Over the last few days, we have received a series of communications from several brothers and sisters from national and international solidarity asking us for an assessment of the Consultation that was held on March 21. We had not done this previously because we did not have the resources necessary, and, in addition, the final results were not in. Now, with more resources, and with some firm results, we will try to make an assessment. We will do this through the three key questions that were used in the first part of the review during the Second Encuentro of Civil Society with the EZLN between May 7 and 10. More than 2000 persons from the 32 states of the Mexican republic participated in that Encuentro.

What was done well in the Consulta?

1. - What was done well in the Consulta was that, despite having the media against it - who not only minimized the Consulta, but also distorted it - the broad participation by civil society managed to break through the disinformation siege and to destroy the image of the zapatistas as transgressors of the law, as being manipulated by foreigners, of not wanting dialogue, etcetera. The fact that that the zapatistas traveled throughout the country gave the Consulta a great boost, and it brought different realities close together: that of the zapatistas for civil society, and vice versa.

2. - Another thing that was done well was the breaking of the siege of fear, that is, it managed to defeat the campaign of terror that had been waged prior to the Consulta by municipal presidents, police forces and judicial police, in the sense that those participating in the Consulta were zapatistas, and thus subject to the same crimes and punishments.

3. - The incorporation of different sectors of civil society was also very important, since, in various parts of the country, businesspersons participated, as well as cattlemen, barzonistas, PRI's, priests, religious, indigenous and non-indigenous, workers and campesinos. Even a fair number of members of the army participated in the Chiapas Coastal region.

4. - As a consequence of the wide participation, social organizations were strengthened, but this also generated the emergence of others, with a more citizen-based profile, in the urban areas as well as in the rural ones. Today, these organizational expressions are seeking greater spaces of participation in Mexican political life.

5. - To a certain extent, it was timely information and the open and plural nature of the Consulta that allowed for good participation.

6. - The invitation to the public, in that their participation was for the building of peace. They were similarly invited to not consume alcohol on that day.

7. - It was a demonstration of civil society's strength and organizational capacity, which had not found an outlet in the political parties.

8. - The Consulta presented the possibility of recovering spaces: from the tables that set up the polling places on the sidewalks, to even sports and business places, such as Sanbors and the Olympic Stadium in Mexico City.

9. - It was a demonstration to the government that civil society does not want war, but peace.

10. - The structure of the Consulta: Publicity Brigades, Municipal Brigades and Coordinators, Regional Coordinators and State Coordinators, and, then, the formation of Inter-State Coordinators, speaks to us of a new means of organizational formation, but also of a new way of doing politics.

11. - Everything that was done, was done independently, without government help. It was a citizens' effort.

12. - There was wide participation by women, and in many states they were in the majority.

13. - It was a space to talk about the San Andrés Accords, which many people do not know about.

14. - It was a space for people to talk about what they think.

15. - There is a new conscience in the people today.

What could have been done better?

1. - The Coordinators could have been better structured.

2. - Pressure should have been put on the media, because society, as well as the government, has the right to have their opinion known.

3. - There should have been better publicity, and the space was not taken advantage of in order to let the people learn more about the San Andrés Accords.

4. - Activities and responsibilities should have been distributed better, in order to avoid protagonismos, and people would have taken on the Consulta with a greater level of commitment.

5. - People should have been trained through workshops.

6. - In several places, there should have been a better distribution of delegates.

7. - Other mass meeting places should have been utilized to publicize the Consulta.

8. - It is necessary for opinions and observations regarding the situation in Chiapas to not be exaggerated, because this causes fear and disorientation, which prevents popular participation.

9. - They had no news organization of their own.

10. - There was no analysis of the counterinsurgency being carried out by the government, which would have allowed the people to create their own strategy to counter the government's.

11.- There was not an adequate transportation network.

12. - Effective information channels could have been created in the municipalities.

13. - It is necessary to gain more spaces for civil society that would show the civil face of the participation, appropriating spaces of that nature.

14. - It is necessary to recognize that in some places there was no security in place for the zapatistas.

15. - There was a lack of creativity in the carrying out of other activities to raise funds, because many people paid out of their own pocket and others ended up in debt.

What was learned from the Consulta?

1. - The recognition of civil society's organizational capacity, without permission from the government and without the requirement of being 18 years old in order to participate in the political life of the country.

2. - The great experience of learning to work collectively.

3. - The possibility of working along with other people of very diverse thoughts, religious beliefs, political affiliation, political organizations and parties.

4. - The possibility of experiencing respect and political tolerance, and, beyond that, to be more humble in order to recognize errors.

5. - To experience the capabilities and creativity of civil society.

6. - The experience of being more open, to give necessary information to those who ask for it, even if they are opposed to the initiative, because it is necessary to convince.

7. - The possibility of demonstrating that the zapatistas and civil society want peace, while repression and death come from the government.

8. - It was a great lesson, as much for those who participated, as for the government.

9. - The need to seek unity in order to confront the government's war.

10. - Another result left by the Consulta was the possibility of feeling joy and suffering jointly.

11. - The capacity to recognize that we are all equal, therefore we are all brothers.

12. - The possibility to recognize everyone's styles, limits and capacities for participation.

13. - The experience of building peace, of trusting and the opportunity to break the scheme of war.

14. - The experience of recognizing common problems and the commitment to confronting them together, without the need to go to the government.

15. - The possibility of acting creatively, and not just reacting.

16. - The value of discretion was learned.

17. - The possibility of demonstrating to the world that the zapatistas are not clandestine, but rather a part of us, and for that reason they were able to go out and to break all the sieges imposed by the government.

18. - To identify that the lies are coming from the government, through the media.

19. - To recognize that marches, sit-ins and shouts in the streets and in public buildings are not enough, but of the need for building and working from below, from the bases.

20. - The opportunity for civil society and the EZLN to think, act and walk together.

21. - The strength to continue participating because the initiatives have the backing of civil society.

22. - The learning experience that, when caring for others, we are also caring for ourselves.

23. - The hope of putting a new sun in a new land.

The Results of La Realidad

The EZLN put the Arturo Rosenblueth Foundation in charge of the methodology and counting of the votes. On March 29, they released the following partial results:

Of the 15,000 polling places, the foundation released the results from 12,925 of them, reflecting a participation of 2,580,737 persons. Of which, between 94% and 96% answered all the question in a positive manner. The "No's" and "I don't know's" were between 1.0% and 3.3%.

However, at the second EZLN-Civil Society Encuentro in the Aguascalientes of La Realidad, the Southeast Table released the following results:

Oaxaca: The Consulta was held in 438 municipalities, with 1075 polling places and assemblies set up, obtaining 257,588 votes. The cost was 1075 pesos.

Yucatán: 29 Brigades, 50 zapatista delegates traveling to 106 municipalities. 142 polls were set up, with 31,063 persons voting. The cost was 129,075 pesos.

Campeche: 6 brigades, 28 zapatista delegates traveling to 11 municipalities, where 149 polling places were set up, with 20,000 votes.

Tabasco: 14 Brigades, 100 brigadistas, 12 zapatista delegates in 16 municipalities, 345 polling places were established, and 86,696 votes were recorded. The cost was 46,000 pesos.

Quintana Roo: 10 brigades with 275 brigadistas; 12 zapatista delegates traveled to 7 municipalities; 107 polling places and assemblies; 84,000 votes. The cost was 22, 233 pesos.

Veracruz: 196 Brigades, who saw to 170 zapatista delegates, who traveled to 97 municipalities. 902 polling places and assemblies. There were 163,234 votes. The cost was 230,000 pesos.

Chiapas: 370 brigades, 3272 brigadistas. 280 zapatista delegates covered 67 municipalities. There were 2828 polling places and assemblies, with 461,169 votes. The cost was 230,000 pesos.

It is important to emphasize that the Contact Office in Chiapas registered 71 Autonomous Municipalities, with a vote total of 158,518 votes. This contradicts statements by the governor of the state, Roberto Albores Guillén, that 15 or 20,000 zapatistas have deserted, and the EZLN has become of less importance. The zapatistas have become less important for the government in the sense that they are not interested in resolving the causes that led to the armed conflict.

It is necessary to note that inside the Cerro Hueco Jail in Tuxtla Gutiérrez, the prisoners organized in "The Voice of Cerro Hueco" set up a polling place, obtaining 628 votes, among them, those who participated in the Acteal massacre of December 22, 1997.

There were 23,600 votes abroad, of which, 12,000 came from the United States, from cities and states where there is a large Mexican population, predominately undocumented: San Francisco, Chicago, North Carolina, Texas, and so forth. About 11,600 votes came from other countries in Europe and in Latin America.

Most of the State Coordinators reported harassment by police forces, the army, municipal presidencies and police. In Chiapas, several NGO's reported harassment and anonymous telephone calls with death threats. In the community of Cuxuljá, municipality of Ocosingo, there were low overflights from planes at the time the zapatista delegates were doing promotion work. Meanwhile, people from the government and the PRI attempted to discredit the zapatistas in several states, saying they were paramilitaries.

Polling places were not set up in municipalities in the North of Chiapas, in Los Loxica region in Oaxaca and in the Sierra in Veracruz, because paramilitary groups had threatened violence. In several communities in those municipalities, however, they held assemblies and released their votes, without the presence of zapatista delegates.

As we receive more information in this regard, we will complete the results from all the states. What is noted above is information contributed by the states participating in the Southern Gulf Table.

The Seven Tasks

Following a review and discussion of the results, the EZLN and civil society agreed to promote the following tasks:

1. - That the State Coordinators would become Contact Coordinators.

2. - The commitment to extend information at all levels about what happened at the second Encuentro of Civil Society and the EZLN.

3. - That the Contact Coordinators be the bridge between civil society and the EZLN.

4. - To broaden the bases of the Consulta, in order to support the struggles already going on in the country, for example, the student struggle at the UNAM, who have been on strike for 25 days; the struggle of the Electricians Union against privatization of the electricity industry; and the commitment of everyone to join in this struggle and those that might arise.

5. - To establish an information network in all the states, and to provide links between themselves, in order to be able to promote actions in cases of repression against any person who is struggling to build a better Mexico.

6. - The invitation to participate in all political and cultural acts convened and held by the EZLN.

7. - To prepare for the Third Encuentro of Civil Society with the EZLN. And also that it would not be a bad idea for it to be held at the UNAM or at the Electricians Union in Mexico City.

Challenges and Obstacles

At the Southern Gulf Table, Major Moisés set forth a few thoughts, saying: "We are giving this message to all of those who are here, and to those who could not come, please inform them, that you should be conscious that working to seek justice, democracy, liberty and a poner de cabeza this country, brings risks, and we want to know if you are willing to run them. Certainly there shall be deaths, repression, jailings, and everything we already know the bad government does. You need only think of January 12, 1994, at that great march in Mexico City, you said to us, sit down to dialogue with the government, put your weapons to one side, and we obeyed you. Now you have the commitment to sustain the long and difficult path of the struggle. We do not want you to take up arms with us, but, rather, together, we are going to change this country, these encuentros make it possible for us to do so." The response of the people was a moment of silence, and then everyone raised their hands, saying: "We are willing to take the risks with you, because ya basta with so much injustice, and, if we do not do it now, then when?" The message is clear, but I believe there are internal challenges within this new social force that it is necessary to examine.

There will be elections for governor in 2000, and 40 state deputies for Chiapas will be chosen. At the same time, the President of the republic will be elected. Although civil society does not seek to take power, civil society in itself has power, and anyone can try to use it to their benefit. This is why the electoral situation is an important moment to take into consideration, because it means the repositioning of the different social forces. There is the risk that this force-in-progress will debate among themselves whether or not to participate in the elections, and therefore there is the risk that there could be internal ruptures.

If this new force manages to establish clear lines as to what it wants, and it opts to give its vote to whomever commits themselves to promoting those lines, we will then be arriving at a possible democratic transition in Mexico.

The most important part of that new force is not in its debating whether or not to participate in elections, but rather in preparing itself to establish a new kind of relationship with the government that is elected, whomever it may be. The nucleus of this new force will be in the weaving together of new kinds of relationships among the different sectors of civil society, from which values are emerging that will give body and form to a new society.

The challenge for this force is in maintaining its independence, its plurality, its fluidity in work, but with clear rules that will allow them to walk with liberty, respecting differences and identifying common problems in order to construct solutions.

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