In the midst of the worsening of a government offensive that has opted for war, and which is provoking -through the Army - an armed confrontation with the EZLN in Ocosingo (an issue which we shall address in an upcoming special bulletin), we are offering here an analysis of, and the future that awaits, our Guatemalan refugee brothers in Chiapas.

In 1995, it was calculated that there were 124 camps, with a population of approximately 18,000 Guatemalan refugees. Three years later, in October of 1998, according to the last census by the COMAR, there were 99 camps in Chiapas with a total of 13,990 persons (2783 families). These camps are located in seven municipalities: La Trinitaria, Chicomuselo, La Independencia, Frontera Comalapa and Las Margaritas in the Border region, and San Pedro Bella Vista and Amatenango de la Frontera in the Sierra region.

The camps are made up of from four to 419 families, which is the largest. The municipalities with the greatest number of refugees and camps are, in order of importance: La Trinitaria, Las Margaritas, Frontera Comalapa, La Independencia, Amatenango de la Frontera, San Pedro Buena Vista and Chicomuselo. All of these municipalities fall into the category of Very High Marginalization (Las Margaritas and Bella Vista) and High Marginalization (Chicomuselo, Frontera Comalapa, Amatenango de la Frontera, La Independencia and La Trinitaria). The refugees make up 4.7% of the total population of these municipalities.

Few ejidos have assimilated the refugees into their ejidal lands and have even yet presented requests for ejidal extensions. They have provided many refugees with a small plot for working the land, but the majority of them lease other lands or work as day laborers. Perhaps no more than 10% have managed to buy plots of one or two hectares, without their having the proper legal documents. Others, around 30% of the refugees, have been able to buy land in the municipalities of Las Margaritas and Frontera Comalapa.

The refugees have found themselves buried in municipalities where alleged PRI affiliated armed groups have influence, in the tojolabal region. These municipalities similarly have a significant EZLN presence, as well as Autonomous Municipalities, such as "Tierra y Libertad"- with influence in Las Margaritas, La Independencia, Trinitaria, Frontera Comalapa, Chicomuselo and Bella Vista; "Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla," with influence in Las Margaritas and Comitán, and "San Pedro Michoacán," in Las Margaritas. In some of these regions, the population, sympathetic with the official party, does not want the presence of the Guatemalans. In other cases, those Guatemalans not accepted by the ejiditarios for the possession of lands, can end up settled, selling their labor.

According to area, the refugees have joined the political groups which have offered them protection, be it with Autonomous Municipalities, or with the official party. What is certain is that the political tensions in the polarized and exceedingly politicized regions have forced them to hold different positions, since neutrality is difficult for them to maintain. It is not just the zapatista and PRI presence that prevails in the region. The Central Independent of Agricultural Workers and Campesinos (CIOAC), with its various factions, as well as the Emiliano Zapata Proletariat Organization (OPEZ), the Emiliano Zapata Campesino Organization (OCEZ-CNPA) and Teachers Campesino Solidarity (SOCAMA), all operate in the municipalities where the camps are located. The political agendas of these groups end up being imposed on the refugees. Their status as foreigners, but involved in the same demand for lands, among others, could lead to problems for them in the near future.

The Guatemalan refugees had four options:

A) Organized, collective return: The refugees decided where, when, who, how many and how they would do so. This stage ended in 1998. The Permanent Committees (CCPP), the Committee of Returning Blocs (CBR), the Association of Dispersed Refugees of Guatemala (ARDIGUA) and the Coordinator for Comprehensive Community Development (CODEIC) have now closed their activities. Aid was received from ACNUR and COMAR for these programs. Also in 1998, many NGOs closed their offices, moved to Guatemala, or prepared to support the last process of integration or to make their services available to the Mexican population.

B) Individual, voluntary repatriation: Under this method, the governments decided for the refugees how, when, where, who and how many would be repatriated to Guatemala. This process began prior to the collective, organized returns, and they were generally characterized as being small, but continuous, groups. In the case of Chiapas, from 1984 to 1998, more of the population was repatriated individually (12,295 persons) than returned (10,600 persons). This option ended for the refugees, however, on July 28, 1999, when the last two buses left from Campeche, with 61 refugees heading for their homeland. After this date, the institution will continue their aid only for the immigration procedures. During this act, presided over by President Ernesto Zedillo, and his Guatemalan counterpart, Alvaro Arzú, along with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (ACNUR), 939 naturalization letters were awarded. At that time, it was announced that 22,000 indigenous had regularized their stay in Mexico, that almost 2200 had opted for Mexican nationality, and that a little more than 1500 were pending, whom the COMAR reported as being "dispersed throughout Chiapas."

The height of the repatriations and returns occurred in 1994, when the EZLN armed uprising took place. Around 3612 persons returned to Guatemala in that year. In 1995, however, 5575 Guatemalans returned to their country.

C) Permanent relocation in the states of Campeche and Quintana Roo: In order to facilitate this process, the Mexican government, through the COMAR, launched the Program for Support of Definitive Integration (PAID) in 1998. Those who wanted to relocate to the peninsula would be helped, along with the European Comunicad for Economic Programs, in agricultural activities, training in agricultural and forestry production and possibilities for employment and entrance into the private sector. In addition, the PAID would help in the procedures for the exchange of the FM3 for the FM2 visas, obtaining the status of immigrant. After five years, the refugee would be able to obtain immigrant status without losing his Guatemalan nationality. The FM2 would also permit him to work and to travel freely throughout the Mexican Republic. The obligations thus acquired are: informing immigration authorities as to changes of domicile within the state or the Republic; notification upon leaving the country (immigrant status would not be lost if out of the country for a period of 18 months over the course of five years); respecting Mexican laws (as a foreigner, they would not be able to vote, or to participate in the country's political affairs); and to have the FM2 re-stamped by Immigration officials each year.

In addition, ACNUR and COMAR offer other help for those who have been relocated: economic aid for nine months, according to the number of persons in the family. They also provide laminate sheets per family, financial help for repairs to houses, kitchens and latrines, and cash payments to support agricultural production.

The transfer to the peninsula is carried out by land transportation, one truck for each four families with their cargo, except for animals, plants and fruit. When they arrive, they receive five meals per person for a day and a half. They will also receive benefits from the COMAR and ACNUR programs already in place in Campeche and Quintana Roo. The children can attend the settlement schools, with educational programs and Mexican teachers. Those persons with chronic health problems will be cared for at hospitals or clinics in the region. The Campeche and Quintana Roo camps were established as new population centers, recognized by the state governments, and all public services will pass to the municipalities and corresponding entities.

Even with this support, this option has not, nonetheless, generated much interest in the Guatemalan refugees, who already have strong family ties in the region, despite the better conditions in the camps, as compared with those in Chiapas. From 1996 to 1998, during two years of relocation, only 666 persons agreed to leave Chiapas for Campeche or Quintana Roo. The majority of the relocations have been made to the state of Campeche, in the Santo Domingo Kesté camp.

D) Definitive integration in Chiapas: The Guatemalan refugee population in Chiapas has gone from more than 20,000 persons who settled there, to approximately 37,551, adding the repatriated and returned, those relocated to the peninsula and the current residents in the camps. Of these, approximately 45% were born in Mexico, which means that around 16,897 children are Mexicans, who have been growing up over these 14 years of refuge in Chiapas. This is an average birth rate of 3.3. Of the 37,551, 60.1% have returned to Guatemala, 1.7% have been relocated to the states of Campeche and Quintana Roo, and 37.2% wish to remain in Chiapas.

These percentages do not reflect the population that has returned illegally from Guatemala to Chiapas for a second time following their return or repatriation. They remain dispersed throughout the same regions from which they had left, or they are in the informal economy of some cities or towns. There is, in addition, another population of young persons who have decided to immigrate to the US, some of them using the school scholarship of $5500 pesos per semester given them by the ACNUR. And, if that were not enough, the violent situation in Guatemala continues to provoke requests for refuge in this country, such as the 300 families from Aldea El Aguacate, from the Department of Huehuetenango, Guatemala. They denounced that, on December 18, 1998, the Guatemalan Army attacked with gunfire and burned two homes. Because of this, the Guatemalans, who were in refuge in Mexico, asked to be allowed to return to the refugee camps.

In order to achieve the integration of the Guatemalan refugees in Chiapas, on June 16, 1998, the Mexican government announced the Local Integration Program, through the Under Secretary for Population and Immigration Services, which will apply for the remainder of 1998 and 1999. This program would consist in the definitive cancellation of the FM3 and its replacement with the FM2, which would be given to each refugee born in Guatemala individually. This document would be delivered by the National Immigration Institute (INM), in coordination with the COMAR and the ACNUR. This process is expected to be completed at the end of 1998, but this could quite possibly be difficult to achieve.

They will be able to acquire lands in Chiapas that are not restricted by Mexican law, and without financing from the COMAR and ACNUR. However, Article 27 of the Political Constitution of Mexico states, in Section 1: "Within 100 kilometers, along the border, and 50 kilometers along the beaches, foreigners may not for any reason acquire direct control over the lands and waters." This means that none of them will be able to acquire lands around their current refugee camps. This has led to some refugees (perhaps no more than 10%) having purchased land in their children's names. The documents, however, are legally weak.

Food, medical and educational assistance, as well as all other aid programs, will be suspended at the beginning of the fifth month following the refugee's receiving his FM2. Meanwhile, this option will end prior to the end of 2000. The COMAR schools will be gradually closing, so that the children can be incorporated into Mexican schools. Health services will do the same.

The ACNUR has defined three stages for definitive integration into Chiapas, according to the criterion of housing:

a) Camps where the accommodations are more secure and which have well defined infrastructure. This includes about ten camps (San Lorenzo, La Gloria and La Libertad, among others), which take in approximately 35% of the refugee population. Some of these refugees have leased lands, or have purchased them in their children's names. Regarding education, the Department of Public Education, starting with the current school year, that begins in the second semester of 1998, will take the educational system back over, with young indigenous teachers, who will be granted scholarships so that they may later attend the educational system with teachers. Where necessary, the refugee schools will be closed, and they will be incorporated into nearby educational establishments. In other cases, they will have school extensions with the support of ACNUR.

b) Camps where the refugees themselves are seeking solutions with the ejiditarios who are sheltering them on their lands. In these cases, the ACNUR will help with the construction of additional schoolrooms, or will reinforce the infrastructure in support of the two populations, such as water or other facilities.

c) Camps where the Mexican population no longer wants the refugees, or where the Guatemalans themselves do not desire to remain in the same camp. A relocation process is required for these cases.

ACNUR will carry out very few programs during 1999. The future, therefore, will be presenting us with several challenges. In legal terms, for the official immigration documentation, and others, such as birth, death certificates, and so on, the future Mexicans will require legal assistance during this naturalization process. On the other hand, with the disappearance of the institutions (ACNUR, COMAR and the NGOs), so too will their role of protecting human rights, the protection of women, and protection from possible violent conflicts in regions with social, political and military problems.

As for reconciliation, there have been conflicts between the Mexican and refugee populations, for which there will need to be a process of accompaniment in order to solve these community conflicts. Regarding land, although there are only a few refugees who have bought land, their ownership status is not adequately guaranteed legally. This legal weakness concerning their possession could cause them to become involved in agrarian struggles. For those who have been able to buy land in their children's names, it will not be until 2000 - when the first children born in Chiapas will be of age (18) - that they will be able to be owners and to take possession of their lands without their parents' guardianship. Starting with this first generation, it will be many years before those who have been naturalized, or the children of legal age, will be able to buy land. During the five years following the awarding of their FM2, no Guatemalan will be able to acquire lands in the area of their current places of refuge, since it is within the 100 kilometers of the border or the 50 kilometers of the chiapaneco coast. This will, therefore, provide very little support in the face of the social conflicts that could generate, in the worst case, new internal displacements of the now new Mexicans. Many of the refugees who opt for naturalization, in the face of the lack of land, will be employed as agricultural day laborers with finqueros or ranchers who consider them "second class Mexicans." Because of this, they will receive lower salaries for their labor. This will lead them to demand a salary equal to that of Mexican campesinos and indigenous.

Regarding the economy, with the absence of support programs, the refugees could be tempted to move in greater numbers to nearby cities or to the US, as the young persons are doing. It is worth remembering that very few of the lands are theirs, that the majority lease land or their labor. The disappearance of supports will make the resident's ties difficult with political institutions, as well as with those of health and education, among others, of the three levels of government (municipal, state and federal). The refugees, however, have begun this year, in 1998, a Coordination for Integration with the newly found representation from all the areas where there are camps, and with the participation of women. This process will be important in the facilitation of the reintegration.

Cultural identity will be another important challenge. The rebuilding and adaptation of the various generations to Mexican culture will not be at all easy for the children and the adults, even less so for the young people. On the other hand, relationships with the Mexican population will be of extreme importance. The links to networks of midwives, promoters, savings banks, economic programs, and others, with local social structure will help to strengthen their identity and their integration. The challenge will also be in preventing the new Mexicans from being taken advantage of, or co-opted by, the patronage systems of the various levels of government, and to prevent their being used, taken advantage of or manipulated by the electoral interests of the official party.

In the midst of this situation, we would venture a few recommendations: create a more independent human rights center in the region. The one that already exists is the South-Southeastern Human Rights Center, located in Comitán, but it only addresses demands and denunciations from the OPEZ. Support an advisory body and legal agency which will link them with the various federal and state departments and agencies related to land, health, education, and so on. Strengthen the education and training of the refugees concerning their rights as Mexicans, their knowledge of the Political Constitution of Mexico and of Chiapas, their knowledge of federal and state structures, their knowledge of the political parties and of social, economic and human rights organizations, of the history of Mexico and Chiapas, and so forth. Support the refugees' initiative concerning the Coordination for Integration.

We also see the importance of implementing sensitivity campaigns in the three levels of government and within the neighboring population, regarding the rights and obligations of the refugees who wish to integrate themselves, in order to facilitate that integration, and in order to avoid difficulties in their regions. NGOs and social organizations should include the refugees who are in the process of reintegration in their programs and projects, in order to facilitate their naturalization. To demand that the federal and state governments explicitly recognize in the Constitutions of both government levels the ethnic groups who now make up the new linguistic and cultural landscape of Chiapas and of the country. For the newly naturalized, it will also be a challenge to see that their ethnic groups are included as Mexicans from the perspective of their own cultural identities (Kekchí, Kanjobales, and others), and in government programs, such as having their textbooks translated into their languages. And to see that their integration will not have be paid by the new Mexicans through the purchase of their votes, or with other political favors for the official party, and that they will be able to develop their political and organizational preferences with greater liberty.

For the government, the Guatemalan refugee, in official terms, has ended, but for the indigenous, another stage has barely begun, of survival in a more hostile reality.

Note: This bulletin is an excerpt from the second chapter of the book, "The Displaced of Chiapas," by authors Gustavo Castro and Onécimo Hidalgo, introduced on August 18, 1999, in Mexico City by Gustavo Castro, co-author; Fray Gonzalo Ituarte, Vicar of Justice and Peace of the Diocese of San Cristóbal de Las Casas, in the name of Bishop Samuel Ruiz García; Sergio Aguayo, researcher from the College of Mexico; Diana Avila, Executive Secretary of the Department of Programs, who sponsored the research; and Mario Monroy, Coordinator of SIPRO and of "Faces and Voices. Fair Play." This book contains an evaluation of the internally displaced, such as the Guatemalan refugees, along with maps, tables and graphics. It was to be presented on August 21 in San Cristóbal de Las Casas, at the Museum Café, with the participation of Fray Gonzalo Ituarte; Carmelino and José, displaced from the Northern region, Leonardo González, Coordinator of the CORECO; Ernesto Ledesma, Coordinator of Global Exchange; Sister Josefina, of the Chenalhó Pastoral team; and Onécimo Hidalgo, co-author.

This book is being sold and distributed by: "Rostros y Voces, Trato Justo," Mérida No. 109 Local D. Esquina Alvaro Obregón, Colonia Roma, C.P. 06700 Mexico, D.F. Telephone: 5514-8453, Tel-fax: 5514-6359; Email: <sipro@laneta.apc.org> It is also for sale in bookstores in San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Chiapas.

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