:: UPDATE & ANALYSIS

Resistance and autonomy: the creation of the zapatista juntas of good government.

Last July, the Zapatista Army for National Liberation (EZLN) reclaimed the initiative with a series of communiqués, which announced the end of the Aguascalientes (meeting spaces for the EZLN and civil society, located in the Zapatista Autonomous Municipalities) and the creation of the Juntas of Good Government, all of which amounted to a surprising political repositioning (see www.ezln.org). The Zapatistas continue to create autonomy by acting through and strengthening the civil resistance process, a process that has been maturing for many years.

One More Step Toward Creating Autonomy

In July, Subcomandante Marcos (the designated spokesperson for the Zapatista command) stated that, due to the lack of responses from various levels of power in regard to the indigenous demand for autonomy, the San Andres Accords "will simply be applied in rebel territory". In addition, he announced that Zapatista municipalities "have prepared a series of changes, which have to do with their internal functioning and their relationships with national and international civil society".

Subsequently, after critically analyzing the difficulties that they face, the EZLN announced the death of the "Aguascalientes". In their place, they have installed "Caracoles, Houses of the Juntas of Good Government": "(. . .) they will serve as doors of entry into and exit from communities; as windows so we can see into ourselves and so that we may see the outside; as horns that will broadcast our word far and wide and will allow us to hear other words from afar."

Each of the five Juntas of Good Government will consist of one or two delegates from each of the Autonomous Councils in each zone, thus embracing the 30 Zapatista Autonomous Municipalities in Rebellion.

The EZLN invited civil society to the death of the Aguascalientes and the inauguration of the Caracoles at the "Caracol" of Oventik (in the Highlands of Chiapas) from the 8th to the 10th of August. Ten zapatista comandantes, 100 representatives of autonomous municipalities, thousands of zapatistas and members of national and international society attended the event.

The new structure strengthens the EZLN from within and without, from top to bottom, clearly establishing channels for communication with national and international civil society: "So that the civil society now knows with whom it must confer for projects, human rights observation camps, visits, donations, etc. Human rights defenders now know to whom they must turn in relation to denunciations that they receive and from whom they should await responses. The army and the police now know who to attack (taking into account that the EZLN will also be there). The media that says 'those who pay us speak,' now know whom to slander and/or ignore. The honest media now know where to go to solicit interviews or reports in communities. The federal government and its "commissioner" now know what they have to do to stop existing. And Power and Money now know who else they should fear" (The Thirteenth Stele, Part Six).

Proposals, From Local to International

In the fifth communiqué from July, Marcos raised a sensitive topic: the delicate relationships between zapatista communities and non-zapatista communities. The EZLN has aimed to strengthen the operation of communities where power is distributed democratically, horizontally, and on a rotating basis. Yet it has recognized that, in cases of conflict or differences, the final word has rested with the EZLN: "The military structure of the EZLN in a way "contaminated" democratic traditions and self-government. The EZLN therefore constituted an "antidemocratic" element within a communal system of direct democracy."

At Oventik, the EZLN announced the end of checkpoints and tolls on highways and roads within its control as a gesture of good will toward non-zapatista communities. It also defined a new relationship between the autonomous municipalities and the military arm of the Zapatistas: the "shadow" of the EZLN will step back and allow the communities to take the lead. Now more than ever, the zapatista experiment appears as one of resistance rather than military force, adopting a proactive attitude in terms of civil disobedience, each time assuming more explicitly the functions of government.

Nevertheless, the EZLN will continue defending the autonomous municipalities. In this vein, it sent strong messages to paramilitary groups, "especially those in the Highlands zone of Chiapas."

On an international level, in relation to Plan Puebla Panama (PPP) , "the Zapatistas have the means and the organization to stop steps being taken to put into effect this plan." As counterproposals, the EZLN has proposed Plan La Realidad-Tijuana; for the north of the American continent, Plan Morelia-North Pole; for Central America, the Caribbean, and South America, Plan La Garrucha-Tierra del Fuego; for Europe and Africa, Plan Oventik-Moscow, reaching toward the east; for Asia and Oceania, Plan Roberto-Barrios New Delhi reaching toward the west. The EZLN also announced that it would participate in the mobilizations against the World Trade Organization (WTO) in Cancun during September. It had been a long time since the EZLN announced its social agenda against economic globalization with such clarity and definition.

The words of the EZLN arrived at the summit in Cancun through the organization "Via Campesina," which brought a recording of comandante Esther, comandante David, and Subcomandante Marcos. They motivated civil socierty to continue resisting in the struggle against neoliberalism and to construct, through autonomy, a world where life triumphs over war.

Reactions

Members of the federal government took a variety of positions in response to the Zapatista repositioning. For Xóchitl Gálvez, head of the National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Villages, the indigenous problem that persists in Chiapas has "only one real solution: to advance in constitutional reform, as the last changes have left both communities and zapatistas dissatisfied." She celebrated the fact that the new proposals were more political than martial in character, an aspect celebrated by the State Department as well.

On September 1, President Fox presented his third report to the government, dedicating a large portion of his speech to structural reforms within the agricultural, labor, telecommunications and energy sectors. In regard to the situation of indigenous villages, he emphasized the creation of the National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Villages. Said Commission was rejected by more than 50 indigenous organizations and human rights defenders because they were not consulted before its creation.

Official government speech has tried to frame the Juntas of Good Government within the Constitution which, thanks to the last constitutional reform, allows for indigenous autonomy. We must remember that this very reform was rejected by the EZLN for not respecting what had been established in the reform law known as COCOPA. The COCOPA law took into account the most important agreements from the San Andres Accords. For the EZLN the Juntas of Good Government represent one more step on the path of resistance, meanwhile the government is trying to define them within a constitutional framework so they appear to be government-backed reform.

At the state level, PRI and PAN representatives from Chiapas's Congress rejected the creation of the Juntas of Good Government, claiming that they violate the state's rights and that they will further polarize the social fabric.

On the other hand, Chiapas's government commissioner for reconciliation of communities in conflict, Juan González Esponda, affirmed that Pablo Salazar's administration believes that "no form of government that seeks to improve the situation of the indigenous violates the law." He characterized the initiative as "an interesting effort by communities to search for new solutions to their conflicts."

Representatives of the National Indigenous Congress (which brings together a large part of the indigenous movement in Mexico) committed to continue following the Zapatista example, promoting indigenous autonomy throughout the country and defending the rights of the indigenous people. Representatives from a variety of campesino organizations celebrated the birth of the Juntas of Good Government, affirming that the Juntas represent an extraordinary instrument for exercising popular democracy.

Legislative Elections: Abstention, The Only Winner

The repositioning of the EZLN was all the more relevant within the post-election environment in which it arose. On July 6, Mexico held federal elections for members of Congress, and there occurred the largest rate of abstention in the country's recent history, with a record 58.32% of voters (more than 37 million abstaining). Although the electoral census counted 15 million more voters, fewer cast their votes this time around than in the interim elections during 1997 and 1994. Beginning in 1988, civil society mobilized, demanding respect for each vote and clean elections. Today, however, it appears that disenchantment prevails: the large percentage of abstentions is read as political punishment, not only of the Fox government but also of the dominant political parties, reflecting society's disappointment with alternative policies and the lack of real options.

In the last elections, none of the political parties obtained above 35% of the vote. Nevertheless, the final results point to an apparent reconsolidation of power for the Revolutionary Institutional Party (PRI), after its defeat in the presidential elections of 2000. The PRI obtained 36.9% of the vote and a total of 224 representative seats, which means it now has the highest percentage of the seats in the Congress among the different political parties, though the party is still far from its heyday when it represented more than 50% of congressional votes.

The National Action Party (PAN, President Fox's party) was this election's big loser, as it did not obtain the majority necessary to pass proposed reforms without negotiating with the opposition. Nevertheless, the PAN won 32.83% of the vote (which translates into 153 representative seats), corresponding to the voting percentages it has won in the past, barely three points below the PRI.

The Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD, the center-left opposition party) consolidated its position in Mexico City, where it won in a landslide, due to the popularity of PRD member Manuel Lópex Obrador, governor of Mexico City. Obtaining a total of 18.77% of the vote (95 representative seats), the PRD maintains itself as Mexico's third political force, but it did lose presence outside of Mexico City.

The other three parties that will be represented in the next Congress are the Green Ecology Party of Mexico (PVEM) with 6.55% of the vote (17 representative seats), the Labor Party (PT) with 2.55% (6 representative seats), and Convergence with 2.41% (5 representative seats). The rest of the parties that were up for election did not obtain enough votes to win seats in Congress.

With these results, even if it is true that Mexico has reached a level of credibility in regard to its electoral processes, it is concerning the lack of legitimacy the next House of Representatives will have. The largest minority is the PRI, representing around 15% of the electorate identified by the census. On the other hand, the significant fragmentation of the House of Representatives will make it difficult to reach consensus on any reforms.

Conflict in the Montes Azules Biosphere: A Preeminent Red Light

After much tension generated by months of threats and displacements (see www.sipaz.org), the government of the state of Chiapas and Lacandón authorities agreed to a truce, which will put a halt to the displacement of communities in the Montes Azules Reserve. Government authorities will undertake to guarantee diverse economic supports for the ethnic inhabitants of the Reserve, while the Lacandones will stop their attempts to expel other indigenous groups from the region.

In May, the relocation of 28 indigenous Chols, who voluntarily abandoned the Montes Azules Reserve in December, was postponed for the fifth time. The Federal Prosecutor for Environmental Protection (PROFEPA) had promised to give the Chols new lands. The Choles broke dialogue with the government and decided to move themselves to the municipality Marqués de Comillas at their own expense.

Mario Hernández Pérez, from the Coalition of Autonomous Organizations in the State of Chiapas (COAECH) stressed that, "this shows that the federal government has neither the will nor the resources to resituate the communities currently located in Montes Azules." He added that, "now more than ever, the position of the indigenous people living in Montes Azules is that they will not accept relocation, because the government does not live up to its word."

Human Rights Latecomers

Although there have been advances in regard to Mexico's human rights situation, the Interamerican Commission of Human Rights (CIDH), in a report released in April, expressed concern at the steady deterioration of institutionalized democracy. In 2002, Mexico occupied second place in denunciations presented to the CIDH and sixth place in requests sent by the CIDH to the government asking it to implement measures of security for the purpose of offering protection to people who made denunciations when their fundamental rights were violated.

The Mexican Office of the High Commission for Human Rights is initiating an analysis of the human rights situation. The end goal is to obtain precise information about human, individual, civil, and political rights obstruction so as to comply with international agreements.

Almost a year and nine months after the death of lawyer Digna Ochoa y Plácido, the special commission created to investigate the case closed the investigation affirming that the human rights lawyer killed herself. After family members decided to challenge the decision and national and international organizations rejected it, attorney Bernardo Bátiz said that he would give the go ahead to departments of internal and external revision.

Processes of Resistance at a Regional Level

In June, the President of the Central American Parliament, Augusto Vela, recognized three pending issues within PPP: project financing, more consultations and meetings with involved populations, and, above all, social development.

Mexico, much like the rest of Central America, has seen an increase in the coordination of meeting spaces for those opposed to the economic mega-projects. Here, we highlight a few among many of such meetings.

The Continental and Global Meeting against the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) and the WTO took place in Mexico on May 11 and 12. Delegates from more than 150 international organizations agreed to a world agenda for mobilizations, actions of resistance and civil disobedience against FTAA promotion, the WTO meeting in Cancun, and to "unmask" the fourth summit of the Presidents of the Americas, which will also take place in Mexico at the end of this year.

The National Meeting in Response and Resistance to Neoliberal Globalization in Mesoamerica took place in May in Oaxaca, where around 400 representatives from 130 social and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) united themselves under the slogan "For a future without PPP and without the FTAA!" As the event concluded, attendees underlined the importance of indigenous, campesinos, the marginalized, and excluded creating their own social projects.

The Workdays of Resistance 2003, which took place in Honduras in mid-July, consisted of a series of forums and meetings aimed at strengthening popular struggles in Mesoamerica and the Caribbean and looking for alternatives to economic mega-projects. These forums included The Third Week of Cultural and Biological Biodiversity*, The Second Mesoamerican Forum Against Dams, and The Fourth Mesoamerican Forum Against PPP.

During these forums, attendees planned mobilizations against the Fifth Minsterial Summit of the WTO, which took place September 10-14 in Cancun. Numerous campesino, indigenous, and social organizations as well as Mexican and international non-governmental organizations worked together to provide alternative forums to the summit, in addition to protesting the trade laws established by the WTO's participating governments. During the week of the WTO summit, there were mobilizations in many countries and states in memory of all of the victims of economic and military wars generated by WTO policies.

:: FEATURE

IN ORDER TO SILENCE THE WEAPONS, THE PEOPLE SPEAK!

FIRST HEMISPHERIC CONFERENCE ON MILITARIZATION
SAN CRISTOBAL DE LAS CASAS (CHIAPAS)
MAY 6-9 2003

From May 6-9, the First Hemispheric Conference on Militarization gathered together civil and social organizations from all over the American continent in San Cristobal de las Casas. Representatives from organizations came together and discussed militarization, from which the people of the Americas are suffering. They discussed its causes, consequences, and of course, forms and instruments for putting an end to it and for constructing a new way to live without arms, soldiers, and wars.

The background for the forum was Chiapas, a Mexican state that has suffered permanent militarization since the Zapatista uprising in 1994. At the international level, the forum converted into a call, without power, against the aggression of the United States in Iraq, which was supported by European countries such as Great Britain and Spain. The US invasion did nothing but reinforce the justification and relevance for such a conference at this moment in time.

But there was also reason to celebrate. In Vieques, Puerto Rico, popular mobilizations prompted the closing on May 1 of a United States military base that had been in place for more than 60 years. The presence and testimony of people involved in the Puerto Rican social movement at the conference gave strength and hope to the searches for instruments to eliminate military bases and militarization from communities in North and South America.

While bombs and arms continued destroying entire societies, cultures, and, when it comes down to it, life itself, in the heart of the Highlands of Chiapas people from 28 countries joined together. Individuals did not attend the conference just to say that a world without militarization is possible, but also in order to create a common front through active solidarity networks among those who pursue political, economic, social, and cultural organizations without impositions, based on people's self-determination and mutual respect.

Participants shared different personal experiences and contexts dealing with militarization through words. Sharing established similarities between places separated by continents, but united by suffering due to the militarization of territories that responds to a global and political hegemony.

Workshops were held in three different places, just a few meters apart. During the first two days, the dynamic consisted of alternate lectures and personal experiences among the different participating countries. On the third day, workshops were conducted by region, and the conference's final declaration came from proposals from each group.

On the last day before the closing session, regions came together and presented a "fair" (i.e. through banners, signs, and games) of concrete proposals from each working group.

The plenary agreed to initiate the Campaign for the Demilitarization of the Americas (CADA). It also made other statements such as the Plan of Continental Action and the Continental Social Agenda.

During the four days and within the three meeting spaces, participants had the opportunity to listen to lectures, experiences, and denouncements as well as music, poetry, theater, puppets shows and clowns. Art and culture were present as instruments to awaken consciences against militarization.

The conference united a plurality of organizations, from Mexican to international indigenous, Colombian unions, Guatemalan students, and coordinators from marginalized areas. In total, there was a large variety of participants that shared a common denominator. In addition to a concern with militarization, the participants expressed their sense of being excluded and threatened by dominating neoliberal economic projects that affect the region: Plan Colombia, Plan Puebla-Panama (PPP), the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), and the Andina Regional Initiative. These projects respond to the needs of transnational economic powers and the plans designed by the World Trade Organization (WTO), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Bank (WB).

Military bases form part of the inner workings of this economic machinery and are therefore situated precisely in the regions with the largest concentration of natural resources, as well as in relevant geo-strategic zones. Armies, therefore, are used to preserve the powerful economic interests of global capital which, to further complicate things, are diffuse around the globe.

This reality led the Conference to establish an agreement to struggle for demilitarization of the continent. The conference's final declaration presented strategies promoting the construction of a new society whose fundamental principles are a culture of economic and social peace and justice, which caters toward solidarity agreements and exchange between people (see the Conference final declaration).

To this end, organizations have proposed two means of action. The first action is to share information, analysis, and diagnostics about experiences and consequences of militarization in the Americas. The second action proposed is: "to unite efforts, hearts, and wills to create peaceful alternatives" through the creation of a permanent and continuous process of analysis regarding experiences and alternatives.

SIPAZ was part of the network of organizations that facilitated and made the conference possible. The coming together of organizations represented the beginning of a continuous and permanent aim to denounce the militarization of American communities and represent political and economic interests. So has begun the Campaign for the Demilitarization of the Americas.

Convergence among participating organizations will continue at local, national, regional, and continental levels through follow-up meetings and spreading information about the conference to civil society and indigenous communities. In addition, groups will continue to hold different regional forums against neoliberal projects and in favor of people's self-determination.

Participants in the Hemispheric Conference agreed to organize the Campaign for the Demilitarization of the Americas Conference, March 5-7, 2004, in Quito, Ecuador, before the Social Forum of the Americas, March 8-13, 2004, also in Quito, Ecuador. And they look forward to the Second Hemispheric Conference on Militarization in 2005.

On the final day, in his lecture entitled "Peace and Militarization", Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Adolfo Pérez Esquivel, reiterated that armed forces in Latin American must change their roles and put themselves at the service of people, not against them as they are today. He maintained that to halt the "grave situation of militarization", it is necessary to create social, political, economic, and cultural alternatives for the people of the continents. "It is not enough to say NO to militarization and make Unites States bases leave: we have to work internally in our countries and protest the government officials who allow this to happen."

Institutions created to safeguard world peace, for example the United Nations, are today facing a crisis. This conference shows that international civil society has become the protagonist in the ethical struggle for human rights as well as collective responsibility for respecting and defending human rights.

The First Hemispheric Conference on Militarization has established strategies to struggle against the most destructive instrument of today's powerful states: the military. It is the responsibility of the conference's participating organizations to continue denouncing, protesting, and exchanging information, as well as to strengthen solidarity among communities.

SIPAZ's international aspect allows it to contribute and serve as a bridge and point of connection for many international organizations. In addition, SIPAZ can connect the struggle in the American hemisphere with other regions in the world that also suffer from militarization, either through war (Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine) or through the progressive installation of military bases (Valencia, Spain).

In the words of Mexican author Carlos Montemayor, each generation must struggle for its rights and liberties, because those things cannot be inherited (Inaugural Lecture: "General Discussion on Militarization and United States Hegemony”).

We continue, therefore, speaking out in order to construct a world in which the silence is the absence of arms and not of words.

http://www.sitiocompa.org/desmilitarizacion/english.html

:: SIPAZ ACTIVITIES

May - August 2003

Accompaniment

• In May and July we traveled to the Northern zone of Chiapas to talk with different political and social actors of the region.
• In June, a SIPAZ volunteer visited the Civil Encampment for Peace at Nuevo San Rafael (Montes Azules). The volunteer also visited the community of Nuevo San Isidro, as well as the seven families displaced this past year from the Reserve of the Biosphere at Montes Azules (see our article from June: www.sipaz.org)
• In August the puppet troupe toured the municipality of Las Margaritas, invited by an independent women’s organization of the area. The puppet troupe presented plays in five communities.
• We served as International Observers at the celebration of the birth of the Caracoles and the Zapatista Juntas of Good Government, during the 8th to the 10th of August in Oventik

Interreligious Dialogue

• We have had a number of meetings and interviews with the religious actors of San Cristobal de las Casas and with those from the municipality of Chenalhó in the framework of the Peacebuilding exchange project between religious leaders of Chenalhó and the Peace Commissions from Nicaragua.
• We have maintained a presence in the municipality of Chenalhó through our puppet shows. These shows have given SIPAZ the opportunity to visit a dozen communities that are participating in the process of the Peace Commissions.
• In June we participated in a workshop on ecumenism organized by the Institute of Intercultural and Social Studies (INESIN), which used to be the Biblical School of Integral Training in San Cristobal de las Casas.
• We attended a lecture on “The Challenges of Theology in the New Millennium,” in the CIESAS (Center for sociological and anthropological investigations of the Southeast).
• We attended the episcopal ordination of the new auxiliary bishop, Monsignor Enrique Diaz Diaz.
• We participated in the meeting “The Integral Mission of the Church Against Poverty in Mexico” convened by the Presbyterian Church and others (San Cristobal de las Casas, from the 21st to the 25th of July).

Education for Peace

• We continue to take part in the Peace Network. This is a space for action and reflection that aims at supporting reconciliation and peace processes amongst organizations and communities in Chiapas. In August, the Network organized a forum on the experiences of autonomy in San Cristobal de las Casas with participants from different regions of Chiapas, as well as representatives from autonomous projects from other Mexican states.
• We presented a new puppet show about women’s rights in the framework of the Meeting of the Diocese Coordination of Women, in which more than 200 women participated from all over the state.
• We began a new cycle of workshops on Peace Culture and Human Rights with the young people of CEDECOS (Center for Community Development) in San Cristobal de las Casas.
• We participated in a workshop on conflict transformation facilitated by CORECO in Comitan from the 3rd to the 5th of July.

Contacts and Information

• We received visits from delegations, students and reporters seeking information on the current situation in Chiapas and on Sipaz work.
• In June, we participated in the preparation and realization of the visit of the U.N. Special Representative on Indigenous Fundamental Rights and Liberties, Rodolfo Stavenhagen.
• We attended the first International Meeting on Development and Regional Integration in the south of Mexico and Central America, held on the 4th to the 6th of June in San Cristobal de las Casas.

International

• We participated in the preparation, realization and continuation of the Hemispheric Forum against Militarization held in San Cristobal de las Casas, Chiapas from the 6th to the 9th of May (see side article).
• We shared our experiences of international accompaniment at the workshop “Brotherhood, protection and diplomatic citizenship,” under the auspices of the Thematic Social World Forum, held in Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, from the 16th to the 20th of June (see side article).
• We participated in the Conference of Resistance held in Honduras from the 17th to the 23rd of July, where we attended the Second Forum against Dams and the Third Week for Cultural and Biological Diversity, from the 17th to the 20th of July in La Esperanza and from the 22nd to the 24th at the fourth Mesoamerican Forum for Self-determination and Resistance of the Communities, in Tegucigalpa.
• We participated in the Binational Meeting of the United States and Mexico on Human Rights, from the 7th to the 8th of August in Mexico City.

:: Building Bridges through Processes

Thematic World Social Forum in Columbia

“And we have power, our power does not come from weapons, because we fight for peace, it comes from our arguments, from our participation as citizens, from our enthusiasm, our consistency, and the sustainability of our mobilizations. It is the power of the debates that we are going to have here when critical networks emerge, and when there are propositions for putting on the political agenda another agenda, an agenda of true development in which human life in community, the primacy of life, of security, of survival, are central.”
Boaventura de Sousa Santos

In May, SIPAZ received an invitation to participate in a workshop of the Network of Brotherhood “Brother People, Visible Bonds”, with the aim of sharing our experience with accompaniment in Chiapas. The workshop was set to take place during the Thematic World Social Forum “Democracy, Human Rights, War and Drug Trafficking” (FSMT), which increased our enthusiasm about participating.

The FSMT took place in Cartagena de Indias, from the 16th to the 20th of June. Many conferences, meetings, workshops, and panel discussions tackled the ample subjects of human rights, democracy, drug trafficking, and wars. The forum didn’t lose sight of the particularities of our host country, but also looked at the topics in an international context marked by the politics of “security” in the face of “terrorism.” There were so many simultaneous activities that it was impossible to get to all of them.

Monday: The inaugural march of the FMST

The forum began with the Magisterial Conference of Boaventura de Sousa Santos (www.fmst.org.co). Facing the lack of hope for present society, the professor of the University of Coimbra pointed out that our problem and our solution rests with democracy. He suggested the necessity of demanding “demo-diversity”: “we have to develop trans-cultural criteria for democracy. There is no such thing as democracy: there are democratization processes and there are alternative cultural principals which permit campesinos, communities of color, indigenous communities, to have the self esteem of being the producers of inclusive models of democracy.” He argued for the necessity of “high intensity” democracy within which we substitute relationships of power with relationships of shared authority. These relationships are combined with complementary confrontational and creative representative and participatory democracy, articulating side-by-side local, national and global democracy.

He recognized the World Social Forum as a space for constructing an alternative: the globalization of solidarity. At the same time, he acknowledged that the current challenge is to change the political agendas. With all of these propositions and challenges raised, we began the work of the forum.

During the first afternoon, there was a march through the whole city. We moved with the rhythm and sound of salsa. A banner at the head of the march read, “In this world, if we will it, there’s room for everyone. We want a better world: more just, more democratic, and with more solidarity”.

Tuesday: A day of meetings

Tuesday was a day of meetings: the International Meeting for Democracy, of environmentalists, of the youth, unions, women, education, about migration, of culture and arts, about dispalced people, and the National Meeting of the Civil and Communal Sector.
I decided to attend the International Meeting of Environmentalists, and more specifically, the panel, “The recuperation and defense of the environment against the violent privatization of life”. Thirteen representatives from different organizations from different countries spoke about the increasing privatization of natural resources and the local and national battles against it.

Mario Vasconez, from Ecuador spoke about environmental management by municipalities, and the need to create alternative policies of environmental management. He pointed out the importance of joint action forming an “entanglement” in which many people form one whole. He expressed the necessity of promoting global change from the local level: one should obtain those “grains of sand” that benefit everyone through real change in policies.

Humberto Vargas, from the Center for the Study of the Social Reality of Bolivia, argued the importance of insuring that water is a social good, not available for privatization, while stressing the role of indigenous movements in defending places faced with privatization.
Luis Suarez of the Latin American Network of Political Ecology in Cuba discussed the necessity of creating alliances in order to establish common agendas with campesinos and other organizations. He stressed the existing relationship between the market for genetically engineered seeds, Plan Columbia, the Andean Regional Initiative and the FTAA.

The representative from the Italian Environmentalist league talked about the work this organization does around environmental law, where they have coined the term “eco-mafia” as well as the development of the legal protection of the environment. They affirmed that those who commit “crimes” against the environment are the “thieves of the future”.

Speaking about Chiapas, I shared about the existing conflict in the Montes Azules Reserve (the Lacandon Jungle) where a discourse of environmental protection is being used to justify the expulsion of indigenous communities in conflict with other ethnic groups and the government. At the same time that they use this discourse, the business interests aware of biodiversity can’t be hidden.

The Final Declaration of this meeting, in which 95 organizations participated, affirms that “the application of the neoliberal model and the commercialization of nature are bringing about the dismantling of the Social State and the Democratic Rights, particularly in its environmental principals”. At the same time, they recognized the building resistance, particularly from the south, confronting this hegemonic project. This resistance is consolidating projects of food sovereignty, energy security, community reclamation of water, and the defense of the biosystem.

In the afternoon I attended a panel about “Experiences in the pedagogy of peace and conflict resolution”, which was a part of the International Meeting on Education.

Alonso Ojeda of the Pedagogical University of Columbia stressed the necessity of education that is ethical, social and political. He argued that violence is a response to an aggressive instinct—an instinct that reason should serve to help us unlearn. He finished by citing Humberto Eco: “The force of culture can restrain the clash of civilizations”.

Alicia Cabezudo, a scholar of Argentinean history, began her presentation by telling us a true story: during the rule of the Argentinean military, soldiers interrupted a school during one of their classes. The soldiers burned all of the textbooks. The professor made all of the students watch the fire destroying the books. Years later, while shopping in a supermarket, one of the workers greeted her as professor. She asked when she had taught him, and he just said, “The fire, professor”. For her, it was the best history class that she had ever given, because it was one that her students would never forget.

Later, Alicia spoke about her concrete experiences in peace education through open spaces in cities, constructing a horizontal, intersectional, and interdisciplinary education. These were some of the pedagogical experiences and strategies for peace and human rights, but they lacked more focused proposals for indigenous communities and rural areas.

The day finished with the Peter Lock Conference about “The new wars and preventative wars”. In the new international context the “new wars” oppose an enemy who is “omnipresent in time and space” with totalitarian dimensions.

The presenter’s thesis ended up being very controversial. He argued that the external politics of the United States are driven more dominantly by the conservation of internal political power and don’t constitute a classic imperialism. Furthermore, he affirmed that the wars that take place under these policies were waged for the benefit of industry and only happen when there are possibilities to obtain currencies and import arms. He believes that we will live in a globalization of increasing violence that will define commerce and exchange between people.

Wednesday: Confrontation between discordant voices.

The youth, who had been running a parallel forum, interrupted the morning’s panel on “Wars, terrorism, security and human rights”. Young people, soaking wet, put up a tent on the stage and read a communiqué protesting the internal inconsistencies within the FSMT.

The rain the night before had flooded their campsite and was the impetus for the youth’s protest against the unequal conditions for the people who were attending the forum. While some of us were staying in hotels in the tourist zone, the youth and others were sleeping on the ground without basic minimal hygienic conditions. They shamed us all, and showed us that clearly another world will not happen through just talking without bringing the words and actions into accord.

The general intention was to return to normality and continue with the conversations, but it was impossible to do so as long as nothing had taken place after the youth had called to our attention the necessity of constructing in our own forums this “other possible world” that is so often invoked.

We returned midday with new disruptions. The conference about “Globalization and human rights” was being led by the director of Human Rights Watch, José Miguel Vivanco.

The discord began with his talk on human rights in Cuba. He argued that the exercising of basic human rights is not permitted in Cuba. He also stated that his organization wasn’t permitted access to the Cuban jails. Faced with these accusations, part of the listening public began to boo. The Cuban ambassador to Columbia, defending the official Cuban position, accused his opponent of being a liar, and invited him to go to Cuba to prove that they aren’t violating human rights. The discord heated up the atmosphere, and the audience behaved itself like during a soccer match, hissing or applauding.

Thursday: Rethinking the role of citizens

In the roundtable about “Globalization, democracy and new practices in global citizenship” the representatives from Brazil refuted the existence of democratic “models”, presenting instead values like plurality (recognizing others), equality (participation), justice (distribution), diversity (inclusion), which are indispensable when talking about democracy.

hey criticized the current authority of the market over politics: “To produce ways of living is a part of being a human being. The problem is when commerce starts feeling the same as life and we only feel like citizens when we’re working within the market.”

In the middle of the speeches, the young people entered and walked through the room holding a giant sign that had a drawing of a pig with a dollar sign and “NGO’s NGO’s NGO’s” and “FMST: More Thematic than Social.”

In the afternoon, in the round table dialogue on, “Wars, sovereignty and the role of the international community”, Adam Isacson from the Center for International Policy (USA) presented documents about the international politics of the United States, in relation to Columbia. He began his talk by begging pardon for the actions of the US. From the point of view of his country, the US couldn’t advance development projects in Columbia until there was a better security system in the country.

Alejandro Kirk of the International Press Service criticized the absence of debate about the role of the media, suggesting that “there is no democracy without communication.”

Finally, we spoke about the role of the international community in a conflict like Columbia. This role becomes much more important these days, when the president, Alvaro Uribe, is beginning a massive multilateral invasion in Columbia, added to the “bilateral cooperation” of the US, which is to say Plan Columbia and the Andean Regional Initiative.

Friday: Talking about local and global resistance movements.

“ Civil Resistance and opposition to wars”. Under this title, a roundtable discussed where to aim the different forms of civil resistance to war.

Ulrich Oslender, Researcher of Social Movements, suggested that the necessary course of action is to “globalize the resistance” and make different forms of resistance more visible. He established as an example the mobilizations of civil society against the war in Iraq. He commented on the heterogeneity of these protests and that many people were participating for the first time in political protests. He also pointed to the importance of the Zapatistas in the globalization of resistance and the responsibility of civil society in its construction.

REDPAZ (Network of Peace Initiatives) led a meeting about all of the activities that this organization has undertaken to construct peace in Columbia, making sure to explain that peace not only means the absence of violence, but also development, democracy, human rights and inclusion. They reject that peace could have ambiguities: “violence cannot construct anything”. And they insist that “peace is possible only if we are capable of building it from below, from the communities”.

In the afternoon, I participated in the workshop “Brotherhoods, protectorates, and alternative diplomacy”, organized by the Network of Brotherhoods “Brother People-Visible Bonds” who presented different experiences with brotherhood and cooperative relationships between the north and the north, the south and the north, the north and the south, and the south and the south.

Representing SIPAZ, and more concretely the puppet troupe “DIVERSIDAD” coordinated by SIPAZ and the Civil Alliance-Chiapas) I shared the new form of international accompaniment that our puppet project has allowed us to realize.

On the other side, the coordinator of PBI-Columbia explained the human rights observing work that takes place in Columbia, and mourned the impossibility of responding to all of the requests for human rights observers.

Finally, Arcadi Oliveres, director of the NGO “Peace and Justice” of Barcelona, spoke about cooperation between municipalities, emphasizing the necessity of constructing true relationships that are not only formal, but also have real content.

Saturday: Smiles that breath death.

My understanding of the Columbian reality didn’t end with the forum. Two friends from Columbian human rights organizations invited me to go to a community, which three years ago had suffered a massacre, El Salado. It’s located in an area controlled by paramilitaries, and where just that week three persons traveling were kidnapped on this road.

The people told us about the massacre and about their return this year. The community was like the living dead. They have no crops. The holes from the machine guns still mark the walls, and you can also see them in the glances of those who never stopped being grateful for our presence there. They told us with anger and indignation how the helicopters continue flying over the community at night.

The asked me to share with them about the work done by SIPAZ in Chiapas, and more than anything about how the indigenous communities are. They all listened to my words, and also my apologies about not being able to help.

Without a doubt, the most enriching thing about the FSMT was getting to know all of the organizations and people who work towards constructing a society that respects fundamental human rights as a daily reality. In the case of Columbia, the majority of the Columbian participants walk into the future with dead companions on their backs. Their power, their energy, and their smiles will stay with me. Columbia has, for me, the shape of their proud faces and their fierce hearts.