Article written by Melissa Mundt
This month in Chiapas, as is often the case, understanding events is a matter of patching together the occasional coverage in mainstream periodicals with the equally significant silences on the part of government and Zapatista representatives. Silence can be a powerful tool, as well as, a dangerous portent of things brewing beneath the surface.
It's been some time since the Plan Puebla Panama has received substantial coverage in the press. These days it is mentioned more in terms of the groups and organizations opposing it in mass demonstrations and conferences. Government interests, after the initial overwhelming uproar against the Plan, have long since started a process of official backpedaling and sliding the Plan out of the spotlight.
The Plan Puebla Panama is the large-scale development project, announced in 2001 by the Fox administration, that includes infrastructure, highways, railroads, dams, etc. from central Mexico through southern Mexico to Panama, with the overall goal of making the area more friendly to industry, transport, and international investment. A large percentage of proposed development is to take place in areas of high poverty with high Indigenous populations in Oaxaca and Chiapas. The project was announced and begun with little input from the populations that would be effected. Even the Plan's original "ecological and sustainable development" arm, the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor (these two projects have since been separated), has proceeded with the exclusive input of large environmental organizations (Conservation International with support from Ford Foundation, Pronatura) that are advocating displacing Indigenous communities in order to "conserve nature." But not without a nod to transnational corporations (in pharmaceuticals, timber, ecotourism etc.) who will benefit from these ecological reserves (see Peace House February newsletter for more information about the Montes Azules environmental controversy).
The project is foundering, however. Continual pressure from nonprofit organizations and civil society, as well as, less funding and international support than had originally been projected, have caused the Fox administration to backpedal, reduce budgets, separate projects and overall give the PPP a publicity makeover. Recently, projects (such as the newly completed mega-bridge, highway in Chiapas) are taken on quietly, one at a time, and then later attributed as a success of the PPP. There is much lip service given to questionable "Indigenous consultations" where supposedly local populations are given a forum for input into the project. Civil society has forced government interests to get creative, adapt the discourse to that of the opposition (including more talk of social development) and overall proceed with development plans quietly. Miguel Prickard recently wrote an excellent summary of the PPPs movements out of this silence ("The Plan Puebla-Panama Revived: Looking Back To See What's Ahead," found at www.ciepac.org or, Interhemispheric Resource Center (IRC) www.americaspolicy.org.) In July, organizations and civil society will meet the fifth Mesoamerican Forum in San Salvador to discuss regional organizing against the PPP, Central American Free Trade Area and other large development schemes. Bush's insistence on pushing the Free Trade Area of the Americas to be signed by 2005 will also once again bring these issues to the forefront.
For more information see:
PPP official website
Center for Economic Research and Political Action
La Jornada newspaper
On June 22nd Luis H. Alvarez, the Commissioner for Dialogue and Negotiation in Chiapas declared that according to his Zapatista contacts, Subcomandante Marcos had left the country a long time ago and that the EZLN was no longer and had never really been a threat to the government of Mexico (La Jornada, Cuarto Poder and Expreso Chiapas June 23, 2004). These comments aren't entirely surprising considering they came hand in hand with statements such as "there is peace and tranquility in communities· and that information that Indigenous communities were irritated by military presence in the conflict zone was incorrect. These statements that fly in the face of the reality that communities are living, and that belittle the struggle and organization of last ten years almost seem like a provocation for the EZLN, for Subcomandante Marcos, to speak up and defend themselves.
When I visited Poh'lo, a community of displaced Zapatistas, last week they lamented the government propaganda aimed at making the world believe that the Chiapas situation had been resolved; that there was "peace and tranquility." When, in fact, not only have none of the original demands of the San Andres Accords been met and communities continue to be economically and socially marginalized, but now they live in constant fear of the Mexican military and paramilitary groups. The struggle continues despite Zapatista silences and government announcements that peace has returned to the state.
In July conflicts and violence will only increase. On June 5th, Semernat (Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources) and SRA (Secretary of Agrarian Reform) announced that in July, 42 communities within the Montes Azules biosphere will be relocated (La Jornada, Cuarto Poder June 5, 2004). This is news, however, to both communities who are supposedly being relocated and the communities to which they are theoretically being moved. In the coming weeks violence is likely to erupt among communities in the Bioreserve refusing to be displaced, and in communities of already scarce land and resources where the displaced people will be relocated.
Likewise, tension is building in northern Chiapas where the government electricity commission continues to cut electricity to communities in resistance to unjust light tariffs. These communities have begun blockading roads and throwing rock etc. to ward off electricity officials. It's likely that military and paramilitary groups will soon get involved, escalating the conflict. Zapatistas have kept silence on both these issues aggravating frustrations that Zapatistas speak out only in their own interests not for the struggles of Indigenous peoples in general. In July we'll bring you more news as these issues develop.
