Wash your hands - relating the struggle in Chiapas, Mexico to the U.S

Thoreau in Civil Disobedience said: "It is not man's as a matter of course, to devote himself to the eradication of any, even the most enormous, wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage him; but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support." But how can we wash our hands of something we don't know exists?

After asking my history teacher--who I considered very well informed and socially conscious--some specific questions about the political situation in Chiapas, a state in Mexico, he said he didn't pay attention to the specifics because it doesn't really relate to us. He is wrong. I was shocked by his answer and concerned that this might be the general sentiment in America. We need to care about what is going on in the rest of the world and specifically Chiapas.

The People of Chiapas

You may think that the abuses to people in Chiapas are similar in scope to those of discrimination in the United States. This is understandable due to inadequate media coverage. However, the situation is a lot worse than most people realize.

Although Chiapas is one of the most resource-rich states in Mexico, it is also one of the poorest, lacking fundamental health and educational institutions. This situation began when the indigenous inhabitants were forced off their lands by the dominant Ladino society in Mexico. Since then, they have been the target of fierce racism. Problems continued as a result of the discrimination and corruption of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (Partido Revolucionario Institucional or PRI, which has maintained an undemocratic stronghold on Mexican politics for sixty-five years. The government also supports the brutal private armies of the large landholders in the region.

When the Mexican government accepted the North American Free Trade Agreement, it also repealed Article 27 of the Mexican Constitution protecting communal land holdings from privatization. The indigenous peoples argue that the privatization of land will mean the death of their culture, which exists in a collective relationship with the land.

The Mexican government has been waging a war of genocide, sometimes from neglect, sometimes using direct action. The government has ignored curable but deadly diseases such as malaria and cholera. This succeeds in keeping the indigenous peoples weak, thus crippling their resistance. Descended from the Mayans, they have several different dialects and have been excluded from politics and education (after primary school, there is no opportunity for further schooling due to discrimination). Beyond all this, the people are starving to death.

As a response to these conditions, a large group of peasants calling themselves the Zapatista National Liberation Army (Ejercito Zapatista de Liberacion Nacional or EZLN) rose up in armed revolt to get their message to the world. In their 1993 "Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle," they announced:

We have nothing to lose, absolutely nothing, no decent

roof over our heads, no land, no work, poor health, no

food, no education, no right to freely and democratically

choose our leaders, no independence from foreign interests,

and no justice for ourselves or our children. But we

say enough is enough! We are the descendants of those

who truly built this nation, we are the millions of dispossessed,

and we call upon all of our brethren to join our

crusade, the only option to avoid dying of starvation!

After a blood struggle, the Mexican army drove the Zapatistas into Chiapas' jungle regions, where they continue to be the most organized and popular revolutionary group in the country. Despite an official ceasefire, the army has continued to wage a low-intensity war, with occasional attacks destroying entire communities and farmlands. According to the Coordinating Agency of Nongovernmental Organizations for Peace, a Mexican human rights agency, the Mexican army has also participated in constructing booby traps around villages, using attack dogs against residents, promoting alcoholism and prostitution, terrorizing children, spraying villagers' fields with marijuana seeds, and recording the identity of all villagers.

In addition, rape, false arrests, violent land evictions, and selective assassinations are common at the hands of the judicial police and the ranchers' private armies. Because the peoples of the region are so desperate, logging companies find it easy to offer $4.75 as a day's pay--similar to sweatshop conditions. Amnesty International reports that many members of human rights and peasant organizations in Mexico have been threatened, arrested without due process, tortured, sexually abused, and assassinated.

The Fallacy of Isolationism

Lack of information leads to many political delusions. Many American pundits, like Pat Buchanan, argue that the United States should concentrate on the problems of the United States and not meddle in foreign affairs. He is correct in saying that America should not have to police the world. But his argument is based on a delusion that it is possible to isolate the country. The fact is that the United States is very involved already--and not on the humane side.

The U.S. government has had a stable, friendly relationship with Mexico and, according to Dolia Estvez's Chiapas: An Intelligence Fiasco or Coverup? is not about to see that disrupted:

Some analysts predict that the CIA will launch Cold

War-style covert operations against the rebels. On the

eve of the initiation of the peace talks between the Zapatistas

and the Mexican government, Ralph McGehee, who

spent 14 years overseas as a CIA operations officer, said

that in this type of negotiation you always have technical

operations against the rebels to gather information

on the leadership and members, and their negotiating

position.

McGehee suggested that the CIA would gather this information and give it to the Mexican government:

Congressional leaders with jurisdiction over Mexico have

asked for the [CIA's] information, arguing that if the

reports revealed violations of human rights by Mexican

security forces, the situation could become another El

Mozote fiasco, referring to the massacre by the

Salvadoran Armed Forces in 1981 which Reagan's State

Department covered up to protect its cozy relationship

with the Salvadoran government .... But the State

Department is not sharing its information, even though

there is reason to believe that its reports not only document

the [human rights] violations, but will clarify

whether the Mexican army used American helicopters, on

loan from the U.S. for the war on drugs, in combat against

the rebels.

Subcomandante Marcos, spokesperson for the Zapatistas, also claims that the United States and Argentina are involved in counterinsurgency missions. According to the National Center for Democracy, Liberty, and Justice, the U.S. government has recently approved giving Mexico seventy-three donated Huey helicopters worth over $220 million; two naval ships of the Knox class; $1 million for military training; $5 million for anti-drug trafficking training; and $10 million for radios, night-vision equipment, uniforms, and intelligence monitoring and detection equipment. This shouldn't be a big surprise; the United States has a long history of interfering in countries that don't agree with its economic policies (as the Zapatistas do not). In the words of Marine Corps General Smedley D. Butler in James W. Loewen's Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Book Got Wrong:

I helped make Mexico safe for American oil interests in

1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the

National City Bank boys to collect revenue in. I helped

purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of

Brown Brothers .... I brought light to the Dominican

Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. I helped

make Honduras "right" for American fruit companies in

1903. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a

few hints.

The political situation in Mexico has been particularly ideal for the United States because it is very reliable. It's reliable because, through election fraud, the PRI has a monopoly on government. So don't expect Washington to do anything for human rights in Chiapas without political pressure. I'm not suggesting that the United States should send in troops to help the Zapatistas--only that we should stop doing harm. Anyone who votes has the responsibility to know this before they approve the legislators who approve these actions.

NAFTA

The North American Free Trade Agreement is an alliance between the United States, Canada, and Mexico that makes free trade between the countries easier. It is well intentioned and has succeeded in helping many businesses. Likewise, our system of economic competition has made our economy thrive and has made our country a world power. But NAFTA and the free trade system also allow for many abuses for which the United States, as a partner and main proponent of free trade, has to take some responsibility.

The leaders of our economic system--the stockbrokers of Wall Street--are distressed over the situation in Chiapas. According to political analyst Dennise Dresser, speaking on National Public Radio, such companies as Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch and the Wall Street Journal have called for Mexican "military intervention" in Chiapas to demonstrate President Ernesto Zedillo's leadership and to generate interest in investing in Mexico. Speaking on C-SPAN, Riordan Roett, an international capital markets analyst with Chase Manhattan Bank, asserted, "I think it is absolutely essential, from the investor point of view, to resolve the Chiapas issue as quickly as possible. There are always political costs to bold action. If it cannot be solved diplomatically, it must be resolved." Later he said, "The government will have to eliminate the Zapatistas to demonstrate [its] effective control of the national territory and security policy."

NAFTA--in addition to lowering the value of corn, which the poorest of Mexico produce--has paved the way for many abuses of the environment. Logging corporations, such as Boise Cascade, now have unregulated access to exploit the woods that are the lifeline of the Mexican farmers. According to John Ross' Treasure of the Costa Grande, twenty-seven farmers were killed by the local police in response to a peaceful protest against the logging company.

The Mexican government has recently repaid its loan from the United States. This was hailed as proof of the cooperation and fair play of the Mexican government. However, the United States must look at where the money came from before taking it. Most of it came from the profits of Petroleos Mexicanos (Pemex), Mexico's national oil company, which for years has ruined the way of life of Tabascan subsistence farmers, fishers, and oyster farmers. According to the cyber-newsletter Chiapas '95, "Due to Pemex's pollution of the air, water, and soil (123 oil spills in 1995 alone) [the peasants of Tabasco] have reported production decreases in all major crops and up to ninety percent decreases in oyster beds while suffering from high rates of diseases including epidemic rates of childhood leukemia and cholera."

The U.S. government cannot just approve a policy like NAFTA and let it run wild. As soon as NAFTA was approved, the United States had the responsibility to look after its industries in Mexico. Like a mother looking after her children, the United States needs to make sure American corporations in Mexico are not getting into trouble and terrorizing the neighbors.

Implications of the Struggle

One may assume that the struggle of a small group of Mexican peasants does not have any implications on America or the rest of the world. I would agree, if I didn't look past the mainstream press in America. However, the reality is quite different: if the Zapatistas fail, it will be a setback for environmentalists, feminists, homosexuals, minorities, indigenous peoples, and human rights activists around the world.

On the issues of feminism and sexual freedom in the Zapatista struggle, the Law on Women, authored by Zapatista heroine Comandante Ramona, "specifies a woman's right to equal participation in community assemblies, to choose the number of children she bears, and to have equal access to all major posts within the [liberation army]." The feminist movement in Mexico is objecting to arranged marriages, domestic violence, and ill treatment by health authorities, including negligence and forced sterilization. Esperanza Brito, editor of the Mexican feminist magazine FEM, said that "the feminist struggle made common cause with that of the EZLN because it is a revolution that does not betray women."

The Zapatistas have also included protecting the environment and combating racism as some of the their aims. Tolerance of homosexuality is an element in their struggle that makes them unique. They also protest some conditions of the free market economy that affect many people in America as well.

If the Zapatistas triumph, there may be repercussions across the world when other struggling groups hear of their success and work for their own freedom. The Zapatistas' struggle may prove to be a model for similar struggles everywhere. Their international meeting in the jungles of Chiapas involving over 3,000 representatives from forty-two nations to discuss the conditions of humanity and the effects of neo-liberalism (a modern-day expression for free enterprise or laissez-faire capitalism) could serve as a blueprint for some future international cooperative government.

My objective in this essay is to compensate for the inadequacies of America's mainstream media and to educate the people. It is your responsibility to get the word out. The more people who know what is going on in Chiapas, the more people there will be who will send money, pressure their congressional representatives, protest, or even volunteer their physical labor to the Zapatistas. The current policy of the U.S. government cannot survive if enough people are aware of it and disagree.

COPYRIGHT 1998 American Humanist Association
COPYRIGHT 2000 Gale Group