By Peter Gellert
MEXICO CITY — The peace process in the conflict-ridden southern state of Chiapas suffered a major setback over the weekend of January 11-12. In response to President Ernesto Zedillo's modifications to a bill on indigenous rights drafted and submitted by the legislative peace commission, the COCOPA, the Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN) rejected the government counter-proposal.
The rebels had indicated support for the COCOPA proposal on constitutional reforms, sparking widespread hopes that peace might soon be at hand. All political parties represented in Congress — including the ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) — participate in the COCOPA, and its proposal on indigenous rights was adopted by consensus.
The rebels and the government are now accusing each other of abandoning agreements reached last February, making it a little difficult for the public to grasp exactly what's at stake.
Beneath the differences in legal terminology between the two texts, there are divergent conceptions of autonomy, the primary Indian demand.
The government charges that the Zapatistas' concept of autonomy would lead to the Balkanisation of Mexico. Government negotiator Marco Antonio Bernal said the Zapatistas were "seeking a separate territory and autonomous justice and political systems. This is not viable because the government has the obligation to guarantee the equality of all Mexicans under the law, including Indians, and to ensure national sovereignty."
In Zedillo's counter-proposal, initial COCOPA clauses on the rights of indigenous communities to use their own judicial norms and to elect municipal authorities through mass assemblies are subordinated to the existing legal framework or otherwise watered down.
Rebel Subcomandante Marcos, in characterising the government counter-proposal as racist, ethnocentric, discriminatory and therefore unacceptable, claims it would negate the capacity of indigenous peoples to implement self-government, subordinate Indian norms of justice to existing legal tribunals and maintain the political status quo.
EZLN adviser Juan Cristian Gutierrez told 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ Weekly: "The government's counter-proposal ... limits autonomy in every respect. For example, while the COCOPA proposal says indigenous communities should determine their own property forms, Zedillo's text places the question in the framework of the constitution — that is, private property."
All attention is now centred on the COCOPA, which has still not clarified its position on Zedillo's modifications to its proposal or the Zapatistas' rejection of the changes. The question is whether the COCOPA will stick to its initial proposal and submit to Congress the bill as it was originally drafted.
Given the tradition of iron discipline in the PRI's parliamentary caucus, the COCOPA as a whole challenging the president is unlikely.
The military situation is quiet at present. The rebels say the government's counter-proposal again casts the shadow of war over Chiapas. Interior Ministry spokesperson Dionisio Perez said, however, that for the time being there are no plans for a military offensive in Chiapas and that President Zedillo is completely open to a dialogue.
Civilian supporters of the Zapatista rebels are planning nationwide activities and demonstrations in support of the original COCOPA proposal.