freedom against the forces of tyranny (godless communism might work too) and make no apologies whatsoever.
4. We apologize for our support for military rule and the repression of the nonviolent left in the 1970s and 1980s.
5. While we do not wish to re-open up debates, we are committed to helping the people of the Americas learn the truth about the dead and disappeared.

I'm not that creative, but in the current environment I think the best Obama can do is number 1.