The Bishop of San Cristobal de Las Casas and President of the National Commission for Intermediation (Conai), Samuel Ruiz, announced yesterday the end of his mediation charge. A few hours later, the other members of the mediation group supported the Bishop in his decision; they recognized him for his efforts for peace and justice; emphasized that, through their actions, the government "continues dismantling the conditions necessary for dialogue and negotiation," and declared the mediation work of the Conai to be concluded.
Samuel Ruiz noted, as the primary reasons for his decision, the lack of official carrying out of what was agreed upon at the first Table of San Andres Larrainzar and the reaction of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation: "A long, understandable and, untimately, heavy silence;" the determination of the federal government to remove themselves from dialogue, as and how it was defined at San Andres, and of unilaterally executing the accords and moving towards unresolved issues, calling for a direct dialogue which does not require any mediation," also the "continuous and growing government attacks" against him, which, on recent occasions, were "carried out, through gestures and words, by the very head of the Executive." The Bishop also denounced the systematic persecution of his Diocese by the authorities.
It is worth remembering that the Conai, established in December 1994, has done invaluable work in maintaining a precarious peace in Chiapas, in promoting a peace process that could resolve the profound causes for the uprising in January of that year, and for documenting the conditions of misery and marginalization that the Indians of that area suffer, including the atrocities of which they have been victims. In the most recent phase of the conflict, from the Acteal massacre in December 1997, and through the consequent official change in strategy for Chiapas, the Conai, as well as the Diocese of San Cristobal, have had to confront a stream of accusations, imputations and calumnies by the authorities.
In the present explosive context of Chiapas, the loss of the intermediatory body is extremely worrisome, and should lead the parties in conflict, in the first place the government, to suspend their strategy of striking at the principal - if not the only - factors for detente and moderation that remain in the area. Without them, the risk is run of a major polarization, of new tears in the social fabric and of new criminal actions, such as the Acteal massacre.
It is clear that neither in this, nor in any conflict, can the process of dialogue - direct or indirect - be inititiated or reinitiated without the presence of mediators to establish the minimal channels of communication between the parties, and, also, that, as a consequence, the purpose expressed by a statement of the Secretary for Government's office - in reaction to Samuel Ruiz' announcement - that the federal government would seek direct dialogue and negotiation with the leadership of the indigenous rebels, lacks feelings and perspective. In the absence of the Conai or a similar organization, the peace process between the federal government and their local alliances, on the one hand, and the zapatista communities and their organization, on the other, will not be able to be reactivated.
The logical, the desirable and the necessary is, certainly, that the Chiapas conflict be resolved exclusively by Mexicans in Mexico. But it cannot be ignored that the dismantling of the national mediation creates a scenario in which international intermediation becomes inevitable.
From this perspective, the government - which has insisted in rejecting all possibility of foreign peace gestures - should stop their pressure and attacks against the Conai and ask its members to reconsider their decision. It would have been desirable to hear expressions of concern on the part of public authorities, for Samuel Ruiz' and the other intermediators' statements. Disgracefully, in the short run, the official reaction - by means of a Government statement - has been limited to the denial of the existence of persecution and harassment against the Diocese of San Cristobal and the Conai, and to the characterization of those observations as tendentious and fraudulent. The tone employed in the Secretary of Government's bulletin is surprising, referring to the mediatory organization created by civil society and accepted by the parties, and it surprises that they try to justify the government's harassment of that group of Mexicans who have made invaluable efforts in the interests of peace.
In the present circumstances, there does not seem to be a solution other than an urgent mobilization by society in the interest of peace, a profound reflection on the part of the authorities and an interruption in what the members of the now dissolved commission referred to as the government's "strategy of war" in Chiapas.
If events unfold from this point of view, it is worth hoping, as a consequence of the end of this mediatory body, for a reactivation of the peace process in this area.
_______________________________ NUEVO AMANECER PRESS - NAP ____________________________________ Registered as a non-profit corporation in the USA. NAP translates and distributes information in support of human rights in Mexico. Advisory team: Mexico. General Director: Roger Maldonado - Mexico Darrin Wood: Director NAP - Spain office. Susana Saravia: Coordinator NAP: Mexico/USA/Spain Our web page in Spanish: http://www.nap.cuhm.mx/nap0.htm ___________________________________________________ ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN MEXICO BY LA JORNADA, June 8, 1998 TRANSLATED FROM THE SPANISH BY irlandesa FOR NUEVO AMANECER PRESS NUEVO AMANECER PRESS- N.A.P.To know about us visit: http://www.nap.cuhm.mx/nap0.htm General Director: Roger Maldonado Director Europe: Darrin Wood Coordinator: USA-Mexico-Europe: Susana Saravia (Anibarro) Advisory and support team: Mexico *When reproducing NAP's translations; please give credit to translator and NAP. Thank you, NAP advisory board.