State: Mexico - Oaxaca

Protesters join hands at the Women's March on November 19
in Oaxaca City


Mexican Government Crushes Resistance in Oaxaca


This week incoming Mexican President Felipe Calderon was sworn in amidst turmoil in the Mexican Congress as members of opposition party tried to block his inauguration. The leader of the opposition PRD party, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, lost in the July 2 election but continues to assert that the election was fraudulent despite many fairly objective reports to the contrary from groups inside and outside of Mexico. Lopez Obrador held his own shadow inauguration a few days before Calderon. All of this chaos in the Mexican government is representative of the fractured state of Mexican society. Antipathy runs deep between different regions of the country, between different socio-economic classes, and between different racial/ethnic groups. Compounding the difficulties is that many of these divides lie along the same lines. These troubles are no more apparent than in the southern state of Oaxaca.

Oaxaca has long been known as a top tourist destination. It combines a rich indigenous culture with beautiful geography. Americans and Europeans poured in, hoping for a taste of "authentic" Mexico. But this romantic image of Oaxaca covered over a much harsher political reality. The state's residents are very poor compared with other regions of Mexico. There is a small group of powerful Oaxacans who control most of the wealth and benefit most from the tourism. The poor, largely indigenous (having Zapotec or Mixtec heritage) population is underrepresented and underemployed. The state government is ruled by the old dictatorial PRI party and Governor Ulises Ruiz.

In May 2006 the Oaxaca section of the national teachers' union (SNTE) began a strike demanding that their paltry salaries be increased. This strike, small at first, became a lightning rod for popular discontent with the poor economic situation and especially with Governor Ruiz. His re-election was widely considered fraudulent. He attempted to end the strike by sending in state police to evict the strikers from the central Zocalo plaza. Many student and other union protesters responded by joining the teachers and fighting off the state police. Then together they seized most of Oaxaca City under the banner of the Popular Assembly of the People of Oaxaca (APPO).

This was unacceptable to both Governor Ruiz and former President Fox. They moved, separately, to send troops into the city. Fox sends in the Federal Police (PFP), who manage to retake the city by the end of October. They are aided by Oaxacan police and paramilitary groups operating in plainclothes. This is accomplished through armed intimidation and violent repression of protesters. There were widespread accusations of human rights abuses by the PFP and the other agents of repression. Many opposition members have "disappeared", some reputed to be held in prisons near Mexico City. While not all of these reports can be confirmed, there have been well-documented human rights abuses in the past by the Mexican government in Oaxaca as well as its neighbor state Chiapas where the Zapatista rebellion continues. This past abuse lends a great deal of weight to the many claims of current abuse.

The events in Oaxaca have great significance for Mexico, but also shed some light on the political situation in the Americas as a whole. The Calderon administration must find a way to deal with the growing wealth disparity in Mexico, otherwise it will most certainly face both more uprisings like the one in Oaxaca and additional support for the Zapatistas. The regional and economic divide between the south and the more affluent north must also be addressed. There is certainly a potential for government opponents in the south to ally with the growing leftist political shift in South America. Addressing this divide will also be important for the U.S.-Mexican relationship, as many immigrants to the U.S. come from the southern states. Improving the economic situation there will be important to solving immigration issues between the two countries.

In our opinion, the Oaxacan uprising reflects a growing dissatisfaction with the neoliberal economic policies promoted by the U.S. and its allies, most notably the free trade agreements NAFTA and CAFTA. Mexico has no choice but to interact with the U.S. But the countries which to not share a border seem to be moving as far as they can from the U.S., short of physically leaving the continent. Recent elections in Nicaragua, Ecuador, Bolivia, Brazil, and Chile have brought to power leaders who share two major characteristics. They are all leftists who have moderated their socialist policies to please moderate elements in their countries. They are also all moving towards eliminating permanent economic and political links with the U.S. The wide success of all candidates who possess these characteristics shows the popular support throughout Central and South America for this new pragmatic political doctrine. It is the rejection of the Monroe Doctrine by the very people it is supposed to be protecting. The people of Central and South America see self-reliance as the only way forward - no more dependence on the U.S. or Russia. Whether these new leaders will be able to sustain economic growth and heal ethnic divides within their countries remains to be seen.