http://www.proceso.com.mx/?p=289152
This article points at the sad reality that in many violent conflicts children bear the brunt of the violence. In Mexico’s Drug war launched by President Felipe Calderón, it is estimated that close to 4,000 children have died. In a broader context, its interesting to note that the declaration of the rights of children were released by the UN independently from the all-age encompassing human rights declaration. Why the special document I wonder?
This week we focused our attention on Guatemala and what many consider to be a genocide of the Mayan people there. This history really was not all that long ago and yet I am sure many people in North America are not that familiar with what happened. A friend of mine who even lived in Guatemala was not really aware of this history. It’s interesting what history people are presented with. In North America, the only genocide most people are ever really made aware of is the holocaust. While it is important to know this history, I think it is probably only taught to us because it was a genocide of white Europeans predominantly. Since the genocide in Guatemala involved poor indigenous people in Latin America, most of the world outside Latin America most likely knows little about the situation.
I also found it interesting how much of the discussion about Guatemala is often centered around the role of the CIA and the American government or corporations. While we may see the CIA and America’s role as the root of all evil, perhaps seeking retribution for their role is not the main concern for those actually living in Guatemala that had to deal with the horrific aftermath of the atrocities. Perhaps it is a major concern for them but I wonder if since in North America we can relate to the nefarious nature of the CIA we sort of inflate their importance for others? I would imagine seeking justice from their own military leaders would probably come before anything.
With that being said, though, it is horrifying that America is never held accountable for their actions abroad. It would be great if there was an international court that actual tried people outside of the developing world. Instead we somehow think that America will just police itself. We still live in a world where the American president can win the Nobel Peace prize while waging an illegal war so it would not be the least surprising if America was still up to similar tricks in Latin America. I am sure that once the dust settles on the conflict over the drug trade in Mexico right now we will also see how complicit the American government was in much of the violence. America thrives on the political instability of other countries. Instability allows America to assert more control over a country. If the people really had the power and the country had a stable government, America would not be allowed to intervene and force themselves upon their country in the name of “security” and “democracy”.
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.
The selections for this week were focused on the United Fruit Company, or la frutera as it was known in Guatemala. United Fruit was an American company based in Guatemala, and basically dominated Guatemala’s international commerce from the 1800s and still has a presence today. The concept of human rights comes up a couple times within this selection. On page 71, the living conditions and situations of the workers employed by United Fruit is discussed. Basically, the employees had better living conditions and pay than many other Guatemalan labourers. However, they were basically dependent upon the company, including living in the which made a disproportionate profit from conducting business in Guatemala, then selling the product in the United States. The company is described as “benevolent and paternal” (p 71), a term reminiscent of colonists and missionaries who ‘know what’s best for the people’, etc. Indeed, United Fruit provided housing and medical facilities for their workers as well as education for the employees’ children. However, the company’s employees worked seven-day work weeks, and the company continually refused to allow their workers to join any kind of independent labor union, and for a time I’m sure they were okay with that due to the benefits that they received from the company already. However, in 1945, Jose Arevalo’s administration began to target United Fruit, and strikes broke out, with workers demanding better pay and working conditions, fuelled by the Labor Code of 1947. In fact, at one point the Labor Code almost motivated United Fruit to withdraw from Guatemala.
Many Guatemalans were aware of the negative affects that United Fruit had upon their country. The Minister of Labor and Economy believed that the company was “the principal enemy of the progress of Guatemala, of its democracy, and of every effort directed at its economic liberation” (p 73). It seems as though the company had the country in a economic hold, as it had managed to make deals with a great number of politicians which did seem to impede the country’s progress, for example, their deal with General Ubico, who signed a 99 year long deal with the company which guaranteed them “exemption from internal taxation, duty-free importation of all goods and a guarantee of low wages” (p 70). Ubico seemed to think that the benefits the company would bring to Guatemala would outweigh the accompanying drawbacks, as well as probably wanting to extend good relations with the United States, an obvious international power.
Indeed, the matter of the United Fruit Company in Guatemala became an international issue. In an effort to undermine the Guatemalan government, United Fruit officials informed the American government that there was a possibility of communist influence in Guatemala. President Eisenhower appointed ‘The Liberator’ of Guatemala, Colonel Carlos Castillo Armas, and the CIA dispatched 170 troops to Guatemala through Honduras. Meanwhile United Fruit was providing the US military with access to its railroads, its communications systems and even places to stay on its properties in order to counteract the rebellious forces. This entire process led to a coup in 1945, and afterwards the United Fruit company lost its power within Guatemala, as the government of the US had lost its faith in the company, and without that they could not continue on the same level as before. All in all, the United Fruit Company had an unfathomable impact upon the citizens of Guatemala, mostly due to it bringing the country to international attention and linking it to the United States.
In this article, Rafael Romo discusses the number of women who were unwillingly and unknowingly sterilized during Alberto Fujimori’s presidency in the nineties. The special prosecutor investigation the issue, Victor Cubas, estimates that there are thousands of undocumented cases of forced sterilization, and at least 2000 documented cases. These investigations were opened first in the years following Fujimori’s term, but were shelved in 2009 by Alan Garcia’s government. It wasn’t until Ollanta Humala was elected in July that the investigations were ordered to be opened up once again. Under Fujimori, doctors, gynaecologists and nurses had a quota to fill, consisting of sterilizing three women a month. Marino Costa Bauer, the Peruvian health minister between 1996 and 1998 insists that although the campaign was ‘perhaps’ poorly executed, the sterilizations were all voluntary, citing many signed documents as proof. However, a woman says that she and her husband were forced to sign such a document, indicated that even if there was signed consent, it was not voluntary. Costa Bauer also denies that this campaign targeted poor, indigenous women in isolated communities, although human rights groups have insisted that this is the demographic that seems to be mostly effected.
Recently I have been wondering about the theme of Truth Commissions and what some people have called the right to truth. If it is truth as it has been argued that the rights to truth is a fundamental component of international humanitarian law, particularly when gross violations of human rights have been committed. In Brazil, president Dilma Rousseff has established a Truth Commission that will look into the human rights abuses and disappearances that occurred during the military regime that went from 1964 to 1985.
Six commissioners who beyond subpoena powers will not be able to prosecute or recommend charges against the perpetrators of the human rights violations will integrate the Commission. Although, it is an interesting discussion to have, namely what is the purpose of having a truth commission if there are no prosecutions, not even under transitional justice parameters, particularly when the existence of the Commission is premised on the right to justice. But again it seems that if there was a fear of prosecution the Military will have not supported the creation of the commission.
Even if one disagrees with a truth commission with a sanitized sense of justice, it seems an interesting discussion to have. On the one hand, one could argue that it is a purely bureaucratic endeavor, which only aims at saving face, but that lack of prosecution could also open the door for confessions that would have not emerge if the fear of prosecution was present.
The above article is simply about how Columbia is trying to bolster trade with England and show itself as an economic power in Latin America. What’s really interesting about it is that England has said that they will sign a Human Rights agreement with Columbia as part of starting to trade with them. It was pointed out in another article on the topic that England has put Human Rights at the forefront of it’s international policy (so it says), but Columbia is accused of some of the worst Human Rights abuses especially against trade unionists. It will be very interesting to see what the Human Rights agreement actually says when it is signed by the two countries as trading partners. It is one thing to have a bilateral trade agreement but it is very interesting to see a bilateral Human Rights agreement as well.
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.
“A new report says Mexico fails to limit security forces’ torture, disappearances, and extrajudicial killings in the drug war. But Calderon’s response ‘skirts the issue,’ says blogger Patrick Corcoran.”