San Cristobal perspectives on the EZLN Red Alert.

Monday June 27th, the Mexican Army moved over a thousand troops, hummers and heavy machinery along the curving highway between Tuxtla and San Cristobal, final destination, Rancho Nuevo, a base just outside of San Cristobal.  A week after the EZLN declared Red Alert, the movement and proximity of the soldiers was, to say the least, intimidating, despite assurance on both sides that no offensive action was to be taken.   Uncertain, I think aptly describes the atmosphere in Chiapas these last two weeks.  Vague and often alarming communiqués were issued every couple of days, and daily the alarmist press would fan the flames of fear with news of military movement, rumors of drugs, speculation.  Even in Zapatista communities, where news spreads a little slower, people sat glued to their radios.  Red Alert, but what does it all mean?  What will happen next?

In the first few days after the Red Alert was declared doubt was rampant.  The first startling communiqué on June 19th, closing the Caracoles, calling up EZLN troops and asking international and civil society to leave the conflict zone, seemed to come out of no where.  This announcement came at the same time as Mexican militaries report of a major drug bust on Zapatista territory. These claims later were pronounced false (see news update this newsletter), but there were moments when it appeared as though the Mexican military would attempt to use drug trade to justify military intervention into communities.  In fact, the Abejas issued a statement on June 24th supporting the Zapatistas and describing current events as a government trap linking the Zapatistas to drug trade.

In following communiqués the EZLN clarified that the purpose of the Red Alert was defensive, as they were holding a consultation process among their support bases and were therefore vulnerable to attack (in 1995 the military took advantage of a consultation period to attempt to eradicate the Zapatista leaders).  They also stated that they would take no offensive action and that this consultation would define “the next phase” of their struggle.  The communiqués (as they often are) spoke frankly but poetically about Chiapas reality and the Zapatista struggle, but were also draped in foreboding, with statements that they were preparing to lose the little they had gained, and continue struggling even if their leaders were imprisoned or killed. 

The Zapatistas had said their piece, now politicians and civil society had to figure out how to react.  Government officials on both the state and federal level were continuously dismissive of the Red Alert.  President Fox, traveling in Europe, refused to acknowledge the situation until June 29th when the consultation was complete.  Church officials demanded a new opening of dialogue and urged peaceful solutions.  Many San Cristobal NGOs leapt into action, monitoring the army movements, writing declarations in support of Zapatistas and making statements for the press denouncing the military’s presence and claims of drug trafficking.  For the Peace House, the Red Alert meant discussing and honing our emergency protocol, reading, writing and analyzing the situation, collaborating with our organizational partners about what action could be taken, but further, contemplating as a group and as individuals, what solidarity really meant to us.

It is one thing to come to live and volunteer in a low intensity war zone, quite another to imagine the possibility of an outbreak of open hostilities again.  Does solidarity mean going where you are told you are needed or keeping yourself safe?  What is the most helpful in the long-term for indigenous people in Chiapas?  What is best for our home communities?  These being questions each person must answer for themselves, but important ones to consider.  Life in many communities in Chiapas is precarious at best, and how far should and could compassionate internationals be willing to go to alleviate that?  It is a difficult time for NGOs, the majority of whom either explicitly or implicitly rely on the Zapatista movement for their existence.  The suspension of projects in the conflict zone has meant many people taking a long look at who exactly they are serving and why.  This is an important and essential reality check.  And despite or because of two weeks of tension and uncertainty, the Zapatistas have taken steps into the future that are well grounded in their original ideals and demands, and international and civil society has reaffirmed their solidarity in this struggle for dignity and justice.  

In the final days of June the Zapatistas completed their consultation with a reported 98% agreement among their support base.  They agreed upon a stance of increasing openness to anti-neoliberal movements worldwide and the nonelectoral left of Mexico.  They call for the grassroots left of Mexico to share and create alliances by means of a caravan through Mexico and large gatherings to be planned.  They expressed solidarity (and even a willingness to send aid in corn, coffee and artesian crafts) to movements in Bolivia, Cuba, Europe and around the world. 

This new phase is a relief to many after two weeks of rumors and wild speculation of EZLN taking military action, or dropping arms and becoming a political party.  The Red Alert was proceeded by a scathing communiqué critiquing Mexico’s political parties and Lopez Obrador the popular leftist candidate for President in 2006.  Already other indigenous organizations are reacting against the Zapatistas in support of Lopez Obrador.  As Mexico heads into the one year count down before the elections, many speculate that the Zapatistas new stance will further divide communities, while others see it as a way to galvanize and radicalize the left.

 Much remains to be seen  in terms of the role internationals will now play in Chiapas.  Many organizations believe the Caracoles will reopen and community projects will continue as before.  There is always a role for monitoring the human rights situation and using international connections to spread news.  The Zapatistas have once again acknowledged the connected-ness of the worlds oppressed peoples and their movements for social justice.  It is an ideal time to take those words to heart and seek the common ground on which we can collaborate “against neoliberalism and for humanity.”