NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/misc/activism/progress/10300

Text File | 1993-01-24 | 7.3 KB | 155 lines

Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive
Path: sparky!uunet!utcsri!torn!spool.mu.edu!agate!netsys!ukma!mont!pencil.cs.missouri.edu!rich
From: [e-mail] (Rich Winkel)
Subject: Guatemala: Permanent Commission rpt on refugees
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: PACH
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 22:15:48 GMT
Approved: [e-mail]
Lines: 140

/** reg.guatemala: 158.0 **/
** Topic: Permanent Commissions Comunique **
** Written  9:48 pm  Jan 21, 1993 by greview in cdp:reg.guatemala **
                   THE RETURN OF THE REFUGEES
                FOR SOME, FEAR; FOR OTHERS, HOPE

COMMUNIQUE BY THE PERMANENT COMMISSIONS OF THE REFUGEES, CCPP

1. The Permanent Commissions are deeply concerned over the
reactions and positions of government officials and the military
to the return of the refugees.  These reactions and positions
express fear, and are, at the same time, aggressive.  A few days
ago we denounced the duplicity of the government's policy.  On
the one hand, they have a formal, official stance (signing the
Letter of Understanding on the highest level with the UN High
Commission on Refugees, UNHCR, as well as the October 8 Accords
with the Permanent Commissions).  On the other hand, their real
policy has been one of threats, slander, bombings in the region
near the settlement sites for the returnees in Ixcan, increased
militarization in the region for the return, and the intentional
abandonment of the highway linking Coban to Polygon 14.

On January 8, Mr. Sergio Mollinedo, Executive Director of the
Special Commission for Repatriate Assistance, CEAR, made a series
of fallacious, biased statements at a press conference, and even
gave out completely false information on the return.  He accused
the Permanent Commissions of failure to comply with the accords.
He went so far as to state that there are only 30 kilometers from
La Mesilla to Polygon 14 on the Ingenieros route, and that they
could be travelled in two hours. (El Grafico, January 9, p. 6).
He called the route chosen by the Permanent Commissions, which is
the Pan American Highway, the "road of death."  He tried to
blackmail the refugees, threatening to withhold resources (which,
incidentally, come from the international community), unless we
accepted the Ingenieros route.  He, in advance, labelled refugees
returning by another route as "illegals."

Additionally, there are the statements by President Serrano and
General Domingo Garcia Samayoa to the Mediating Body on January
7, that the return of the refugees is considered to be a national
security problem.

2. On account of these untruths, clear threats and pressure, the
Permanent Commissions consider it necessary to clarify once more
the contents, meaning, technical character and purpose of the
Route we set in our Operating Plan, which is both humanitarian
and aimed at national reconciliation, an outgrowth of the October
8 Accords signed jointly with the government of Guatemala.

Due to the flexibility of the Permanent Commissions in making
changes to the Operating Plan originally presented, the manner of
the route we set and officially presented to UNCHR and the
Mediating Body was as follows:

a) The arrival of the refugees' domestic animals and belongings
will be by way of the Ingenieros Route.

b) The arrival of persons whose condition is delicate (pregnant
women, persons of ill health, etc.), will be by air.

c) The main body of the group of returnees going to Ixcan would
enter by way of La Mesilla, travelling entirely on the Pan
American Highway, until reaching the city of Coban.  We selected
this route due to the fact that it has the best Infrastructure
and basic services to handle emergencies, and because we want our
return to the country by this route to fully demonstrate that we
are peaceful civilians, aspiring to contribute to the
construction of peace with social justice in Guatemala.

With the support of the Church and various sectors of the
population in the Verapazes, the returnees would stay for a few
short days in the city of Coban.  From there we would gradually
leave in blocks of 200 to 300 persons until reaching Polygon 14.
We have fully assured support and tremendous solidarity for
accomplishing this.

We have support from the Catholic Church, the Protestant
churches, non-governmental development organizations, grassroots
organizations, trade unions, guilds, and ethnic organizations to
implement the return under these conditions, as well as massive
support from people living near the chosen route.  We likewise
have broad international support.

In describing this manner of return, the distinct and combined
routes, and specifying the support we are receiving, it is
reliably demonstrated that the Permanent Commissions have the
most at stake in having the return take place under conditions of
dignity, liberty, and security.  It demonstrates our flexibility,
while the government increases its intransigence and
inflexibility.  Despite such conditions, we have maintained the
dialogue, and have even been renegotiating aspects such as the
Route, which, as per the October 8 accords, was to be set by the
Permanent Commissions, and simply coordinated with the
government, UNHCR and other entities involved (Point Eleven,
paragraph C).

3. The refugee population has been engaging in continuous talks
and reiterates its inalienable right to return this coming
January 13.  The Permanent Commissions ask the following
questions:

     - Which is more dangerous to travel, the Pan American
Highway (with all its basic services readily available), or the
Ingenieros Route, whose construction hasn't even been completed
on the Mexican side and which lacks any basic available services?

     - Which is more dangerous, passing through the capital with
a message of reconciliation and peace with social justice, or the
accusations of the army that the refugees are guerrillas?

     - What show of flexibility has been made by the government
in its discussions and negotiations on the route?

     - Is it humanitarian to blackmail the refugees, threatening
to cut off their resources, unless they accept the route proposed
by the government?

     - Do the government and the Army of Guatemala really want
the refugees to return?

Finally, the Permanent Commissions, in representation of the
entire refugee population in Mexico, reiterate their
determination to return, making use of their constitutional
rights and all the social, economic, cultural and political
rights at their service regulated by International Law.  The
Permanent Commissions seek to lay the best possible foundation
for the process of return as a whole (which will not only be to
Nenton and Ixcan, but also to various other places in the
country) to be a success, and to contribute to progress and
development in Guatemala.

The Permanent Commissions reiterate their willingness to keep the
channels of dialogue and negotiations open in a civilized search
for solutions.  They insist that the government correspond
likewise, and put an end to its conduct of threats, blackmail,
inflexibility, intolerance, and obstruction of solutions.

                                      Guatemala, January 9, 1993.
** End of text from cdp:reg.guatemala **