Zapatistas winning the Mexican media war

COURTESY NEWSMAKERS The Zapatistas, fighting 'a war of ideas and images rather than bullets and guns.'

When I spent spring break as a human rights observer in Chiapas, Mexico, three years ago, I witnessed the poverty of the indigenous rebels who called themselves Zapatistas, and I learned of their suffering under the oppressive occupation by the Mexican military. But what struck me most was how the real battles between the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) and the Mexican government were fought not by peasant and soldier, but in the national and international media. The seven-year-old struggle continues to be a war of the information age, and over the past few weeks the intellectual conflict has been escalating.

Ever since the EZLN captured the media's attention by force for four days in 1994, their war has been one of ideas and images rather than bullets and guns. From what I observed, the rebels could otherwise never have sustained their cause. While most are indigenous peasants too poor to buy beans, let alone guns, they face heavy coercive repression from the state and are constantly terrorized by human rights abuses tactically conducted below the radar of corporate media. Upon my arrival, I discovered that my fellow observers and I were the Zapatistas' most potent defense; our role was to represent the eyes of the world, making the Mexican military too self-conscious to hurt people. It worked. Despite the government's obvious desire to stifle the resistance, it couldn't withstand being portrayed by the media as the ruthless oppressor of poor Indians.

Ironically, even though the only guns I ever saw in Chiapas were carried by Mexican soldiers, the government has been imploring the Zapatistas more and more lately to "lay down their arms," and Vicente Fox, Mexico's new president, has even taken momentous steps towards establishing "peace talks." Considering that the EZLN hasn't used violence in seven years, these requests show the power of the Zapatistas' non-military threat: the control of imagery, discourse, and ideology. Their poetic arsenal holds tremendous resonance with the hearts of the people, while their demands for an end to 500 years of exploitation and their challenges to destructive neoliberal policies strike fear into the hearts of the administration's publicists. The government's pleas for "peace" are pleas for silence.

This week, expectations for a resolution have been at their highest point in years. Immediately following his inauguration last December, Fox began to plead for peace in Chiapas and fulfill one of the EZLN's conditions for returning to talks by submitting a bill for the constitutional protection of Indian rights and culture. And after rejecting Fox's offer for a meeting before the passage of the bill, in February the EZLN left its secret headquarters and made an unprecedented, high-profile march to Mexico City. Touring through 12 states, flanked by popular support and greeted by an huge rally in the Capital, the Zapatistas skillfully built up public expectations for Fox's actions to culminate in peace. On Wed., Mar. 27, in a turn of events that shocked Mexico, the EZLN addressed Congress in support of Fox's bill.

Right now, at the climax of the Zapatistas' momentous visit, Fox is vocally begging the EZLN for cooperation, while the EZLN is fighting off his attempts. As part of his carefully constructed image as democratizador, Fox has been banking on the peace process as a way to develop his economic plans. Still, the Zapatistas' radical demands clash with the neoliberal politics of Fox's party, the National Action Party (PAN). And as if to enhance the irony, the party most set against the indigenous rights bill has been the PAN. The PAN's obstinacy is evidence that Fox isn't just a hapless indigenous advocate constrained by lawmakers but rather a fork-tongued politician edging for the dilution of his own bill. In spite of his public pleas, Fox has so far remained loyal to corporate interests that balk at any new social rights—rights that might inhibit free market takeover and, worse yet, put ideas in the heads of the many activists and oppressed groups rallied behind the Zapatistas.

As one of those activists, I can tell from many miles away that the PAN is losing territory in this publicity war. Thanks to the EZLN's strategic media mobilization, even if the bill fails, the Zapatistas' popular support—and their message of multilateral resistance—will only gain force. The key for the EZLN is to prevent the sealing of an agreement that bears the name "indigenous rights" and gains Fox publicity points, but that doesn't deliver freedom and equality to the people of Chiapas. Although I was worried when Fox started making his proposals, the Zapatistas' steady refusal to meet directly with Fox has convinced me that they'll settle for nothing less than concrete social change.

Three years after my trip, I'm even more aware of how dangerous the wrong spin in the news can be for the struggle in Chiapas. I also know that the Zapatistas are too accustomed to being the casualties of corporate media to let Fox get away with virtual concessions. They'd probably pick up real guns again before they'd let Fox churn them through his populist publicity machine.

Back to Opinion...