Two events of paramount importance will occur in the month of November: 1) the meeting, from the 20th to the 22nd, between the EZLN and Civil Society, represented by the most diverse sectors of the country, for the purpose of preparing the National Consultation (see Bulletin No. 133) and, 2) the meeting between the EZLN and the Commission of Concordance and Peace (COCOPA), made up of the Federal and the Chiapas State Legislative branches (the Congress of the Union and the State Congress), and of members from the 5 largest parties represented in those Congresses: the Revolutionary Institutional Party (PRI); the National Action Party (PAN); the Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD); the Labor Party (PT) and the Green Ecologist Party (PVEM), in that order, according to their national strength.

The federal government has lost credibility and the arguments which would allow it to call for dialogue. It uses at least three points when defending the difficulties which it has had over the last few months: 1) The zapatista silence, which the EZLN broke in July, and which they wish would return, since its denunciation and evaluation of the situation in Chiapas, and in the country, attracted a consensus of public opinion; 2) The CONAI and its "bias", "selling out the country", "cause of the violence", among other charges which they made against its president, and, 3) The COCOPA, and its inability to act as a mediator and to achieve a meeting with the EZLN. Now, there is neither silence from the zapatistas, nor does the CONAI exist any longer in order to take the blame, and it is expected that there will soon be a meeting from November 6 to 8 in La Realidad, in the autonomous municipality of San Pedro Michoacán, between the EZLN and the COCOPA, almost two years after their last meeting.

In the midst of these expectations, not just in Chiapas, but throughout the country, the EZLN once more issues two communiqués on October 27, released publicly on the 29th of that month. The first was directed to the people of Mexico and to the people and governments of the World, wherein they accuse federal Army troops of carrying out a simulated takeover of the Aguascalientes of La Realidad on that very 27th, with a column of 40 military vehicles, among them war tanks, armored vehicles and troop transportation units, and approximately 400 soldiers, which crossed the community of La Realidad, while another column of four military vehicles, one armored and one military truck carrying officials, entered the community at the same time, taking still and video pictures of the people and of the cultural facilities. This movement was repeated a few hours later. They also denounced that, over the last few days, and constantly, day and night, Mexican Air Force planes were flying over the community and surrounding areas.

The second communiqué is directed to the COCOPA, where they informed them that, since making public their desire to meet once again with the legislators, "the military has increased their pressure, harassment and threats over the different Aguascalientes, and particularly over the tojolabal indigenous community of La Realidad." They criticize Governor Roberto Albores for having given an ultimatum for dialogue. They propose 4 possible interpretation of these events: a) reprisal for wanting to dialogue with the COCOPA, the Congress of the Union and Civil Society, and not with the government; b) prevent the COCOPA-EZLN meeting, in order to then blame the EZLN for their lack of willingness; c) the military is looking for a "meeting" with the EZLN, and 4) the meeting would be an opportunity for a new betrayal of the EZLN.

Three days previously, the federal government's coordinator for dialogue, Emilio Rabasa, had announced all the guarantees for the meeting with the COCOPA, and now, from Mexico City, he "emphatically" rejected the EZLN's assertions. The legislators expressed their desire to go to La Realidad from November 6 to 8 in order to meet with the General Command of the EZLN. However, later, the PRD representatives and one from the PRI (Pablo Salazar Mendiguchía) refused to attend the meeting as long as the federal government had not put the necessary conditions in place, and they stated they were not willing to endorse their actions.

At the same time, several campesino organizations in the municipality of Ocosingo confirmed that mobilizations by the Army have increased over the last few days in the cañadas of Patihuitz, Las Tazas and Taniperlas where, they state, soldiers are firing into the air in order to terrify the town and are entering the communities. They also denounce more harassment and minute searches and interrogations at the military checkpoints. In response to these events, several human rights organizations expressed their concern and noted the government's "double language" once more.

However, the situation is not only tense in La Realidad. There have been other events over the last ten days. PRD sympathizers took over for a few hours the mayors' offices in Cancuc, Catazajá, Jiquipilas, Coapilla, Amatenango del Valle de la Frontera and Comitán, in protest over the election fraud of last October 4. In the municipality of Venustiano Carranza, an ambush occurred by 25 armed alleged PRI members, who were masked and in military uniforms, which cost the lives of two campesinos, leaving one wounded and another missing. In the municipality of El Bosque, there is tension due to the presence of alleged paramilitary groups, while the Antorcha campesino organization denies that it is trafficking in arms in the municipality. In the municipality of Chilón, two members of the armed group "Los Aguilares" are detained, and, in Monte Libano, municipality of Ocosingo, the press reports indications of another alleged paramilitary group. The Attorney General's Office of the Republic (PGR) confirms that it is investigating 12 "armed groups", among which are mentioned the "Indigenous Revolutionary Anti-zapatista group" (MIRA) and "Peace and Justice."

During the month of October there were very significant mobilizations in various parts of the world over the situation in Chiapas. Various actions were reported in Germany, the US, Canada, Argentina, Spain, Italy and France, among others. Meanwhile, the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights expresses their concern for the human rights situation in Chiapas, and the delegation made up of 12 Spanish citizens, among them a representative of the United Left, provoked much public controversy. The government rejected their observations, and Emilio Rabasa called them "out of place", denying that there were 75,000 troops in Chiapas, admitting to only 25,000. The Department of Foreign Relations also denied the statements by the Spaniards, while at the same time stating that Subcomandante Marcos did not want peace, as did the National Fraternity of Evangelical Churches (COFRATERNICE) and the governor of the state himself. The Spanish delegation touched on at least three sensitive issues: possible international mediation and the presence of Mexican civil society in the dialogue, disarmament of the paramilitaries and the excessive presence of the Army in the indigenous communities.

While in some countries cries for the release of the political prisoners in Chiapas were being raised, members of the Human Rights Committee of the Senate of the Republic confirmed that they had requested the intervention of the Inter-American Human Rights Commission (CIDH) of the OAS and of the EU, in order to pressure the Chiapas government to carry out the recommendations made by the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) regarding the release of the prisoners. Then, days later, two indigenous persons from Chavajeval, municipality of El Bosque - where there had been a military operation last June which resulted in the deaths of 9 campesinos - regained their freedom, while another 8 remained in prison. Previously another 6 indigenous from the municipality of Nicolás Ruiz - the result of another military operation, and one other from the "Ricardo Flores Magón" autonomous municipality of the community of Taniperlas - were also released from the "Cerro Hueco" prison in Tuxtla Gutiérrez.

Governor Roberto Albores Guillén announced changes in his cabinet. Nine months in to his administration, he shuffles 13 officials, among them the Secretary of Government, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Economic Development, the Secretary of Tourism and the State Coffee Council person; changes which were considered by the opposition parties to be an attempt to consolidate complete control in the state by the State Executive. At the same time, the State Congress, under PRI control, approves Albores' legislative proposal for creating a special trusteeship called the "Fund for Public Security for the State of Chiapas," which, with combined state and federal funding, will total 127 million pesos ($12.7 million) for the police forces, when, one day before, 40 million pesos had been announced. In the next few days, the governor will announce a proposal for an indigenous law, at the same time the EZLN and civil society will be preparing the National Consultation on the COCOPA's legislative proposal on Indigenous Rights and Culture, the product of the San Andrés Accords.

On the national front, the Congress of the Union was embroiled in discussions concerning the preparation of the 1999 federal budget and the clarification of the country's worst economic disaster, caused by the Bank Fund for the Protection of Savings (FOBAPROA) fraud. In addition, the Senate of the Republic, which has an official party majority, is reviewing 4 commercial agreements with the European Union: Germany, the Belgium-Luxembourg community, Austria and the Low Countries, none of which include a human rights clause. Meanwhile, the press reports that Mexican capital abroad has reached 200 billion dollars, deposited in the US, Canada and Switzerland, among other countries, and the Inter-American Development Bank (BID) reports that it will lend Mexico one billion dollars in credits before the end of the year. UNICEF announces an initial fund of 2.5 million dollars to support the children of Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, Belize and El Salvador, who are currently struggling to overcome the tragedy caused by Hurricane Mitch, which has caused the collapse of the Central American economy. In Mexico, this UNICEF program will include the states of Quintana Roo, Yucatan, Tabasco, Campeche and Chiapas, as part of the "Mayan World" tourism project. It also states that Chiapas is among the most deficient in terms of primary education, with a little more than 70% of the population in deplorable and indigent conditions. Just one example of this is that, of the 42 million poor persons in the country, only 6% receive school breakfasts, and only 5% are able to purchase milk at 2 pesos per liter, according to the Department of Social Development itself.

The Peace Council arrives in Chiapas in order to hold their Fourth Annual Meeting, and also in order to lend solidarity with peace in Chiapas. After visiting Acteal, they will hold an ecumenical celebration for Bishop Samuel Ruiz García's 73rd birthday, on November 3. This Council is made up of three Nobel Peace Prize winners, Rabbi Levi Weiman-Kelman, Dr. Irfan Ahmad (Muslim of India) and other Benedictine and Buddhist leaders, among others.

In short, the debate surrounding the conflict in Chiapas revolves around two questions:

1) The Dialogue: As to the necessity for renewing the dialogue in order to advance in the peace process, the majority of the country's social and political sectors and actors are in agreement. Nonetheless, there is no consensus concerning the mechanisms and conditions for achieving it, with the differences based on the analyses of the situation. For the EZLN, the majority of the campesino and indigenous organizations, NGOs, political parties and other national and international actors, the militarization and paramilitarization of the state, as well as the release of the political prisoners, among other elements, are necessary for creating détente and confidence and for achieving a second return to the negotiating table. Paradoxically, the government proposes that these issues, in spite of not being real, will be solved as a product of the negotiations. Which is first?

2) Mediation: There is no consensus in this matter. We can distinguish three general positions:

a) International Mediation: In response to the federal government's refusal to grant intermediation authority to any person, body or group in the country - as was the case with Bishop Samuel Ruiz and the National Intermediation Commission (CONAI), which he presided over until June 7 - some human rights groups, campesino and indigenous organizations, and other sectors of civil society, are leaning towards this position, requesting intervention from, for example, the UN. This has implied a rejection of the legislators, who see themselves displaced in this scenario, but also, obviously, of the federal government and some businessmen, who are standard bearers for nationalism and against foreign interference; although they are in favor of it in the economic sphere, with US military aid and in the fight against drug trafficking in the country.

b) Direct Dialogue: This is the position held by the federal and state governments, as well as by the official party (PRI), some businessmen and some bishops, among others. It is difficult to see the consistency in this position, since it would not be possible to have President Zedillo, or his "coordinator for dialogue," meet with Subcomandante Marcos and other members of the Clandestine Committee of the EZLN, in the Selva Lacandona or in San Cristóbal de las Casas, even by telephone, without some bridge between the two. The Executive's five previous "coordinators" have not demonstrated decision making capacity nor the ability to amend the Constitution of the Republic. It requires the agreement of more actors. In reality, those who hold this position do not accurately comprehend what it would signify in practice, and its impossibility.

c) National Mediation: This is the intermediate, but equally difficult, position. If the government refuses Don Samuel Ruiz' and the old CONAI's mediation in the conflict, or that of the church or other bishops who are interested in participating take part, or, the COFRATERNICE and other business groups who have demanded to be included, dialogue has no future. The government, in the interests of reaffirming their willingness for dialogue, by demanding it in a direct manner, does not, in their heart, want it, because a mediation, a bridge, will always be necessary. Mediation requires the approval of both parties in conflict. Nonetheless, the government's policies have not desisted from attacking a sector of the society in political, social and economic terms. The government does not believe in, nor trust, anyone, and no one believes in the government. President Ernesto Zedillo is alone. This is the dilemma.

Article 13:

1. The civil population and civilians will enjoy general protection from the dangers generated by military operations. In order to make this protection effective, the following rules will be observed in all circumstances.

2. The civil population as such shall not be the object of attack, nor shall civilians. Acts or threats of violence whose primary purpose is to terrorize the civil population shall be prohibited.

3. Civilians will enjoy the protection conferred by this Title, unless they participate directly in the hostilities and only while that participation lasts.

One of the strategies to wear these people down is to generate fear, to make those men and women, who are conscious of their dignity ,and who want to transform the injustice and the exclusion which they suffer, feel the weight of the power which confronts them, and understand the price for challenging this domination is death. The one who creates this psychological effect is, naturally, the Army (Concha, M. Militarization and Politics. La Jornada, 6/29/98).

The four dead, the 27 wounded, the 2 disappeared children and an undetermined number of those wounded by gunfire are, all, zapatista civilians who did not fire, simply because they were found unarmed.

() They were large-caliber weapons - the health worker explained - like those used by the police and the soldiers.

() the police "loaded their weapons and fired at us then. They didn't even give us time. We defended ourselves, but not with weapons, some compañeros grabbed firewood and sticks."

At the same time, helicopters - Manuel did not know if they were from the police or the Army - began firing. Because shortly after the firing began, federal Army vehicles began to arrive. Manuel was wounded: "The Army left four here, dead, and my little brother was still alive then. Then they shot him twice. I didn't see it. The women saw it."

"When the federales arrived, they went into each house," of those which were pointed out as belonging to zapatistas, "the federales didn't even apologize, they even broke the door, the windows, the televisions, beds, whatever was in the house, they wrecked it all."

During this operation, the soldiers "took away the men, even 13 and 14 year old boys, they took them all away. Others went to the mountain, to the coffee plantation." The women managed to escape. In all, 22 were arrested in the houses, violently kicked and beaten up, according to the health worker who was translating for the women who witnessed it.

In all, 27 arrests. "Two children disappeared, 8 and 9 years old. And we couldn't go in," Manuel goes on. "The Security Police were there, taking care of their people, the PRI's." San Pedro is closed, the families dispersed, incommunicado. There could have been more dead and wounded in San Pedro, and more zapatistas caught. "I don't know where my family is," Manuel concludes. (Case of San Pedro Nixtalucum. Bellinghausen, H. La Jornada, 3/16/97, p. 18)

On the night of July 6 to July 7 of 1997, some dogs belonging to a family in Sultana went to the military barracks as they always did, but they came back poisoned.

() at least 7 dogs and 40 hens belonging to several families in Sultana died () the animals were killed with rat poison, which is not used by the people in the community.

On the 6th and 7th you couldn't walk by the military barracks because of the traps the soldiers had set around the camp. Maybe they had something to do with the dead animals. (Report from the Community of Sultana. Ojarasca. La Jornada, 3/11/98, p. 7).

There is a climate of "constant tension and fear." () "All of this alters and wears down the daily life of the communities."

() "The community's state of mind (Las Tacitas) is one of obvious panic, some of them mentioned that a military attack appeared imminent."

Days before, some soldiers commented that they were ready now to "fill those guerrillas with lead." One of the campesinos asked: "And the civilians?", to which the soldier responded: "Let's see if we can tell them apart." (Balboa, J. La Jornada, 6/8/97, p. 6).

After the elections, the military pressure on the communities in resistance was renewed.

() Yesterday, at 10:00 PM, a large search plane flew very low over Las Tacitas.

() Since yesterday the federal Army has started to come out of their numerous barracks and renew the patrols. (Bellinghausen, H. La Jornada, 7/10/97, p. 17).

() Last Tuesday, June 17, a large number of soldiers - the neighbors talk about thousands - entered Patathé Viejo, municipality of Ocosingo, and positioned themselves there, despite the displeasure expressed by the communal authorities. In addition to the terror their presence generated, are added the deliberate problems of the contamination of the water, the destruction of the sugar cane sowings. (Concha, Militarization and Politics. La Jornada, 6/29/97, p.8).

Residents of ten places in Ocosingo, who have been established on Selva Lacandona lands for the last 15 years, have been threatened with expulsion, reported the Union of Indigenous Communities of the Selva of Chiapas (Ucisech). He added that, as part of the "threats, intimidations and harassment," last week-end the zone where the ten communities are located was "surrounded" by members of the Mexican Army, which has created a climate of "anxiety" among the residents (Henríquez, E. la Jornada, 7/23/97, p. 16).

Members of the Army went into the Sibacjá ejido, in the municipality of Ocosingo, and caused fear and concern within the community, where EZLN sympathizers live. (Balboa, J. La Jornada, 8/3/97, p. 8).

Four trucks - one with state Public Security officers and three with soldiers - entered one of the barrios in Acteal at noon today, which has been tension-filled the last few days due to the actions of PRI-affiliated paramilitary groups. The objective of the police-military incursion was to "look for weapons," which never appeared; on the other hand, several women were attacked when they formed a barrier in an attempt to prevent the soldiers' entrance. (Balboa, J. La Jornada, 11/25/97, p. 1).

In the case of the Acteal massacre, it is significant that the aggression has been directed against a group of displaced who belong to Las Abejas Civil Society, which has been making an effort to find peaceful solutions to the conflict between the federal government and the EZLN, and who have themselves suffered the harshest consequences of that confrontation; it is revealing that the victims were, in the great majority, women and children, and that the massacre occurred in a zone under the intense scrutiny of the Mexican Army and state public security forces. (Editorial, La Jornada, 12/24/97, p. 2).

In the last three days, following the massacre at Acteal, at least 5000 military troops have arrived in the state, with the National Defense Department (SEDENA) positioning some 2000 in the municipality of Chenalhó, and who yesterday set up four camps in the district where the massacre of 45 refugee indigenous occurred last Monday. (Mariscal, A. and Balboa, J. La Jornada, 12/26/97, p. 5).

The Mexican Army mobilized members of the Anti-Riot Military Police, equipped with electric prods, protective gear, tear gas and acrylic face shields, as well as infantry and special troops and a helicopter from the state Public Security Police against the tzotziles, who were trying, at all costs, to keep the military out of X'oyep.

The intensive military and police mobilization in that region (Los Altos) was manifested in the military presence in 10 communities in the municipalities of San Andrés, El Bosque, Chenalhó and Pantelhó, "supported by artillery helicopters and warplanes which swooped low over the communities."

They noted, as an example, that last January 5 military troops arrived in 24 cars in the communities of Nijoj, Belisario Domínguez, San Jose Fiu, Revolución and Aldama in the municipality of Chenalhó, and, when they got out of the vehicles, "they took up attack positions, surrounding and taking the communities by assault, occupying paths and mountains, harassing and threatening the indigenous campesinos with rifles and machine guns." (Gil Olmos, J. La Jornada, 1/8/98, p. 11).

An operation by the Army brought anxiety and serious concern to San Juan del Bosque, seat of the Autonomous Municipality San Juan de la Libertad: 60 federal soldiers rushed in, at 4:15 PM, to the El Bosque Regional Center of Eco-Development, charging that it was a "guerrilla training camp." The operation included, according to Center personnel, the interrogation of innocent parties, legal processing of all those present with pictures and video, and the invitation for them to clear out "if it wasn't convenient for them to stay."

() the captain in charge of the operation said the Center was "a good place for a barracks," and the troops should "celebrate Army Day" there. (Bellinghausen, H. La Jornada, 3/1/98, p. 4).

In the Sierra Madre in Chiapas, a minimum of five Army convoys and two from Public Security arrived in the towns and searched the campesinos' houses, demanding they hand over arms.

During the operations, the police forces threatened the women and the children in the community, demanding they inform them of the whereabouts of the men, who generally flee to the nearby mountains for fear of being assassinated or incarcerated. (Mariscal, A. La Jornada, 4/3/97, p. 15).

"They say (the soldiers) that they come to offer medicines and care, and instead of medicine, they point their guns. Today some PRI compañeros who are handing us over, pointing out the houses. Messing around with the soldiers in the houses, and here, we are, alone, taking it," related residents of Morelia. (Entrance of the Federal Army into the Morelia Ejido January 3. Bellinghausen, H. La Jornada, 1/6/98, p. 11).

The violent incursion of 50 soldiers into the community of La Union yesterday, Wednesday, at 12:30 PM, during which they harassed the residents and struck a woman.

They also showed up today in Sibacjá, "where they intimidated and insisted that the people receive their social service."

In the community of Moisés Gandhi they tried to break in at 6:30 in the morning, but they were stopped by a group of women, just like in the Morelia ejido.

The incursion of troops into eight communities in the municipality of Ocosingo was denounced. (Gil Olmos, J. La Jornada, 1/9/98, p. 7).

"They wanted to come; we wanted to know where they were going, what they were looking for; we didn't want them to frighten the children, it was the first time they had come. We wanted to talk with them, but they didn't give us time; they came quickly, throwing rocks at us. They came in ten trucks, along with the police and the PRI's they brought. There were about three hundred.

They came in three formations; when we asked them who had sent them they said the government had sent them, 'we came here to kill you, because you are zapatistas,' the bloody soldier told us." This is the testimony of Rosario, a tzeltal indigenous from the community of 1st de Mayo, in the Autonomous Municipality 17 de Noviembre, and she is one of the 50 women who, on January 9, confronted the federal Army for two hours, in order to protect the entrance to their community. (Lagunes, L. Doble Jornada. La Jornada, 2/2/98, p. 7).

"They just grabbed us and clubbed us, they grabbed other women by the hair and shook them by the head, that's what they were doing to us when they hit Manuela's child in the face with their arm. Her nose has been bleeding for two days now." Testimony by Maria, tojolabal indigenous from the community of San Pedro Guerrero, municipality of 17 de Noviembre, which the Federal Army also entered on January 9. Here they searched a home and the Health House, where they threw away the medicine they found. The bread oven the community built last year was destroyed by the soldiers. In the communities they have decided to abandon the camp; they are afraid the Army will return. It is now the time to harvest the coffee (Lagunes, L. Masiosare. La Jornada, 2/2/98, p. 7).

The staccato of the high-powered automatic weapons lasted for three minutes: some 18 agents from the State Public Security Police (PSPE) fired at close range against some 500 indigenous who were demanding, first by yelling, and letter with rocks, that they leave the municipality because "to us you are assassins."

() At 1:32 PM, PSPE officers threw a tear gas bomb at the demonstrators, causing most of them to retreat. The police loaded their weapons and some of them took up firing positions. A few seconds later the first bursts of machine-gunfire could be heard.

() The highway was flooded with indigenous, who were protecting each other with their own arms.

() When the unit got to the highway and headed towards San Cristóbal, the police fired their weapons at the people who were along the side of the road. Guadalupe Méndez López, 25, was mortally wounded, as was her daughter Isabel Santiz Méndez, whom she was carrying. (Balboa, J. La Jornada, 1/13/98, p. 6)

*Excerpt from the document "The Unbearable Lightness of the Law: Impunity; Three Months from Acteal," by "Alternative Popular Communication, Working Group," from 4/11/98

Gustavo Castro Soto
Center for Economic and Political Investigations of Community Action, A.C.
CIEPAC

Note: If you wish to be placed on a list to receive this English version of the Bulletin, or the Spanish, or both, please direct a request to: ciepac@laneta.apc.org and indicate whether you wish to receive the bulletin in plain text or as a Word 7 for Windows 95 attachment.

Note: If you use this information, cite the source and our email address. We are grateful to the persons and institutions who have given us their comments on these Bulletins. CIEPAC, A.C. is a non-government and non-profit organization, and your support is necessary for us to be able to continue offering you this news and analysis service. If you would like to contribute, in any amount, we would infinitely appreciate your remittance to the bank account in the name of:

CIEPAC, A.C.
Bank: Banamex
Account number: 7049672 Sucursal 386
San Cristóbal de las Casas, Chiapas, México.
You will also need to use an ABA number:
BNMXMXMM

Thank you! CIEPAC

Telephone:
in México: 01 967 674 5168
from outside Mexico:: +52 967 674 5168