A comparative estudy of indigenous movements in Ecuador and Colombia

CHAPTER II

THE ORIGINS AND EVOLUTION OF INDIGENOUS MOVEMENTS IN COLOMBIA AND ECUADOR

The second chapter is concerned with the origin and evolution of indigenous movements in Ecuador and Colombia. Both movements are rooted in the Colonial period and the fight for land. The social structure of these countries led to the different evolution of the position of Indian people. This in turn shaped the composition of indigenous movements in a different way. I argue that in order to understand the role of each indigenous movement and its behaviour within the current political, economical and social sphere it is essential to go back to the historical context at the time, in Ecuador and Colombia.

The origin of the Indian struggles goes back to the time of the Spanish Conquest. During the colonial and post-colonial period the conflict between Indians and “colonos” would often end up with the massacre of Indians. Since then, there have been frequent confrontations between indigenous people and institutional authorities. Although the strength of the movement is related to their historical cyclical context[41] the indigenous problem has always been latent in society. For a long time indigenous concerns were completely ignored in the political sphere and it was not until the 1960s when indigenous movements started to be noticed by society in general.

Indian uprisings in Ecuador can be found during the colonial period and the first years of the republican government. But at no time was it an articulate movement and it was not organised at the national level. It did not seek to do away with ethnic oppression or demand the recognition of its specific rights within the state.[42] Therefore, the shift from the Spanish colonial system to the establishment of the Republic of Ecuador in 1830 did not result in any change for the regions’ indigenous population. One result of the colonial legacy, however, was that national boundaries cut through indigenous land with little concern for the people involved.[43] Often these ethnic groups have had little identification with the national state which has remained distant and has offered minimal assistance to the needs and concerns of the indigenous population.[44]

The bases for the consolidation of the Indian movement in Ecuador, can be found in two spheres. Firstly, the fight for land in the inter-Andean region between the indigenous quechua people and the landowners and secondly, the protection of territory among the ethnic groups of the tropical forests of the Amazon.[45] In the 1920s, the indigenous people of the inter-Andean region confronted the landowners. It was a struggle against economic exploitation and ethnic oppression. By this time, they were already claiming the legitimacy of their native language. However, the main struggle was the need for significant land reform. It is not until agrarian reform had come to an end, in the 1970s, that the indigenous Sierra people raised their demands to the level of a national-ethnic fight together with ethnic groups from the Coast and the Amazon region.[46]

At the same time, the situation of the Amazon people was different but similarly conflictive. The exploitation of rubber and the Hacienda system forced the indigenous communities to find refuge deep in the jungle in order to survive. The situation worsened in the Twenty Century when the Ecuadorian state began to sell lands to trans-national companies for oil-exploitation and agro-industrial production. The consequence was that ethnic communities lost their territory and their habitat was polluted.[47]This situation contributed to the isolation of indigenous groups from the “white man”.[48] It was only in the Southern Amazon that the Indian community had more contact with the outside world. As a result it would develop the conditions necessary for the emergence of the first indigenous organisation. The Federación de Centros Shuar, founded in 1964 by the Salessian Mission, aimed to preserve the ethnic identity of the indigenous people against the penetration of the colonists.[49]

So, it was in the early 1970s when indigenous people from the Amazon moved from a defensive position to starting an organised movement to claim for their rights. Moreover, they joined together with the indigenous of the Sierra in order to constitute the National Indian Ethnic Movement of Ecuador.[50]Again, this new condition came about by the modification of the productive structure and the inclusion of the indigenous economy within the market as a consequence of the agrarian reform of 1964. This process helped to develop a “petite” manufacturing industry which involved a process of social differentiation in some ethnic communities. The appearance of an Indian intellectual elite strengthened their ethnic identity and the recovery of their history, tradition and culture.[51]

This shift from peasant demands to national-ethnic requirements implies the right of being recognised as different people. Within this framework the Indian notions of self-determination and nationality have to be understood.[52] These concepts entail the right to control land, natural resources, economic development, government and socio-cultural matters[53]. This new consciousness was steadily channelled through local, regional and national networks which were increasely used by indigenous people to organise themselves and obtain resources from the state. Between 1974 and 1990, the number of registered communities increased by more than 50%, from 1,530 to 2,236, and the process is not yet complete.[54] The increasing growth of these federations at the regional and national level shows how indigenous concerns such as land, education, public administration and constitutional reform, began to be expressed within the national political and social arena. The most representative indigenous organisations were grouped into the Confederación de Nacionalidades Indigenas de la Amazonia Ecuadorian (CONFENIAE), founded in the eastern lowlands in 1980, and the Ecuador Runacunapac Riccharimui (ECUARUNARI) formed in 1974 to represent the Indians of the altiplano. These two movements joined together in 1986, with the creation of the Confederación de Nacionalidades Indigenas del Ecuador (CONAIE) as an umbrella group of confederations.[55]

The force of the indigenous movements was most evident in 1990 when the most powerful indigenous uprising ever seen in Ecuador took place. CONAIE was the masterpiece of the revolt and took advantage of the situation to express the claims of its organisation, summarised in a list of sixteen demands (“Los 16 puntos”). Many of the points were concerned with land distribution and ownership or the commitment of national resources needed for economic development in indigenous communities. Other points were related to bi-lingual education programmes, indigenous control of archaeological sites and the expulsion of the Summer Institute of Linguistics from Ecuadorian territory. Together these demands outlined a programme for indigenous control over their own affairs which culminated in a the petition to amend the Ecuadorian Constitution in order to proclaim it a multinational state.

The strength and the discontent of the indigenous people in Ecuador again came to the attention of the entire society, on April 11 of 1992, when another massive uprising took place. Once more, the regulation of indigenous territory was demanded together with the recognition of a pluri-national and multicultural country. This new situation is indicative of the “shift in indigenous consciousness and national identity which has currently swept throughout Ecuador”.[56]

On the other hand, the origin of the indigenous movements in Colombia is similar to the Ecuadorian case, but the evolution is different. One has to bear in mind that today the Colombian indigenous community represents only 1.74% of society, whereas in Ecuador it is 24.85% of the population.[57] As a result Colombia has not developed the most radical forms of indigenism.[58]

The indigenous presence in the national scenario corresponds to a political moment dominated by the interests of “Colombian society”, where indigenous people were relegated to a marginal position. The first urban appearance of the indigenous movement took place on the streets of Medellín against Catholic missionaries who were seeking to reform the legislation governing indigenous affairs.[59]On another front, the country was committed to carrying out land reform approved by Congress in 1961, whereas class conflict was moulded in the existing land tenure system. In this context, the importance of the peasantry as a social and political force grew greatly. Even the main adversaries were the landowners, closely connected to the two traditional parties exercising power, the Conservative and the Liberal.

In Colombia the indigenous people found the most propitious to start the late 1960s organising themselves in the Cauca region. In this area they confronted the Hacienda system with Resguardo land in the late 1960s. Two institutions of local power coexisted, both relatively weak in comparison to the power of the hacienda: the Indigenous Council (Cabildo de Indigenas), governed by a special law (Law 89 of 1890), and the municipality, the local link with the central government. Within this framework, rebels began to appear at the haciendas. They were the communities of Terrajeros[60] who started to exercise their rights over their ancestral land. Often, these communities fought alone, with no previous mutual co-ordination. However these actions “revealed the communities’ autonomy, their capacity for initiative, and their potential for action”.

With regard to this a genuinely indigenous organisation was formed in 1971, calling itself the Regional Indigenous Council of the Cauca - Consejo Regional Indigena del Cauca (CRIC) -. This organisation was born out of terrajero struggles and was therefore completely integrated with the peasants and left aside the question of “ethnicity”. From that moment on Resguardo members, union delegates, and peasants have all converged within the indigenous movement.[61] In this context, the state continued to ignore the specific nature of indigenous communities and to view their members merely as peasants.

During the 1970s, indigenous conflict, was most commonly read as a “struggle for land” but in the 1980s, they started to be read as a “struggle for territory”. It was in this sense that the struggles began to be understood by critical minority sectors within the CRIC, while the leadership rejected such a reading and even refused to discuss it with the communities during the Fifth Congress in 1978.

The CRIC was supported by both the National Institute of Agrarian Reform in Colombia ( Instituto Nacional de Colombia de Reforma Agraria -INCORA-) and the National Association of Peasants (Asociación Nacional de Usuarios Campesinos- ANUC-).In this context emerged what is known today as the Indigenous Authorities Movement of Colombia (Movimiento de Autoridades Indigenas de Colombia -MAIC-) emerged.[62]March, path, movement - these terms were often used by MAIC in counter-distinction to the notions of a centralised, vertical type of organisation. This movement was able to modify state policy on the basis of a decision of the Council of State that recognised the legitimate character of the public rights of the indigenous cabildos. In this manner, “the Authorities Movement had modified state-Indian relations in a way that was qualitatively different from those commonly employed by Colombian organisations”.[63] Meanwhile, the CRIC and the ONIC tended to demand state intervention in the form of social services and benefits whereas the Indigenous Authorities Movement took as their point of departure the recognition of their difference, while simultaneously emphasising their understanding of social relations in terms of reciprocity.

In 1987 the Indigenous Authorities Movement decided to participate in the first local elections that took place in 1988. Its aim was to advance its own recognition. The movement also put forward Taita Lorenzo Muelas, a former Guambiano governor, as candidate for the 1990 elections to the national congress. This directly led to his election as a delegate to the National Constituent Assembly at the end of that year.[64]Finally, the peak of Colombian indigenous success was reached in 1991 when the National Constitution recognised Colombia as a pluricultural and pluriethnic country in which the rights of indigenous people were recognised.[65]

Therefore, as it has been shown throughout this chapter, although the origin of the indigenous movements in Ecuador and Colombia were rooted in the fight for land, they evolved in different ways. The size of the indigenous population, the degree of ethnic identity, the composition of the demands and the relationship with the state has shaped the strategies and the outcomes of both indigenous movements.

[1] Latin American Weekly Report, 1994, p.64.

[2] Scott Alan , Ideology and Social Movements. Allen and Unwin. London 1991.

[3] For further references look at Escobar Arturo and Alvarez E. Sonia (eds),The making of social movement in Latin America; identity, strategy and democracy. Westview Press 1992, and Foweraker Joe TheorisingSocial Movements. Pluto Press 1995.

[4] Foweraker, Op. cit, 1995, p.3.

[5] Ibid, p.5.

[6] The combination of urban expansion and repressive government spread the increasing demands in terms of rights in Latin America from the 1970s onwards. Ibid.

[7] Ibid, p.4.

[8] Slater David, New Social Movements and the State in Latin America. CEDLA. Amsterdam. 1985, pp.3-4.

[9] Mainwaring and Cardoso thinks that the problem that many social movements face is that they lack a program of negotiation with political and social actors and they just remain as a protest movement. For futher information look at; Cardoso Ruth Correa Leite “Movimentos Sociais na America Latina”, Revista Brasileira de Ciencias Sociais1987, vol. 1, no.3 and Mainwaring Scott “Urban popular movements, identity, and democratisation in Brasil”, Comparative Political Studies 1987, 20, 2 (July).

[10] Mainwaring, Scott and Viola, New Social Movements, Political culture and Democracy; Brazil and Argentina in 1980s. Tetos 61 (fall). 1984, p. 20.

[11] Fuentes Sonia and Gunder Frank, “Ten Theses on Social Movements”, in World Development. Vol. 17, No. 2. 1989,pp. 179-180.

[12] Scott, Op. cit, p. 155.

[13] Cardoso, Op. cit, p.224.

[14] Becker Marc, Nationalism and pluri-nationalism in a multi-ethnic state; indigenous organisation in Ecuador, University of Arkansas. 1992.

[15] Wray Natalia, “La constitución del movimiento etnico-nacional indio en Ecuador”. America Indigena, Instituto Indigenista Americano. Mexico. Vol.XLIX., No. 1. 1989, p. 92. Findji Maria, “From resistance to Social Movement: the Indigenous Authorities in Colombia”, in Escobar Arturo and Alvarez E. Sonia (eds.),The making of Social Movement in Latin America; Identity, strategy and democracy. Westview Press. 1992, p. 114.

[16] Evers Tilman “ Identity, the hidden side of new social movements in Latin America”, in Slater David (eds), Op, cit, 1985, p.58.

[17] Tarrow Sidney “Old movements in new cycles of protest; the career of an Italian Religious Community”, in Klandermans, Bert, Hanspeter Kriesi and Sidney Tarrow (eds) From structure to action; Comparing Movements Across Cultures. International Social Movement Research. Vol.1 JAIPress; Greenwich, CT.1988, p.283.

[18] Foweraker, Op. cit, p. 67.

[19] Fuentes and Frank, Op. cit, p.181.

[20] CONAIE, Political Declaration of Ecuadors’ indigenous people. The Fourth Congress of CONAIE.

[21] Rhon D. Francisco “Lucha etnica o lucha de clases: Ecuador”, in Campesinado e Indigenismo en America Latina. ed. CELATS, Centro Latinoamericano de Trabajo Social.1978, p. 75.

[22] CDDH, El levantamiento indigena y la cuestión nacional, ed. Abya-Yala. 1990, p. 17.

[23] The Indian Ecuadorian Federation, created in 1941 organised the first bilingual school in the early 1940s, and published the first journal in quichua. Natalia Wray, Op, cit, 1989, p.81.

[24] CDDH, Op. cit. 1990, p. 17.

[25] Scott, Op. cit,p. 24.

[26] Foweraker, Op. cit., p. 62.

[27] Ibid.

[28] Foweraker Joe, Popular mobilisation in Mexico. The teachers movement 1977-1987. Cambridge University press. 1993, Ch. 10.

[29] Correa Leite Cardoso Ruth “Movimientos sociales urbanos; Blaco Critico”, Sorj, Bernardo and Maria Herminia Tavares de Almedia (eds) Sociedades y Política no Brasil Pos-1964. Editora brasilense; Sao Paolo. 1983.

[30] Foweraker, Op. cit, 1995, p. 67.

[31] In itsefforts to create a unified Shuar people, the Federation is carrying out the work of civilising the Shuar, by rejecting the more “savage” element of Shuar culture in Hendricks Janet,, “Symbolic Counterhegemony among the Ecuadorian Shuar” in Greg Urban and Joel Shezer (eds) Nation-States and Indians in Latin America. University of Texas Press, Austin. 1991,pp.56-57.

[32] Ibid, pp. 56-67.

[33] In an interview carried out with the leaders of different Ecuadorian political parties, all rejected the representation of the national indigenous movement, CONAIE. Moreover, in 1991 the government launched a campaign to discredit Conaie in order to isolat it from the rest of society. Also the government pursued the institutionalisation of the conflict in order to demobilise the Indian problem.Frank Erwin et. al., Los políticos y los indigenas. Diez entrevistas a candidatos presidenciales de partidos políticos del Ecuador sobre la cuestión indigena”. Ed. Abya-Yala, 1992.

[34] “Success” takes the form of integrating previously excluded issues and groups into the “normal” political process. This argument is diametrically opposed to Touraine’s analysis of social movements as pure forms of activity towards the political system. Quoted in Scott, Op. cit, p.11.

[35] Foweraker, Op. cit, 1995, p. 83.

[36] Bebbington Anthony et al. “From protest to productivity; the evolution ofIndigenous federation in Ecuador”, in Grassroot Development, 16/2, 1992, p.14.

[37] Hellman Adle Judith Adle “The study of new social movements in Latin America and the question of autonomy”, in Escobar and Alvarez (eds.), Op. cit., p. 58.

[38] Escobar Arturo “Culture, Economics and Politics in Latin American Social Movements Theory and Research”, in Escobar and Alvarez (eds.), Op. cit., p.69.

[39] Bebbington et al, Op. cit, p.12.

[40] Evers, Op. cit, p.65.

[41] Social Movements are cyclical in two sense. First, they respond to circumstances, which change as a result of political, economic and perhaps ideological fluctuations or cycles. Second, Social Movements tend to have life cycles of their own. Their membership, mobilisation and strength tend to be cyclical; because the movements mobilise people in response to circumstances which are themselves cyclical. Fuentes and Frank, Op. cit, p.182.

[42] Becker, Op. cit.

[43] For example, the Shuar-Achuar tribe was geographically divided between Ecuador and Peru.

[44] Ibid, 1992.

[45] Wray, Op. cit, p.79.

[46] Ibid, p.82.

[47] Ibid, p.83.

[48] Colonisation of Shuar territory didn’t begin until about fifty years ago. At the same time, the increased need for trade goods led to more peaceful relationship among the Shuar people and as war decreased, the population increased. The present population of about 45.000 people is a significant factor in their survival as a group, inHendricks, Op cit, p.53.

[49] Salesian missionaries, who had established a permanent mission and boarding schools for Shuar children, saw the increase in colonization as a threat to their economic and religious interests. Ibid, p.56.

[50] Wray, Op. cit, p.83.

[51] Ibid, p.86.

[52] Ibid, p.90.

[53] Becker, Op. cit.

[54] Bebbington et.al, Op. cit, p.13.

^[54] Becker, Op. cit.

[55] Ibid.

[56] Becker, Op. cit.

[57] Matos Mar “Grupos etnicos de America”. Anuario Indigena. Mexico.Marzo 1993, pp.165-203.

[58] ONIC; Primer Congreso Indigena Nacional. Organizacion Nacional Indigena de Colombia: Conclusiones y Documentos. Febrero 27 de 1982, p.75.

[59] The 1968 publications of Siervos deDios y Amados de los Indios discussed the relationship between the state and the missions in Putumayo. At this juncture, the protagonists were not indigenous people; they were the “nationals” seeking changes in the relationship in their society between church and state. Findji Teresa “From resistance to Social Movements; the indigenous Authorities Movement in Colombia” in Escobar Arturo and Alvarez E. Sonia (eds) The making of social movements in Latin America. Indentity, strategy and democracy, Westview Press 1992, p.114.

[60] The terrajeros are those indigenous people who must pay the landowner with their labour for the right to set up their homes and have subsistence plots on the hacienda. A resguardo is a proportion of territory that is recognised as the inalienable, permanent common property of an indigenous community. In economic terms resguardos are lands segregated from the market. In sociopolitical terms, they are managed by a small council according to specific legislation. Ibid, p.13.

[61] Ibid, pp. 116-8.

[62] Ibid, pp.120-21.

[63] Ibid.

[64] Ibid, pp.129.

[65] Ibid.

[66] Tarrow Sydney “Struggle, Politics and Reform: Collective Action, Social Movements, and Cycles of Protest” Western Societies Program Occasional Paper no21 Center for International Studies, Cornell University.1989, p.71.

[67] Lowi Theodore “The Politics of disorder”. New York; Basic books 1971.

[68] Munck Gerardo “Identity and Ambiguity in Democratic Stuggles” in Foweraker and Craig (eds), Popular Movements and Political Change in Mexico. Lynne Reinner. Boulder 1990, p.37.

[69] Escobar and Alvarez, Op. cit, p.325.

[70] Scott, Op. cit, p.152.

[71] Escobar and Alvarez, Op. cit, p.328.

[72] Wilson Frank “Neo corporatism an the rise of new social movements” in Dalton, Rusell J. and Manfred Kuechler (eds) Challenging the political order. New Social and Political Movements in Western Democracies. Oxford University Press. New York 1990, pp.67-83.

[73] Findji, Op. cit, p.328.

[74] Several important case studies - Jenkins and Perrow, 1997; Mitchell,1979; Oberschall,1975 - provide thebasis for hypothesizing about the combination of resources that are most promising for a movement’s success. quoted in Tarrow, Op. cit, p.73.

[75] Gamson William“The strategy of social protest”.The Dorsey Press 1975, pp.28-29.

[76] Ibid pp.29-30.

[77] Ibid, p.19.

[78] Landman Todd “ Toward Formalising Social Movement Theory”, paper prepared for the Ph.D Colloquium at the Department of Govenment at the University of Essex. 1995, pp.20-21.

[79] Correa Rubio Francois, Op. cit, pp.9-30.

[80] Political parties in Ecuador reject the notion of a pluriethnic or pluricultural State in Frank, Patino et.al. Op. cit, 1992.

[81] ONIC, Op. cit,p.15.

[82]Legislation. Anuario Indigenista.Vol XXXII. Mexico. 1992, pp.179-184.

[83] Fuentes and Frank, Op. cit, p.187.

[84]Latin American Weekly Report. 1994, p.13 and p.221.

[85] Tarrow, Op. cit, p.74.

[86] Ibid.

[87] quoted in Tarrow, ibid.

[88] Ibid, p.86.

[89] Jenkins and Perrow (1977:257) quoted in Tarrow, ibid.

[90] Tarrow, Op. cit, p.76.

[91] Pizarro Longómez Eduardo “Elecciones, partidos y nuevo marco institucional: En que estamos?”. Revista Análisis. Univerisdad de Bogota, 1994, No.22, mayo-agosto, p.86.

[92] Ibid, p.87.

[93] The 30% of

the Afro-Colombian population includes sambos and mulatos poeple, Ibid.

[94] Ibid, p.90.

[95] Ibid.

[96] Ibid, p.89.

[97] Cesar Augusto Marulanda, “Las elecciones de la circunscripcion especial, apoyo a las minorías?” Cine dias vistos por el CINEP, No.25, enero- marzo de 1994.

[98] Diekonja et al. 1978, quoted in Whitten Norman E. “Cultural transformation and ethnicity in Modern Ecuador”University of Illinois Press. 1981, p.9.

[99] Velasco Leon “Las elecciones en el Ecuador; concejales- cantonales, 1978 y 1990”. Quito CIESA 1992, p.110.

[100] Ibid pp.113-119.

[101]Latin American Weekly Report 1990, no.16.

[102] quoted in Whitten, Op. cit, p.10.

[103]AngladeChristian “Democracy and the rule of law in Latin America” in Ian Budge and David Mackay (eds) Developing Democracy: a Comparative ResearchLondon: Saga Publications 1994.

[104] Escobar and Alvarez, Op. cit, p.9.

[105] Tarrow Sydney“Modular Collective Action and the Rise of the social Movement: Why the French Revolution was not enough”, Politics and Society, Vol.21, No.1. March 1994, p.85.

[106] CONAIE, Achievements of the indigenous people. Diciembre 1992.

[107] Escobar and Alvarez, Op. cit, p.7.

[108] Chavez R. Leon “Seguir adelante: La etica empresarial y el comportamiento político entre los tejedores comerciales de Otavalo” in Jeffrey Enhreich (ed) Antropologia política en Ecuador, prespectivas desde las culturas indigenas. Abya-Yala. Quito (Ecuador).1991, p.214.

[109] Findji, Op. cit, p.131.

[110] Landman, Op. cit, p23.

[111] Matos Mar, Op. cit, pp. 165-203.

[112] Hendricks, Op. cit, p. 53.

[113]During the First National Indigenous Congress, organised byONIC (Organizacion Nacional de Indigenas de Colombia), in 1982, they still recognised their fight as a class conflict. Conclusions about general outline of the indigenous movement. Op. cit, p.20.

[114] The notion of“Indigenismo cósmico” was developed by some indigenous movements in Bolivia and Peru. This concept rejects any influence from Europe and emphasises traditional indigenous values as the solution. Moreover, these territories which were part of the Inca Empire aspire to create a second Tawantinsuyo.

[115] Ibid, p.74.

[116] Look at CONAIE, Achievements of the Indigenous Movement. Dec.1992.

[117] “In Colombia, the degree of destruction and assimilation of indigenous communities has been very unequal. There are some communities with 10.000 inhabitants whereas others have no more than a dozen families. Also, the degree of acculturisation has been very varied; some isolated sectors remain with their own language and style of life, others has been completely integrated into modern life.” ONIC, Op. cit, pp.75-77.

[118] Marc Becker, Op. cit, 1992.

[119] ONIC, Op. cit, p.74.

[120] Findji, Op. cit, p.127.

[121] Evers, Op. cit, p.64.

[122] Scott, Op. cit, pp.150-151.

[123] Foweraker 1995, Slater 1989, Fuentes and Frank 1989.

[124] Calderon Fernando “Los movimientos sociales ante la crisis” . Universidad de las Nacioned Unidas 1986.

[125] Evers, Op. cit, p.52.

[126] Fuentes and Frank 1989, Escobar and Alvarez1992, Calderon 1986.

[127] Calderon 1986.

[128] Gamson 1975, Tarrow 1989, Lowi 1971, Scott 1990, Escobar and Alvarez 1992, Findji 1992.

[129] Bebbington et. al. Op. cit, p.14.

[130] Ibid, p.12.