Heather Foote ( Unitarian Universalist Service Committee): Could you expand on how you see the difference between legislative reform initiatives coming from some of the political parties that are in Mexico and a reform package that would come out of the UN negotiating process on constitutional reforms?
Bernard Aronson: The political parties in the assembly have the legal and political responsibility to pass any constitutional reforms.They have been elected by the people of El Salvador to carry out that responsibility, so their involvement is both appropriate and positive. It would not be useful for the parties to reach agreement at the negotiating table in isolation from the political parties that have to vote on it in the assembly. And, clearly, a consensus that includes the Christian Democrats and ARENA is relatively broadly reflective. The Democratic Convergence was invited to join that process and at one point they were a part of it.I do not know if, in the end, they will agree to be part of this consensus or not.
It was positive that the parties went to Mexico City and met with the government, particularly with the FMLN, whom they had not talked to about the specifics.The issues on which they are prepared to carry out specific reforms are the issues that the parties at the bargaining table are addressing. The hope is to implement some of the more important reforms, particularly those that require constitutional action, before the assembly expires.
In the original accords in Geneva and Caracas, it was spelled out by both the government and the FMLN that other sectors in El Salvador should participate in the process.Clearly the elected political leadership is one of the more important of these sectors. The parties have discussed