In May 2001 the First “People Before Globalization” Forum was held in Tapachula, Chiapas, sponsored by RMALC (Mexican Action Network against Free Trade), the Diocese of Tapachula and CIEPAC.  Some 250 representatives of 109 organizations of civil society participated.  These were civil society and producer organizations from the Central American countries of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras and Nicaragua, and from the Mexican states of Campeche, Chiapas, Guerrero, Oaxaca, Puebla, Quintana Roo, Tabasco and Yucatán.  From this first forum sprang various regional fora in Central America (Huehuetenango, Petén, El Salvador, etc.) and in Mexico (Peninsula, Chiapas, Isthmus, etc.) whose purpose was to inform participants regarding the Puebla Panama Plan (PPP) and its consequences (see the Chiapas al Día Bulletin, No. 243 at www.ciepac.org/bulletins/index01.htm ).

Six months after this initial Forum, expectations have been exceeded.  At the II Forum in Xelajú (Quetzaltenango), Guatemala, held November 22-24, there were 800 participants from 300 social organizations in Mexico (Yucatán Peninsula, Chiapas, Puebla, Oaxaca, Guerrero, Mexico City, Veracruz, etc.) and Central America (Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Panama).  They were accompanied by observers from Canada, United States, Germany, Australia, Belgium, Spain, Basque Country, France, England, Ireland, Norway, Sweden and Italy.  The main topics of discussion were globalization, free trade agreements, and particularly the PPP.  The final Declaration stated that “The women and men present at the Xelajú Forum denounce that the PPP is a geopolitical plan prefabricated according to the interests of multinational corporations (MNCs), local elites, and international financial bodies. The main points of this plan are centered on building an infrastructure of services for the exploitation of goods, our natural resources, biodiversity, and the labor force of our people, and the Plan does not take into consideration, at any point, the needs of the Mesoamerican people and our communities."

Participants at the Forum took part in discussions at “thematic roundtables” on Megaprojects, Indigenous Peoples, Natural Resources, Alternative Trade, Indigenous Peoples and International Cooperation, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Labor Rights and the Maquiladoras, Campesino Economy and Globalization, and Local Control (Poder Local) Municipal Governments and Social Development.

Official documents on the PPP state that no public consultations will be held about the plan.  Therefore the Xelajú Declaration states that “The conception and construction of the PPP have been antidemocratic: the Central American governments approved a plan elaborated by the Mexican government, and Mexico pushed this plan as the U.S. government's local intermediary in the region. The PPP violates the sovereignty of our countries as well as the self-determination of our peoples.  Furthermore the plan does not consider workers’ and migrant workers' rights and on the contrary it creates repressive policies towards them." As if this were not enough, "It also forms part of an exclusionary model of economic development, that is illegal and illegitimate, since it violates commitments contained in the ILO’s Article 169, as well as other treaties and international instruments that have been ratified by most of the Meso-American countries.  To date no public consultation has been held on the PPP, when it is apparent that legislative and administrative measures will be taken through the PPP that will gravely and directly affect the public. This lack of consultation deprives people of their right to participate in the decision-making process.

The dams that corporations are attempting to construct such as Itzantún in Huitiupán, Chiapas, along the Usumacinta River in the Chiapas region of Marqués de Comillas and Guatemala, and the Tigre dam between Honduras and El Salvador and others, will have disastrous consequences for the local population, increasing the displacement of indigenous people from their lands. In addition these dams will negatively impact the environment and the Meso-American Biological Corridor (MBC). In light of these and other facts, “Participants in the forum emphasized the need to promote investments that generate productive employment and agricultural development that guarantees food security. These types of investments should be prioritized before megaprojects at the service of the MNCs, and before maquiladora or agro-exporting projects that ignore the most basic needs of our people.  The participants at the Xelajú Forum 2001 emphasized that the PPP in its current form presents risks to the environment and biodiversity, but above all it violates to the rights of the peoples in the region. Thus the Xelajú Forum considers that full respect must be paid to the rights of the indigenous peoples." 

For this reason, "Demands were voiced that the Xelajú Forum 2001 be a step in the building of a collective, Meso-American action network, focused on the PPP as well as the effects of the Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and plans for the creation of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).  In addition, participants proposed the creation of new networks and new ways of cooperating together around different topics, such as the maquiladoras, or to denounce the hydroelectric megaprojects.  In summary, we coincided in rejecting the globalization imposed on us and agreed on the need to place the demand that “People come first, before globalization" at the center our agenda.

The Xelajú Forum emphasized the need to “forge the greatest possible amount of social alliances, based in grass-roots, social, and non-governmental organizations, in order to carry out specific activities on concrete topics”.  Thus the Xelajú Forum agreed to:

1. Totally reject the PPP.
2. Increase efforts to systematize experiences and alternatives for community and regional development, with equity, justice, and sustainability, in the face of the authoritarian and antidemocratic plans of globalization and PPP.
3. Launch an information campaign for the people and for local authorities in the region regarding the PPP and its effects.  Also, the FTAA was rejected because it is contrary to the independent development of our peoples.
4. Promote the establishment of a network of Mesoamerican peoples and organizations working against globalization and the PPP.
5. Develop a plan for coordinated mobilizations in the local, national and regional spheres, regarding our demands.
6. Convoke organizations and the peoples of the Mesoamerican region to prepare and participate in the III International Forum, to be held in Nicaragua in 2002.
7. We condemn all forms of militarization in the Mesoamerican region, and manifest our categorical rejection of the Plan Colombia, while calling for the advancement of the peace process in Colombia.
8. We ratify support for the Continental Social Alliance and the World Social Forum, which we consider ourselves a part of.
9. We express our solidarity with the struggle of all peoples against imposed globalization.

At the roundtable discussions organized by topic, we shared experiences that enriched our reflections, diagnoses and alternatives.  What follows are brief summaries of the tables.  A complete version of the Xelajú Final Document can be consulted at www.ciepac.org in the chapter on the PPP.

The Mega-project and Indigenous Peoples Table proposed the establishment of a mechanism to share information on the PPP and its impacts and that a MESOAMERICAN NETWORK be built for the purpose of obtaining and distributing information.  This information should include experiences of our people and organizations and should be made available in the languages of the people in the region.  Another proposal is the creation of a MESOAMERICAN COORDINATION to faithfully represent the different sectors of civil society and to carry out joint actions regarding the PPP.  We should also strengthen our organizations while carrying out joint actions in which other social sectors will participate.  The group will encourage actions to support local struggles that are already confronting the PPP and foster joint mobilizations from the grass roots up to the Mesoamerican level.  We will demand that governments respect and comply with international treaties and agreements regarding human rights and the rights of Indigenous peoples (Article 169 of the ILO).  Furthermore, given the impacts of the PPP, resistance in itself is insufficient; rather a sustainable development proposal must be drawn up by our peoples which guides the building of infrastructure for the benefit of local communities, while respecting the environment.  We must support the economic activities of the indigenous peoples, campesino communities, and grass-roots groups, while using natural resources responsibly and respecting labor rights.  We should create education and training programs at all levels that will respect cultural identities and improve the living standards of our peoples.

The Mega-projects and Natural Resources Table proposed the following actions:
* set a date to mobilize in protest against the PPP
* coordinate efforts among diverse organizations to generate alternatives to the PPP
* promote environmental impact studies carried out by communities
* work against the privatization of water resources
* gather data on PPP investments and their effects
* coordinate with all of the sectors in each country
* carry out a consciousness-raising campaign among non-profit agencies in order to work against the imposition of projects
* carry out fora such as this one at the community level
* undertake studies on water-resource legislation
* prioritize food self-sufficiency and sovereignty within the topic of natural resources and put pressure on political parties to place the topic on their agendas
* reject the PPP due to its environmental destruction and due to the debt that it implies
* systematize local information regarding the PPP and natural resources in order to exercise pressure
* establish a mechanism for the exchange of information about human rights violations in each country
* review current relevant legislation in all of the countries regarding natural resource management and link it to PPP-related policies
* draw up a list of thematic strategies in order to articulate alternative proposals to the PPP.

It was also proposed that a data bank be set up on economic integration processes, with information on case studies, technical and academic research related to this articulation of civil society, and that this data bank be accessible to all sectors.  There should be clear and precise information regarding the PPP, MNC investments, multilateral agencies such as the Inter American Development Bank (IDB), the World Bank (WB), International Monetary Fund (IMF), among others, and their negative effects.  Promote information forums and debate on the implications of the PPP and on the creation of alternatives.  It was also deemed necessary to undertake lobbying and negotiation with foundations and international solidarity, as well as with governmental PPP negotiators so they might take into consideration local agendas.  Develop political clout from citizens’ sectors through the creation of a Mesoamerican commission that will gather results of a survey by sectors and present results at international bodies such as the Rio + 10 Commission on Biodiversity, CICAT, SICA.  Carry out referenda, plebiscites, petitions, among other activities within all PPP countries in order to reject the Plan.  Hold a march in all PPP countries on February 5, 2002 directed at the offices of the IMF, IDB, WB and the Central Americana Economic Integration Bank to coincide with the march against the FTAA during the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil.  Carry out a second march on June 10, 2002 to coincide the march against the Food and Agriculture Organization to be held that same day in Rome.  The march will officially inaugurate the information campaign on the 3^rd regional forum on the PPP to be held in Managua, Nicaragua.  Carry out resistance campaigns against the consumption of GMOs (genetically modified organisms) and in defense of food sovereignty and security.  Promote articulation of different sectors to halt treaties or trade initiatives that affect us.  Bring to the next PPP forum proposals and criteria for the building of an alternative development model.  Rely on national and international jurisprudence as a legal base for stopping the implementation of neoliberal policies and follow up on legal processes that are currently facilitating privatization of basic services and strategic natural resources (water, oil, forests, biodiversity, etc.).

The Table on Fair Trade questioned whether alternative trade can really be alternative.  Concern was expressed regarding the opening of markets that put food sources at risk.  The WTO (World Trade Organization) eliminates barriers to trade while imposing rules that violate consumer interests and pressuring governments to revoke rules that protect consumers, especially in the area of genetically modified foods.  The quality of products is low and can cause secondary effects.  It is therefore important to disseminate information and defend our rights as consumers.  But the concern was “What (kind of) trade?"  This is understood to be the exchange of goods and services.  In Nicaragua there is a large deficit in foreign trade, US$640 million in exports versus US$1.78 billion (thousand million) in imports.  Nicaragua can’t hope to survive in this environment.  The topic needs to be analyzed from a neoliberal perspective (structural adjustment policies, etc.) that creates greater dependency and reduces social services (social security, for example, is being privatized).  Services become merchandize, and people’s futures are put at risk.  So too energy resources, primary schools, etc., in violation of social and economic rights.  Now the PPP would continue to impose these kinds of policies via mega-projects, appropriating natural resources that belong to indigenous peoples.  If foreign trade runs a deficit, can it strengthen the internal economy?  Or is it necessary to strengthen a country’s internal markets?  The problem with fair and equitable trade is the large-scale competition with conventional producers. (Fair Trade) products are always more expensive and this limits the market.  How can networks for alternative trade be created and what role can we as individuals play?

Various projects are producing positive results, especially in terms of training that promotes awareness that companies can be managed with different rules, not based on exploitation.  We emphasize handicraft production in indigenous communities and our organization promotes and markets them.  We generate alternatives and experiences that evolve into new ideas, making other investments that compliment subsistence, thus guaranteeing better use of the support that reaches communities (monetary, in kind, etc.)  Yet the sale of Maseca (commercial corn meal for tortillas) in the countryside controls market prices, coffee is in crisis, sugar has been blocked, the price has plummeted for bananas, and oranges are worth nothing.  That’s why there are protests everywhere.  How can we establish mechanisms for internal trade?  Maseca displaces local corn (maize) production and establishes planting conditions for campesinos, such as the use of seed from a particular multinational company, including its package of inputs (fertilizers, insecticide etc.)  In five years that land will be worthless.  Further, with the higher costs of production, campesinos do not earn greater profits.  This is leading to out-migration and failures in the countryside.  We must break this cycle that makes it impossible for families to even subsist.

Fair trade cannot be generated because there is no awareness among consumers (a social movement).  In addition, fair trade initiatives often are worked out and remain among the higher echelon.  We want to struggle for greater links among communities and not so much against the PPP.  At times the intermediary takes the lion’s share of profits and yet we have not generated alternatives to promote fair trade among communities.  We mount campaigns at schools, especially among the young, to promote fair consumption of beans.  We have an agreement with producers from the north that sets prices for beans at 5.50 with 0.50 going towards the campaign.  We thus promote fair trade at the grass-roots level based on community organizations (as established by the Zapatistas).  We’re now looking at a community level movement.  We must analyze the concept of development at the level of the population.  The University of the Land is proposing to make this definition based on a diagnosis of the current situation in Oaxaca, since it is students that strengthen social mobilization.

In Guatemala we have cultivated organic coffee in the Lake Atitlan basin through networks in the area, while maintaining coffee quality.  Certification is very costly and is a barrier for small producers.  Last year fair trade coffee sold for $1.26, while commercial coffee sold for $0.43.  We’re trying to find a new buyer to take the place of western countries, because we continue to be within the same logic of globalization.  We haven’t yet looked into the local and regional markets.  In addition, we face the challenge of producing for our own food needs, rather than just for export.  Globalization has kept us dependent and has transformed productive and trade structures.  We are the source of raw materials and labor for the dominant countries, and this doesn’t allow us to break the dependency in which we have been and continue to be in.  In the maquiladoras we are a cheap source of labor and make products which are sent abroad and then are returned to us with a label.  We must get out of this cycle of dependence.  An example might be an association of free producers, in order to not depend on external markets and set our sights on the internal market.  Barriers for fruit are another example and the growing of fruit doesn’t improve our living conditions.  We must overcome our conception as transformers of raw goods.  The situation in Huehuetenango is critical because people are living on what they take home every day.  And during the months from September to November there is no other option than to go to work in the large plantations.  Salaries are extremely low, due in part to coffee’s low price.  There is no work for teachers, for example, and many people are heading north.  The situation is also very critical on the Southern Coast where cotton used to be grown (by the large land owners).  In light of this situation we campesinos have been a conformist lot and we have thus remained stagnant.  We must join efforts to confront this globalization that is impoverishing us.  For example the planting of potatoes was a failure because its price fell.  Nor is there work on the large plantations now, and people are now seeking jobs in the army.

What do we understand by alternative trade?  How can we establish inter-regional networks for alternative trade (strategy and regional mechanisms)?  We saw that it was necessary to reactivate local and sub-regional economies based on exchange and offers from abroad.... to produce to exchange and not to capitalize.  To establish lists of producers, limitations and capacities.  To raise awareness about values that have been tossed aside by capitalism.  To create trade that strengthens solidarity among countries and migrants.  Create Central American certifications and cooperatives of migrant consumers, as well as the sale of environmental services.  To strengthen the use of organic fertilizers, and promote a treaty of Mesoamerican cooperation to trade in raw materials.  To increase self-consumption.  To diversify production and promote manufactured products.  For some of us it wasn’t a matter of becoming more professional and inserting ourselves in the market competitively, but rather of breaking free from the model of competition in order to assist each other and to resist and confront monopoly trade. That is, to stop following the logic of capitalism and instead work to build an alternative production model and break away from the hegemony of the international financial system.

The Table on Indigenous Peoples and International Cooperation found that in the newly opened Office for Indigenous Peoples in Geneva, only 8 of the 16 officials are indigenous.  In addition, the office lacks resources and it is thought to be mostly window dressing.  Efforts should be made for Office to have a vote in the General Assembly and not just in ECOSOC.  This Table proposed that support be lent to this Office within the U.N.  The greatest threat would be to deny the office its rights at all levels, and we see this concretely in the planning of programs such as the PPP.  Governmental cooperation has always used a “carrot” strategy.  The PPP goes against the interests of the indigenous peoples.  One example that stands out is the MBC (Mesoamerican Biological Corridor), started in 1994 with the support of the IDB.  The IDB offered funds to the CICAFOR, because at the bottom of matter is the subject of bio-piracy, in addition to taking advantages of tourist locations. This strategy also copies the Botswana model, where wealthy tourists visit without apparent impact on the environment.  A deeper diagnosis was called for on the effects on indigenous peoples.  Proposals included producing materials (radio, TV, murals, of all kinds) with international cooperation that can be transmitted at a national level, undertaking a campaign with materials about bio-piracy and working on training that incorporates the terms of international rights with indigenous realities and cultural viewpoints. 

Aid can play not only a financial role but one of political solidarity as well: supporting community self-help projects; orienting aid towards alternative development for indigenous populations, forming and strengthening alliances and seeking common agendas and decoding and demystifying all government propaganda. International aid can also have an impact in home countries and can strengthen South-South cooperation.  Likewise aid can support legalization of indigenous lands in order to carry out development projects generated from an indigenous cultural viewpoint.  It can also support dialogue and negotiations at a local level. 

Another question was discussed: whether to accept all international aid or to establish restrictions.  “At the very least, international solidarity could work to assure that "aid" not be used to screw us. This would be a good form of international cooperation.”  But what happens with the use of government or IDB funds?  The IDB seems to have approved US$745,000 for public hearings about the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor.  Should these funds be rejected? Would accepting the funds be an endorsement of the "public hearings."   It is also necessary to create a socially-based auditing system.  Projects must not be given “legitimacy” through supposed "public hearings" when indigenous people are being affected by the projects and not truly listened too.  International bodies should have contacts with people who represent indigenous communities.  But we are also divided.  Those of us who reach public posts change. Both mestizos and foreigners take our properties.  Transnational corporations have great influence over our rural economies. They have asked for the use and benefit of the land for 20 years or more.  They then leave and the lands have been clear cut, leaving no benefit for indigenous peoples.  The nature of NGOs must be discussed as well, and their resources well directed so as to strengthen alliances.  It is an error to divide indigenous and non-indigenous people.  The PPP does not only harm indigenous people, it harms all poor people.

The Table on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ESCR) and Globalization proposed the encouragement of open town meetings in all of the areas affected by PPP initiatives.  Parallel meetings should be held when ministerial or presidential meetings or summits are held on the topic.  We should be attentive to related legal initiatives that come before our national congresses.  Demand reductions in the defense budget.  Campaigns to denounce legally substantiated violations of the ESCR.  Undertake street actions against corporations that affect our people's quality of life. Create social and political forces so that citizens have an active presence when decisions are made by governments and pressure to have these forces within the seat of formal power.  Link up with other regional and Latin American efforts.  Demand the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Central America.  Create a national body to analyze and generate action proposals and design negotiation strategies.

The Table on Labor Rights and the Maquiladoras proposed the creation of a permanent task network in order to prepare the third encounter along strategic lines that will become better defined in accordance to the struggles and experiences of the Mesoamerican countries.  These struggles have centered on workers’ labor conditions at the maquiladoras, the right to unionize, security and hygiene, lowering production quotas, work flexibility, respect for the environment, handling of toxic materials, no deforestation to install maquiladoras, against water pollution, women's rights, ending conditionality of jobs on pregnancy and sexual harassment, respect for reproductive rights and health conditions, minimal working conditions (social security, maternity leave, breast-feeding rights, clinics).  The table also considered important the sharing of information regarding national and international legal mechanisms (codes of conducts, labor codes, international agreements, ILO convention).  Invite labor unions and women's organizations in the region to the next meeting.  Maintain contact and relations with international groups.  Participants need to form a permanent network on maquiladora information.  Follow up on maquiladora companies and their behavior in the region.  Create a directory on the origin of the capital and the destination of the products.  For this reason, information already gathered by many organizations present at the Xelajú Forum must be shared.

The Table on Campesino Economy and Globalization reiterated that indigenous peoples are at a disadvantage because governments are totally unconcerned and unresponsive.  Work must be done to raise people’s awareness and to defend the national sovereignty of the peoples of the Americas given the present emphasis on large industry.  Globalization would transfer resources and disarticulate the agricultural sector.  In San Marcos, Guatemala, the large coffee producers don’t pay decent salaries to the campesinos.  For this reason, a first objective should be to create an alliance among campesinos.  Eighty percent of the campesinos have only 20% of the national income in Guatemala.  The rules of the market make living conditions precarious for the campesinos.  Chemical products at the large plantations, for fumigation, are destructive to the land and to campesinos.  The land has been poisoned.  What has the PPP failed to consider?  The re-concentration of lands in hands of a few.  The conversion of small producers into poorly paid employees.  The loss of productive capacity and therefore of self-sufficiency, leading to the import of products that many citizens can’t afford.  Yet unions have no project proposal or long-range vision and so these organizations must be examined and the methods of struggle renovated, changing terminology and widening leadership.

In El Salvador banks have reduced credit by 10% and tariffs have also fallen.  This year a value added tax was applied to small producers who have no medical coverage.  In Guatemala 85% of the land is in the hands of 15% of the population and the government is not complying with the peace accords regarding land distribution.  The agrarian distribution has re-concentrated most lands in the hands of a few.  Land is very quickly being privatized. For this reason we must diversify production and not depend solely on one product, like coffee.  In the midst of all this we are asking for deeper collaboration from people from the US and Europe who attend these forums, because many of them come only to work on their thesis and do nothing to encourage activism in their country or to spread the word about the campesino's situation.  Some of the action proposals from this table were: increase women's access to credit, land, education and health, encourage the autonomy of the indigenous communities in Mesoamerica, reform and enforce laws on indigenous rights, emphasize that the relationship between the indigenous peoples and nature is not the cause of environmental destruction as national and international elites claim, appreciate the value of local technology (and spread this knowledge) and create a system to protect and support small and medium producers.

The Table on Local Power, Municipal Governments and Local Development confirmed that free trade agreements and the PPP are having negative impacts: environmental destruction, the stealing of lands, the break-up of families, bankruptcy of small and medium businesses due to (foreign) competition, promotion of false needs (consumerism), an ever-decreasing role of the government, transformation of democracy into a tool for the service of multinational corporations and valuing people only as a producer and consumer. Among general proposals for local and regional alternative development, those emphasized were the need to value and strengthen local work and production, strengthening the local economy through crop diversification, defending our territory, values, culture, customs and local forms organization, legalizing the possession of lands; defending natural resources of the poor and committing ourselves to spreading information and drawing up proposals that encourage the struggle for integral development.  Among the short term proposals: undertake an information campaign on the PPP.  Inform local authorities of the content and repercussions of the PPP.  Draw up a document for municipal authorities.  Create campaign committees and raise awareness on the impact of the free trade agreements and the PPP.  Undertake information campaigns in municipalities and communities, as well as pamphlets, posters and leaflets in different languages and for different age groups.  Record cassettes, videos, interviews and talks for the mass media, unmasking the true intentions of the free trade agreements and the PPP.  Use legal instruments to denounce the violation of the 169 and 107 Treaties, the commitments of the Agenda 21 of Rio de Janeiro, etc.  Disseminate successful experiences of resistance.  Strengthen networks.  Define dates for events (demonstrations, referenda, etc.).  Name national coordinators and formalize them within Xelajú 2001.  Visit communities through brigades in order to disseminate information.  Strengthen organizations through unity and through changing negative attitudes. Carry out activities in every country to demonstrate people’s resistance, unity and force.  Create commissions by country, presenting proposals and alternatives that benefit the common welfare.

Some plans for the mid-term are: carry out regional forums with local and community authorities against PPP projects that affect citizens, organize a forum against dam building projects, seek strategic alliances in the US that can lobby the US congress, design an alternative development project to the PPP, plan a day of struggle in favor of the alternative project “Mesoamerican Agreement for Citizens’ Democracy and Development”,   integrate the other countries in South America.  Over the longer term: bring to the next forum a diagnosis of the Puebla-Panama region of government projects and of political and social forces; hold a demonstration and a Mesoamerican plebiscite.

The alliances, struggles and alternatives do indeed have names: for this reason we include here a partial list of the Xelajú Forum participants: Germany: Project Counselling Service; Austria: OXFAM; Belgium: Plataforma Política Europea; Canada: Fondo PWRDF Anglicana, Sombrilla, Building Bridges HUMAN R., Droits et Démocratie, AMICUS FOUNDATION, Social Justice Committee, CECI; El Salvador: Alforja, CDC, CEAL, Centro de Defensa del Consumidor, CIDAR, CORDES-CRIPDES, Dignas, FESPAD, Foro Agropecuario, Foro de Mujeres, FULSALPRODESE, FUNDE, ISEN, OIKOS Solidaridad PNUD, Saprin, UNES; Spain: Students from Universidad Valencia, Accsur, MUJERES TRANSFORMANDO, Accio Solidaria – IGMAN, Entre Pueblo, Colectivo de la Rebelion Zapatista/Barcelona; United States: MSN, ACERCA, DEPAUL, students from the Universidad of Chicago and Colgate University, CISPES, Social Justice Committee, Rights Action, Grassroots International, Nisgua, Quakers, students from the Universidad of Texas, France: CCDA; Guatemala: ACADIC, Acción Ciudadana, ACODIH, ACOFOP Peten, ACOMAC, ACSUR Las Segovias, ADDAIL, ADEP (Aso.Desarraigados Peten), ADIQ, ADIVINA, Aguas de Pueblo, AIDES, Alcalde Auxiliar Zona 3 Totonicapán, Alcalde La Libertad, Alcalde Municipal Colotenango, Alcalde Municipal Ixtahuacán, Alianza contra la impunidad, Amadec, AMERG, Amupedi, As. De Miniriego de Hortalizas, ASCRA, ASEDE, Asoc. San Gaspar, Asoc. Vecinos Champerico, Asociación AIDAC, Asociación Crecer, Asociación Ixmucane, Asociación Mayalan, Asociación Mujeres Ixtahuacán, Asociación Mujeres Rio Sijal, ASOCUCH, ASODEC, ASODHI, ASOMAMD, Asoman Colotenango, ASOMAN San Sebastián, Asomugagua, ASOPERC, ASOPS San Sebastián, Avancso, CADEL, CALAS, CALDH, CAPAZ, CCDA, CEDES, CEDFOG, CEIBA, CEPAHER, CESMA, CHILAM, CICA, CIDECA, CIEP, Clinica Maxeña, CNOC, COCENTRA, CODECA, COINDE, COMADECA, COMG, Comité de Mujeres, Comunicarte, CONAVIGUA, CONDEG, CONGCOOP, CONIC, Consejeria de Proyectos, Conservación International, Consoc, COODESC, Coop La Esperanza, Coop. Esperanza San Sebastián, Cooperativa Lourdes, CPD, CRS/GT, CRS/GT, CUC, CUNOC, DECOPAZ, Defensoria Indìgena Waxaquib Noj, Derechos en Acción, Derechos Humanos de San Marcos, Derechos Humanos, DIGI USAC, Dos ceibas Democracia Huehue, EB' YAJAW, Farmacia Comunitaria, FAUSAC, FECAIRAN, FETICC, FODIGUA, FONTIERRA, Foro de coordinaciones, Funcedescri, Fundación ANDAR, Fundaciòn Rigoberta Menchú, Fundación Solar, Fundamaya, Fundamor, FUNDAR, Fundatep, Fupedes, Grufepromefam, Grupo indígena de la Democracia, Hermanadad Presbiteriana Maya, Hijos, IIES-USAC Red Democrática, IMAP, Inforpress Centroamericana, Ins Supera. Misera Urbana, INTERVIDA, Libres Pensadores, Mamá Maquin, Maquilas Unidas, Marynokll, Memorial Guatemala, Menamig, MOJOMAYAS, Movimiento Desarraigados, Mujeres en Solidaridad, Mujeres Garífunas, Mujeres Mayas IXCHEL, Muni Nenton, Muni. San Juan Auitan, Muni. de Nentón, Muni. Quetgo., Muni. Sn. Juan A., MUNIKAT, Nueva Generación, ONEGUA (frente solidario), Org. Mujeres Rio Squisal, Oxfam, Párroco de la Libertad, Párroco Ixtahuacán, Parroquia de Aguacatan, Parroquia de la Libertad, Parroquia de Soloma, Parroquia Domocracia, Pastoral Social Huehuetenango, PIES, PJC, PROCUCH, Procuradoría DD HH, Prodesa, Programa de Educación con Jóvenes, PTM, SADEGUA, SEPAZ, SERJUS, SHARE, SID, Sociedad civil, STEG, STITCH, UASP, UDAK, USAC CEMA, USAP, USCA FAUSAC, UTQ y Sindicato de Trabajadores HRO, Xela-Guía; Honduras: SINTRINA, ANACH, URP, COPA, CICHSA-CORTI, CONPAH, EAC. 28 JUNIO, OFRANEH, COPINH-COMPA, BLOQUE POPULAR, BLOCOPAH, PUEBLO TOLUPAN, SAN FRANCISCO OPALACA, CID DE LA PAZ, CG COPINH, ODECO (FRENTE SOLIDARIO), ASOCODE, Frente Solidario Honduras, Comité de Familiares Desaparecidos, COCOCH, ASONOG/FOSDEH; Great Britain: Student, El Arco; Italy: PNUD, CISS, CISPI, Universidad de Pavoba; Mexico: ACSUR Las Segovias, Área de Muejeres, EDUCE, Centro DH Tepeyac, Centro Investigaciones IPN Merida, Chontecomatlán, CIEPAC, CIESAS, CINVESTAV- Yucatán, CISCAP, CNPI, CODIMUJ, Comercio Justo, COMITE DEFENSA POPULAR ZARAGOZA, COMPITCH, Comunidad de Tabasco, Coop de Pescadores Santa Ros, Cordinadora Contacto, CORECO, Derechos Humanos Municipio Autónomo Chiapas, Derechos Humanos, Diputado Federal, EDUPAZ, Equipo Pueblo, Escuela de Capacitación Cívica, Estación Libre, Students from the UNAM, FAT, Frente Cívico Potosino SLP, Global Exchange, Ikoots de San Francisco del Mar, Instituto de Asuntos Mundiales Contemporáneos, Las Abejas, Manitesse, MCD, Misión Guadalupe, Misioneros Maryknoll, Movimiento Oaxaqueño, OPICH, Organización de Médicos Indigenas de la Sierra, Parroquia de Chicomuselo, Parroquia San Andrés, Parroquia Santo Domingo, Pueblo Creyente, Red de Defensores Comunitarios DDHH, Red de Jovenes Indígenas, Red Indígena Consejo Guerrerense, Red Nacional de Promotores y Asesores, Región del Istmo, RMALC, Seminario Permanente de Estudios Chicanos y de Fronteras, SEPICJ, Trasparencia, UCIZONI, Unión Campesina, Villamermosa Tabasco-Santo Tomás, YOMBLEJ, Zapoteca de Tlacolulita; Nicaragua: CEALP, Oaganic, ADEPHCA, ASOCODE, FENACOOP, Movimiento Comunal, FNT, UNAG, Coordinadora Maquilas, URACCAN, FRNCA, Centro Humboldt, COM. MONKEY POINT, MESA ALT. ALCA, Mov. Antiglobalización, ATC, FNT, CONFERS, SUKAWALA; Norway: Comité Noruego De Solidaridad; Basque Country: ASKAPENA, C.P.R Sierra; Panama: Movimiento Juventud Kuna, Centro de Asistencia Legal, Rap Panama Frente solidario, Red Mujeres Afropanameñas, AAMECAB; Sweden: DIAKONIA.

Gustavo Castro Soto

Sources: Quehacer Político, Cuarto Poder, Páginas, Expreso de Chiapas, Foja Coleta, Diario de Chiapas, Proceso, Proceso Sur and 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