THE INDIAN REVOLT IN CHIAPAS

Interview with Guillermo Reynoso

The Chiapas Rebellion must be analysed within its proper context. The Ejercito Zapatista de Liberacion National or EZLN (the "Zapatista Army for National Liberation") started their armed attack on a few towns of Chiapas the very day that the NAFTA Common Market was launched. Nobody knew of their existence before ! The surprise was total but 10 years of underground training in the jungle prepared this impressive event. It led to armed repression by the State but also to a formidable mobilization of civil society throughout Mexico. Thanks to this and to international pressure, the Government called a truce, after having first launched armed attacks on the Indian movement. The bishop of Chiapas, Mgr. Samuel Ruiz played a big role in explaining the movement to the outside world. The hated and very exploitative Governor of the State of Chiapas was taken prisoner by the EZLN, judged ... and "condemned to be free". EZLN has a good sense of humour.

All these dramatic statements, events, etc. succeeded to launch a deep debate throughout the nation. The main points put out for dialogue by the EZLN were very rich and picked up by many discussion groups. These points are :
- legitimacy of violence;
- violence by the State;
- freedom and democracy;
- dignity and social agreement;
- plurality and equality;
- religion and politics;
- politics and truth;
- language and culture.

At the very moment that NAFTA tried to create the image of Mexico as belonging to the "First World", the issue of misery was put out quite bluntly. This was shocking because rich Mexicans have tended to look at the other latin-american states as poor underdeveloped "third world" whereas they claimed Mexico is modern and rich !

The leader, "sub-commandante Marcos", excells in having these issues discussed well beyond Chiapas and even Mexico. These questions actually go beyond the concept of nation-state and usher a new, startling approach to politics.

The dialogue in San Cristobal between the Mexican Government and EZLN with bishop Samuel as a mediator was an important event. But more important was that EZLN took a back-seat position in order to stimulate a more active role by the Mexican civil society. The whole situation teaches at least two lessons : (1) the importance of civil society to keep in check the arrogance of the State; (2) the fact that the people in the State of Chiapas has never looked upon themselves as being really part of Mexico. They rather looked at the Maya region (encompassing also North of Guatemala). Through the EZLN action, Chiapas paradoxically re-integrates Mexico. And everybody is taken aback.

Poor Indians will have, in the future, to be listened to seriously.