> La Jornada Tuesday, Dec. 23, 1997
> 
> by Andres Aubry and Angelica Inda
> translated by Duane Ediger
> 
> Who are the "paramilitaries"?
> 
> The conflict in Chiapas has given anthropologists a new task: to identify a
> new societal subject, the protagonist of violence, which arose first in
> Chiapas' northern zone, then spread to the highlands and canyonlands.  A
> methodical inventory found different levels of "paramilitary" activity
> among five of Chiapas' nine indigenous ethnic groups: the Chol, Tzotzil,
> Tzeltal, with some activity among the Tojolabal, and timid beginnings among
> the Zoque.  In Chenalh� alone, 17 townships are affected: one-third of the
> villages and half the population.  The scope of the phenomenon, as well as
> its ravages and number of victims, point to its need for study under
> disciplined methods.
> 
> By historical precedent, they were called first pistoleros (gunmen) or
> guardias blancas (white guards), for the wounds they have wrought in the
> collective memory of Chiapas.  Though these are still present, the media
> began calling some paramilitaries to differentiate them from the former 
> (agents from outside the communities, whereas the newer paramilitaries came
> from within them), because they act in an ambiguous and undeclared relation
> with the police, military and government, and they intervene with their own
> arms.
> 
> Despite repeated shows of proof to the contrary, the state has denied the
> existence of paramilitaries, arguing that some local congress people and
> public opinion shapers refused to believe.  For lack of a better term, and
> out of respect for the authorities, we will continue to name them after the
> fashion of the media, but in quotation marks.
> 
> Who are the "paramilitaries"?  They appear almost exclusively among young
> people frustrated by rural authorities.  In the 17 townships of the
> municipality of Chenalh� in which we were able to document the existence of
> 246 of them, rural inertia combined with population growth provides neither
> land nor work, not even farm work, to the young people who reach the age of
> membership in an ejido.  (An ejido is a communally held and worked parcel
> of land; it also refers to the land holders.)  Married and the heads of
> their households, they find themselves in the same situation as their
> parents: unable to find work, surviving by miracle or by stealing land and
> harvests.  Obligated to live as delinquents, they not only lack a
> subsistence, but also have no reason to attend the assemblies and for that
> reason they are excluded from decisions made by the ejido which considers
> them pariahs.  First conclusion: these criminals are products of the system
> and of their economic, agrarian and labor options.
> 
> Immediately "paramilitarization" offers them a way out and prestige.  The
> way out is first the heavy war tax they levy (25 pesos, or US$3, biweekly
> per permanent adult, or a one-time payment of 375 pesos, or US$47,  per
> person for those who don't pay the 25 pesos biweekly), which gives them an
> income; secondly, the booty of animals, harvested crops and domestic goods 
> (including automobiles); these in turn legitimize the humiliating theft of
> corn, coffee and poultry.  The weapons--and these are not light arms--bring
> prestige and confer upon them power and status unlike they or their
> landless parents have ever known.
> 
> Because they have led an itinerant life looking for work, and have not been
> ejido members, they never had the civic education afforded through periodic
> assemblies in which the collective destinies of villages, townships and
> municipalities are decided, and they escaped all communal responsibility. 
> For this reason, the "paramilitaries" have no social or political project. 
> They make no proclamations; they simply impose themselves.  The only
> masters they have had are the monitors of their military training, a
> condition they must meet in order to acquire the arms they carry.
> 
> Their mentors, whether in encampments or on patrols, conduct themselves in
> a way very similar to the Kaibiles of Guatemala.  They can be seen at their
> checkpoints, clearly affected by drug use.  Their way of talking and
> carrying themselves betrays the fascistic nature of their formation.
> 
> What is their aim?  Why do they operate only within the close boundaries of
> the zone of influence within which they enjoy perfect impunity?  The reason
> is strategic, and they themselves are probably unaware of it, for they
> would not exist were it not for the manipulation of a hidden Director.  The
> villages that fill the local news form a wedge between the four contiguous
> municipalities of Chenalho, Pantelh�, Cancuc and Tenajapa.  The warning
> signs that mark the training area of the group MIRA reveal the same
> tactical option: these "paramilitaries" are based at the convergence of the
> four municipalities of Huixtan, Chanal, Oxchuc, and Cancuc, anticipating an
> eventual bridge to the paramilitaries of Chenalh�.
> 
> The commanders of the Paz y Justicia group, near El Limar, control the five
> Chol Indian municipalities and the entrances to Amat�n, Huitiup�n,
> Simojovel, El Bosque, and Chil�n (via the Chinchulines of Bachaj�n).  Taken
> together, they dominate the public policy space in nearly all of the
> municipalities administered by SEAPI (State Secretariat for Attention to
> Indigenous Peoples).  The objective of all of them is to dismantle any and
> all--unarmed--opposition bases of support. 
> 
> After the military offensive of February 9, 1995, one of the military
> tactics denounced by the observer missions was the destruction of
> productive installations, crops and even farm implements to take away the
> dissidents' future.  The "paramilitary" tactics employed in Chenalh� are
> the same. The operations began when the coffee was near ready to harvest,
> in a year when the price was high. Like flies shooed away, productive
> farmers were expelled en masse.  Like undesirables getting the rug pulled
> out from under them, the indigenous of Chiapas' are robbed of their future.
> 
> 
> ____________________________
> Andres Aubry and Angelica Inda are sociologists and historians living in
> San Crist�bal de las Casas, Chiapas, Mexico.
> 
> Duane Ediger is a resident of Dallas and a frequent traveler to Mexico    
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 
> 
> 



Reply via email to