Argentina, 1985 is a historical drama which premiered in 2022. The title refers to a trial which was held in Buenos Aires – the capital of Argentina – in 1985.
The nine defendants in this trial were members of the military junta which ruled the country during the so-called Dirty War (1976-1983) – a dark chapter of Argentina’s modern history.
Here is some basic information about this drama:
** Director: Santiago Mitre
** Writers: Santiago Mitre and Mariano Llinas
** Language: Spanish
** Subtitles: English
** Run time: 140 minutes
The cast includes the following
The first group – historical persons
** Ricardo Darin as Julio Cesar Strassera (1933-2015) – chief prosecutor
** Peter Lanzani as Luis Moreno Ocampo (born 1952) – deputy prosecutor
** Alejandra Flechner as Silvia – wife of Julio
** Gina Mastronicola as Veronica – daughter of Julio
** Santiago Armas as Javier – son of Julio
** Laura Paredes as Adriana Calvo (1947-2010) – a victim who survived the Dirty War – the first witness to testify at the trial of 1985
** Carlos Portaluppi as Leon Arslanian (born 1941) – president of the court
The second group – fictional characters
** Gabriel Fernandez as Bruzzo – a political operator for the government of Raul Alfonsin
** Norman Bruski as “Ruso” – Strassera’s mentor
The nine defendants at the trial of 1985
** Jorge Rafael Videla (1925-2013)
** Emilio Eduardo Massera (1925-2010)
** Roberto Eduardo Viola (1924-1994)
** Armando Lambruschini (1924-2004)
** Orlando Ramon Agosti (1924-1997)
** Omar Graffigna (1926-2019)
** Leopoldo Galtieri (1926-2003)
** Jorge Anaya (1926-2008)
** Basilio Lami Dozo (1929-2017)
Since this drama is based on a true story, the basic facts are part of the public record. They are not a secret. This is why I feel free to mention some of them here.
While this drama is based on a true story, it is not a documentary film. It is a dramatized version of events. Not everything happened exactly as shown here.
Some details may have been altered, added or excluded for dramatic reasons or practical purposes. But the basic story is true.
The story begins in 1984, when chief prosecutor Julio Strassera is informed that the government of President Raul Alfonsin wants him to organize a trial against nine leading members of the military junta which ruled the country during the Dirty War.
Strassera talks to his deputy Ocampo about the case. They wonder how they can do this.
How can they organize a trial against nine leading members of the military junta? What are the charges? What is the evidence? Can they win such a case?
The members of the junta are accused of several serious crimes. The junta went outside the law. Members of the armed forces who worked for the junta conducted numerous extrajudicial operations in a long-running campaign to suppress and destroy the opposition.
Who was the enemy?
Any person and any organization on the left wing of the political spectrum. Socialists, communists, anarchists, members of trade unions were all regarded as a threat to the national security of the state.
Suspects were kidnapped, interrogated and subjected to torture. Some were killed, but most were eventually released after being detained under harsh conditions.
How many people were victims of this campaign? Estimates are not certain. It is often assumed that as many as 30,000 persons were “disappeared.”
This term is a euphemism for the truth. They were kidnapped, tortured, and killed.
One common method was to drug victims and place them on a military airplane, then fly over the ocean and finally push the victims out of the airplane while it was flying over the water.
More than 100,000 men and women were kidnapped, interrogated, tortured, and later released.
Among those who were kidnapped and detained were around 500 pregnant women who gave birth while they were in detention.
Once the child
was born, it was taken from the mother and handed to a trusted family who
adopted the child. Obviously, such an adoption was illegal.
The adoption of 500 stolen children was arranged with the support and assistance of the Catholic Church.
During the Dirty War, public protest against the junta was limited, because it was very dangerous to speak out against a government which used ruthless violence against the opposition.
There was, however, one remarkable exception to the general rule. The Mothers and the Grandmothers of Plaza de Mayo is an organisation which was formed in 1977.
Members of this group began to meet every Thursday afternoon at Plaza de Mayo. Members carried signs with short questions:
Where is my son?
Where is my daughter?
Where is my grandson?
Where is my granddaughter?
At first, the members of the military junta wanted to arrest them in order to get rid of them, but this did not happen.
Why not?
The members of the military junta realised that it would not be good for their image if soldiers began to arrest unarmed women in public.
The junta decided to let it go. The mothers and grandmothers were tolerated; they were allowed to show up at Plaza de Mayo and conduct a silent protest.
But this did not prevent the junta from going after individual members of the group at a time when they were not involved in a public demonstration.
Strassera and Ocampo realise that they need to find some hard evidence. They need testimonies from victims who survived the Dirty War and who are willing to testify in court.
How can they find such witnesses? Who can they trust to do the job in a proper way?
Strassera and Ocampo hire a large number of young lawyers as assistant prosecutors. Their task is to find surviving victims who are prepared to appear in court.
The nine defendants deny all charges. They present a series of short statements which run like this:
# 1. I did not kill anybody.
# 2. I did not order any person to kill anybody.
# 3. I do not know anything about a killing.
# 4. If any person was killed, it was an exception. It must have been done by a person who was over-active, by a rogue agent. I am not responsible for this.
# 5. I do not accept the authority of this civilian court. If I must be tried in a court of law, I demand to be tried in a military court.
Strassera and Ocampo realise that they must find evidence which can show a pattern. They must find cases for every year from 1976 to 1983 and they must find cases from every region of the country.
If they can show a pattern of abuse, the defendants cannot excuse themselves by saying that they did not know what was happening. They cannot say they were not responsible for what was happening.
Having travelled all over the country for several months, the young assistant prosecutors manage to find more than 700 survivors who are prepared to testify in court.
The first part of the drama covers the preparations for the trial. The second part of the drama covers the trial itself.
What do reviewers say about this historical drama?
Here are some results:
76 percent = IMDb
78 percent = Meta
92 percent = Rotten Tomatoes (the audience)
96 percent = Rotten Tomatoes (the critics)
As you can see, the ratings are high. I understand the numerous positive reviews and agree with many of them. But I cannot follow the general trend and go all the way to the top. Why not? Because there are some flaws.
What is wrong?
Let me explain:
# 1. Raul Alfonsin (1927-2009) was president of Argentina 1983-1989. He was the first civilian president after the end of the Dirty War. But he does not appear in this drama, even though he was the driving force behind the trial which was held in 1985.
As a viewer, I would like to know his state of mind when he decided that leading members of the military junta should be tried in a civilian court of law.
He had to ask and answer some difficult questions:
Can we do this? Should we do this? If we decide that we are actually going to do this, what is the scope? How wide or how narrow will the charges be?
This trial was a landmark in judicial history. It was the first time a civilian government in Latin America tried to hold the leaders of the armed forces responsible for their actions while they were ruling the country.
Alfonsin wanted to try something new. How far did he want to go? Did he go too far? Or not far enough? These questions deserve to be explored. But it does not happen. It could have happened if Alfonsin had been a character in this drama.
# 2. ESMA is an acronym which is mentioned several times in this drama, but the meaning of these four letters is not explained.
It is obviously a place or an institution which is important and which has a negative connotation. Only later in the drama are we told what ESMA is.
The letters ESMA stand for
Escuela de Mecanica de la Armada
ESMA was built as a naval academy in Buenos Aires.
During the Dirty War, it was used as a centre of detention. It was a place where kidnapped victims were interrogated and subjected to torture.
Since 2004, ESMA is a public museum dedicated to the memory of those who were kidnapped, tortured and killed during the Dirty War.
Most Argentine viewers do not need an explanation of this acronym, because it is well-known in Argentina. But this drama is also aimed at an international audience who is not familiar with this acronym.
It is unfortunate that the meaning of this term is not explained as soon as it appears.
# 3. Why did the armed forces of Argentina create a junta and take control of the country in 1976? Were they acting on their own? Or was there some external power which motivated them and told them what to do?
This question is not explored in the drama. An important aspect of the Dirty War has been omitted.
Operation Condor is a program which was active for more than ten years (1975-1989).
Several Latin American countries were involved in this program which was created and supported by the United States: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay.
The purpose of this program was to eliminate the threat of communist subversion and terrorist aggression in the American continent.
In order to protect the national security of the state, the armed forces might - in some situations - have to abolish civilian and democratic rule and take control of the country for a while.
The military was allowed to use any means necessary to counter the threat against national security, including extrajudicial operations.
When the armed forces of Argentina took control of the country in 1976, they were not acting on their own. They were following instructions and advice from members of Operation Condor.
They were not doing this to enrich themselves. They were doing this, because they were hoping and trying to save the country.
The problem was that in order to save the country they had to destroy it. They abolished democratic law and order.
Any person who was regarded as a dissident was kidnapped, interrogated and subjected to torture because the military regarded him or her as a real or a potential criminal.
The armed forces acted with impunity. They could do whatever they wanted, because they had total power and for seven years no one was able to stop them from doing what they wanted.
After a while, the leaders of military junta began to realise the bitter truth:
(1) They did not know how to save the country.
(2) They did not know how to run a government.
(3) They were not better than the civilian politicians who they had pushed aside claiming that they were useless, weak, and even dangerous.
After ruling for seven years, the junta finally decided to surrender and allow a civilian government to take over. Before surrendering, the members of the junta tried to arrange a secure exit. They wanted to negotiate a deal for the future. They wanted to retire with a promise that they would never be prosecuted for their actions.
This method worked in many countries. Even though the military had to step down, the new civilian government was often so weak that it did not venture to hold the military accountable for their actions.
In Argentina, things were different. In Argentina, the usual plan did not work, because the civilian government under Alfonsin refused to forgive and forget.
A trial was held.
The civilian government wanted to show the people of Argentina - and the people of the world - that a military junta cannot rule for seven years and then walk away scot-free, A military junta cannot secure impunity for its actions.
During the Dirty War, the armed forces of Argentina worked with Operation Condor, a system of military dictatorships in Latin America, but this fact is not explored in this drama. It is not even mentioned.
# 4. What did Strassera do during the Dirty War? What was his role? This question is not explored in this drama, even though it is relevant.
Strassera worked for the military junta. He was a prosecutor and later a judge who often denied applications for habeas corpus. The term habeas corpus is used when a person who has been arrested is asking for a fair trial.
Strassera had to deal with the case which is known as the San Patricio Church massacre which took place in July 1976. Three priests and two seminarians were murdered.
Testimony presented in 1984 indicated that the massacre was carried out by members of the Argentine navy on the orders of Rear Admiral Ruben Chamorro (1926-1986) who was the commander of ESMA 1976-1979.
Strassera made sure that this case was not investigated. The suspects were neither found nor prosecuted. He was a loyal servant of the military junta. But his activities during the Dirty War are not covered in the drama.
# 5. In the drama, Strassera delivers a powerful statement to the court. The statement in the drama is close to the original statement which the real Strassera delivered to the court in 1985, but one significant part is excluded.
This is the part where Strassera explains the narrow scope and the limited purpose of the trial. He says:
“… this trial and conviction are important and necessary for the Armed Forces of the Nation. This process has not been held against them, but against those responsible for their leadership in the period 1976-82.
“It is not the Armed Forces that are in the dock, but specific and determined individuals who are accused of specific and determined crimes.”
The armed forces were not on trial in 1985, only nine members of the military junta who led them during the Dirty War.
But perhaps the armed forces should have been on trial. After all, members of the armed forces were willing to follow orders when the junta told them to go into action.
They were ready to kidnap, interrogate and torture thousands of victims, even though such actions happened outside the legal system and were clearly illegal.
While the trial of 1985 was spectacular, it had clear limits: Nine leaders of the junta were accused. But the armed forces were not on trial, even though the members had conducted a systematic and long-running campaign of death and destruction against any person who was designated as an enemy.
While we cannot blame director Santiago Mitre for the actions of the armed forces, we can blame him for not showing us the narrow scope of the trial whose story he wants to portray in his drama.
Argentina, 1985 is good but not great. It has some flaws which cannot be ignored. This is why I cannot follow the general trend and go all the way to the top.
I have to remove one star because of these flaws. I think this product deserves a rating of four stars (80 percent).
PS # 1. What happened to the nine defendants? Here are the names and the verdicts for each of them:
The first group
Jorge Rafael Videla – life
Emilio Eduardo Massera – life
The second group
Roberto Eduardo Viola – 17 years
Armando Lambruschini – 8 years
Orlando Ramon Agosti – 5 years
The third group
Omar Graffigna – not guilty
Leopoldo Galtieri – not guilty
Jorge Anaya – not guilty
Basilio Lami Dozo – not guilty
PS # 2. The following item offers important observations about the drama and the general topic:
Rafael Azul,
“Golden Globe award winner Argentina, 1985 examines trial of military junta leaders.”
World Socialist Web Site,
15 February 2023
The following brief paragraph sums up the conclusion:
“It is an accomplished work, but one with serious political and historical distortions and omissions.”
REFERENCES
# 1. Film and video
Argentina’s Stolen Children
A News Report – Retro Report – 15 minutes
Available on YouTube
(1984)
The Official Story
A historical drama
(1985)
Stolen children of Argentina’s dictatorship
search for the truth
A News Report - France 24 – 26 minutes
Available on YouTube
(2016)
Messenger on a White Horse
A documentary
(2017)
# 2. Books about the Dirty War
Mothers of the Disappeared
By Josephine Fisher
(1989)
Revolutionizing Motherhood:
The Mothers of Plaza de Mayo
By Marguerite Guzman Bouvard
(1994)
God’s Assassins:
State Terrorism in Argentina in the 1970s
By Patricia Marchak with William Marchak
(1999)
The Catholic Church and Argentina’s Dirty War
By Gustavo Morello, SJ
(2015)
Argentina’s Missing Bones
By James P. Brennan
(2018)
# 3. Books about Operation Condor
The Condor Years
By John Dinges
(2004)
Predatory States:
Operation Condor and Covert War in Latin America
By J. Patrice McSherry
(2005)
When States Kill:
Latin America, the US and Technologies of Terror
Edited by Cecilia Menjuvar and Nestor Rodriguez
(2005)
State Terrorism in Latin America:
Chile, Argentina, and International Human Rights
By Thomas C. Wright
(2006)
The Feathers of Condor: Transnational State Terrorism, Exiles and Civilian Anticommunism in South America
By Fernando Lopez
(2016)
The Jakarta Method: Washington’s Anticommunist Crusade & the Mass Murder Program That Shaped Our World
By Vincent Bevins
(2020)
The Condor Trials: Transnational Repression and Human Rights in South America
By Francesca Lessa
(2022)
*****
ESMA
During the Dirty War,
this was a place of detention and torture
Since 2004,
this place is a museum dedicated to
the memory of those who were disappeared
*****
The Mothers and the Grandmothers of
Plaza de Mayo
This picture shows a demonstration
held in December 1982
*****
No comments:
Post a Comment