Massacre In Peru Leads To Roll-Back Of Free Trade "Development" Laws

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sun Jun 14, 2009 at 21:30


A massacre of indigenous protesters in Peru last weekend has resulted in the temporary roll-back of development laws that were passed without proper consultation under international law.  They were part of a package of laws issued to comply with a free trade agreement with the US.  This is just the tip of the iceberg of the overseas impacts of free trade laws that we routinely hear nothing about.

Peaceful protesters were attacked by police, who killed at least 22 of them, according to their latest count--police claimed just nine.  Twenty-three police were killed in return.  Democracy Now! reported on the massacre on Tuesday (excerpts on the flip), and Al Jazeera filed this report:

More about the massacre itself, and the legislative response on the flip.

Paul Rosenberg :: Massacre In Peru Leads To Roll-Back Of Free Trade "Development" Laws
Democracy Now! reported on the massacre itself, as well as the background of the development laws that threaten the indigenous community.  Here is the beginning of their report:

AMY GOODMAN: Dozens of people are estimated to have been killed in clashes between police and indigenous activists protesting oil and mining projects in the northern Peruvian Amazonian province of Bagua. Peruvian authorities have declared a military curfew. Troops are patrolling towns in the Amazon jungle. Authorities say up to twenty-two policemen have been killed, and two remain missing. The indigenous community says at least forty people, including three children, were killed by the police this weekend.

On Friday morning, some 600 Peruvian riot police and helicopters attacked a peaceful indigenous blockade outside of Bagua, killing twenty-five and injuring more than 150. Eyewitness accounts indicate the police fired live ammunition and tear gas into the crowd. The images our TV viewers are watching are from an on-the-ground eyewitness to the attack. Our radio listeners can see these images on our website, democracynow.org.

Alberto Pizango, the leader of the national indigenous organization, the Peruvian Jungle Interethnic Development Association, or AIDESEP, accused the government of President Alan Garcia of ordering the, quote, "genocide" of the indigenous communities.

    ALBERTO PIZANGO: [translated] Our brothers are cornered. I want to put the responsibility on the government. We are going to put the responsibility on Alan Garcia's government for ordering this genocide. This is genocide.

AMY GOODMAN: Pizango is now in hiding after a judge ordered his arrest Saturday on charges of sedition and for allegedly inciting violence.

Authorities say, following Friday's attack on the indigenous protesters, dozens of policemen were held hostage and several murdered. An injured policeman, Fredegundo Vasquez, said he saw indigenous activists torturing and killing policemen with their spears.

    FREDEGUNDO VASQUEZ: [translated] I saw them kill people right in front of me. And they began to hit the rest of us with spears. It's disgraceful. They are just terrible. They said that their brothers died, so we had to die, too.

AMY GOODMAN: On Sunday, Peruvian President Alan Garcia defended the police actions and lashed out against the deaths of the policemen. He blamed, quote, "foreign forces" for the violence and spoke of a, quote, "conspiracy" to stop his government from exploiting natural resources.

    PRESIDENT ALAN GARCIA: [translated] These death mongers would like the world to denounce hundreds of natives being killed. But what has been found are dozens of police with their throats slit. That's the truth when one talks of the facts of these deaths. And you might ask why they are our police deaths, if they are the one who are armed. The explanation for all of this, you come to understand, is a will for dialogue on the part of these humble policemen, who had no desire to fire their weapons.

AMY GOODMAN: Peruvian President Alan Garcia defending the police actions against indigenous protesters last week. Over the weekend, Garcia, a free trade advocate, said 40,000 natives did not have the right to tell 28 million Peruvians not to come to their lands. Anyone who did so, he warned, would lead Peru into, quote, "irrationality and a backwards primitive state."

Since April, indigenous groups have opposed new laws that would allow an unprecedented wave of logging, oil drilling, mining and agriculture in the Amazon rainforest by blocking roads, waterways and oil pipelines. President Garcia's government passed these laws under "fast track" authority he had received from the Peruvian congress to facilitate implementation of the US-Peru Free Trade Agreement.

Friday's clashes followed a governmental decision to reject congressional attempts to overturn some of the laws.

Independent journalist Henry Pillares interviewed indigenous leader Alberto Pizango last month for the group Amazon Watch.

    ALBERTO PIZANGO: [translated] They've said that we indigenous peoples are against the system, but, no, we want development, but from our perspective, development that adheres to legal conventions, such as the United Nations International Labour Organization's Convention 169, that says we, the indigenous peoples, have to be consulted. The government has not consulted us. Not only am I being persecuted, but I feel that my life is in danger, because I am defending the rights of the peoples, the legitimate rights that the indigenous people have. I feel I am being persecuted, and the situation can get much worse with my criminal prosecution.

LatinAmericanPress.org, is the product of Comunicaciones Aliadas, which describes itself as a non-profit based in Lima, with a focus on rights. Their story, Battle for the Amazon still on by Ramiro Escobar, says, in part:

Peruvian lawmakers voted to suspend two legislative decrees that sought to open up Peru´s Amazon Basin to large investment projects, sparking more than two months´ of protests by indigenous groups in the country´s jungle.

Despite this vote, which came in the wake of deadly clashes between protesters and the police in northern Peru that left dozens killed, a true dialogue with the government is still blocked and protests are continuing.

Peru´s unicameral legislature voted with 57 votes in favor - by the ruling Aprista Party, the center-right National Unity and another bloc of supporters of jailed ex-President Alberto Fujimori - and 47 against. Nationalist and left-leaning groups who voted against the measure said the decrees should have been completely revoked, not just suspended.

The laws, part of a package of decrees issued by President Alan García, in order to implement the free trade agreement with the United States, infuriated the indigenous groups of Peru´s Amazon Basin. It was the second time in less than a year that following their demonstrations, however, the Congress voted to revoke or suspend García´s decrees to draw investment to their homeland.

The package of nine decrees seeks to increase the area of lands used for farming and limit indigenous peoples´ access to these lands, as well as easing requirements for exploitation of natural resources such as minerals and hydrocarbons under the soil. Under Peruvian law, citizens do not own subsoil resources.

Political failure

The two most controversial of the decrees, particularly 1090, the so-called "Forest Law," sparked massive demonstrations, as indigenous groups in the Amazon Basin complained that it will limit their access to the forests. The other decree, 1064, they say violates communal land rights, by opening up these areas to farming.

These are issues that almost never appear in political debates in the United States, yet they are central to the politics of the countries we trade with.  After hearing the initial report on Democracy Now! I felt it would be helpful to bring some of the background directly to Open Left in the words of those much closer to the story than I myself am.  I wanted to preserve some feeling of their perspective being much closer to the story.  Although this eruption into mass violence is not so common, violence on a personal level is virtually a routine part of "development" under free trade agreements throughout Latin America and much of the rest of the Third World.  This is the sort of thing that happens all the time.


Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
As well as those who (4.00 / 2)
supported it, like the president and secretary of state (they weren't in DC for the vote.)

[ Parent ]
Likewise, after Iran (4.00 / 3)
the hardliners world-wide will see that they can massacre, torture, and disappear pro-democracy movements and still have a seat at the table with Obama.

He may even congratulate them on a "robust debate".

Coda: Many of the self-styled "left" respond by saying Obama could take no positive action to stop the Iranian hardliners, therefor criticism is unwarranted.

Was I saying he should positively interfere with bombs, etc.?

I would be happy if the crumb of non-interference was thrown my way. In other words, I would be happier if Obama did not publicly wash his hands of the pro-democracy movement.

But he did with his "robust debate" we will negotiate with "whoever wins" bullshit.

What he ought to do is make firm statements about the illegitimacy of governments that do not protect the rights of speech, press, freedom, and assembly. He should say that while we refrain from using war for regime change, we will do every lesser thing to assist freedom fighters world wide.

We learn more every day about which people would do what if fascists attempted to govern openly in America.

I've encountered many on the "left" in the past few days who would do nothing more than criticize those at the barricades for believing in "conspiracy theories".


There's no evidence "those at the barricades" believe in your theories (0.00 / 0)
Judging from the TV pictures and the reporting, they simply want honest elections, more democracy, and reforms in general.

Imho it's a piece of impudence that you exploit the brave Iranian protestors as support for your theory. And those of us who hesitate in calling this a fascist coup d'etat, because there's no hard evidence for accusing Ahmadinejad to be more of a fascist than Moussavi and Rafsandjani, have already explained why we think western interference in the Iran situation isn't helpful at this point.

So, don't try to paint us as supporters of violent regime change. Virtually everyone here has a strong record of pointing out dangerous tendencies when there were real facts which required to raise an alarm!  

Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested, we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back, nor did we falter


[ Parent ]
Thanks for showing the other side of the free trade agreements, Paul! (4.00 / 1)
Much too often, the critics of the FTAs make it look as though only the US suffers from this trade, and if the contract partner nations get a boost of tens of thousands of outsourced jobs, at the expense of US workers. But the fact is, the US ALWAYS pays a lot of care to advance its own "interests" with those agreements, and often other nations are induced to sign contracts whose results are not positive for their people. Well, imho the main problem with the FTAs is that they put an almost exclusive focus on the demands of industry and investors, and not on those of the people. It's not free trade in general, but the dominance of capital interests that has to be fought. And it's not other nations who are the enemy, but selfish capitalists who are seeking decadent rates of profit at a time when many hard working people have problems in even making a living.

Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested, we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back, nor did we falter

Good news in Peru (4.00 / 1)
The government realizes that the situation has gotten completely out of hand.  The curfew in Bagua will be lifted and the gov't is talking about renegotiating both decrees:
http://www.elcomercio.com.pe/n...

That said, this is still a complicated subject since these lands are very sparsely inhabited, but represent a very high potential for development.  I am 100% in favor of giving the residents voice and dealing fairly (which the gov't has not done to this point), but it is important to remember that when vast swaths of territory are up for development it should be the Democratic process that resolves these disputes (think ANWR).  Peru will have new Presidential elections in 2011 and there are a number of competing ideologies that will have a chance to win 50% or make the run-off election, including an Evo-style candidate, Fujimori's daughter, a conservative/urban candidate and possibly the ex-President Toledo among others...


Donate to Open Left









QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.


blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search