The Mesoamerican social movement against the Puebla Panama Plan (PPP) has been so strong that at one point the same governments and the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) considered it politically defeated.  But in reality it was never dead and, just as the World Bank did, the IADB passed much of the financing to companies and the governments through the Central American Bank for Economic Integration (CABEI).  Now this year the government has launched a publicity and financial counter-offensive in favor of the PPP to recuperate the public credibility it has lost, wash itself of concerns for the poor and pose itself as a project based in democracy and consultation with indigenous groups.  The Mexican government’s counteroffensive is also deployed by means of a publicity campaign with television advertisements that show how happy the population will be with the PPP.

THE RE-LAUNCHING OF THE PPP

In August of 2003, Mexican president Vicente Fox affirmed that “we want development without discrimination.”  He assured that no action in the framework of the PPP has been taken, nor will it without agreement from the communities directly involved (which would certainly comply with the ILO’s Convention 169 on Indigenous and Tribal People), and that the government had conducted more than 50 “town halls” with communities of 36 indigenous groups, which demonstrates that “we want development without discrimination, without imposition, and with full participation.”  Later on we will see that this assertion is untrue.

In the first session of the PPP Intersecretarial Commission, comprised of 12 secretaries of state, the Commission for Development of Indigenous Groups, Bancomext and Banobras (because they are where multilateral bank resources are channeled), it insisted that its government wanted a balanced, inclusive and just development that would consider the needs and wants of each and every person in the communities.  Before the ambassadors and their staff, the president confirmed that the PPP was advancing in its execution and investing: “The governments of Mexico and the Central American nations have united forces to detonate economic growth and, at the same time, drive human and social development in the zone.”  Nonetheless, growth indicators of the population do not improve; poverty, food dependency as well as external debt of these nations continue growing, and the high numbers of migrants who abandon their homes.

The first phase of the strategy is directed to investment in infrastructure to integrate the entire region through ports, highways, telecommunications, airports, and the electricity grid.  Deregulating national laws in all sectors for just one law that facilitates investment and privatization.  For the Secretary of the Exterior, Luis Ernesto Derbez, the PPP Intersecretarial Commission coordinates and promotes the actions and federal programs to improve quality of life of the Mesoamerican population with the aid of the public, social and private sectors.  This is a new strategy of neoliberal governments in the sense that they define public funds and resources as those these were not society’s.  In this way they charge society as responsible for contributing extra resources (from the social sector) through use of the workers’ retirement funds to invest in the stock market or in infrastructure projects.  The need to extract more resources from the population manifests itself in other strategies, as well: taking another part of workers’ wages to pay for future pensions or retirements in all sectors (health, education, etc.), while sequestering these funds in the hands of bankers.

The PPP forms part of a subregional mechanism that is aiming at the formation of the Free Trade Area of the American (FTAA) in the same way as sub-regional processes are forming MERCOSUR, or as free trade agreements between the United States with a growing number of countries in Latin America and the Caribbean.  This is the strategy that the United States government designed in case the negotiations in the World Trade Organization (WTO) fell through.  The commercial routes, water, petroleum, gas, genetic resources, earth, wood, and other mineral resources are included today in the strategic interests of the United States and are marked with the norm of harshly repressed struggles and resistance of society in Honduras, but also in Guatemala, Peru, Ecuador, Venezuela, Colombia, Brazil, Chile, El Salvador, etc.  In this framework of connecting the continent, it was recently announced that Colombia could form part of the PPP beginning in June 2005 and that Caribbean nations could enter as observers or voting partners (AFP, July 8th, 2004).

In the last two months and in the context of the Fifth Mesoamerican Forum Against the PPP that took place in the month of July in El Salvador, the governments gave a new push to the PPP agenda, intensifying meeting (“Puebla Panama Plan, Progress Report,” July 1st, 2004): meetings with the Executive Commission of the PPP in El Salvador; the second meeting of the Mesoamerican Council for Competitiveness in Honduras; the meeting of the Advisory Group for Indigenous and Ethnic Participation in Oaxaca; the meeting of the ministers of tourism in Cancun where they made the “Mesoamerican Declaration on Tourism,” calling on the need for more infrastructure of the PPP; and the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding of Culture at the meeting of the Ministers of Culture.  For its part, the IADB also launched a new publicity strategy to gild the PPP and give it a “human face,” announcing resources for indigenous communities to combat poverty.  Nonetheless, the Mexican migrants in 2003 and in this year are those who have most contributed money to combat poverty, since their remittances are greater than the investment of all the banks and corporations, and are in second place as a source of money for Mexico after petroleum.  But we can say the same of Central American countries where the same poor economically displaced in the United States provide the principal source of money to their countries.

The subsecretary for Latin America and the Caribbean of the Secretary of External Relations of Mexico, Miguel Hakim, affirmed that nothing will stop the consolidation of the PPP and that they will not interpose the interests of armed groups, mafias or delinquents.  To the federal delegates of the South-Southeast Commission they assured that Chiapas will only incorporate projects inherent in the PPP to those communities that decide to do so voluntarily, even those within the zone of influence of the EZLN, and that there would not be any project that would cause social opposition.  Hakim said that Chiapas is not included as an entity within the projects that include the PPP, but noted that “in the moment that consensus is achieved, we would like to work in a coordinated manner with the state and municipal governments” (La Jornada, July 1st, 2004).

SOME ADVANCES IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE PPP

With the help of the excellent work of DataCenter (www.datacenter.org), we summarize here some of the actions within the framework of the PPP in recent months.  We omit the information on repression that we have already covered in Bulletin Number 422 of “Chiapas al Día.”

In Mexico, in the last four years, while the federal government has earmarked 12,417,000,000 pesos for infrastructure in the south-southeastern region, only 11,838,000,000 pesos have been earmarked for the rest of the country.  Along these lines, the state of Oaxaca places emphasis in the construction of highways at the cost of repression and defrauding indigenous and peasant communities that ask for respect for their lands, ways of life, human rights and demand that their opinions are respected.  In this framework, the ICA construction firm signed an agreement in May 2004 with the Spanish company Itinere de Infraestructuras (of the Sacyr Vallehermoso) to analyze the joint participation in concession projects along 795 kilometers of highway that will be developed in Mexico over the next three years (El Universal, July 6th, 2004).  For its part, Stevedoring Services of America (SSA) announced 90 million dollars in investments for remodeling, extension, and maintenance of its port terminals in Acapulco, Cozumel, Manzanillo, Progreso and Veracruz (El Universal, June 29th, 2004).  In Chiapas, the governor announced the creation of the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor (MBC), which forms part of the PPP, and announced at that time the first relocation of the indigenous people of Montes Azules; push for the construction of the Madero port and that construction of an international airport close to Tuxtla Gutierrez without noting opposition to this project.  Already in December of last year, the state government inaugurated the new highway from Tuxtla to Mexico City, assuring that it would lower travel times for companies, saving costs and gas.  Nonetheless, the prices of products and their transport have not gone down but up.  Who has benefited from this development?

In Guatemala, the government announced the construction of the port of Champerico with a cost of 125 million dollars and with the participation of the government of Taiwan (BNAmericas, July 15th, 2004).  In Honduras, the government announced a project from the Atlantic Corridor that will unite Tegulcigalpa with San Pedro Sula and Puerto Cortes as part of the PPP and with the financing of 50 million dollars from the IADB (BNAmericas, July 2nd and 14th, 2004; Duetsche Presse Agentur, July 14th, 2004).  Meanwhile, the International Maritime Organization certifies that four Honduran ports are apt for any commercial activity within the framework of the International Code for the Protection of Vessels and Port Installations.  The certification of La Ceiba port is still pending (EFE, July 1st, 2004).  The IADB also approved loans for 178.5 million dollars, including 40 million for installation of electric energy transmission networks (AFP, July 17th, 2004).  In Panama the company Panama Ports Company (subsidiary of the Hutchinson Group Port Holding of Hong Kong) announced an investment of 100 million dollars in the Port of Balboa, of which 95 million dollars will come from HSBC, Nova Scotia Bank, BNP-Paribas, and the Bank of China (EFE, July 1st, 2004).  In Panama they are also planning new dams and three more floodgates for the Panama Canal and soon they will inaugurate a new bridge with six lanes (AFP, July 6th, 2004).  For Nicaragua the IADB approved 46.5 million dollars for the improvement of highways as part of the PPP (Noticias Financieras, July 7th, 2004).  The decreasing imports of petroleum in Nicaragua for more than 240 million dollars is one of the new challenges for the PPP.  The exportation of geothermic and hydroelectric energy across Central America is one of the driving forces of the PPP where Spanish and Japanese companies are extremely interested (La Prensa, Nicaragua, July 6th, 2004).  The Central American Bank for Economic Integration (CABEI) also approved approximately one million dollars for the San Jacinto Power company of Nicaragua for a geothermic project with the help of Standard Bank London (CABEI, July 7th, 2004).

THE RESPONSE OF THE PEOPLE TO THE PPP

Below we textually reproduce the response of the communities, groups and organizations of the region to the new strategy for re-launching the PPP.  To consult a list of those who oppose the PPP, please see http://www.ciepac.org/ppp.htm.

Fox Lies in Central America on the Puebla Panama Plan (PPP)

Stance of the Mexican Alliance for Self-Determination of Peoples (AMAP)

Mexico City, March 30th, 2004

In March 2002, more than thirty organizations decided to integrate in AMAP with the central objective of confronting together the struggle against mega-projects included in the PPP. The development of the organization is based on the responses of national, state and local organization and affected groups in distinct manners to these mega-projects.  To date, the response continues because the aggression has been permanent.  The PPP has taken from the official part distinct names and the contribution of financial resources has been assigned through the budgets of distinct secretaries of state, principally the resources have been destined to the Secretary of Communications and Transportation for the construction of highways, modernization of ports and airports, and other infrastructure that will allow for the later installation of transnational businesses and maquiladora industries.

United to this are programmed more than sixty seizures for construction in the south-southeast of the country and various technical studies for these projects have already been completed: four binationals between Petén, Guatemala, and Chiapas; those of Nuevo Huixtán I and II and another along the border close to Montebello, that of Itzantún in Huitiupán in the Chiapas highlands, that of Boca del Cerro in Tabasco, Jalapa del Marqués in Oaxaca and La Parota in Acapulco, Guerrero.

Another sign of the concretion of the PPP is expressed in the conjunction of aggression that signifies the imposition of all these projects in rural and indigenous communities and over all in the social response to these.  Some examples are: the violations of human, economic, social, cultural, environmental rights of the indigenous peoples of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec in Oaxaca where indigenous Mixes, Zapotecos, Mixtecos, Zoques, Chinantecos, Chontales and Kunats or Huaves have mobilized to manifest their rejection of the mega-projects that are already being developed in the region, such as the construction of the super-highway from Oaxaca-Isthmus-Huatulco.

The construction of this highway network has meant the stripping of rural peasants’ farmland and the destruction of archeological vestiges of the ancient Zapoteca culture, as occurred in the section from Guelaguichi to Tehuantepec.  These state and federal government plans to presumably “modernize” the highways in reality constitute the infrastructure to establish tourist and industrial corridors in the region.  Such is the case of the project of the tourism corridor from Salina Cruz to Huatulco that threatens also to do away with ejidal and communal land ownership and threatens the natural resources that the Chontales have protected for hundreds of years.

To this situation we add the fact that the majority of peasants do not even own cars, the new highways will impose fees of more than 25 pesos, that the fences placed on the edges of the super-highway impede access of the peasants to their farmland, directly affecting their ability to produce sustenance and violating their right to food.  Faced with this panorama, the peasants have not benefited from the super-highways, which are only bringing more profits to the corporate managers of tourist venues that are already established in the zone.

On the other side, in the area of La Ventosa, in the environs of what is known as the port of the Pacific, there is also advanced construction of a connector that will soon unite the new inter-oceanic highway from Coatzacoalcos to Salina Cruz that has also negatively affected surrounding communities.

In Jalapa del Marqués, on the way to the city of Oaxaca, the dam Benito Juarez has existed since 1957.  Currently, there are plans to establish a hydroelectric plant that will supply major corporations and another super-highway without bothering to consult the indigenous communities of the area.  The affected communities of Guichiquero have presented a complaint against the Mexican government for violating ILO Convention 169 where it is established that any project or plan that is developed on indigenous territories must inform and consult those peoples.

The Konats or Huaves, as well as the Zapotecos, who inhabit another part of the Pacific are facing the threat of suffering economic and environmental impacts as a consequence of the establishment of industrial shrimp farms that will leave them without resources to fish and that represent potential pollution of the ocean and coastal forests.

Further north, in Acapulco, Guerrero, 47 communities and 25,000 peasants are threatened with being displaced by the construction of La Parota dam.  Recently, on March 14th, International Day Against Dams, they formed the Front for Economic, Socio-Environmental and Cultural Rights of the peasants of La Parota that will defend their rights to free self-determination and the right to food for these producers of corn, beans, fruits, and sesame seeds.

In Xalapa, the mesophyll cloud forest would be affected by the construction of the opening of the capital of the state of Veracruz, which civil society has roundly criticized.  In Tepeaca-Tecamachalco, Puebla has frozen construction of a highway that was to be constructed in the region, and peasants today demand the definitive cancellation of the project; the opposition and mobilization against the highway project has been going on for three years running.

Despite the fact that the Director of the IADB in Mexico, David Atkinson, said last October to AMAP that the Bank had not financed any projects of the PPP, neither highways, nor dams, we, the organizations of AMAP, note that even though the IADB does not finance projects in Mexico, this organism is part of a team that is allowing the PPP to violate international and national norms and therefore is responsible for it.

Faced with this situation, we demand the suspension of any and all financial resources as long as there is no true consultation with the affected populations with sufficient information regarding the repercussions of the works and the necessary mechanisms to take the stance of the affected communities into account.

AMAP affirms that the PPP, contrary to what Fox said in Central America, DOES represent innumerable outrages for the communities and violates human rights, indigenous rights, and economic, social and cultural rights.  Despite the fact that the PPP is declared dead, the mega-projects that favor corporations continue to advance and without any benefits for the communities and the region itself.

Fox’s statements in Central America deteriorate even more when they are qualified with the low diplomatic stature of our country, and we affirm that this deterioration does not touch local communities, but their governors.

We reiterate our demand for the cancellation of commercial investment plans and mega-projects that are to the detriment of all the rights of communities.  We call on all indigenous groups and communities of Mesoamerica to construct an alternative life plan from our communities against the “free trade” that is currently being promoted.

Because the Nation is First, No to the Puebla Panama Plan!

Mexican Alliance for Self-Determination (AMAP)

CHIAPAS: Centro de Investigaciones Económicas y Políticas (CIEPAC), CORECICOS, Organización Hermano Sol; GUERRERO: PRT-GRO, Colectivo Estudiantil Rebelión, Organización Social para el Desarrollo A.C. (OSDAC), Colectivo Costa Libre OAXACA: Centro de Derechos Humanos Tepeyac del Istmo de Tehuantepec (CDHTT), Comité de Voluntarios para el mejoramiento Ambiental (COVOMA), Consejo Regional Ecológico Cultural del Istmo (CRECI), Colectivo Cortamortaja, Centro para los Derechos de las Mujeres Naax Wiim (CDHMAAW), Grupo de Preservación Cultural Huave Mi Kualaj Xa Kabaj, Grupo de Trabajo Colectivo del Istmo (GTCI), Grupo Cultural Binigulazaa, Unión de Comunidades Indígenas de la Zona Norte del Istmo (UCIZONI), Frente Indígena Oaxaqueño Binacional (FIOB), CACTUS, Centro de Atención y Apoyo a la Mujer Istmeña (CAMI) Red de Organizaciones Juveniles Indígenas del Istmo de Tehuantepec (ROJIIT), Grupo Cultural “Nivi Ñuu”. Comunidades Oaxaqueñas: Cerro Chivo, Guiechiquero, Jalapa del Marqués, Matías Romero, Guevea de Humboltd, Asunción Tlacolulita, San Mateo del Mar, San Juan Guchicovi, Ejido Morro Mazatan, Santo Domingo Mixtepec; PUEBLA: Unión Campesina Emiliano Zapata “VIVE” (UCEZ”VIVE”), Centro de Derechos Humanos y Laborales del Valle de Tehuacán (CDHyLVT), Consejo de Lucha Ciudadana, Comunidades Poblanas: Tepeaca, San Pablo Actipan, San Nicolás Zoyapetlayoca, Cuantinchan, San Francisco Mixtla, San Simon, Tecali, Buenaventura Tetanancla, Tecamachalco, Ejido de Xochimilco, Ejido de Pino Súarez, Xalitlzintla, San Jeronimo Almoloya; QUINTANA ROO: Productores No Tradicionales; TABASCO: Movimiento Agrario Indígena Zapatista-Tabasco, Centro Sto. Tomas; VERACRUZ: Frente Popoluca del Sur de Veracruz (FREPOSEV), Consejo Indígena de Uxpanapan (CIUX), Movimiento Agrario Indígena Zapatista-Veracruz (MAIZV); BAJA CALIFORNIA:Corporación Corazón A. C. (COCOAC); D.F:Revista La Guillotina; QUERETARO:Unión de Mujeres Indígenas Campesinas de Queretaro (UMICQ) Redes Nacionales : Red Mexicana de Acción Frente al Libre Comercio (RMALC), Frente Autentico del Trabajo (FAT), Movimiento Agrario Indígena Zapatista (MAIZ).

DECLARATION OF THE FIFTH MESOAMERICAN FORUM

San Salvador, July 21st, 2004

(from www.foromesoamericano.org)

We, the constituent peoples and organizations of the Mesoamerican social and popular resistance movement –gathered in San Salvador, El Salvador from July 19 to 21, 2004 at the Fifth Mesoamerican Forum– ratify our conviction and commitment to continue the struggle in our region in the defense of our peoples’ rights. We are determined to move forward in building popular power as a guarantee to the self determination of peoples in the region.

During these three days of debates at the different discussion panels we have witnessed the iron-willed and growing popular opposition in Mesoamerica to neoliberal policies and their instruments, such as the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA),the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Plan Puebla Panama (PPP) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). These policies have devastated the peoples and the natural resources of the region, subjecting our lives to the logic of profit and to the interests of transnational corporations.

It is evident that the imposition of such policies by corrupt governments in the area responds directly to the interests of transnational corporations and of a few national companies, complicit with international financial institutions such as the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), Central American Bank for Economic Integration (BCIE), and the World Bank.

With a vision towards the future, we assert the need to build Mesoamerican political subjects who will be multicultural and inclusive, and who will promote our alternatives for the common good of peoples, based on principles of ethics, justice, equity and sustainability.  This is in direct contrast to the deathly project of neoliberal capitalism and to its practices of corruption, lack of transparency, and exclusion.

This V Mesoamerican Forum, as well as the special conferences on specific issues and sectors taking place in El Salvador in the month of July show that the Mesoamerican social and popular movement is ready to face the challenges that confront us. The organizations of women, youth, Indigenous people and workers are becoming stronger, together with the Mesoamerican alliance for the defense and self-determination of our peoples.

Therefore, WE AGREE

1)      To block the ratification of the Free Trade Agreement US/Central America (CAFTA), and the approval of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), by increasing the pressure on governments, legislative assemblies and congresses in our region.

2)      To maintain and increase the mobilization of peoples in the region, in order to stop the imposition of the Plan Puebla Panama (PPP).

3)      To reject the project of the governments in the area to negotiate a free trade agreement between Central America and the European Union.

4)      To promote an integral agrarian reform, in order to guarantee our self sufficiency and sovereignty with relation to foodstuffs; to oppose the privatization of public services, particularly water; and to defend our biodiversity and our natural and cultural heritage.

5)      To defend our economic, social, cultural and environmental rights, with an emphasis on labor rights, which are being seriously threatened by the maquiladora model, particularly in the case of women workers.

6)      To mobilize against institutionalized violence exemplified by the killing of women, ethnocidal and genocidal practices, and by violence against youth.  Therefore we declare the Mesoamerican region an “Area of Humanitarian Disaster.”

7)      To struggle against militarization and terrorist practices of the US government and its allies.

8)      To promote our national and regional development projects stimulating integration based on our peoples, and on the principles of democratic participation; sustainability; reduction of gender, ethnic, geographical and social inequality gaps; as well as on the affirmation of our Mesoamerican cultural identity.

9)      We express our solidarity with the Venezuelan people and their Bolivarian Revolution, with the Cuban people, with the Iraqi people and with the Palestinian people. We also express our solidarity with the peoples of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia and Ecuador.

Finally, we issue a call to keep alive October 12 as a symbolic date for resistance and alternative proposals by the Mesoamerican region.

No to NAFTA, No to FTAA, no to PPP !
For the union of all peoples !
A different Mesoamerica is possible.

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