Ramona Wadi
http://venceremoschile.blogspot.com/2013/05/el-doble-asesinato-de-neruda.htmlWednesday,
May 22, 2013

El Doble Asesinato de Neruda
<http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-l7iCB_JBmFk/UZynUcgSMcI/AAAAAAAAAKI/cFdonHbgiuk/s1600/El-doble-asesinato-de-Neruda%5B1%5D.jpg>In
light of the recent news regarding the investigations into Pablo Neruda’s
death, the much maligned testimony of Neruda’s personal assistant and
chauffeur Manuel Araya, is of significant importance. Denounced by the
Chilean right as a leftist conspiracy, Araya’s declaration in the Mexican
publication *Proceso *accusing the dictatorship of having assassinated
Neruda by a lethal substance injected into his stomach created a furore and
Chilean courts opened investigations into Neruda’s death, following a
petition filed by Partido Comunista.

El Doble Asesinato de Neruda (Ocho Libros, 2012) presents a compelling case
based upon Araya’s testimony and the Fundación Neruda’s insistence upon
adhering to the official version, which related the cause of death as
happening from advanced and metastatic prostate cancer. The recent forensic
investigations, partially completed since laboratories still have to test
for toxic substances, have determined that Neruda was indeed suffering from
advanced and metastatic prostate cancer, yet the authors Francisco Marín
and Mario Casasús insist that medical records were void of such grim
diagnosis and radiology reports did not specify the presence of metastatic
cancer.
The book is described as 'a reference to a biological and ideological
crime' - befitting the irregularities and contradictions which evolved
through the years, as well as a possible manipulation of Chilean history.
Prior to Neruda's exhumation, the Foundation expressed its objection to the
investigation, endorsing the dictatorship's official statement and
reiterating that there was no doubt that Neruda's death had occurred due to
natural causes. Despite the ambiguous statement indicating a lack of
interest in constructing a vital segment of chile's recent history, Marín
and Casasús discover a more sinister network of contacts which may shed
light upon why Neruda's wish to bequeath La Isla Negra as a retreat for
artists and intellectuals was disregarded. A betrayal of ideals ensued with
the foundation became economically aligned with Cristalerías Chile - an
enterprise owned by Ricardo Lagos, a torture coordinator as well as
a financial supporters of Pinochet's dicatatorship.
Prior to Neruda’s return to Chile from France where he was serving as
ambassador, Araya was summoned to Santiago by leaders of the Communist
Party and asked by Victor Díaz and Luis Corvalan whether he would accept
the role of personal assistant and chauffeur to Pablo Neruda – a job which
entailed a magnitude of commitment and responsibility. Araya describes
Neruda as brimming with plans to strengthen the Communist Party in Chile,
seeking ways to mobilise further support for Salvador Allende and concerned
with establishing a cultural foundation for writers and intellectuals. Far
from retiring to his home at La Isla Negra due to consuming illness, Neruda
maintained an active political stance and frequently denounced US
imperialism and interference in Chile, considering his role ‘a poetic,
political and patriotic duty’ to prevent a right wing insurgency in the
country. Among the frequent visitors to La Isla Negra were Salvador
Allende, Voloida Teitelboim and Cardinal Raul Sílva Henríquez. The latter
would attract the ire of the dictatorship and Vatican officials, who
instructed the clergy to maintain a perfunctory role restricted to
religious duties instead of campaigning against human rights violations and
clamouring for investigations into the cases of Chile’s desaparecidos.
<http://ts3.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4854757173299054&pid=15.1>Pablo Neruda
Considering Pinochet's fear of leftist intellectuals destabilising the
dictatorship from exile, the assassination scenario fits in perfectly with
the later powers allocated to DINA and the deadly targeting of militants.
In the aftermath of the coup, Neruda expressed the conviction that Allende
had been murdered, despite the dictatorship's proclamation of alleged
suicide. The Tejas Verdes contingent paid their first visit to La Isla
Negra on September 12, 1973, while Neruda fretted incessantly about the
fate of his compañeros, sentiments fluctuating between the despair of
abandonment and futility of defence. Knowing that the military would detain
and torture Neruda for his involvement in the Allende government,
discussions about the possibility of exile heightened, which would
safeguard Neruda's life and also provide him with the opportunity to
initiate a formidable resistance.
Meanwhile La Tercera, a newspaper which was closely affiliated to the
dictatorship, had started spreading rumours about Neruda’s allegedly
debilitating illness. In an attempt to quell opposition suspicions of
assassination, Pinochet issued a statement through Radio Luxemburgo.
“Neruda is not dead. He is alive and free to travel wherever he likes, as
befits other people of old age and struck with infirmity. We do not kill
anyone and, if Neruda dies, it will be of natural causes.” The book
translates this ubiquitous statement as proof of constructing Neruda’s
imminent annihilation.
Having left La Isla Negra to avoid the possibility of torture, Neruda,
accompanied by his wife Matilde, and Araya, sought refuge at the Clínica
Santa María. The exile offer by the Mexican government was at first
repudiated, with Neruda vehemently declaring he would not assume a
traitorous stance and betray his compañeros. After being briefed about the
atrocities committed by the military, Neruda assumed a resilient stance,
stating that he would lead the struggle against the dictatorship from exile
in Mexico. On September 23, the newspaper El Mercurio contributed to the
rumours by stating that Neruda had experienced a deterioration of health,
coinciding with the injection administered by a doctor at the clinic at a
time when the poet was alone, having sent Araya and Matilde on some errands
prior to exile. Upon their return to the clinic, having been alerted of the
suspicious circumstances by an employee, Araya was sent to buy medicine
which, according to the doctor, was not available at the clinic. Upon his
departure, Araya was ambushed and detained in Estadio Nacional. “I lost all
contact with Neruda forever, I never saw him again. I believe it was a plot
to detain me.”
Araya’s version of Neruda’s final hours has been discredited by the
Fundación Neruda, despite the fact that all ‘official’ testimonies which
have been endorsed by the foundation come from sources who had no access to
the poet during his final days. Araya was beaten, subjected to electric
shocks and asked to reveal the identities of Communist Party Leaders. He
was released 45 days later following intervention by Raul Sílva Henríquez.
Matilde’s reluctance to denounce the alleged assassination was reciprocated
by the foundation in later years. A solitary figure searching for ways to
open an investigation, Araya’s efforts were shunned and the official
version assumed the emblem of truth. The existence of the lethal injection
would have been eliminated from collective memory, had it not been for
Araya’s determination in maintaining his testimony. The official medical
and death certificates obliterated its existence, citing cardiac arrest as
the cause of death. Only when El Mercurio reported Neruda having been given
‘a tranquiliser’, did the injection suddenly spring into existence.
The possibility of Araya having invented his testimony in order to create a
controversy fades when faced with the various contradictions and reluctance
to properly investigate the cause of Neruda’s death. The authors hold
Matilde responsible for the ensuing silence – it is reported that she had
even tried to reach a compromise with Araya in return for relinquishing the
quest for justice. She is also deemed responsible for the foundation’s
betrayal of Neruda’s wishes, having entrusted the administration to
individuals responsible for maintaining the dictatorship’s atrocities.

As we await the final results regarding the presence of toxic substances in
Neruda’s remains, it is evident that, whatever the forensic verdict
decrees, Neruda’s death will continue to hover within the confines of
Chilean memory. The measures of impunity imposed by Pinochet to protect the
network of torturers and murderers has rendered investigation a source of
controversy and a means through which truth will remain eternally shrouded
with a pervading negotiation of privilege over human rights violations.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to