Mehuín on the move: indigenous people oppose pollution in Chile

The forthcoming War Resisters' International Triennial will include a theme group on Civil Disobedience and Environmental Action. People from a range of environmental campaigns have been invited to come and discuss their experiences. This article gives the background to one such campaign in southern Chile.

Oscar Wilde once said, "wherever there is a man who exercises authority,
there is a man who resists authority". Chile, like most Latin American
countries has had a strong experience of oppression, and different strategies
of resistance have arisen in response. Civil disobedience has been one
such strategy, which organisations, grassroots groups, and individuals
used during the dictatorship years to respond to injustice and human rights
violations. At that time the so-called enemy was clear: Pinochet represented
the evil, the cause of the problems and sufferings and the target of resistance.
We learned much from those years and laid the foundations for NGOs and
grassroots organisations.

Pinochet is no longer president or commander-in-chief of the army, but
he is a senator for life. Although this is "legal" under the
constitution that was written under his rule, it is unfair. We now have
a different president, but the laws by which he governs have not changed
fundamentally. Not all that is "legal" is just, fair or reasonable.
Each individual, and society as a whole, have the right to resist laws
which do not contribute to the common good or which do not respect human
rights. Laws are the product of politics, a way of organising and regulating
human relationships. The main purpose of politics is not to maintain a
given political order, but to protect human life and basic human rights
of all citizens. If a government tries to bolster privilege, often using
the argument that it is democratic because it was elected, we have the
right and duty to react.

Civil disobedience

One method for doing so is civil disobedience: any act or process by
which people organise themselves to publicly challenge a law or policy
using carefully chosen and limited means. It must be premeditated and well
planned in its execution. It cannot just be done spontaneously, because
a badly organised action decreases the morale of supporters and strengthens
those in power by highlighting the flawed action rather than pointing out
the evil and what needs to be improved or changed.

The case of Mehuín

Mehuín is a little fishing village and popular seaside resort
near Valdivia and 840km south of Santiago in a region inhabited largely
by indigenous Mapuche people. This year, 10 and 12 January were two days
which have already become part of local history, with the largest march
in the village's history and a maritime mobilisation of fishermen and indigenous
people along the bay. In this way Mehuín gave its final and loudest
signal that it would not allow two big cellulose companies — Arauco and
Constitución — to do feasibility studies in the bay. They had learned
from experiences elsewhere, that whatever the results of environmental
studies, the authorities favour the big enterprises pushing through their
plans, which are normally against local inhabitants' interests.

This was the culmination of 19 months of struggle against the building
of a pipeline which would discharge the chemical wastes from the cellulose
factory into the sea were. This is the most important project in the forestry
industry, for the biggest cellulose plant in Latin America, with more than
US$1.3 million of investment. The plant is situated north of Valdivia,
35km from Mehuín. The authorities had supported the project from
the very beginning but they could not neglect the fact that the community
had organised itself and was acting as a unit.

Since the conflict, Mehuín has become well known, not only by
the indigenous people of the region who have used it as a seaside resort
and a fishing port, but also by the authorities, business interests and
the media. The publicity has brought many more tourists, who unexpectedly
have become supporters of the movement.

In June 1996 the community started the Mehuín Defence Committee,
which defends the commercial activities of the community: small-scale fishing
and tourism. The pipeline project had been under consideration since 1995
and was at first rejected by the government agencies who did the technical
study. It was finally accepted, paradoxically, by the Environmental Commission
which did the political evaluation. This commission is run by authorities
directly appointed by the president, and its lack of independence is one
of the most questionable aspects of Chilean environmental legislation.

Coordinated actions

Mehuín's opposition and the co-ordinated actions of environmental
groups forced Celco to propose a second project which was technically improved
but would still discharge millions of tonnes of toxic waste into the sea
by means of a 30km pipeline.

Nonviolent obstruction

These were the reasons that persuaded the community to use nonviolent
action to hinder the studies evaluating the project. By obstructing the
gathering of data, they hoped there would not be enough information to
evaluate the project. In other cases the local people had participated
in the environmental evaluation but had ended up frustrated at their lack
of power in the face of big business. Mehuín does not trust a mechanism
which only benefits those who have a privileged relationship with the government,
access to technical information, and the resources for big promotional
campaigns.

Mehuín launched its own campaign, trying to get support from
local authorities and organisations in the coastal zone. They started a
strong media campaign pointing out their opposition to the building of
the pipeline and also went directly to high-level political and environmental
authorities. They held marches in Mehuín itself, and in nearby towns
and the main provincial cities. As a clear statement of their discontent
with the government and business, they rejected parliamentary candidates
who supported the project. In the December 1997 elections around 60% of
ballot papers were spoiled in protest, the highest percentage in the country.

Mistrust in the institutions

For the government, the most difficult aspect of this conflict is the
way the community has faced it. Their actions are a clear expression of
mistrust in the recently created environmental institutions and the channels
the government has set up for citizens' participation. The attitude of
the people of Mehuín calls into question the basis of the government's
environmental policies and the legitimacy of the environmental evaluation
procedures of investment projects.

Huge highways and hydroelectric dams in indigenous territories, the
defence of the Bió Bió River and the native forests of the
South, the oil pipes and city sewers that damage historical areas and pollute
the environment — these are some of the best known conflicts in our country.
In all these cases business interests have won, mainly due to their good
relationship with the government and economic policies which put economic
interests before the conservation of natural resources. The state, which
holds the main responsibility for protecting the environment, does not
consider it relevant to its policies.

Private investments and mega-projects are presented as really important
for the economic growth and development of the country. This is even worse
in poor regions where there is a high level of poverty and unemployment.
People finally accept them since they offer jobs, increase income in the
region and bring them closer to the image a of modern country which the
government has tried to promote.

The people of Mehuín are not worried by accusations that they
are ignorant, or opposed to development, or being manipulated by environmental
activists. Constant control and threats of police repression do not make
them hesitate. They are people who have learnt and are clear about the
value of their environment and that their future depends on natural resources
and their ancient ecosystem. They have also learnt about the importance
of organisations and the need to be more active in policies that affect
their community. This unusual enemy — pollution — has taken them away from
their quiet isolation and has brought them nearer to the rest of the country
and their networks of power. They know they are alerting the ethical/social
conscience of the environmental policies of the state and are an important
example for the future of the country's environmental institutions.