
FROM AN ANTI-AUTHORITARIAN PERSPECTIVE:
INTERVIEW WITH INSURGENT SUBCOMMANDER MARCOS OF
THE ZAPATISTA NATIONAL LIBERATION ARMY (EZLN)
[Early April]
By Bill Weinberg

What kind of support do you need from your
sympathizers in the United States? What should we
be doing?

Well, we have a lot of necessities here because
the federal army has surrounded us. For our
troops, that is not a problem, but the civilian
population here is suffering a lot. They lack
necessities like food, clothes, medicine. Even the
children. Our people, the civilian people here,
cannot go to the city to buy such necessities,
because the federal army can take them prisoner
and "disappear" them. So our people are under very
strong conditions of war, even if it is not one of
bullets and guns now, but the "dirty war" that the
government is making against us. The only chance
that we have is support from other people, from
Mexico, and from Mexicans in other parts of the
world. I mean, we know that in the States there
are a lot of people whose families are Mexican
Indian people ...

But what about anglos and other folks who aren't
Mexican or Indian who support the struggle? What
can we do?

We have a lot of necessities. The first concerns
the federal government--the government of Salinas.
They have made a big lie about our country. They
say that our country is free, without serious
economic or social problems, a good partner for
the NAFTA. His government is making a big
publicity campaign for other people in other parts
of the world, principally the Unites States. So it
is imperative for us that the world know that
Mexican people, especially Indian people, are not
in the life condition that Salinas says--as you
can see in this trip that you have made here. We
need people in the Unites States to create
counter-propaganda to that of the Mexican federal
government, and get out the truth, against the lie
of Salinas.

Salinas wants to isolate our struggle, contain it
to only one part of Mexico, and only one part of
Chiapas. He says that what we are fighting for are
not concerns elsewhere in the country. But it is a
lie again. He made an agreement with Canada and
the Unites States in NAFTA. When he shook hands on
this agreement, he was playing with the lives of a
lot of Indian people. You cannot shake hands on an
agreement like that without staining your hands
with blood.

But the federal government is very sophisticated
with its publicity. If the truth is known in all
parts of the world, especially the United States,
it would be a great help to us. That is the first
thing.

There is another kind of help. You can see that
here there are many children without anything--
without food, without healthcare, without
education, without good houses. So organizations
that help the poor in other parts of the world
should notice us. Our movement is a true movement.
There are no strangers or foreigners behind us. We
are all Mexicans, and the big majority of our army
are Indian people. We think the government is
Lying to us with their promises to solve our
problems. We don't trust anymore in this
government. But our needs remain, and maybe we
have to rely on people in other parts of the world
to help us. I repeat, our troops are surrounded,
and the civilian population here needs such
necessities as food and clothes...

Who can we work with here in Mexico to get you
donations?

One way is through the non-governmental
organizations here in Mexico, like the Red Cross,
the non-governmental human rights groups, the
Diocese of Bishop Samuel Ruiz. Or come here
yourselves, and we will receive this help with
plenty of thanks.

If we can get it through the army checkpoints ...

Well, the federal army doesn't interfere with
American people, because they are afraid of the
American government.

Some of your early statements back in the first
days of the uprising in January spoke about
fighting for socialism, and marching on Mexico
City. Almost immediately, your rhetoric changed to
what it is now--demands for democracy and
indigenous autonomy. So what prompted the change?
And when you talk about "socialism", what do you
mean? What kind of socialism? Socialism like in
Cuba?

The directorate of our army has never spoken about
Cuban or Soviet socialism. We have always spoken
about the basic rights of the human. Education,
housing, health, food, land, good pay for our
work, democracy, liberty. Some people may call
this socialism. But it doesn't matter what name
you give these demands. In Mexico there is no
democracy. So it doesn't matter what you think,
,or what your political goal is. Because only the
political goal of the government party wins--
always wins.

We say, make a democratic space, make enough
liberty so that you can explain your ideas. It
doesn't matter what kind of ideas--communism or
socialism or capitalism or lo que quiere, whatever
you want. With democracy and liberty, you can tell
the people, "I want this, follow me." And if the
majority follow you, you will win. But this
doesn't exist. Now, it doesn't matter if people
follow you, what kind of government you want, or
your political ideas. The people doesn't matter
for the government. It is always the government's
political ideas and economic projects which are
imposed on the people. So we don't want any more
of this. We want to find ways to resolve our own
problems. When there is democracy, we can decide
which leaders were agree with--and by "we", I mean
the people, not the Zapatista Army.

The federal government does not represent us. We
want to follow our own Mexican way to democracy
and liberty and justice.

And what about socialism?

The kind of life we want--life with good food,
good land, good health, good education, good work,
democracy, independence, justice and peace--if you
want to call it socialism, OK, call it that. But
we are not a clich=E9' of Cuban socialism, or
Castrismo or Sendero Luminoso. If you want to call
it Mexican socialism or the Mexican way to
liberty, that's a good name for it.

Have you been influenced by anarchism at all, {especially Magonismo, the
Mexican anarchist tradition?

Basically, all of our thoughts about the workers
and campesinos and the revolution are taken from
Flores Mag=F3n, Francisco Villa, Emiliano Zapata.
Their ideas about the farm workers, the workers in
the cities, the hopes of liberty, are our
inspiration for this movement.

You've said that you don't want any more
ecological reserves for the Lacandon Selva. How do
you envision protecting what remains of Mexico's
last rainforest?

Well, look. We don't agree with this preoccupation
with the trees over the death of our people. We
say, we want trees. We want the mountains. But we
also want a dignified life for our people. So we
say, if the government makes a good plan and the
people have what they need, they will not have to
attack the trees and mountains. The government
just declares by decree that there will be no more
cutting of trees.

We say, we don't want to cut the trees. Because
the mountain is very important for Indian people.
It is a part of their tradition and their history.
So we agree, we say, "No, there should be no more
cutting of trees--but give me the life conditions
for another way, so I will no longer have the
necessity to cut the trees. I will take good care
of this mountain, I will take good care of these
trees, and I will take care for the future of my
child, from one generation to another generation.
But now my people have no way to live other than
to cut trees and burn them. That is the only way
we can find land." I mean here there are no
tractors, here there is no machinery; there is
nothing for the Indian people. There is no option
but to cut the trees, burn them, and put the seed
in the land. It doesn't matter how the land is
taken when you are hungry.

The average production here from one hectare is
less than half what it is in other parts of the
country. In other parts of the country, its about
eight tons per hectare. Here in the Selva
Lacandona the average is about a half-ton per
hectare. There is no justice for us. And our land,
you can see, with good work, and some technology,
could produce.

What about land redistribution? What about taking
land away from the ganaderos [ranchers] and fincas
[plantations], and giving it to the campesinos?

Yes. This is the second way to make a better life
for our peasants. I mean, this land was originally
for the Indian people. The white people, the big
farmers and ranchers, imposed their force over the
Indian people and pushed them up into the
mountains. You can see that here the good land is
on the fincas.--the plains, the valleys. The
Indians have the rocky lands in the mountains. But
the Indian sees the good land below and says,
"Originally, this was my land, so I have the right
to recover it."

The big farmer says, "they have stolen my land,
they have stolen my cattle." But my people say,
"before you were even born, my grandparents made
their life here."

  So, our lands cannot produce with this
injustice. We need redistribution of the land. But
that is not all we need.

=BFQue m=E1s?

We need roads, water, schools, hospitals,
technology--like tractors, like planes. So even if
the land is producing, the next question is the
price. You can grow a good crop of coffee, but
when you take it to the city, the coyote, the
intermediary, thinks, "you don't speak Spanish, so
I can lie to you and cheat you." You can bring in
one hundred pounds of coffee and he will say it is
only fifty. He will say that the quality isn't
good, and he can only pay you half price. And you
have to walk four or five days from your village
to get to the city, so you just take the money.
You can't bear the thought of carrying your
hundred pounds of coffee back to the village.

So the Indian people face very complex structures
of exploitation. I've implicated the federal
government, the big farmers, the coyotes, the
municipal governments, the police, the army. Over
all these there are a lot of people who are living
with the blood of Indian people. People don't
understand this in other countries. They think
that Mexico is Acapulco, it's Cancun, it's Puerto
Vallarta, Guadalajara, Monterrey, Mexico City.
They think that the Indians just make pretty
clothes, they are curiosities. They cannot even
imagine that these people are dying.

There's been speculation that helicopters which
were donated to Mexico by the United States for
the War on Drugs have been used against the
civilian population here in Chiapas. Do see the
War on Drugs as a significant factor in the
militarization of Mexico and Indian lands?

There's no speculation. The people saw the
choppers that said PGR [the Mexican Attorney
General's office], and we know the American
government gives the PGR choppers to fight against
drug dealers. But everybody knows that there are
no drugs in our territory. The DEA knows it. The
federal army knows it. The PGR knows it. All they
have to do is look at their maps and their
satellite pictures.

The Indian people who were attacked from these
helicopters with machine guns and bombs--they
don't have anything. If they were trafficking
drugs--well, look at their houses. Where are the
big trucks, the luxury?

A lot of people, even journalists, saw these
choppers fight in San Crist=F3bal, fight in
Ocosingo, fight in Altamirano, fight in Las
Margaritas. We sent a letter to Bill Clinton about
this problem, and we never received an answer. The
choppers are even now in the airport at Tuxtla
Gutierrez, ready to strike again.

Would you support the legalization of drugs as a
means to undercut this kind of militarization?

Well, we must think about this, reflect on it. But
our problems are very urgent. I mean, our problem
is dire survival, and our principal work is in
this direction.

During the 1 980s in Guatemala and El Salvador,
after rebel movements emerged there was terrible
repression. Whole villages were massacred. How do
you hope to avoid such a scenario in Chiapas?

The only way is that our movement becomes
national. If our war gains support all around the
country, then the army can't take one place and
make a total effort against us. If the war is only
here, of course the federal army can put all of
its force against us. But if there are a lot of
guerrillas, or social movements, against the
government, we can divide their forces.

In any case, our people are prepared for
resistance. We are training the civilian people to
resist an attack. But this resistance will cost a
lot. So it would be better if there was a push
against the government, if there was civil
pressure on the government to change direction,
not in their own interests, but in the interests
of the people of Mexico. The political exit would
be better. I hope that it is possible. But if it
is not possible, we will continue the war.

What do you think is to be learned from the
experience of the rebels in Guatemala, who often
let the Indian civil population suffer the worst
of the repression?

Well, we think our principal effort must be
directed towards a national revolutionary movement
that could incorporate a lot of forces. Not only
the forces of-the Zapatista National Liberation
Army. I mean, other political forces, cultural
forces. Our problems are the same problems faced
in other parts of the country. We are learning
about what happened in other parts of Latin
America, in Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua.
When the guerrilla provided the direction for all
the movements, there were a lot of problems of
division, unity became impossible. So we must find
the right flag to incorporate all the ways of
struggle.

Are you optimistic that there can be a peaceful
solution, or do you think that there's going to be
more violence?

We see a lot of signs of violence. We don't see
any signal of peace. We are very skeptical about
the peace process. Some parts of the government
say, "OK, make a deal." But other parts of the
government say "no, the strong hand is better."
The big farmers don't want peace. They just want
to protect their land, and they don't want the
Indians to live in the same state as the white
people. I mean, the big farmers have been educated
to think that they are the aristocracy. They think
the Indian people should only serve the white
people. Equality? They don't want to hear about
it. You are dealing with very reactionary people.
In their minds, it is still centuries ago. So we
are making an effort for peace, but if it is
impossible ...

You're prepared.

We'll fight, of course. We are prepared for a long
war. I'm talking about years and years of war,
throughout the mountains of the southeast of
Mexico.

Do you think there's a threat of US military
intervention?

Whenever we talk to the American media, we say,
"we don't want to attack the White House. We want
to live with dignity." Our demands are the same
demands of the American people--I mean, the
average American people. So why should they want
to fight us?

Because the American government has a whole lot
riding on NAFTA.

But do you want a NAFTA with blood on it? We don't
want a NAFTA written with the blood of Indian
people. If you want a NAFTA, make some kind of
reform to incorporate Indian people. Because
Indian people will not die without a fight. This
is our message to the American people. Let us live
with dignity, understand us. If you understand our
situation, our reasons for fighting, the American
people will not want to go to fight against
Mexican people. We are trusting in this.

# # #

_______________________________________
Fromthe Love and Rage New York News Bureau
Love and Rage is a Revolutionary Anarchist Federation
in Canada, the US and Mexico.  For more information
please write to lnr@blythe.org
For an email subscription to our bimonthly publication
please send $10 to POB 853 Stuyvesant Sta/ NY, NY 10009
_______________________________________


