The main reason that the Zapatistas launched their revolution on
the same day as the opening of NAFTA was this:
When the already marginal peasants, who depend on selling small
purchases of corn and beans, realized that NAFTA would take away the
agricultural tariffs which made tortillas and bread more expensive for the
urban middle classes,this was their coup de grace, by transforming land into a
commodity.
Chiapas is acting as a catalyst for pent-up expressions throughout
the country. All over Mexico, Mexicans are expressing dissatisfaction with
economic policies that benefit the few. "Effective Suffrage" was the
rallying cry of the Mexican Revolution of 1910.
The Clinton administration shows little sign of appreciating either
the depth of discontent in Mexico or the need to act to ensure a truly
democratic outcome. The need to build multilateral institutions to promote
democracy and human rights has not been recognized. Understanding of Mexican
politics by the USA has so far been inadequate.
Multiple failures for reform include:
1. Exclusion of large segments of the population from economic development.
2. Growing gap between rich and poor.
3. Denial of basic political rights
4. Brutal repression of dissent by the armed forces and police.
5. Persistence of racist attitudes that contribute to the maintenance of a
social structure that makes genuine economic and political reform impossible.
CHIAPAS: RICH LAND, POOR PEOPLE
Understanding the revolt in Chiapas has many facets.
1. Electoral fraud, official corruption, use or torture, and mistreatment of
minorities are endemic throughout Mexico.
2. Rebellion could break out at any time in many states.
3. What drove a normally peaceful population to the breaking point is a result
of a confluence of causes - economic, political, social, and ecological.
4. Too eager to elevate Mexico's economy to First World standards, by replacing
subsistence agriculture with profitable export enterprises.
5. The constitutional provisions in Article 27 that were intended to secure land
for the poor were impediments for progress.
6. What foreign company wants to invest in Mexican agriculture when that land
might be redistributed to the indigenous population.
7. Because cattle ranching requires little labor, it supports less than 1/100th
the population density that can be sustained by small farms growing corn and
beans.
Facts:
1. In Ocosingo, half the homes lack piped water; 5 of 6 lack septic systems;
3 out of 4 homes have earthen floors.
Electricity - 3 in 10 homes have electricity; in Las Margaritas only 1 in 3;
in Altamirano, only 1 in 4 (less outside the cites).
2. Reservoirs in Chiapas supply 3/5ths of all electricity in Mexico.
3. Dams and wells are located on Mayan lands, while the inhabitants are excluded
from the benefits.
4. It is no wonder that an insurrection occurs when inhabitants are treated as
conquered foreigners in their own land.
5. Whenever soldiers disappear in the highlands, this is what happens:
Mass detentions, beatings, and torture.
6. The birth rate in Chiapas is 4.5 percent, which means doubling of the
population every 16 years.
7. Oaxaca has the highest ratio of homes without sewage (7 in 10).
8. Guerrero has the highest share of homes that lack piped water (3 in 7).
9. The poorest 20% of all Mexicans received only 3.9% of all income, slightly
below the World Bank's figure of 4% for the average for Latin America.
THE REFORM THAT WASN'T
Examples of barbarism:
The ex-governor of Chiapas, Abslon Castellanos, who was recently
kidnapped, has an interesting history that might show why he was so disliked. In
1980 he was the general in command of the 31st Military Zone around Golonchan,
in the Chiapas highlands. During the peaceful transfer of land titles that
were going to several Tzeltal Mayans, a massacre ensued, because powerful
ranchers wanted these squatters removed. Instead of showing up to negotiate, the
General's troops arrived, with the results being similar to Wounded Knee. As it
turned out the General also was a prominent rancher. He wanted to deliver a
message to all of the indigenous peoples that activism can be fatal. To show
their
appreciation the state and federal authorities rewarded him with the
governorship of Chiapas from 1982 to 1988, instead of investigating the carnage.
During his
reign of terror the prisons filled with political prisoners. Even the new
reform governor, Patrocinio Gonzalez Garrido was an in-law of President Salinas.
Rather than instituting reforms, the repression escalated, especially with the
priests that tried to help the Mayans, even when 2 were imprisoned and one
deported to Belgium. For his stalwart efforts in Chiapas Mr. Garrido was given
the second most powerful office in Mexico, that of Secretary of Government, a
cabinet post in charge of federal-state relations, domestic intelligence, and
elections (a very un-logical choice). This was also the man who spearheaded the
drive to oust Bishop Ruiz from Chiapas.
ECONOMIC THEORY AND REALITY
Left out of the calculations in Chiapas are the enormous social and ecological
costs of shifting to an economy based on timber and cattle ranching. In the
rain forest, due to the diversity of species, it makes reseeding impossible.
Biophysical efficiency is not taken into account. When people are driven onto
poorer land, a chain reaction happens. If they do not have savings to confront
old age and disease, then they rely on having many children as a form of social
security. More and more as the growing population retreats into the Lacandon
rain forest, by slashing and burning the vegetation, the ranchers follow, the
soil erodes, reservoirs fill with silt, thus raising the levels of carbon
dioxide which contributes to global warming. The cycle continues, until one day
there won't be anymore place to go. This is one of the sad effects that poverty
has around the world.
ELECTORAL TRANSPARENCY, CHIAPAS-STYLE
An economic model centered on promoting development among the very rich in a
society in which the poor are the overwhelming majority is also politically
destabilizing. One irony of all this is that President Salinas named his oldest
son 'Carlos Emiliano' and his presidential jet 'Emiliano Zapata'. While trying
to make himself out as the modern day 'Zapata', Salinas has failed to consult
Mexico's peasants and indigenous population in how to jointly determine how to
resolve their problems, unlike the real Zapata. The insurrection in Chiapas has
exposed the way that the Mexican government invests a disproportionate share of
its budget on states like Chiapas, in a patronizing way, without democratic
input, and without addressing the state's underlying social problems. Not only
that, it has shown the broader reality of authoritarianism behind it's approach
toward the tasks of democracy, reform, solidarity, and modernization. Yet here,
as elsewhere in Mexico, one is confronted by the paradox that support is
highest precisely where the population has suffered most from government
economic policies. Whereas in other countries where rates if electorial
participation rise with education and income, in Mexico the reverse occurs.
Nowhere is voter registration and turnout stronger than among illiterate
peasants. The answer comes from one word: repression. Why else would there be
100% vote count for the PRI in many small towns. As an example of this: when
the Zapatistas ransacked a local PRI office, they found ballots from the
previous election. The real face of authority in rural Mexico is with the
caciques (chieftains) elected through fraud in collusion with the PRI-dominated
electoral commissions, helped by police and military repression.
Chiapas IS Mexico
The country's ruling elite do not care to admit that Chiapas is more
representative of Mexico as a whole, although it may be the extreme case.
Mexico's native populations are widely distrusted; from the long distance
running Tarahumaras and Tepehuans in the Chihuahua to the 4 distinct language
groups (Tzeltal, Tzotzil, Zoque, and Tojolabal) Mayans in Chiapas, Yucatan,
and Tabasco. Extreme poverty is characteristic of nearly all of southern
Mexico. Also the states of Puebla, Veracruz, Hidalgo, Oaxaca, and Michoacan
suffer comparable neglect. Even though they may be greater in numbers in
Mexico than the United States, discrimination and mistreatment are as bad, if
not worse there. While unacknowledged and often unconscious, racism is a
universal feature of Mexican society, easily perceptible in the exclusion of
dark-skinned persons from TV commercials, newspaper/magazine ads, and roadside
billboards. Why is this when no less than 20% of Mexico's people speak as their
native tongue something other than Spanish. Ninety percent of the population
have
Amerindian features, but they are only noticed when a revolt occurs, such as
the one in Chiapas.
One personal note here. I have been to Mexico perhaps 20 times in
the last 18 years and the above statement is very true. When I ride the buses,
Metro, etc. I am the only light skinned person around. Also not many Gringos
take public transportation in Mexico City so I can say I have seen Mexico from
a different point of view. I have been to both Chiapas and Yucatan, and like
people on this list, I found that Mayan people to be the nicest, warmest
people that I have ever met.
Repression or the threat of repression is a fact of life throughout
rural Mexico. As an example: just months before the events in Chiapas, the
Mexican army conducted similar sweeps of 6 Tepehuan villages in the Baborigame
region of Chihuahua following the murder of an officer. Without a warrant or
evidence of culpability, soldiers burned homes, scattered livestock, and
detained, beat, and tortured inhabitants.
What ails Mexico is symptomatic of Latin America as a whole. Although Mexico's
per capita income is well above Chiapas, the country's distribution of wealth
and income is similarly skewed. Throughout Latin America the poor are in the
majority. The middle class is "middle" only in its level of income. Why did
Mexico just recently become the 4th in ranking when it comes to the number of
billionaires per country in the world? Does the vote of a Tzotzil subsistence
farmer have the same value as that of the multibillionaire owner of Mexico's
Televisa TV network. There are innumerably more of the former than the latter.
Even though there has been 65 years of non-military takeovers in Mexico, one
should not forget the massacre that occurred in Mexico City's Tlatelolco Square
back in 1968 when students demanded more democracy.
Below are 2 articles that date back ten years, but what they have to say tell
a lot about why events are happening in Mexico. All four of these articles are
very good for anyone doing research on Chiapas and Mexico.
Sincerely yours,
Glenn Welker
(1) "Chiapas IS Mexico" by Andrew Reding - Senior Fellow for hemisphere
affairs/World Policy Institute/Director of the North America Project.
Article appears in the World Policy Journal, 'Mexico: The Imperative of
Political Reform', pg. 11-25. (Parts written above)
(2) "Chiapas IS Mexico" by Dick Reavis - Southern rights (USA) activist,
writing in 'The Progressive' magazine, May 28, 1994, pg. 28-32. (He compares
the events in Chiapas to what happened in the southern United States during
the 1960's.)
(3) "Mexican Farmers Get Grants of Small Plots, But Output Is Meager", The
Wall Street Journal, pg. 1 & 18, June 14, 1984
(4) "A Proud Capital's Distress", pg. 26-35, TIME Magazine, August 6, 1984.