The new proposal of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN in Spanish) has raised numerous questions and worries from many sectors of society. Subcomandante Marcos has used recent commiques to make an attempt to respond. We also intend here to place this new proposal within the context of the history that preceded the Caracoles.

On the same day that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between the US, Canada and Mexico went into affect, January 1, 1994, the EZLN appeared in public for the first time in the poorest region of Mexico. Thus, the state of Chiapas came to the center of attention of Mexican politics. In the midst of combat between the indigenous people and the Mexican army, national social activists mobilized to ask for a cease-fire and to seek another way to achieve peace, democracy and human rights so long desired, but never achieved by the indigenous peoples.

Historical Background

The experience of electoral fraud in the country, the co-opting of community and indigenous leaders, and the lack of credibility in executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government were contagious and led to growing disillusionment in all sectors of society. Successive governments ignored the rights of the indigenous peoples. The illusion of hope that generated the defeat of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) which had flaunted its control of the Presidency for 70 years vanished. The National Action Party (PAN) came to power in 2000 in the person of Vicente Fox – and continued the same neoliberal economic and political policies. Unemployment and migration from the country to cities has worsened to such a degree that 60% of the Mexican population now live in poverty. Coincidentally, 60% of the population decided not to vote in the federal elections of legislators in July 2003.

The Electoral Route

Thus, as in many countries of the world, representative democracy is discredited. The political parties and the presidency have lost the trust of the population. The President continues to abuse the powers of “presidential decrees” in order to impose the globalization agenda without relying on democratic instruments and institutions to generate political consultations or accords with various sectors of society. Perhaps the experiences of the guerrillas in Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua provided the pattern that kept the EZLN from following the route of converting itself to a political party, because it had been a political force since it appeared. For the EZLN, it was not even morally possible to become a political party; they had already assured the world that one who is prepared to die could not direct the destiny of society. The zapatista insurgents decided to seek another route that could satisfy their demands.   

The Armed Route

In the end, Central American guerrillas and peace processes forced national and international sentiment that with armed violence they would support neither side. At the same time, everyone agreed with the basic demands of the zapatista uprising: liberty, democracy, housing, work, justice, health, peace, etc. After ten years of preparation as an army and a few days of armed insurgency, the EZLN then decided to seek another route, another road. But which one? If neither democratic and electoral participation nor the use of arms was the route, what would work if the route of political and social mobilizations had been savagely rejected and cost the lives of indigenous leaders and political prisoners?

The Route of Dialogue and Negotiation

Dialogue and negotiation then became the fourth option. Thus the federal government felt obligated to sit down at the same table with the indigenous, something that no one had achieved until this moment. The zapatistas offered a table with a lot of chairs at which to seat themselves, taking advantage of the opportunity to pose their demands to the government. Laborers, campesinos, students, tenant farmers, producers, artists and many other groups saw this as a window of opportunity. A real national dialogue between the government and the people was opened in 1994, outside the institutional structures in which the federal government could have more control over the content, the format and the results of negotiations.

Origin of the “Aguascalientes”

In August 1994, the EZLN convened an encuentro for Mexican peoples called the National Democratic Convention (CND) in the indigenous community of Guadalupe Tepeyac in the Lacandón jungle. In this Chiapaneco community, the zapatistas hurried to make the preparations to receive more than 6,000 people from all sectors of civil society. They called the gathering place “Aguascalientes”, alluding to the National Revolutionary Convention that took place in the state of Aguascalientes involving armed insurgents during the Mexican revolution. But this time it was a revolutionary encuentro of social activists committed to democracy. Following the CND, the Mexican army tried to destroy these efforts at dialogue and encuentro that would have strengthened both sectors. The army invaded the community and the zapatistas fled to the jungle where they reconstituted the “Aguascalientes” in the community of La Realidad. Shortly thereafter, the EZLN inaugurated four other “Aguascalientes” where they carried out several other encuentros with social activists.

The Federal government tried many ways to leave the dialogue and negotiation table and carry out the discussion in scenarios where they could control it – the Legislature and the electoral process. The government continually pushed the EZLN to become a political party, to become a “political force”, to participate in “democracy” and to “dialogue” with the government in the halls of Congress. With the help of the Mexican army and police forces, the government activated paramilitary groups that still exist, re-enforced and built up the military presence, and human rights violations increased in the indigenous communities. Military checkpoints, bases and control points increased the indigenous isolation, hunger, poverty, evictions, exclusion and death. In spite of everything, the zapatista indigenous did not respond to these provocations and continued to dialogue and negotiate. In February 1996, after two years of the dialogue, and at the cost of increased poverty among the indigenous, the federal government and the EZLN signed the Accords of San Andrés, referring to Table (Theme) I about Indigenous Rights and Culture. There remained three other tables or themes to be negotiated before the indigenous insurgents would sign a definitive peace accord, demobilize and disarm.

The EZLN proposed to continue with the dialogue and negotiation until the accords of the first table were fulfilled. Again, the experience of the Central American guerrillas was helpful. The EZLN would not demobilize until all the accords were fulfilled. Nevertheless, the federal government never had the political desire to dialogue nor negotiate, much less to fulfill the already signed accords. The San Andrés indigenous community never again would see the federal government and society looking for peace in their streets. Five years later, in 2001, the federal government unilaterally passed a proposed indigenous law contravening the San Andrés Accords and Convention 169 of the ILO (International Labor Organization). Once more the government launched a counteroffensive, not only against the indigenous people, but all of society. The three branches of government (Executive, Legislative and Judicial) allied themselves to approve a counter-reform that limited the right to indigenous autonomy. Anomalies and illegalities plagued this process. The government stood discredited before the nation by its actions.

THE NEW EZLN STRATEGY

So it was necessary to seek another route, a fifth way. Although the EZLN took several years to clarify it publicly, it began the process in December 1994, when they announced the creation of the Zapatista Autonomous Municipalities in Rebellion.

The New Strategy, the Route of Action

For the EZLN, the Mexican power structure (political parties and the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches) betrayed “the hope of millions of Mexicans and thousands of people in other countries” when it denied the San Andrés Accords. Because of this, “The EZLN decided to completely cut off contact with the federal government and the political parties.” With this move it became clear that for the indigenous, dialogue, negotiation and political participation would not be the mechanisms by which human rights, and particularly the rights of the indigenous peoples, would be achieved. Rather, “they confirmed that resistance is their main form of struggle.” On the other hand, the EZLN resolved that the San Andrés Accords would “apply in the rebel territories”. Thus they made clear the two central foci of their strategy: Resistance and Rebelliousness. “The only road they have left open to us is to organize ourselves for resistance and rebelliousness”, according to Comandante Tacho. Comandante David stated, “With our struggle, resistance and rebelliousness we hope to make a small contribution to the larger struggle against neoliberalism and globalization of death, that threatens all humanity.”

Thus, another road opens for the indigenous peoples – the route of deeds. When we look at great indigenous struggles and mobilizations in Peru, Guatemala or Ecuador they came to political power by way of governmental institution, elections, so-called “political maneuvering”, or involvement in public politics. Others have opted to more firmly entrench themselves, fighting from the underground using the land as the fundamental autonomous base from which to develop a new direction. For the EZLN, the strategy centers on “putting our rights into practice as the just road for the indigenous peoples of Mexico to travel.”

From the local to the global, from the global to the local

Without forgetting the social struggles on the national, continental and world scene and in solidarity with them, the EZLN struggles locally thinking of the global. If globalization has to come to the local level, the zapatistas have decided to strengthen the local against the onslaught of neoliberal policies. In the same manner, thinking locally, they also struggle globally. Their 1996 convening of the International Encuentro for Humanity and against Neoliberalism was a demonstration of this, as was their presence in the demonstrations against the Fifth World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministers’ Meeting in Cancún, Mexico.

Breaking its silence, the EZLN confronted the problems and challenges presented by globalization, connecting the indigenous world with worldwide struggles. The zapatistas made reference to the aggression against the people of Iraq, the sovereignty of the Venezuelan people, the international struggle against war and the resistance against policies of domination over the peoples of the world. They describe this process as “the world-wide humiliation of the poor of the earth”. “These times of globalization are applying a new Holy Inquisition”, declare the commandantes and add, “The sins of the poor are being punished with sophisticated weapons, specially made to retaliate against those who rebel against plans for globalization”. The EZLN also referred to free trade agreements, the WTO, the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) as “implements and elements for the extermination of the heritage, sovereignty and culture of each country”. These elements outlined in their analysis of the world situation will be decisive for the completion of their strategy, as we will analyze below.

The zapatistas also make reference to Cuba’s situation: “In the Caribbean there is a people in the sights of world conquest, Cuba. To that people we give our admiration and respect. Small as we are, there is nothing we can do. But we are well aware that the reports of plans to attack it are not lies, nor is the decision of that people to resist and defend against foreign invasions”. About the people of the United States, the EZLN stated, “that there arose from the debris of the Twin Towers opposition to a war motivated by economic interests and hidden in the pain and courage provoked by the events of September 11, 2001.” They included their support for Mexican migrants “that suffer and work in a foreign land because globalization has stripped them of their lands”. The EZLN saluted the mobilization in Larzac, France: “Here are brother French campesinos that fight against the globalization of hunger, genetically modified organisms and the war for power. We don’t know if they hear us at this moment, but I know that although they are far away, they will feel the embrace that the most insignificant, we zapatistas, send them”. They also sent a message to Italy, “where under a bad government, the dignified rebel speaks Italian and thinks of culture”. They mentioned the support that they have received from Argentina: “We respond with humble conceit that we exist and that our embrace encompasses all of Latin America”.

The New Political Structure

In order to achieve the EZLN’s strategy, the zapatistas have spelled out a new structure. After achieving a critical balance and self criticism in recent years, they are indicating success and a change in direction in their process of constructing autonomy; their relationship with neighbors; and the participation and assistance of national and international social activists in the form of caravans, humanitarian aid, tools, economic and related projects and other ways. Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos announced that the EZLN “decided on the death of the so-called ‘Aguascalientes’ in La Realidad, Oventic, La Garrucha, Morelia and Roberto Barrios” and their conversion to “Caracoles”. Once again the zapatistas have demonstrated their capacity to modify, change and adapt themselves to a new strategy.

The significance of “Caracol”

In his communication, Subcomandante Marcos explained the significance of ‘Caracol’ to the zapatistas, reviving the sense of their ancestors: “ from the earliest days these lands have appreciated that the figure of the caracol (…) represents the core of the heart, (…) knowledge (…). It also represents leaving the heart and walking the world, the earliest life (…). The caracol is the collective so that words from one and another give birth to agreement (…). The caracol helps the ear to hear more clearly, including the most distant word (…)”.

Nevertheless, although the 27 Rebel Zapatista Autonomous Municipalities (MAREZ) are grouped in five Caracoles, “the governments of the Rebel Zapatista Autonomous Municipalities continue to function on their own, dealing locally with: administering justice, community health, education, housing, land, work, food, commerce, information and culture and local traffic.”

In each Caracol there will be a “ House of the Good Government Council” formed by one or two delegates from each of the Autonomous Councils within that zone, “in order to construct a more direct bridge between themselves and the world”. The caracoles “will function as entry points to the communities, exit points for the communities, like windows to see us and for us to see out, like amplifiers to send out our word and to hear what is happening far away. But, above all, to remind ourselves that we are watching and are aware of the integrity of those worlds that make up the world.” The Clandestine Indigenous Revolutionary Committee of the General Command of the EZLN (CCRI-CG EZLN) in each zone will oversee its functioning in order to root out acts of corruption, intolerance, arbitrariness, injustice and deviation from the zapatista principle of  “leading obediently”.

The Caracoles

The structure of the Caracoles and their Councils of Good Government were defined by the EZLN as follows:

1) La Realidad Caracol, made up of Tojolabal, Tzeltal and Mame zapatistas will be called The Mother Caracoles in the Sea of our Dreams, or S-Nan Xoch Baj Paman Ja Tez Waychimel Ku’untic. The Jungle Border Council of Good Government, called “Towards Hope”, includes Marqués de Comillas, the Montes Azules region and the border communities with Guatemala all the way to Tapachula. Its autonomous municipalities are General Emiliano Zapata, San Pedro de Michoacán, Libertad de los Pueblos Mayas and Tierra y Libertad.

2) Morelia Caracol made up of Tzeltal, Tzotzil and Tojolabal zapatistas will be called Whirlwind of our Words, or Muc’ul Puy Zutu’ik Ju’un Jc’optic.  The Tzots Choj Council of Good Government, call Heart of the Rainbow of Hope (Yot'an te xojobil yu'un te smaliyel in the indigenous language), includes part of the territories in the ‘official’ municipalities of Ocosingo, Altamirano, Chanal, Oxchuc, Huixtán, Chilón, Teopisca and Amatenango del Valle. Its autonomous municipalities are 17 de Noviembre, Primero de Enero, Ernesto Che Guevara, Olga Isabel, Lucio Cabañas, Miguel Hidalgo and Vicente Guerrero.

3) La Garrucha Caracol made up of Tzeltal zapatistas, will be called Resistance Until a New Dawn, or Te Puy Tas Maliyel Yas Pas Yach’il Sacal Quinal.  The Tzeltal Jungle Council of Good Government, called the Road to the Future (Te s'belal lixambael in Tzeltal) includes part of the municipality of Ocosingo. Its autonomous municipalities are Francisco Gómez, San Manuel, Francisco Villa and Ricardo Flores Magón.

4) Roberto Barrios Caracol made up of Chol, Zoque and Tzeltal zapatistas will be called Caracol that Speaks for All, or Te Puy Yax Sco’opu Yu’un Pisiltic (Tzeltal) and Puy Mui Ti T’an Cha ‘an Ti Lak Pejtel  (Chol). The Northern Zone of Chiapas Council of Good Government, called The New Seed that will Produce (Yach'il ts'unibel te yax bat'p'oluc in Tzeltal, and Tsi Jiba Pakabal Micajel Polel in Chol) includes parts of the municipalities of Northern Chiapas from Palenque to Amatán. Its autonomous municipalities are Vicente Guerrero, Del Trabajo, La Montaña, San José en Rebeldía, La Paz, Benito Juárez and Francisco Villa.

5) Oventic Caracol made up of Tzotzil and Tzeltal zapatistas will be called Resistance and Rebelliousness for Humanity, or Ta Tzikel Vocolil Xchiuc Jtoybailtic Sventa Slekilal Sjunul Balumil. The Chiapaneco Highlands Council of Good Government, called the Central Heart of the Zapatistas leading the World (Ta olol yoon zapatista tas tuk'il sat yelob sjunul balumil) includes parts of the municipalities in the Chiapaneco Highlands extending to Chiapa de Corzo, Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Berriozábal, Ocozocuautla and Cintalapa. Its autonomous municipalities are San Andrés Sakamchén de los Pobres, San Juan de la Libertad, San Pedro Polhó, Santa Catarina, Magdalena de la Paz, 16 de Febrero and San Juan Apóstol Cancuc.

The Councils of Good Government

The new political structure of autonomy will soon have the following characteristics and objectives. From all the communiqués and discourses of the EZLN, we have culled out and arranged the following:

a)  “Try to counteract the inequality of development in the autonomous municipalities and the communities.”

b)  “Mediate the conflicts that arise between autonomous municipalities and between autonomous municipalities and ‘official’ municipalities.”

c)  “Respond to accusations of human rights violations, protests and nonconformity against the Autonomous Councils; to investigate their truth and order the Autonomous Councils to correct their errors and to make certain they comply.”

d)  “Supervise the completion of the community projects and works in the Rebel Zapatista Autonomous Municipalities, taking care that they are completed on time and in accord with the community expectations; and to promote the support of community projects in the Rebel Zapatista Autonomous Municipalities.”

e)  ‘See to the obedience to the laws that function, by common agreement of the communities, in the Rebel Zapatista Autonomous Municipalities.”

f)   “Attend to and guide national and international social activists that visit the communities to work on productive projects, set up peace camps, research (N.B., that will benefit the communities), and any other activity permitted by the rebel communities.”

g)  “By common agreement with the CCRI-CG of the EZLN, promote and approve the participation of the compañeros and compañeras of the Rebel Zapatista Autonomous Municipalities in activities or events outside the communities and to select and prepare those compañeros and compañeras.”

h)  “No longer permit donations and support from national and international social activists to be directed to any specific person, community or autonomous municipality. The Good Government Council will decide, after evaluating community situations, where the need is greatest and direct it there. The Good Government Council imposes a so called “brotherhood tax” of 10 percent of the total value of any project. That is, if a community, municipality or collective receives economic support for a project, they will be required to pay 10 percent of that support to the Good Government Council which it will direct to another community that does not receive support. The objective is to equalize a bit, the economic development of the communities in resistance. It is clear that neither surpluses, charity nor imposed projects will be accepted.”

i)  “Recognize as zapatistas only those individuals, communities, cooperatives and societies of production and commerce that are registered with a Good Government Council. This will avoid the possibility that non-zapatista or anti-zapatistas (as are included in some organic coffee cooperatives) can claim to be zapatistas. The income and benefits from the zapatista cooperatives and business societies will go to the Good Government Councils for the support of the compañeros and compañeras who are not able to sell their products or who receive no other support.”

j)  “It is common that dishonest people deceive national and international social activists by posing as ‘zapatistas’ supposedly sent on a ‘secret or special mission’ asking for money for illnesses, projects, travel expenses or things of that nature. At times, even offering training at supposed, and false, EZLN ‘safe houses’ in Mexico City. In the first place they are false intellectuals, artists, professionals and not officials from local governments. In the second place it is young students who are the victims of the lie. The EZLN states clearly that it does not have a ‘safe house’ in Mexico City and does not offer any training (…). Since it is difficult to contact the General Command of the EZLN in order to verify if a person is, or is not, a part of the EZLN or its support base, and if one is not certain about who s/he is, now it will be possible to contact one of the Good Government Councils (in the zone where the ‘deceiver’ claims to be from) and learn in minutes whether s/he is a zapatista. The Good Government Councils will issue certificates or accreditation that, nevertheless, will have to be corroborated.”

k)  “It is not necessary to be a zapatista in order to be taken care of or respected by the Good Government Councils of the autonomous municipalities. All members of the community have the right to be served. We are brothers by race, color and history. There is no reason to fight and confront one another. We suffer the same misery, the same disregard. What we ask is that they respect us and respect the Good Government Councils that from this day on exist in the presence of many thousands of witnesses.”

l)  “The zapatistas are not going to assault or impose anything. We are always respectful when they respect us without regard to party or political or religious organization, because we indigenous people can live our rights as spelled out in the San Andrés Accords, acts introduced into law by the Commission of Harmony and Pacification (COCOPA).”

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