This week we continue our examination of Guatemala. In this selection, author Victor Perera outlines his efforts to discover evidence of army activity in the country’s western highlands known as the Ixil Triangle (aka Operation Ixil) , and the resulting findings. This operation was said to have taken place between 1978 and 1983, and to have resulted in the deaths or displacements of at least “25, 000 Ixil residents of Mayan descent” (p 62). If the allegations made by human rights and church groups were true, then the Operation would basically have been a genocide.

The Ixils had been used by the Spanish colonists as cheap labour when the coffee plantations arose in the late 19th century, and the legislative enslavement of the indigenous migrant labour has remained basically changed until today. In other words, the rights of the Ixils have been violated for a long time. They were ‘recruited’ by contratistas who were charged with hiring as many labourers for the coffee plantations as possible, often using liquor or debts as a way to basically force the Ixils to sign up.

Ixils themselves are not the only ones who have been enraged by the treatment they have received. Two Spanish priests, Fathers Xavier and Luis Gurrurian were appalled by the exploitation of the Ixil labourers and between 1955 and 1975 worked to establish agricultural and craft cooperatives, installing indigenous people as the heads of them. However, in 1975, the army identified them as Marxist subversion, despite many of the priests’ alliance with anti-communism. Although the priests ended up needing to flee the area, the army could not stop the peasant labour movements which had emerged in the Ixil Triangle from the priests’ time spent there, the largest of which was called the Committee of Peasant Unity, or CUC.

The CUC’s major concerns were the treatment of Mayan workers in the highland coffee fincas and the working conditions of ladino and indigenous peons on the West coast’s sugar, coffee and cotton plantations. One human rights violation that frequently occurred on these plantations was the illegally frequent spraying of DDT on cotton plants, which caused hundreds of workers to die from liver and lung diseases, as well as infiltrating and intoxicating the breast milk of nursing mothers. All of this and more led to several strikes in the 1970s, which ended up succeeding in that the minimum wage was raised (to $3.20 daily), but many employers found ways to avoid this law, and most coffee and cotton workers only ended up collecting about $0.80 to 1.00 daily. From these examples, it is clear that the Guatemalan property and plantation owners were majorly taking advantage of the indigenous peoples, who were either willing to work for little wages due to their prior living conditions, or forced into it in some way.

While this week’s readings highlight many interesting thing about the Guatemalan military conflict in the Western Highlands, one thing that really struck me was the ‘battle’ between evangelical and catholic forces and how those two branches of christianity played so heavily into different sides of the conflict.

Obviously, missionaries have been a persistent force in Latin America since the arrival of European colonists. Also, the ‘christainization’ of indigenous peoples has been shown as a ‘justification’ for colonization many times. However, it is interesting how this piece highlights that the evangelicals and the catholics were distinctly on the side of either the military or the EGP.

Interestingly, it was the strong community bond of the Ixils which was bolstered by Catholic Priests which drew the EGP to the area in the first place. From there  on out the catholics seem to be synonymous with people who are in the EGP and as a ‘communist’ force in the area. It’s interesting how the priests felt the need to intervene on more than a religious level in order to start socially organizing the people in political ways, like how Father Xavier created the indigenous agricultural and craft co-ops. On the other side, the evangelicals are helping to sponsor the military and to invest in the landowners who are going bankrupt. One incredible example of the evangelical example is that of Luis Arenas who had the audacity not to really pay his workers, but to still accept money from christian groups abroad as the representative for  ”Americans for Freedom in Central America.”

It is fascinating to look at the discourse on both sides of the aisle. On the Catholic side it seems to be that the priests and their well intentioned initiatives are just portrayed as part of the cause adding to EGP power. While it’s probably safe to say that the ‘progressive’ actions of the priests were intended to provide solidarity to the indigenous people, it would be very interesting to see if they actually intended to become so tied to something seen as a ‘guerilla’ movement. As described on page 86 the catholics went from being conservative, to a ‘progressive’ christian base to  being regarded by the military as “hotbeds of insurgency.” I find it hard to believe that the priests truly wanted to be so polarized in their work; however, they found themselves so tied to the EGP that they eventually had to leave the area for a period of time.

The rhetoric surrounding the evangelical movement is slightly  disturbing.  If you think about it, “Americans for Freedom in Central America” could easily be a slogan on Fox news tomorrow just replace Central America with Middle East, or actually you might not even need to change it. These kind of campaigns always seem to be dangerous and the idea that foreign investment in militarized regimes so easily follows such campaigns is alarming. It also should be noted in this piece how every time an evangelical group was mentioned, so too was their funding source. Some came from landowners gaining investments from abroad, others came from “reformed real estate brokers” etc. Then of course the percentages of people subscribing to one religion or the other is noted as well, as if it too were an economic statistic. Of course, President Regan gives his blessing to the movement as well showing the presence of reganomics within the situation.

Essentially the idea of catholics alining with co-ops and evangelicals with investors shows how this religious debate is just another factor in the polarization of both sides. In fact, the religious differences between the two sects aren’t highlighted once, just the economic and political differences. This is also demonstrated well in statements, like that about Mayor Guzman, which state that he is an evangelical who still smokes and drinks; this shows that being evangelical had little to do with religious practice and much more alignment with politics.

Overall, it’s interesting to look at how the military verses the EGP is framed. For while they are obviously two separate groups politically virtually everything else, like religion,  seems to be polarized around them as well.

I did my case study on the Zapatista Movement in Mexico and throughout the readings this week parallels rang obvious. A few issues of interest out of the readings and my research: [1] Justice through Violence [2] the role of the media.

I guess one of the biggest questions that I have struggled with not only in this class but in all my classes this term is the role of violence in the search for justice and the defense of Human Rights. [and this ties back to last week’s readings as well] The idea that in most cases where there are high levels of Human rights abuses, Human Rights discourse and peaceful dialoguing between parties never seems to be enough. That violence turns out to be the most viable alternative tending to result not only in pushing forward progress and more immediate results but also in bringing the issues to light in a very public and publicized way—as the reading began “SOLO EL QUE LUCHA TIENE DERECHO A VENCER. SOLO EL QUE VENCE TIENE DERECHO A VIVIR” (62). The Guerilla Army of the Poor (EGP) in a single act of violence, executing Luis Arenas in 1975 set in motion the movement that would spark Human Rights discourse in Guatemala.

“From that moment on, […] the word spread throughout the region that the guerrillas were not foreigners, since they spoke the local dialect… and that they surely had come to do justice, since they had punished a man who had grown rich from the blood and sweat of the poor.”  (69)

The violence occurring in Guatemala on both sides of the fight—both   guerrilla violence and government violence—was able to draw   in the interest of the UN and led to the consequent signing of a Human Rights accord in 1994 between the government and the guerillas. In addition the peace talks resulted in the recognition of the Mayan peoples ethnic rights and indigenous identity granting them recognition and limited political autonomy (360).

On a different topic…

 I also find the relationship between the media, local and international, and its role in the process of Human Rights defense really interesting. In the reading, the story of Jennifer Harbury and her use of tactical media to both promote her cause and incite governmental action was particularly effective. Her portrayal in the local media, the international media and the controversial signing of the million-dollar movie contract with CNN, although not all positive, all had a positive impact on her cause and ultimately allowed her to succeed insofar as she attained the information she was looking for—outwardly stating that she was very happy about the movie contract as it would keep the spotlight on human rights abuses in Guatemala and the fact that she would be able to use the revenues to fund aid to Mayan widows and other victims of the war.

The Zapatistas also used tactical media very impressively – Subcomandante Marcos was able to draw international support for their cause. One of the most peculiar examples of this is his appearance in the French Marie Claire.

It seems that within any movement for Human Rights media coverage is incredibly critical.