Ted Lewis on Thu, 10 Feb 2000 20:13:16 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Global Exchange Critique of NYT and Wash.Post UNAM Coverage,Feb 9 |
[by way of rdom@thing.net] This message contains: 1.) A critique by Global Exchange of the coverage of the UNAM Crisis in the New York Times and the Washington Post. 2.) New York Times article: A Peaceful Raid Ends Students' Long Siege in Mexico by Julia Preston, February 7, 2000 3.) Washington Post Article: Police Retake Mexican Campus; University Radicals Are Ousted After Nine-Month Standoff by John Ward Anderson, February 7, 2000 ************************************************************************ 1.) NEW YORK TIMES AND WASHINGTON POST FAIL TO DO HOMEWORK ON UNAM CRISIS The following is an analysis by Global Exchange of the gaps and omissions in recent reporting by the New York Times and Washington Post in relation to the violent dismantling of the student strike at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) by Mexican Federal Police. Both newspapers published articles on 7 February 2000 that described the forceful reoccupation of the university campus and the arbitrary detention of over 600 students. Neither article questions the legality or the constitutionality of the police action, major topics covered by the Mexican press the next day. According to Mexican law, no-one can be arrested unless he or she is caught in the act of committing a crime, or a judge has issued a detention order that founds and motivates their arrest. Thus, as Carlos Monsivais points out in La Jornada, 7 February, over 600 students were arrested for the mere fact of being physically present on the university campus. Article 3, Fraction VII of the Mexican Constitution guarantees the autonomous status of the university (hence the inclusion of the word in its title). The directors of several leading human rights organizations made reference to the violation of the constitution by the Federal Police incursion the next day. On the 8th and 9th of February, the National Association of Democratic Lawyers also published letters in La Jornada condemning the illegality of the police action, as well as outlining further arguments about why the President's reforms that provoked the strike in the first place were also unconstitutional. It is also worth clarifying, since neither the Washington Post nor the New York Times have done so, that the PRD government of the Federal District steadfastly refused to intervene in the conflict precisely because of the autonomy issue. Neither article mentioned the serious mistrust that existed between the Mexican Government and the strikers throughout the negotiations, based on their experience of broken agreements from previous university conflicts. Mexican political and historical scholar, Dr. Adolfo Gilly, for example, has claimed that the government's absolute refusal to negotiate throughout the dialogues was the "unshakeable point of departure" from which we can understand the history of the UNAM strike and the student movement (see La Jornada, 7 February). The New York Times mentioned the police's discovery of fire bombs and marijuana plants while failing, along with the Washington Post, to mention the tens of cases of torture inflicted on imprisoned students by the police on 1 February (see La Jornada, 4 February). Miguel Angel Pichardo, a specialist in attention to victims for the Miguel Agusti'n Pro Human Rights Center, who was granted entrance to the facility where the students are detained, has confirmed the students' testimonies in interview with Global Exchange. The reporting in the New York Times minimized the scale and force of the police incursion by reporting that "hundreds of federal police officers" were involved, whereas Mexico's national newspaper, Reforma, claimed that "2,662 federal police carried out the operation" and "1000 police officers from the Federal District (Mexico City) laced the streets." The Washington Post article contains four quotes, all of which cite government officials; in the New York Times the ratio is eight to two. Neither the Washington Post nor the New York Times directly quotes critics of the military-police operation on 6 February. The only dissident opinion mentioned in the New York Times was an electronic mail sent out by the "strikers' steering committee" in which the students argue "that the authorities hoped all along to 'use violence' to end the strike." Unfortunately, the Washington Post and New York Times correspondents did not have the opportunity to read La Jornada on the following day, which published over 30 pages of articles and editorials of varying opinions concerning said operation, before writing their articles. We mention La Jornada due to its impressive coverage of the conflict, however, Reforma, Mexico's other leading independent newspaper, also ran extensive coverage. The front-page headlines of the Culture section reads, "Intellectuals demand the liberation of students." On the same page, seven different intellectuals are quoted at length criticizing the Government's operation. The reports portrayed groups connected with the strike as "small" or "radical", and student actions were described as "disturbances and crimes" which pertain to "old, leftist Mexico", without mentioning that the actions of the Federal Government were also illegal. Another important omission in the newspaper reports is that students are being charged with terrorism, accusations that could result in prison sentences of up to 40 years. The charges are also unsubstantiated, according to Mexican human rights lawyer Federico Anaya. "It is true that there were infractions to the law on the part of the students," he claimed in interview with Global Exchange, "but they were a legal political movement: to attack the political nature of the movement - to accuse them of terrorism - brings the State to a dead-end; that is, the accusations of terrorism are unsubstantiated. It is stupid to accuse them of terrorism. They were not terrorists." Another matter not mentioned in the news reports is the fact that the General Strike Committee (CGH) was legally recognized by the university rector, De la Fuente, on 10 December 1999, as an official interlocutor in the negotiations. The issues surrounding the nine-month-long conflict at the UNAM are extremely complex. Global Exchange is concerned that none of this complexity was mentioned in the Post and the New York Times articles. The language and factual content described in this analysis indicate a strong bias in favor of the government's handling of the conflict, without mentioning the constitutional controversy that surrounds both the origination and violent termination of the strike. ********************** 2.) A Peaceful Raid Ends Students' Long Siege in Mexico The New York Times February 7, 2000 by Julia Preston MEXICO CITY, Feb. 6 -- Forcing a sudden end to a nine-month student strike, hundreds of federal police officers took over the main campus of the national university today and arrested more than 600 students who had occupied Latin America's largest center for higher learning. The operation, carried out without bloodshed, was the most important intervention by government forces at the National Autonomous University of Mexico since the student movement of 1968, which ended in a massacre that traumatized a generation of Mexicans and left them determined to make the country more democratic. The end to the long strike showed how far Mexico has moved toward that goal.. President Ernesto Zedillo and the university authorities resorted to police action very reluctantly, after months of on-and-off negotiations in which university leaders gave in to almost all of the strikers' demands, which included an end to a plan to introduce tuition fees. Still, the operation today demonstrated the government's resolve to end the strike, which had in recent weeks become Mexico's premier political issue, eclipsing even the presidential election campaign. Just before 6 a.m., hundreds of police carrying nightsticks and riot shields, but no firearms, rushed into the campus on foot and quickly surrounded the few buildings still occupied by strikers. The students did not resist but instead marched out peacefully, looking grim but raising their fists defiantly, to buses that carried them away to detention. The university president, Juan Ramo'n de la Fuente, echoed sentiments of many Mexicans who hated to see uniformed troops on the campus, which is sheltered by law from intervention by government forces, but felt there was no other alternative. "As president, as an academic and as a Mexican, I am deeply sorry that we had to come to this extreme," Mr. de la Fuente said. By its end, political leaders on all sides were exasperated with a stubborn, anarchic student movement, which refused to release the huge campus and spurned any compromise. In an address televised nationwide this evening, Mr. Zedillo said that he had ordered the attorney general to obtain arrest warrants for hundreds of strikers last week after concluding that they would never agree to a negotiated solution. He said he had insisted that the police making the arrests not carry guns. The strikers "converted our public university into their private property," Mr. Zedillo said, a gibe at the students, who had accused him of turning the university over to the private sector. Acknowledging the emotional significance that the university -- with its 275,000 students -- holds for Mexicans, both national television networks carried five hours of continuous live coverage of the events this morning. At midafternoon, Mr. de la Fuente announced that the university would cancel all the judicial complaints it had brought against the strikers in recent months. In what amounted to a partial amnesty, he asked for the immediate release of all minors arrested during the last week and appealed to justice authorities to prosecute only adult protesters arrested for violent crimes. In a news release sent out by electronic mail, the strikers' steering committee said the police operation confirmed its suspicions that the authorities hoped all along to "use violence" to end the strike. The strike organization said it would not relent on its demands and called for supporters to organize protests across Mexico and at Mexican embassies overseas. Federal officials, eager to draw a contrast with 1968, when President Gustavo Di'az Ordaz dispatched army tanks to the campus, stressed that the final order for the police operation was not given by President Zedillo. Both the federal and Mexico City police, they said, were ordered to evict the strikers by a Mexico City district criminal court judge, Mari'a del Carmen Flores Cervantes. On Friday, Judge Flores issued 432 arrest warrants against strikers for illegal seizure of property, after ruling that the occupation of the campus was a crime. In a nationwide address, Interior Minister Dio'doro Carrasco said the university had been taken over by "a small radicalized group which had fallen outside the law," and added that the police had acted "to dissuade without repressing." "A democratic society cannot permit the kidnapping of its national university," Mr. Carrasco said. Federal officials said they had informed Mr.. de la Fuente, the university president, when the operation was under way. Troops from the Federal Preventive Police, a new national agency, invaded the huge campus swiftly but quietly just before dawn. Most strikers were asleep in the classrooms that had become their home during the strike. Escorted by the police, the strikers shouldered their backpacks and formed orderly lines to get on the commercial tourist buses the police rented to take them away. A few young women among them wept. One youth cradled a puppy he adopted while in residence on the campus. The police found 6 homemade firebombs and 10 plants of marijuana growing in pots in the auditorium in the philosophy department, which was the strikers' headquarters. In the classrooms of the department, books and papers, including many that appeared to be official records and students' papers, were strewn about the floor. Desks and chairs were battered and overturned to build barricades to block entrances. Computers were smashed or dismantled to remove their data storage parts. Several well-known strike leaders were detained. Alejandro Echavarri'a, a political science student who was a chief strategist for the faction known as "ultras," was one of the few strikers to shout slogans as police officers led him to a separate black police van. "This movement will never give in," he said. Also arrested was Mario Beni'tez, an economics professor who was caught by the police and then escaped during a bloody clash between strikers and university custodians last Tuesday. Those events proved to be a turning point. After the authorities took back control of Preparatory School 3, which is part of the university system, strikers armed with metal tubes and wooden clubs assaulted 37 university custodians who were installed to guard the grounds. The beating by strikers whose faces were well known to the public was captured in chilling television images. Mr. de la Fuente summoned the federal police to quell the violence. More than 250 strikers were arrested, including some key leaders. On Friday, Mr. de la Fuente called strike leaders to an emergency meeting. Face to face for the first time in six weeks, the authorities and the strikers negotiated for more than 12 hours but reached no agreement. A senior official said that the government made a final, secret offer to the strikers on Saturday to induce them to leave the campus peacefully. The students went on strike on April 20 to protest a plan by a former university president to charge tuition for the first time. The administration abandoned its tuition plan in June, and the president who proposed it, Francisco Barne's de Castro, resigned in November. Still, the strikers pressed demands to lower academic standards and hold a congress to reshape the organization of the university. ******************************** 3.) Police Retake Mexican Campus; University Radicals Are Ousted After Nine-Month Standoff The Washington Post February 7, 2000 By John Ward Anderson MEXICO CITY, Feb. 6-- More than 2,000 federal police officers stormed Mexico's largest university today, wresting control from a small group of radical students who had seized the campus and barricaded its buildings more than nine months ago, forcing cancellation of all classes. No one was injured in the early morning operation at Mexico's National Autonomous University, known by its Spanish initials as UNAM. Fear of violent clashes between students and police had been a key factor in the soft line school and government officials had taken with the students since last May, allowing the strike--sparked by a proposed tuition hike--to drag on. The officers involved in the raid carried nightsticks and shields but no firearms, a tactic President Ernesto Zedillo said he himself had ordered. More than 600 people were arrested and likely will be charged with looting, rioting and damaging public property, law enforcement officials said. "A democratic society cannot allow the kidnapping of the national university," Interior Secretary Diodoro Carrasco said in a prepared statement. "The university campus is not alien to the rule of law, nor is it acceptable to turn it into a territory of impunity." In a televised speech tonight, Zedillo said it had become evident to him "very sadly, that efforts to reach a resolution within the university community had reached their limit and that they had to be complemented with the application of the law." The strike, which began April 20 of last year, mushroomed into a national crisis. It symbolized the clash between old, leftist Mexico--represented by students demanding a free education--and more fiscally conservative officials aligned with Zedillo, who want to modernize university operations.. It was unclear when the sprawling campus will reopen and classes resume. Parts of the university--one of the largest in the hemisphere, with 300,000 students and faculty members--were heavily damaged in occasional student rampages, and repairs will be needed on some buildings. Windows were smashed, walls were spray-painted with slogans, and furniture was destroyed and used to block roads and building entrances. With a presidential election scheduled for July, the crisis was becoming increasingly politicized. Public impatience grew in recent months as the strikers became more intransigent, and protesters spilled off campus to block rush-hour traffic, stone the U.S. Embassy and clash with police. Hanging over the crisis was the specter of 1968, when Mexican soldiers opened fire on a peaceful student demonstration and killed as many as 300 people. That incident left a deep scar on the Mexican psyche, and the idea of liberating the campus with force seemed to paralyze the college administration and the government. But their unwillingness to act decisively emboldened the students, who hardened their positions, changed their demands and rebuffed most attempts at compromise. Numerous competing agendas and angry finger-pointing also complicated negotiations. The university is a federal institution in Mexico City, and that fact sparked arguments between the federal government--run by the Institutional Revolutionary Party--and the city administration--ruled by the leftist Democratic Revolutionary Party. The two sides squabbled over who had moral responsibility and legal jurisdiction for ending the dispute. Many analysts said the two parties backed different factions within the student movement, perhaps aggravating the stalemate. Government officials complained that the strike was being run by an increasingly small, isolated and radical leftist faction that was not interested in serious negotiation. Many analysts said strike leaders hoped the standoff would catapult them to national prominence--just as the 1968 student movement launched the careers of some of Mexico's top politicians--and were therefore reluctant to compromise. The strike and campus occupation began when the head of the university, Francisco Barnes, proposed raising tuition from a token 2 cents a year to about $ 140. The proposal sparked a backlash from students, parents, alumni and a wide range of left-leaning political analysts, who strongly endorsed the institution's 89-year tradition of providing a free education to everybody who could gain admission, regardless of income. Barnes quickly scrapped the tuition proposal, but it was too late. The strike had begun, and students began pressing for other benefits, such as a stronger student participation in university decision-making, an extension of the time students have to complete their education and a relaxation of admissions standards. Barnes resigned in November. The new university head, Juan Ramon de la Fuente, formerly Zedillo's health minister, organized a campus referendum last month, and about 90 percent of the students and faculty who cast ballots said they favored ending the strike. But the occupation continued. Last Tuesday, in an incident that seemed to force the government's hand, anti-strike students and faculty members briefly recaptured an UNAM-affiliated high school controlled by strikers. A violent clash erupted when the strikers returned to take back the facility, and 37 people were injured. Police moved in, arresting 251 people. Interior Secretary Carrasco said the fracas led to today's "inevitable" police action "to prevent further disturbances and crimes." Researcher Garance Burke contributed to this report. # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net