On Mon., Mar. 23, Connecticut College hosted Pablo Obando and Stuart Schussler, two representatives from the non-profit organization, Fray Bartolomé de las Casas Human Rights Center—Frayba, for short. Frayba is affiliated with the Mexico Solidarity Network, an organization that promotes social change in Mexico and facilitates students’ involvement in solidarity activism.
Frayba’s center has been located in Chiapas, the southernmost state in Mexico, since 1989. Obando explained that aside from being Mexico’s southernmost state, Chiapas is also its poorest state—but in a financial sense alone. He noted that due to the presence of indigenous tribes including the Tzotzil, Tzeltal, Chol, Tojolabal and Zoque peoples, Chiapas is culturally rich. According to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), this richness can potentially be used to further develop the area. As a result, conflict has arisen because, in the name of “development,” the Mexican government ignores the “indigenous right to consent.” Obando explained that this means that permission must be given before taking an indigenous group’s land, resources or freedom. Therefore, development without permission is a violation of basic human rights.
Frayba’s role is to get involved when indigenous groups’ rights are violated. For the cases—between eight hundred and one thousand per year— That Frayba receives, members of the non-profit assess the human rights infringements in question and then investigate and document qualifying cases. The purpose of documentation is simple yet powerful; when atrocities are exposed, they become real. Once these cases become real, it becomes easier to promote awareness and prevent future violations.
In order to provide deeper context for his talk, Obando discussed several atrocities that have been documented by Frayba. He prefaced these accounts, however, with the assertion that his intent was not to scare the audience nor to instill pity for Mexico’s indigenous people. Rather than focus on the negative, Obando challenged listeners to concentrate on the ability to organize, demonstrated by the people of Chiapas, and to view the situation with hope. “Come to Mexico and share hope with us,” he said.
Obando quickly condemned Mexican former president Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de León, who approved a counter-insurgence plan that killed 45 and injured 26 people in the Acteal Massacre at a refugee camp called Las Abejas, or “the bees.” This massacre was only one of many attacks by Ponce de León, and since his presidency Mexico’s “low-intensity war” has continued to be perpetuated, while not by officially recognized paramilitary, but by civilian groups working to oppress the people of Chiapas. Frayba documented a recent case in August of 2014, when one of such groups eliminated Caracól de la Realidad, a unit of the Zapatista movement that promoted autonomy.
Chiapas wants autonomy, Obando explained, but the Mexican government aims to suppress the movement. Therefore, Obando posed the question: “What does autonomy mean? Why is it so dangerous?”
Because the Mexican government wants to maintain its control over Chiapas, the low-intensity war tactics discussed were intended to force divisions in the people of Chiapas, thus making it more difficult for them to unite and gain independence. The fact that the majority of Americans hear so little about this situation in the United States promotes the silence that the Mexican government wants. In the eyes of the corrupt government, American media is doing its job. On the role of the media in addressing this conflict, Obando said, “They want us to associate a million different things with fear. And they want Mexico to be one of them.”
With this statement, Obando reminded the audience of the stigma that exists in the United States against Mexico and the general fear of any conflict within the region. Obando brought up how easily people distance themselves from world conflict and oppression. In reference to Chiapas’s dead and disappeared people, he stated: “They are not only ours.”
Obando’s aim was not to guilt the audience, however, but rather to reinforce the importance of solidarity on a global scale. To the audience, he said, “Please don’t ask me ‘how can we help you?’” reminding them that Frayba’s purpose was not to seek charity, but rather solidarity. The non-profit’s power stems from the notion that with solidarity, “We can make the same noise in 30 different countries.”
Because Frayba is a non-profit organization, it relies largely on volunteer work. Volunteers either serve as employees at the center in Chiapas or complete 15 day sessions as observers stationed in various neighborhoods whose purpose is to bear witness to human rights violations, should they occur. Obando explained that although work as an observer sounds risky, it is actually extremely safe. Because the Mexican authorities want to keep their practices from being exposed, they stop committing atrocities when observers are present. Therefore, observers protect themselves and Chiapas’s civilians simply by being there.
In an interview after the talk, Obando explained that the majority of observers come from Europe. “Hardly any come from the United States,” he said, “We need more.”
Stuart Schussler, whose role in the talk was mainly to provide occasional interpretation and clarification, provided one example of a success story for American involvement with Frayba. When asked how he got involved with Frayba and Mexico Solidarity Network, Schussler responded, “The short answer is that I signed a mailing list at a talk like this.”
Schussler elaborated by admitting that he, like many students here, had been raised in a relatively sheltered American suburb and was “pretty oblivious” until he got to college and involved himself with solidarity activism. “Once you start seeing the truth about how the world works,” he said, “you have to do something about it.”
Obando had two closing thoughts to leave with Conn’s student body with. First, he stated that those in the U.S. need to learn more about occurrences in Mexico and realize that the United States is part of the problem, but with a little effort, it can become part of the solution. As his final statement, he said: “If we have a call for solidarity, respond.”•
