Following Augusto Pinochet's arrest in London last year, many observers feared possibly dangerous consequences for Chile's transitional democracy. But a year after the former dictator's detention, argues PNS associate editor Alfonso Serrano F., Chile is neither paralyzed nor polarized. Serrano, a native of Chile, is a San Francisco-based journalist.

"What do you think about Pinochet's arrest?" I'm often asked. For me -- and for many Chileans -- the answer is not simple. I believe Pinochet is finally paying for his crimes, and deservedly so. I have no sympathy for him or his cohorts. But I also believe he should be paying in Chile.

I see his arrest as a new form of colonialism. Again, outside forces have trampled Chile's sovereignty. General Augusto Pinochet had the backing of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency when he led a military coup in 1973 that toppled Salvador Allende, the democratically elected socialist president.

I have doubts about how effective and fair international tribunals can be in dealing with former tyrants.

Why haven't we arrested "Baby Doc" Duvalier for his crimes in Haiti, or Uganda's Idi Amin, or any of dozens of other dictators for their violations of international law?

And I question whether the world's most powerful nations will ever let international tribunals determine the fate of their leaders. Can you imagine Panama arranging for the extradition of former president George Bush for the atrocities committed during the United States' invasion of that Central American nation?

Perhaps a more important question for me concerns what is happening in Chile since Pinochet's arrest. Critics claim Pinochet can never be tried in Chile, a nation in an imperfect transition to democracy. But a year after the former dictator's arrest, they might want to think twice about that claim.

Before leaving office, Pinochet issued an amnesty for all political crimes committed between 1973 and 1978, to protect himself and the armed forces. Recently however, a Chilean court reinterpreted that law, ruling the amnesty did not protect officials accused of kidnapping.

As a result, in the last two months dozens of former members of the military have been arrested in Chile for their role in human rights abuses during Pinochet's rule.

They include a former four star general, Humberto Gordon, arrested for his alleged role in the death of union leader Tucapel Jiménez in 1982. Human rights groups have implicated Gordon in the deaths of 80 Chileans and 500 cases of torture between 1980 and 1986, when he was head of the intelligence agency, CNI.

And Chilean judges are now questioning the once untouchable Pinochet himself about his role in crimes committed during the 1970s -- Judge Juan Guzman recently ordered Pinochet to answer 75 questions related to his involvement in human rights abuses in Chile -- the first time he has been interrogated by the Chilean judicial system. And 45 lawsuits against Pinochet are pending in Chilean courts.

The irony here is that Pinochet's arrest by outside forces served as a catalyst for the Chilean judiciary's newfound courage. I doubt the judge would be hounding Pinochet and other former generals if the former dictator had not been arrested in London.

Many observers -- including myself -- predicted trouble in Chile after Pinochet's arrest. Chile would become paralyzed. His arrest would again polarize Chileans, we predicted.

The truth is that today Chile is neither paralyzed nor polarized. Most Chileans are not overly concerned with Pinochet's fate. Public supporters and opponents of Pinochet are few, and mostly part of an older generation unable or unwilling to escape the divisions and hatred of the past.

Their shouts on Santiago's streets are drowned out by the churning of a country caught up in the global economy, and obsessed with its place on the international stage.