We don't want your support!
* Mexico Eric Toussaint ON 28 JUNE 1996, FORTY MASKED MEN WITH AK 47 rifles burst into a public meeting organised to mark the first anniversary of the assassination of 17 local peasants by the police. Among the crowd of about 1,000 was PRD leader (and former Presidential candidate) Cuauhtémoc Cardénas, scheduled to speak at the meeting. This was the first public appearance of guerrillas of the Popular Revolutionary Army (EPR). In the following weeks a number of incidents involving the took place in Guerrero, Mexico's poorest states, where Indian self-defence groups have existed for many years. Guerrero is best known abroad as the state which includes Acapulco). Mexico's minister of Defence called the EPR "a real guerrilla force, an amalgamation of radical groups, with better military equipment than the Zapatistas (Proceso, July 7th].
The EPR presents itself as the armed wing of the self-styled Popular Democratic Revolutionary Party, which is the result of the fusion of 15 organisations, mostly of Maoist origin, including PROCUP, a MaoStalinist party similar to Peru's Shining Path.
The EPR says it has "no links with the Zapatistas of the EZLN. Though there have been attempts to build such links. Their uprising on Ist January 1994 raised great hopes... We supported their struggle... They have now chosen the path of negotiations. In this sense, there is an essential difference between them and us. [EPR press conference, August 8th].
The emergence of the EPR has been followed by a systematic militarisation of the state of Guerrero. More than 12,000 soldiers have been deployed (without reducing the number of troops deployed to surround the Zapatistas in Chiapas). Many peasants have been arrested and tortured to admit their supposed membership in the EPR. Only after confession have they been allowed to see a lawyer. Most have immediately refuted their "confession" and denounced the torture [La Jornada, July 14th].
The EZLN immediately distanced itself from the EPR. Zapatista Sub-comandante Marcos has pointed out that the Zapatistas have a mandate from the indigenous base communities, which the ERP does not. We reprint here the full text of an open letter he recently addressed to EPR militants on behalf of the Zapatistas.
On August 28th, the EPR attacked ten army and police positions in Guerrero, Oaxaca, Guanajuato and the state of Mexico. There have been other incidents since. These activities have hindered EZLN negotiations with the govemment. They were one of the factors which led the Zapatiatas to break-off of negotiations on September 2nd. * 10 International Viewpoint
To: the soldiers and commanders of the Popular Revolutionary Army (ERP)
I write to you on behalf of the men, women, children and elderly of the support bases of the EZLN, of the men and women soldiers, regular and irregular of the EZLN I...] We are aware of the respectful tone you use to refer to us. We respect those who respect us: that is why we do not respect the government [.]
You have declared that "if a wrong should arise which would make the EZLN abandon its dialogue [with the government], they would have [the ERT's] modest support, as they now have our respect." [...]
1 only want to say that we do not want your support. We do not need it, we do not seek it. We have our resources, modest, true, but they are ours.
Until now we are happy not to owe any political organization, national or international, anything. The support which we seek and need, is that of nationa and international civil society, their peacetul and civic mobilizations is what we await. Of weapons and soldiers, we have enough. As for military actions, we have the capacity we have and this is enough. What we seek, what we need and want is that all those people without a party and organization make agreements about what they want and do not want and become organized in order to achieve it (preferably through civil and peaceful means), not to take power, but to exercise it. I know you will say this is utopian and unorthodox, but this is the way of the Zapatistas. Too bad. Go on with your path and let us follow ours. Do not save or rescue us. No matter our fate, we want it to be ours. Do not worry about us.
We will not attack you. We have not fallen into the game of the dominant power which promotes the confrontation between the "good" and the bad guerrilla. You are not our enemy nor will we be yours. We also do not view us as "rivals in the direction of the struggle in Mexico." L...]
We do not agree with any of the pejorative labels which they have given you (and which yesterday they gave to us. To make those labels useless and inapplicable, cost us a great deal. Besides death, it cost us a great deal of work and political patience. We did not win our legitimacy with our weapons; we won it with long years of political labor with those who are now our leaders: the indigenous communities, and with the dialogue (which we have sought even at the risk of our own security, autonomy and independence) with national and international civil society.
This is what I meant when I said that the EPR had to win its legitimacy in the eyes of the people of Mexico. I did not say this to deny it to you, butto point out that it is not the political leaders (even when they are guerrillas) which give legitimacy to a movement, nor the declarations of bureaucrats. It is laughable that yesterday they ran over each other to call us terrorists" without a social base and product of a "foreign" implantation of elements of radica university groups with a 70's ideology. Now these same people run over themselves to say that you are the "terrorists" and the EZLN has an "authentic social base").
However, it is useful to point out and repeat, that we are different. And the difference is not what you and others have insisted upon, that you do not dialoque with the government, that you do struggle tol power [...] while we do "dialogue" (attention; we do this not only with the government but in a much larger sense with national and international civic society); and we do not struggle for power [...] The difference between us is that our political proposals are diametrically different and this is evident in the discourse and the practice of the two organizations
[...]As I write this letter, I hear the news about your military actions and propaganda actions in Guerrero, Oaxaca and the state of Mexico. All can say is that these actions appear to unite the element of surprise and sensation, and they have demonstrated once again, that this government constructs virtual realities around the declarations of its bureaucrats and not their actions. Nevertheless, the propaganda action in Chiapas appears, at best, useless and foolish and, at worst, provocative in the worst sense. This actions occurs towards the end of our consultations and jeopardized the lives and liberty of the indigenous leaders who, in these days, were gathering the opinions of the communities. Did you not know we were in the midst of this process?
Why carry out a propaganda action in Chiapas if you had already demonstrated your capacity to move in other parts of Mexico? Was this to prove that you also have sympathizers in the zones where the EZLN is found? Have you fallen into the trap of the "rivalries" promoted by the government? Meanwhile, the cost of these actions will not be paid by your people, but by the Zapatista indigenous communities (who, I will remind you, have undergone almost a thousand days resisting with their armed rebellion and their poetry).
The federal army has increased its military pressure on the Zapatista communities and is installing itself now in garrisons in the northern part of the state. The government "argues" that it is not vio lating the spirit of the law for the dialogue, but that its military operations are "targeting the EPR"...]
You have declared that you do not wish to "interfere" in the dialogue of the EZLN. You have already done so and you knew it. why do you say you will not "interfere in the dialogue"? We do not deny you your actions, we only ask that you be accountable
The remaining consequences of your operations remain to be seen. It is to be expected that they will launch a strong campaign accusing you of "terrorism", "delinquency" and the other etceteras which already fill the mouths of bureaucrats and corporate leaders. The government will presumably follow its line of "good guerrilla versus bad guerrilla" and you will be compared to us (a comparison which will be used to tavor us and harm you. It is also to be expected that the government will narden its position against us, and will decide for a "military solution." The scenario in public opinion is almost ready and we have no illusions about their will to negotiate [...]
I wish you good health, and a good barricade for what awaits you. * Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos La Jornada, September 4th 1996