"The greatest anguish": forced disappearance in Mexico

by Maggie Ervin with Nadín Reyes Maldonado

In his state of the union address a few weeks ago, Mexican president Peña Nieto acknowledged that this past year had been “difficult.” In fact, his entire term has been difficult. Not so much for the companies benefiting from his constitutional reforms, the escaped kingpin Chapo Guzman, or the contractor who sold the first lady a luxury house suspiciously below market value. But it’s certainly been difficult for the 55.3 million Mexicans who are poor, and especially for human rights defenders. During his less than three years in office, there have been 81 cases of forced disappearances of human rights defenders (versus the already high 53 during the entire 6-year administration of his predecessor). 

This Saturday marks the one-year anniversary since the forced disappearances of the 43 students of Ayotzinapa. Despite the government’s denials, an independent investigation by the IAHCR demonstrated that municipal, state and federal police all actively paritipated in the attacks on the students, and that military officers were present at at least two of the attack scenes. If that weren’t enough, it also found that the government destroyed key evidence. 

But when we talk about disappearances in Mexico, 43 is not the only relevant number. 26,000 is also. At least that many Mexicans have been disappeared since the US-supported Drug War went into effect in 2006. 

Nadín Reyes Maldonado is an expert on the topic. Ever since her father Edmundo Reyes and his friend Gabriel Cruz were forcibly disappeared in 2007, she has been working tirelessly on the topic: searching for justice in her father’s case, supporting other family members of disappeared, raising consciousness about the issue, and advocating for preventive laws and measures. She and three other women make up the organization Comité de Familiares de Detenidos-Desaparecidos Hasta Encontrarlos (in English, Committee of Family Members of the Disappeared and Detained ‘Until We Find Them’).

I sat down with her recently and asked a few questions. 

Nadín speaking in Oaxaca

WFP: A year ago the Ayotzinapa case caused horror and indignation on an international scale. However, ever since the Dirty War and especially since the War on Drugs began in Mexico, forced disappearances have been happening here. Why does the Mexican government turn to this crime against humanity? What does it gain? 

Nadín: We think that the crime of forced disappearance is the pefect crime for the government because it causes terror in the population and paralyzes various sectors of society. It also sends a message to certain human rights organizations and movements to dismantle themselves and end their work. Forced disappearances are now being committed against the population in general, not just activists. But it continues to be used selectively - as it was in the sixties and seventies - against social organizations and human rights defenders, with this objective of dismantling them through fear and terror. The government wants its people to be stuck in paralysis so that it can continue implementing neoliberal policies. This is what we see. And it’s important to keep in mind that forced disappearance is a form of torture and repression against the people. Unlike simply killing, disappearing someone creates a lot of distress and anxiety. Their loved ones don’t know what happened to the person who’s missing. And that’s different than an extrajudicial killing or murder, when there’s closure in the process. There’s a grieving process and closure, knowing that the person has been killed. There’s the body, the evidence. In the case of forced disappearance, you don’t know if the person is dead. You don’t know if the person is alive or not, and that creates more anxiety and uncertainty, great anguish and pain in the family and the population as a whole. And therefore it’s a more effective practice that is used by the government to maintain uncertainty in the population.

WFP: In the case of the forced disappearance of your father, the authories didn’t want to take a report in Oaxaca, where it occurred. Furthermore, they denied that it had happened. In cases of forced disappearances, how common are these types of obstacles?

Nadín: In the majority of cases, similiar things happen, as in the case of our family. We’ve heard testimonies of mothers where the same thing’s happened, where the authorities don’t want to take reports of this crime. They put up a lot of roadblocks, and refuse to take action. One issue is that the crime is not classified as such in all states. Additionally, they often tell the family members to go back home, or claim the disappeared person probably just left without saying anything, that they’ll probably be back in a few days. They give excuse after excuse as to not take the report. And that’s why... I think that it’s in over 80 percent of the cases that institutions give the same response, in order to not take a report.  And the authorities intimidate a lot. Not only do they not take reports, but they also threaten family members. They tell them not to report the crime because since they already have a family member disappeared, one of them might also be disappeared. And they recommend not moving forward with a report. That’s the most common response from the authorities, who not only don’t take reports, but also intimidate and threaten folks not to make reports.

WFP: As part of your work, you support and share information with family members of disappeared. Are there patterns that you’ve noticed in their cases? 

Nadín: One of the patterns we’ve seen is the difficulty of identifying who the actors are. We’ve identified them as paramilitary groups, but because they’re usually dressed in black with high-caliber weapons and ski masks, it can be hard to identify them, and to link them directly to the authoriries or state agents. It’s difficult to determine. However, in this context - in this country -  a lot of criminal groups were started by members of the armed forces who deserted, or by police that we can clearly identify as operating as parastatal groups. This is so the government will not be held responsible for the disappearances. These are the majority of the cases that we currently see. Many of the disappearances that are happening now are being committed by these groups. Many call them organized crime but we have identified them as paramlitary groups acting with the clear support and consent of the state. Additionally, along with the crime of forced disappearances, there may be other crimes committed. For example, the disappearance of women which can be linked to human trafficking and sexual exploitation. There have also been collective disappearances of men, to create a workforce, where they’re forced into exploitative work, used for their labor. Then there are also many other related crimes; it’s very difficult to identify or separate one from another. There’s also a pattern we’ve seen in terms of ages. For the most part it’s young folks who are disappeared, of working age, when they’re strong and capable. And some with certain professional or technical skills have been disappeared. This may also indicate that they’re being subjected to forced labor. These are some of the things we’ve identified. And then there are the disappearances of human rights defenders who participate in social and political movements. And we can identify state police, municipal police, and the army that have commited them. And it’s sometimes made clearer by threats made prior to the disappearance. And sometimes there are testimonials of people who see the moment of arrest of people who are subsequently disappeared, and this also points to the participation state agents.

members of Hasta Encontrarlos ("Until We Find Them")

WFP: Since 2006, Mexico has become more and more militarized in the name of the War on Drugs and national security. The US strongly supports this trend, and in fact has channeled more than 2.4 billion dollars for this purpose through the Merida Initiative. What effect has this militarization in Mexico had in terms of human rights violations in general and on forced disappearances specifically?

Nadín: This militarization has brought about an increase in human rights violations. It’s irrefutable, and it’s been well documented by various human rights organizations that in areas where there’s a greater presence of military personnel, there have been more human rights abuses. Chihuahua was one of the first states to militarize. Michoacán was one where the Merida Initiative was first employed. And these are states where thousands of human rights violations have been committed. Michoacán, in 2010, was one of the first states with cases of collective forced disappearances committed in the wake of militarization, and because of the creation of special forces to supposedly fight organized crime groups. And in the North, there have been many violations including extrajudicial killings, forced displacement, and forced disappearances of both men and women. So what we say is that in addition to being a war supposedly against drug trafficking, it’s a war against the people. A war focused more on putting fear and terror in the people under the pretext of fighting drug trafficking. But in fact, the allegations made by the local people show that in areas where the armed forces are, it’s brought more insecurity and fear. They don’t feel protected. On the contrary, there are many testimonies indicating collusion between the military and alleged criminal groups. This is well-documented, and it’s clear that they’re not there to protect, but instead mostly to instill fear and terror in the population. This is what militarization has brought to this country. One example of this is the rejection of the people, who increasingly demand that the armed forces return to their barracks. They don’t want the army doing this type of security work, because…it has a negative effect. There is clear evidence of this. Recently, a child was killed in Ostula, Michoacan who was hit by a bullet fired by soldiers. And there are countless testimonies like this one. So it’s not appropriate. The army wasn’t created to do public security work, but to protect the integrity and security of the nation. It can’t do law enforcement work because it’s not trained for that.

WFP: The majority of the readers of our blogs are US citizens. How can a US citizen be in solidarity with Mexico to support a change in terms of human rights and forced disappearances?

Nadín: I think one way they could be in solidarity with our country on the issue of forced disappearances would be first: questioning the situation in their own country, as Americans. Taking a stand against policies that hurt out country. The US intervenes in our security issues, and that’s one of the causes of increased forced disappearances. US resources are invested in the name of national security, under the pretext of fighting crime. But instead of being used to that end, they’re used to commit serious human rights violations which I’ve already mentioned. So one of the ways that US citizens can support us is questioning their government. How is this money being invested? They can be critical and they question. Another way is to disseminate information and bring light to the issues of human rights in Mexico and how Mexican citizens live in fear of forced disappearances. And I think it could be done in many ways. Sometimes there are young people with professions that may be able to support with their expertise. They can write and share information, and send any kind of support. Perhaps an exchange program where they learn about what’s happening here, and they can link up with organizations here and study and analyze what’s happening in Mexico. And they could share what they experience back in their country and their communities.They can also help with economic resources or with specific materials which we sometimes need. Most of the organizations struggling against forced disappearance are organizations that don’t have material resources, they’re grassroots. And sometimes very minimal support is invaluable to continue their work. So that’s another way you can help support these Mexican organizations.

Nadín will be on the Witness for Peace-Southeast Fall Speaker’s Tour in North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Alabama and Georgia from November 1 - 22. Stay tuned here for more info. 

Show your solidarity with the students of Ayotzinapa this Saturday, September 26th: http://www.soaw.org/news/organizing-updates/4323-ayotzinapa-events-1-year-after-mexican-state-crime-and-us-complicity

Sign this (easy, fast) urgent action demanding the US withdraw funding for militarization of Mexico: http://org.salsalabs.com/o/727/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=18454

Human Trafficking: not an isolated phenomenon

by Sue Davis (WFP Mexico Program delegate)

“If you promise a girl heaven, you can take her to hell.” (Quote from a human trafficker overheard by human rights attorney Malika Saada Saar.) 

This quote took on many layers of meaning as our group encountered various human rights violations in Mexico. And who was our group? A delegation of seven members from Plymouth United Church of Christ and one Quaker from Des Moines, Iowa, embarked on a Witness for Peace experience in Mexico. The focus of our trip was the issue of human trafficking, which we found to be deeply connected to other issues of economic and social justice, both in Mexico and the United States. Our Witness for Peace facilitator, Maggie, engaged speakers and created experiences that allowed us to understand the context in which the phenomenon of human trafficking occurs and to connect personally with Mexicans and Americans fighting for justice on the frontlines.

“Tan lejos de Dios, tan cerca de Estados Unidos.” (“So far from God, so close to the U.S.”) 

Francisco Cerezo, our first speaker, quoted this phrase when he explained the cause of many human rights violations in Mexico. He was speaking from his personal experience of working for the freedom of three of his brothers, who had been illegally arrested and imprisoned in 2001.The government had trumped up charges against them of terrorism. Through the diligent efforts of their lawyer, Digna Ochoa, the youngest brother was freed after three years, and the older two after seven years of incarceration and torture. Comité Cerezo - which consists of the five Cerezo siblings as well as many collaborators - has established a center (named after the lawyer) for aiding other victims of human rights violations.  Francisco’s fourteen years of experience have led him to see how U.S. policies, especially the Mérida Initiative - meant to combat drug trafficking and organized crime - have increased human rights violations in Mexico. According to the fact sheet issued by Witness for Peace about the Mérida Initiative, aka Plan México, the 2.4 billion dollars appropriated by Congress to train Mexican state security forces and to deliver military aircraft and drug interdiction equipment have coincided with a five-fold increase in complaints of human rights violations by Mexican soldiers and federal police, including torture, rape, extrajudicial execution, arbitrary detention, and enforced disappearance. Almost none of these cases have been prosecuted. The impunity rate in Mexico is between 95 and 98%. According to Francisco Cerezo, the culture of impunity continues because an extensive network exists among businessmen, the government, and organized crime. In spite of the odds and multiple death threats, Comité Cerezo continues to document human rights violations in Mexico and to find ways to prevent them.

“I felt anger and denial.” Maru’s emotions during the four-five years that it took her to feel that she had made the right decision to return to Mexico after having lived in the United States from the age of eight through the completion of her college education in New York.

We had the opportunity to hear the personal stories of six young people who had lived in the United States with their parents but were undocumented. Either they returned to Mexico voluntarily when they recognized the limitations that their undocumented status placed on their future, or they were deported. Having spent their formative years in the U.S., all of these young people faced discrimination and red tape when they returned to Mexico. The authorities did not recognize their high school or college educations. The young people often felt anger and denial for a long time before they were able to adjust to life in Mexico. Most had to live with relatives other than their immediate family and sometimes did not feel welcomed by them. In 2013 an organization called Dream in Mexico was formed to help returnees find educational, cultural and career opportunities in their native country. In turn, our group felt anger and dismay that our country has not found a humane way to treat undocumented immigrants who have lived in the U.S. for many years and who have a lot to contribute to our society.

Did you know that Pinocchio and Little Red Riding Hood are tools to educate young children about human trafficking and the vulnerability of victims?

Our speaker, Mayra Rojas, founder and director of an organization called Infancia Común, opened our eyes to the problem of human trafficking of children in Mexico. She claimed that prevention through education is the best measure to take, since rehabilitation of the victims of human trafficking is practically impossible. The statistics of the number of people affected by the problem are not accurate because there is no collaboration among agencies. The last study in 1999 claimed 16,000-20,000 children under the age of 18 were victims, and the numbers have been trending upwards ever since. The poverty of many Mexicans has made it easy to entice them to allow trafficking because they need the money. The consumer mentality of having or needing more has invaded the culture. International laws exist to prevent human trafficking, but they need to be stronger.

120 changes were made to the Mexican constitution to accommodate NAFTA.

This astounding fact was pointed out to us during Maggie’s summary of the history of U.S.-Mexico economic relations. One of the major changes was the allowing the sale and privatization of ejidos, which are communally owned lands that had been created by breaking up the ancient haciendas and which were never intended to be confiscated or sold. In addition, on June 1^st, 1994, the day NAFTA went into effect, there was a Zapatista uprising. Among other issues they were protesting the elimination of tariffs and protections for Mexican grown corn. Now, in Mexico, the birthplace of corn and a country whose dietary staple is corn, over 35% of corn consumed is imported from the U.S. NAFTA has been devastating for small farmers. Farmers from the southern state of Oaxaca have moved north to Baja California or the U.S. to work the fields. All this migration destroys the social fabric of the country. In addition, after a perfect storm of economic conditions in Mexico in the early ‘80’s, the IMF swept in with a 7.2 billion dollar loan in 1982 and insisted that the social safety net be dismantled. This has not done much too improve the lives of the 60 million Mexicans, almost half of the population, who are living in poverty. This poverty has pushed 1 in 10 Mexicans to migrate to the U.S. 

“The drug cartels know that drugs can only be sold once, but women can be sold again and again and again,” says Teresa Ulloa, director of the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women and Girls in Latin America and the Caribbean.

This was a point brought up by Gaby, the director of Casa Tochan, a shelter for refugees and migrants from Central America who either intended Mexico or the U.S. as their final destination. After 9/11 in the U.S., the closing of the U.S.-Mexican border caused a bottleneck in the flow of migrants, principally from Central America, in Mexico. Consequently, thousands of people were put at high risk due to a lack of safety nets of families and gainful employment to support them. It’s a very complex issue, but generating magnets for growth in their countries of origin and improving their educational opportunities would eliminate the need to emigrate.

In the meantime, Mexico has built steel barriers along the south-north rail tracks to obstruct the hopping of the train by migrants. The consequence of this policy is the increased number of migrants taking the entire journey through Mexico by foot along dangerous routes well known to human traffickers and drug cartels. Women who stop at a shelter near the southern border of Mexico are given contraceptive vaccinations because they most certainly will suffer rape and abuse along the way. Gaby, who runs the shelter, wants to prevent human traffickers from posing as migrants and then exploiting the residents by enticing them with false promises that lead them into lives serving the drug cartels and human traffickers, who often work in tandem. Migrants and refugees have been coerced into growing, making or transporting illegal drugs for the cartels or have been enslaved as domestic workers and sex slaves for them. The cartels have found it more lucrative to sell women for sex than to sell drugs.

Here is a common migrant worker’s story: I paid a recruiting fee of $500 to work at a meatpacking plant, I paid a visa fee of $950, (it’s actually $190), I paid my transportation costs to the U.S., I paid for my hotel room while waiting for approval from the embassy, and I paid for travel costs to the final work site.

Sarah Farr of the Center for Migrant Rights, which has two offices, one in Baltimore and one in Mexico City, related this story to us as she explained the H2 visa system of the United States to us. We discovered that H2A visa workers in the agricultural sector have a lot more protections than those that come to work on a H2B visa. The H2B visas encompass such businesses as landscaping, forestry (cutting Christmas trees), and carnivals. Unlike businesses recruiting under H2A visas, H2B companies do not have to reveal who their migrant labor recruiters are. This right to hide their recruiters was supported by JKJ Workforce, which is an American agency that recruits for carnivals and is owned by Jim Judkins in Texas. He has formed the Outdoor Amusement Business Association, which has joined forces with landscaping businesses to form a powerful lobbying group. They have prevented the strict enforcement of labor laws, such as not providing a list of their labor recruiters. Their labor recruiters are subcontractors in Mexico that often resort to fraud to line their own pockets by charging workers recruitment fees. These are prohibited both by the U.S. Dept. of Labor and the Mexican government. Over 50% of workers actually pay these illegal fees. Carnival workers often work 100 hours per week in 36-hour shifts with no time to sleep. Their pay is not commensurate with their hours because weekly flat-rate wages are permitted in H2B visas. The fair and carnival industry is the only one exempt from a minimum wage requirement. Ten carnival workers might be crowded into living in one trailer with no kitchen or bathroom. They have to cook on hotplates outdoors. As a further insult, there is no safety protection when they erect and tear down the equipment. Many have suffered great bodily injury in accidents. How can a democracy allow a powerful lobbying group to effect policy that denies basic human dignity to workers who have come here with legal documents?

“Mexico is a clandestine cemetery. There are mass graves everywhere.” (Quote from Araceli Rodriguez)

Araceli Rodriguez came to talk to our group about her son Luis Angel, a federal policeman, who was disappeared at the age of 23 on November 16, 2009. He and six other federal policemen and one civilian were disappeared on their way to Hidalgo, Michoacán, where the policemen were commissioned to occupy the building of the municipal director because his life was being threatened. At 3:00 on November 16 they were kidnapped by the cartel Michoacán, which is now known as the Caballeros Templarios (Knights Templar). The government didn’t know that the seven men were missing until 6 days after the kidnapping. Araceli went directly to the government office to inform the officials that the policemen were missing and to ask about the welfare of her son. Armed men in the office took her and threw her out on the street. The government didn’t have any information about the missing 7 people. 

Thus began Araceli’s quest to find justice for her son. Besides the perpetrators of the kidnappings and killings who have been convicted, three levels of government, (state, federal, county), were complicit in this case, but no one has been charged criminally or civilly. Araceli is still pushing to try them in court and says that she’ll never give up. A major problem is the distrust of the police and government officials because you don’t know if you’re actually talking to someone involved in organized crime or to someone who is trustworthy. Corruption is prevalent at all levels of government and police.

Drug trafficking and human trafficking have contributed to the ubiquitous corruption and high rate of impunity. The drug cartels have stocked up on weapons and have the means to pursue human trafficking and organ trafficking. By way of human trafficking, the cartels have kidnapped victims to manufacture the drugs and to transport them. Thousands of Mexicans who are disappeared probably are not dead. The authorities know this because they are part of the cartels themselves. Of course, it is not to their advantage to have this exposed.

How does a community function when 30-40% of its families have migrating members?

The answer to this question is an organization called CAFAMI in San Francisco Tetlanohcan in the state of Tlaxcala. CAFAMI is a local organization that, primarily through theater and community projects, seeks to mitigate the phenomenon of migration and its impact on women and families. The consequences of migration are separated families and women searching for employment and having total responsibility for raising their families. Often the grandparents are in charge of raising their grandchildren. CAFAMI has striven to reduce the negative effects of migration by encouraging leadership among the women of the community and giving them the opportunity to develop their rights as citizens. CAFAMI is a place where women can reflect on the social impact of migration on their personal lives and on community life. The women reconstruct their identities through dancing, singing, acting, and cooking. An advantage of the group’s theatrical and cultural activities is their ability to travel to the U.S. to present their heritage. Once there, they can visit their relatives who have immigrated to the U.S. The Mexican government has mostly ignored the effects and causes of migration. To counter the government’s inaction, CAFAMI has joined 3 other organizations as a collective voice known as Colectiva sin Fronteras to work together to push for stronger laws protecting migrants and their families.

“There are boys who want to grow up to be traffickers, but there are no girls who want to grow up to be prostitutes.” (Quote from Emilio Muñoz)

How can it be that there are boys who want to grow up to be traffickers? According to Emilio Muñoz, the director of the Center for Human Rights and Local Development "Fray Julian Garcés" in Tlaxcala, there are entire family trafficking networks operating today that began with the grandfather and that have been maintained by subsequent generations. The adolescent boys in these families actually aspire to be traffickers. The role of the young men in trafficking families is to put psychological pressure on vulnerable young women by first showing up in a poor village in an expensive car. He claims to be in love with a young woman and shows her photos of the expensive houses he owns. He showers her with gifts and constantly sends her text messages. He claims that the girl is the woman of his dreams and that he wants to marry her. He even meets the girl’s family and impresses them by organizing birthday parties for family members and by bringing them food. Consequently, the family is convinced to allow the union of the trafficker and the young girl to go forward. After the wedding, he moves her to his community. Upon their return, his next step is to get her pregnant. The girl’s child or children stay in the trafficker’s home and are cared for by his female relatives.  The children’s lot in life is to continue the trafficking network of the family.

Since 1990, a common theme has been for the trafficker to move with his “wife” to a city, often in the U.S. and most commonly to New York. Once in the city, the trafficker invents an economic crisis and convinces the girl that the only way to get out of the situation is for her to become a prostitute. To protect her “husband’s” life, she will sacrifice whatever is necessary. This is a cultural expectation. If she refuses to become a prostitute, the trafficker threatens her child, her family or even her younger sister by capturing her and forcing her into prostitution. The women stay in prostitution for 10-15 years. They have up to 30 clients per day. They are able to work every day of the week because the traffickers give them medication to stop their menses.

Of course, there have to be clients or consumers to complete the human trafficking cycle. The current trend of neo-liberal thought promotes accumulation of capital. Trafficking has commercialized women’s bodies, which can be sold repeatedly to bring in money. People look at the victims’ bodies as a market. The consumers of the market are willing to spend money on prostitution of these trafficked women. According to Emilio Muñoz, everything has become a marketable item: Mexicans’ bodies, Mexican land, their water and air. For Mexicans, these things are not commodities but are considered sacred and a source of life.

The U.S. and its Dubious Exports

by Maggie Ervin

Hollywood’s biggest blockbusters don’t take long to come out in Mexico. I imagine that the Sonys and the Warner Brothers pay the dubbing companies a pretty peso, ‘cause they get right to the task. So this summer, on screen after screen south of the border, the San Andreas fault has already shattered the earth and downed buildings, the Avengers have put Ultron's army to the test, and Jurassic World’s Indominus has ravaged pretty much everything in its path.

And yet tragically, terror and destruction are not confined to the big screen. Consider the last three weeks. In just this period, here’s some of what’s gone down in Mexico: About 120 migrants passing through Sonora were reportedly attacked by men dressed in military garb, who started shooting at them. Three were killed, at least thirteen escaped, and most are still missing. Amnesty International and migrant rights groups had to demand a formal investigation of the case.

Central American migrants' families in Mexico

Meanwhile, the government’s official version of what happened to the 43 disappeared students of Ayotzinapa came crashing down. Of course, over the past nine months civil society organizations and family members have been calling out the Mexican government for coverup and manipulation, as well as its reliance on testimonies obtained under torture in order to make its case. But just last week a magistrate judge who was working in the police station the night of the massacre (whose family has been threatened and who is in the U.S. seeking asylum) spoke out quite convincingly that the students were never brought to the local police station. This confirms widespread suspicions that the government has attempted to hide the federal and state police’s - and even possibly the army’s - involvement in the students’ disappearance, trying to lay blame entirely on municipal police.

Tribute to the 43 students in Mexico City 

Then last week, a Navy helicopter reportedly shot at civilians in Durango, killing one and injuring several.

As if that weren’t enough, June 7th was election day, which was mired by state violence and repression. The balance sheet: one extrajudicial killing and 127 detained on election day. A majority of the latter took place in Oaxaca, where 25 protestors were taken maximum security prison. They reported torture and multiple human rights abuses, and were charged with terrorism. 56 NGO’s in Oaxaca urgently came together and declared: ”The large presence of police and military in Oaxaca…with the arrival of thousands of federal police officers, members of the gendarmerie, soldiers, and marines to ‘safeguard’ the federal midterm elections…do not contribute to generate a climate of trust and freedom needed for such a democratic exercise. The militarization of a social conflict shows an alarming return to authoritarianism.” Unfortunately, the election-time repression was no less fierce in Guerrero state, and there was also heavy deployment of security forces in Michoacan and Chiapas. Free and fair? Not exactly.

North of the border, of course, the election cycle is just beginning. At his campaign launch last week, Donald Trump wasted no time decrying Mexicans in the U.S. “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending the best…,” he said. “They’re sending people that have lots of problems and they’re bringing those problems.” Now perhaps the latest ludicrous comments from a “Birther” who once claimed President Obama was “Israel’s worst enemy” don’t deserve much attention. But the opposite claim, however, probably does: that the U.S. sends problems to Mexico.

First, there’s the money: over 2.4 billion dollars spent on the Merida Initiative, which Congress has allotted funds for every year since 2007, and which Obama supports. What form has this money taken? Mostly it’s been used to militarize Mexico: providing Blackhawk helicopters, surveillance cameras, sophisticated arms and equipment. Additionally it’s been used to train Mexican security forces whose human rights record - far beyond the forced disappearances of Ayotzinapa - has been abysmal over this same eight year period. And who - as described above - are not only called upon to fight drug cartels, but also to quell social movements.

The Drug War has taken an estimated 70,000 Mexican lives

Then there’s the private sales of arms. Lax U.S. laws around arms sales - even in the wake of the Newtowns, the Isla Vistas, the Fort Hoods, the Charlestons - facilitate this movement. In Mexico, although there is a constitutional right to possess of firearms, there are more restrictions and only one legal gun shop in the entire country. Compare that to the more than 54,000 federally licensed firearm dealers in the U.S., about 6,700 of which are along the border. According to a 2013 study by University of San Diego’s Transborder Institute with Brazil’s Igarape Institute, approximately 253,000 U.S. guns end up n Mexico every year, which is about 2.2 percent of the yearly U.S. sales and about 70% of the firearms in Mexico. Unfortunately, there’s no evidence that this number has gone down since the Supreme Court’s June 2014 decision to ban straw purchases (purchases made on another’s behalf). 

This issue of arms sales isn’t just a story of cartels. As highlighted in a recent Washington Post piece, the Mexican government is eager to buy more and more arms. This year’s orders represent a hundred-fold increase from previous years, in fact. So while private weapons companies seem happy to respond to the demand, Congress seems happy keep funding the Merida Initiative, and as evidenced this week with the passage of Fast Track for the extremely corporate-friendly Trans-Pacific Partnership, it’s becoming harder and harder to tell the difference between the government sector and the corporate sector.

Loss in Translation: Ayotzinapa and Mexico’s More than 27,000 Disappeared

by Maggie Ervin

At its best, a translation can be sublime and elevating. I dare say Edith Grossman’s English version of One Hundred Years of Solitude is almost as stunningly delicious as Garcia Marquez’s original. And I wonder if Rilke’s original Sonnets to Orpheus could possibly be more transcendent than Stephen Mitchell’s take on it. At its worst, translation can be awkward and disappointing. When trying to convey the layers of Portuguese’s saudade, or those long, precise German nouns stuck together to make one single word.

Translating certain words from Spanish to English can be complicated too. In English, "disappear" is not normally a transitive verb. Something or someone disappears by its own will, or by negligence, but it’s not something you do to someone else. There are plenty of cruel things you can do to people in English, but disappearing folks is simply not part of our linguistic repertoire of barbarism. Here in Mexico, someone can be “bagged.” No, not "fired" or "arrested." In this case it means a dead body is wrapped in a garbage bag and most likely left somewhere other than the local morgue. Ever heard of a “goat’s horn?” (Hint: not the one you find on the animal.) That translates to AK-47. Similarly, “el derecho a la verdad” sounds odd in English too. “The right to the truth?” When was the last time you heard that victims have “the right to the truth?”

43 students, disappeared. Or would the right word be “missing?" Or "taken?" Or "unaccounted for?" No, they are indeed disappeared; no ambiguities or euphemisms in this case. In fact, the more accurate term for what happened in Iguala six months ago was forced disappearance. To English speakers, this term might also need some explaining. In spite of the many injustices in the U.S. - class inequalities, crazy rates of incarceration, demonizing of immigrants, bankruptcy due to sickness, police killing unarmed black men, a merciless minimum wage - forced disappearance is not part of our daily reality or rhetoric. So a little clarification. There are three basic elements to forced disappearance: 1) the denial of someone’s freedom against their will, 2) the involvement of state authorities either by commission or omission, and 3) the denial of the incident by state authorities. On the night of September 26, 2014, all of these elements were gruesomely at play. 

Over these last six months, the 43 students of Ayotzinapa have gotten widespread, worldwide attention, as well they should have. But forced disappearance has been a major problem in Mexico since 2006. In the year 2014 alone, over 5,098 Mexicans were disappeared. That’s more people than fit in a typical high school gym. (So imagine that varsity basketball game during a winning season, and then stuff in about 500 more people.) The story of the 43 students has gotten more attention than others, probably because of a confluence of factors: the grisliness of the massacre, the clear collusion between organized crime and the state, the government’s slow response and premature attempts to close the book on the case, and the shameless levels of corruption and putrefaction of political parties embodied in the event. But family members of the forcibly disappeared in Mexico have been speaking out for years.

Not only speaking out, but also alerting authorities. Surely the numbers are low compared to actual disappearances, since family members are often too scared - of narcos or state authorities, or both - to report them. (There are currently over 27,000 disappeared Mexicans.) But perhaps they’re also skeptical that justice will be served. Unfortunately, the evidence strongly supports this skepticism. Between 2006 and 2011, 390 complaints of forced disappearances were filed before Mexico’s National Human Rights Commission. Out of those, there have been zero convictions. And despite the number of forced disappearances having increased since Peña Nieto took office in December 2012, by April 2014 (the last date available) there was still not one single conviction for forced disappearance in all of Mexico. 

All of this is happening in the context of the Drug War. It’s been 34 years since Nixon declared it, fifteen years since it was unleashed on a massive scale in Colombia, and eight years since Mexico became its main frontier. No matter how you measure it, in terms of its stated goals the Drug War has been a colossal, undeniable failure both in the U.S. and south of the border. The availability and consumption of drugs hasn’t decreased, it’s corresponded with a surge in human rights abuses, it’s led to more incarceration and broken families in the U.S., and the deaths keep mounting in Latin America. Much has been written - in many languages, and quite eloquently - about this evidence. And more than a handful of Latin American current and past presidents have criticized the policy, even a few from the right. Yet somehow U.S. politicians of both major parties continue to stubbornly ignore the data. What will it take to stop this war?

That word, of course, is easy to translate: Guerra. War. And it has several derivative words, like the name of the state where the 43 were disappeared: Guerrero. Warrior. We need warriors these days, the kind who fight for an end to state brutality and militarization, who condemn the lucrative business of war, and who defend the “right to the truth.” That is what it will take. 

• Take action to stop the U.S.’s funding the Merida Initiative. Through it the U.S. government has spent over 2.4 billion dollars, most of which has been used to militarize Mexico. Tell your Representatives to stop funding the Initiative.
  
  

• Join the U.S. Caravan of the 43 (through April 28,2014). Show your solidarity with family members of the disappeared students.
  
  

"Security" in Mexico doesn't apply to many human rights defenders

by Maggie Ervin

Felipe Calderón, president of Mexico from 2006 to 2012, had a way of talking that sounded a bit like George W. Bush, which is to say unapologetically bellicose. As soon as his term started, he declared a War on Drug Trafficking, and quickly put it into full military action. By the end of his term, the results were staggeringly tragic: more than 60,000 Mexicans dead, more than 20,000 disappeared, more than 150,000 displaced, and still plenty of drugs flowing to the U.S. and Europe. The current president, Enrique Peña Nieto has shifted the discourse, avoiding the words “war” and “combat” all together, and instead focusing on what he calls a “national security policy.” Additionally, his attention has been divided as he's been busy promoting and passing a series of constitutional reforms. Unfortunately, though, neither of these factors has meant that respect for human rights has necessarily improved under his administration. By a few measures it has, but by others it's actually gotten worse.

Comite Cerezo Mexico was founded 13 years ago and works in the
defense and promotion of human rights of victims of political repression.  

A report issued last week by Comite Cerezo Mexico, “La Defensa de los Derechos Humanos en Mexico: una lucha contra la Impunidad” (in English, “Defending Human Rights in Mexico: a struggle against impunity”), revealed that forced disappearances have increased under Peña Nieto. The report points out that towards human rights defenders alone, this particular crime against humanity has gone up 60% during his administration. 29 human rights defenders have been disappeared in just eighteen months, as compared to 24 during the same time period of the Calderón administration. On August 30, International Day of Victims of Forced Disappearances,the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights called this situation in Mexico “critical.” 

A public act of remembrance of the disappeared in Mexico. As stated in the report, 
Peña Nieto has tried to "make invisible and diminish violence in his official rhetoric 
as well as through the media...and tried to put forth a message of security and peace." 

During this same year and a half, arbitrary detentions and harassment of human rights defenders have increased as well. Both of these tactics, the report argues, go hand in hand with the implementation of Peña Nieto’s political agenda. His reforms passed over the last year cover many dimensions of Mexican life - labor,fiscal policy, education, telecommunications and energy -  and are complex and extensive. Generally, though, their common thread is an unrepentant move towards privatization. Public opposition to the reforms is fierce and widespread, resulting in protests and blockades and the like by Mexican citizens. Meanwhile, the government has been resorting to repressive measures to quell such protests and to discourage participation. As the report states: “the great majority of those arbitrarily detained… were [detained] because of their political positions and disagreement with the neoliberal policies that are being applied in Mexico.”

Francisco Cerezo presents data from the report,

which covers from June 2013 to May 2014. 

Additionally, despite a less warlike rhetoric than his predecessor, Peña Nieto has hardly scaled down the militarization first initiated by Calderón. Just two weeks ago he launched a new 5,000 strong police force called gendarmerie, a new branch of the Federal Police (a force known for human rights abuses). The U.S. has been more than willing to support this militarization. Since Congress passed the Mérida Intitiative (also called Plan Mérida) in 2007, 1.2 billion USD have been delivered to Mexico, largely in the form of military equipment and training, and all in the name of fighting the War on Drugs. 

But much like its predecessor Plan Colombia, it's done very little to stop the flow of drugs. And yet there are no plans to terminate it. In Fiscal Year 2013 alone, more than 3,000 Mexican military personnel were trained at NORTHCOM in Colorado (an increase of 44% from FY 2011). And the Obama administration has requested 115 million dollars more for the Initiative in its FY 2015 budget proposal. So where do human rights come in? Despite the fact that the Mérida Initiative includes “Respect for Human Rights in Mexico” as part of its second pillar, this assertion has proved rather hollow. A mere 15% of its funds are conditioned on meeting human rights standards. And considering that increased human rights violations in Mexico coincided with the distribution of Mérida Initiative funds, the question becomes: Is the U.S. not complicit in these violations? 

This week, Peña Nieto gave his second State of the Union address. In it he announced the construction of a huge new international airport partly in Mexico City and partly in the State of Mexico. Curiously, in 2006, while governor of the State of Mexico, he ordered the massive repression of protests which had sprung up in response to a similar airport project. The result: two dead, 207 arbitrarily detained, many tortured, and 26 women sexually assaulted. Considering both his past and recent record on human rights, there is reason to be concerned about how the president will respond to the protests that are already springing up.

"Land Yes, Planes No!" reads this 2006 sign.