A Voice For the Voiceless

The Advocacy Project helps marginalized communities to tell their story, claim their rights and produce social change. We recruit graduate students to volunteer as Peace Fellows with partners.

The Impact of Service



"I look at myself as having the potential to be as strong and caring as the amazing women I met in Kenya."

Kate Cummings (Tufts University) volunteered in 2009 as a Peace Fellow for Vital Voices in Africa.

For more 2009 feedback click here.

Translate this page:



TAKE ACTION FOR ADVOCACY

  • News
  • Subscribe to our newsletter
  • Search

Resources > Global Issues > On The Record Arc... > Ecuador – The F... > Issue 7: Profiles...

Issue 7: Profiles of Resistance

On the Record - The Fight for the Amazon
Vol. 16, Iss. 7
March 18, 2001
Profiles of Resistance
 
Contents:

 
From the Editors
 
In the next two issues of this series, Peter Lippman profiles some of the indigenous groups in Ecuador that have decided to resist any intrusion by the oil companies into their land.
 
Much of the activity centers on the province of Pastaza, in the southern part of Ecuador's Oriente. Compared to the north, Pastaza is relatively untouched. It is also eyed hungrily by the oil companies. As Lippman reports, the people who live in Pastaza are suspicious and wary. They have seen the devastation wrought in the northern Oriente -- in places like San Carlos -- and they fear that any concessions to the companies will open the door to similar devastation in their land. So they resist. The struggle is particularly fierce when it comes to land rights.

Self-Determination at Issue as UN and OAS Struggle to Draft Declarations on Indigenous Rights
 
Two parallel attempts in the United Nations and Organization of American States (OAS) to draft a declaration on indigenous rights are meeting stiff resistance from governments over the inclusion of the right to self-determination.
 
A working group of the General Assembly of the OAS finished a week of deliberating on a draft declaration in Washington, D.C., last Friday (March 15). The mood at the meeting was good and governments and indigenous representatives are working together well. But the draft does not include the all-important right to self-determination.
 
The UN draft, in contrast, contains extensive references to the right to self-determination and would even give indigenous peoples the right to 'own, develop, and use' their land and resources as well as veto any exploitation that takes place without their consent. Even though declarations are not legally binding, this could provide critical ammunition to indigenous in Ecuador in their fight against oil companies.
 
The problem is that governments are adamantly opposed to the UN draft because it was not drafted with their involvement. The draft was drawn up by independent experts with input from indigenous people and presented in 1994 to governments on the UN Human Rights Commission, which will have to approve any declaration before it can be adopted by the UN General Assembly. In six years, the Commission has only managed to agree on two of the 45 articles in the declaration.   The fate of these two drafts, in the UN and OAS, shows the advantages and disadvantages of negotiating at the regional and international level.
 
The advantage of the OAS process is that there are fewer participants, and everyone knows each other. It is also easier for a regional grouping like the OAS members to reach agreement on a text because they share many common values. The mood is clearly good, as governments and indigenous representatives work together.
 
The process in the UN is a good deal more acrimonious. Governments appear to have taken umbrage at being presented with a finished draft that some feel could undermine the state and even lead to declarations of independence. Participants say that the indigenous caucus has dug in its heels in the UN over the unwillingness of governments to recognize a legal principal -- self-determination -- that is enshrined in international laws they have ratified.
 
The principal area of disagreement -- and the one that relates most specifically to the crisis in Ecuador -- concerns land and resources. Many indigenous peoples do not distinguish between the land and its resources (above, on, or below the surface). They also claim ownership on the basis of traditional use. But most governments view resources as belonging to the state and reserve the ultimate right to expel settlers in the interests of the state. This is at the heart of the dispute over oil exploration in Ecuador. The UN declaration appears to side squarely with the indigenous on this key issue.
 
Many governments are also concerned that the UN draft would impose heavy financial obligations on states. One article (15) states that indigenous peoples have the right to education in their own language. While critical for maintaining the cultural identity of a people, this could be an expensive proposition for a state like Brazil that has 280 distinct tribes.
 
One government delegate at last week's OAS working group said that the OAS offers another advantage over the UN Human Rights Commission, in that the OAS is more of a political than a human rights process. Not all of the indigenous demands need to be seen through the prism of human rights, he argued. For example, there is a big push under way to provide legal protection for indigenous designs and even herbal medicine. That is a matter of intellectual property more than human rights, he argued.
 
There is little doubt that the human rights approach being followed by the UN forces governments to accept a legal obligation, and that this creates an aura of confrontation. But that is precisely the appeal for many indigenous representatives and the reason why they are unwilling to give up on the UN in spite of the glacial pace of negotiations.
 
As a result, they now plan to resume their lobbying at the first-ever indigenous forum -- a new UN body specifically for indigenous peoples -- which is due to meet at the UN in New York in May.

Indigenous Outrage at New World Bank Policy on Indigenous Peoples
 
A new World Bank policy on indigenous people has been harshly criticized by indigenous leaders and representatives as 'incompatible with the indigenous peoples' internationally-recognized human rights and therefore at odds with the legal obligations of the Bank.'
 
The criticism comes in an open letter that was released on March 15 and signed by 48 leading indigenous representatives and activists. It was circulated last week at an OAS working group that has been considering a new draft declaration on indigenous rights.
 
The letter is addressed to James Wolfensohn, President of the World Bank, and it takes aim at the Bank's Operational Directive on Indigenous Peoples (OP 4.10), which, it says, 'sets standards far below human rights standards accepted by, and binding on, the vast majority of Bank members.'
 
The letter says, for example, that international law clearly recognized that indigenous people have the right to own their land, and that this includes titling, demarcation, and ensuring the integrity of the land. OP 4.10, however, only requires governments that borrow from the Bank to 'take into account' indigenous rights (individual and collective) and thus places no obligation or pressure on the borrowing government. This, warns the letter, would give a carte blanche to any government that does not respect indigenous rights.
 
The letter also says that the Bank's policy is clearly inconsistent with Wolfensohn's own position that 'without the protection of human rights and property rights, and a comprehensive framework of laws, no equitable development is possible.'
 
The letter also faults the Bank's staff for being 'patronizing and offensive' in the way that they consulted with indigenous representatives during drafting of the policy. In August 2001, Bank officials agreed to participate at a roundtable with indigenous representatives to discuss the new policy and its compatibility with international law. But, says the letter, 'written requests to set a date for the roundtable were ignored.' The indigenous representatives were not even formally notified of the Bank's decision not to participate.
 
'We are left wondering why the Bank is so reluctant to engage in serious discussion and debate about indigenous peoples' human rights and OP 4.10,' says the letter.
 
Human rights groups have sparred with the World Bank over its indigenous policy since the early 1980s, when the Bank first began to adopt operational directives governing its lending. A growing number of human rights and indigenous groups would like the Bank to withhold loans from any project that involves forcible resettlement. They would also like the Bank not to lend to governments that do not clearly recognize indigenous rights, particularly control and ownership of land. This would provide a powerful financial incentive to governments like Ecuador to respect their indigenous populations and not to engage in ruinous development programs.
 
The Bank's view is that this would overstep its mandate -- which is to promote economic growth -- and also violate the sovereignty of its member governments. In addition, Bank officials have to answer to the governments that sit on the Bank's board. But many critics feel the Bank is hiding behind this legalistic argument to encourage governments to put economic growth before all else. Ecuador's exploitation of oil is a case in point.

 
Profiles of Resistance
 
The Achuar and Shuar
 
The Achuar and Shuar have inhabited the territory that is now Ecuador since before the Inca conquest.
 
Numbering over 5,000, the Achuar live in a remote region of 70 square kilometers on both sides of the border between Pastaza and Morona-Santiago provinces. Much of it is only accessible by foot or by airplane. Since 1990, the Achuar have been represented by FINAE, the Inter-provincial Federation of the Ecuadorian Nation of Achuar.
 
FINAE has taken a stance against all oil development, and most Achuar territory is as yet unscathed. Oil companies began preliminary exploration in Blocks 23 and 24 several years ago. The Achuar responded immediately -- and not always in the most refined manner. In 1997 oil prospectors came to the Achuar community of Shaim in Block 23 disguised as environmentalists. When their identity was discovered, the prospectors were briefly kidnapped by residents and then expelled. Members of FINAE told them not to come back.
 
At a meeting in early 1997, the Achuar decided unanimously to prohibit oil projects completely in their territory. Pedro Tsamaraint, Territorial Director for FINAE, explained: 'Our community concluded that the companies would contaminate our rivers, the fish would die, and that we would get incurable diseases -- cancer, tuberculosis, and others. The Achuar have not suffered from these diseases. But if we permit the oil exploration, the same thing will happen as in the north. We don't want that.'
 
'The oil development would also affect our planting, our gardens, where we grow yucca and other staples. When the companies come they would throw oil on the ground and contaminate it, and then the soil would not produce anything. Trees will die, and the animals that live in our area would swim in the oil pools and die. The Achuar always hunt. If we eat sick animals, then we will become sick.'
 
'Our elders told us all these things. They went to Sucumbios and Orellana, Coca, to see what had happened in that sector. The companies offered us many things, a communal house, food, so that we would live well. They offered to make a contract with us. But they haven't fulfilled such contracts in other places. They do it for six months, and then when they pump the oil, goodbye. The same thing would happen to us, and we don't want it. So we say 'no' to oil development.'
 
The Shuar, represented by FIPSE (Independent Federation of the Shuar Nation of Ecuador), are in accord with the Achuar on this strategy. As Tito Puanchir, the president of FIPSE put it, 'Our rivers, our forests, which are the source of life for us, for our children, and for our children's children, cannot be bought. We are demanding that our right to develop our communities in a sustainable manner be respected.'
 
The Shuar and Achuar have used civil disobedience and other disruptive tactics to prevent oil exploration from going ahead in their territory, and to some extent they have been successful. On one occasion, in July 1999, 1,000 people occupied an airstrip to prevent an illicit company meeting. On that occasion, two company representatives were tied up and kept on the airstrip to prevent government airplanes from landing. The next month, 400 people demonstrated in Macas to support the legal struggle for consultation.
 
The Achuar have been equally tough on their own members who have tried to talk with the oil companies. In 1999 four people who tried to organize a meeting with company representatives were punished in a traditional way, by being held over smoking hot peppers. These actions may seem harsh, but Rainforest Action Network quoted FINAE president Santiago Kawarim as saying, 'We are at war with Arco. They try to divide us, and if they continue to do so there will be a confrontation.'
 
When Quichua activists in Block 10 of western Pastaza province also resisted in the vicinity of the Villano oilfields, Ecuadorian army units retaliated by controlling movements around the villages near the oil wells and pipelines. As was noted earlier, Arco sold its concessions to Agip and Burlington Resources in 1999. One has to assume that the combativeness of the population of the Oriente influenced the decision.
 
Burlington Resources has not fared much better. A provision in the Block 24 concession contract requires the company to negotiate with FIPSE. But in keeping with its unconditional opposition to oil development, FIPSE refuses to speak with Burlington, leaving them no way to proceed with their exploration. As a result, Burlington was compelled to exempt itself from requirements of its contract with the Ecuadorian government due to 'force majeure,' or conditions beyond their control.
 
This seems like a victory for the opponents of oil. But it is probably too early to celebrate. Oil companies have been driven out of the Oriente before, when Conoco and then Maxus abandoned Block 16 in the north as a result of resistance. In 1999, large parts of Cuyabeno Park and the traditional lands of the Tagaere indigenous community were placed under official 'protection.' But today, those lands are again threatened by new oil exploration. The Achuar and Shuar will face more struggles in the future.
 
OPIP Fights for Land Rights
 
'We have seen what happened in the north, and they told us of their experience. The government and the companies never consulted anyone about that exploitation. Then they came to deceive us and to repress us. The police and the army came then, and they still come now,' says Cesar Cerda, activist with OPIP.
 
With a population of 15,000, the Quichua -- descendents of the Incas -- are by far the largest indigenous nation of Pastaza. Their representative body OPIP (the Organization of Indigenous Peoples of Pastaza) is also one of the most well-organized advocacy groups in Pastaza province.
 
OPIP was founded in 1978 to represent all indigenous communities of Pastaza. Since that time, all but the Shiwiar have formed their own independent organizations, leaving OPIP with a largely Quichua membership. Over the past 20 years, OPIP has led a campaign to gain title to indigenous lands, prevent environmental destruction, and promote sustainable alternative development. At present OPIP works with around 135 communities of Pastaza.
 
Pastaza lies in the south-central part of the Oriente, and it is shaping up to be the next battleground. This relatively unspoiled province is home to many traditional indigenous communities, and most still maintain the customs of their ancestors. They hunt and fish and collect wild fruits and vegetables. They raise yucca, platanos, and some grains to augment their diet. Communities are led in some cases by shamans, in others by a more modern type of leadership.
 
By any conventional measurement, they are also poor. Outside of the provincial capital of Puyo, few communities in the province have electricity or running water. Although oil prospecting and road building has begun, bringing with it pollution and colonization, most of Pastaza is still roadless and remote. Many communities are reachable only by foot, canoe over the many rivers, and small aircraft.
 
The struggle for land rights has been particularly intense, and it demonstrates the government's insensitivity to indigenous culture. It started in the late 1980s, when oil companies began prospecting in Pastaza. In 1989 the Ecuadorian government signed an agreement with OPIP at Sarayacu that granted communal title to all indigenous land in Pastaza. However, the next year the government renounced the agreement. In 1990 Pastaza activists, led by OPIP and the regional indigenous organization CONFENIAE, participated in the first of several peaceful uprisings that shook Ecuador throughout the 1990s.
 
Led by CONAIE, the nationwide confederation of indigenous organizations, 160 activists occupied Santo Domingo Cathedral in Quito, demanding the resolution of land disputes. A thousand indigenous demonstrators from all over Ecuador marched to Quito and petitioned the government for legalization of indigenous land titles. Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and the Church also supported the demonstrations. The President of Ecuador made some concessions on bilingual education and other aspects of indigenous rights but ignored the plea for land registration.
 
Soon afterwards, OPIP submitted a proposal to the Ecuadorian government that would have put 90 percent of Pastaza's land under the control of indigenous people. The plan stipulated that OPIP, as representative of the indigenous communities, would receive the land titles. It included arrangements for management of natural resources that would prevent deforestation and other environmental destruction in the province. The president dismissed the proposal as an 'encroachment on the sovereignty of the Ecuadorian state.'
 
Two more years of fruitless negotiations prompted OPIP to organize another march on Quito. In 1992, the quincentennial of the Spanish conquest, thousands of Achuar, Shuar, Shiwiar, and Quichua people from almost 150 communities made the grueling 240 kilometer trek out of the lowlands and up the steep Andes mountains into the capital. They marched for 30 days, wearing traditional dress, playing music, and sharing food along the way.
 
As thousands of indigenous people rallied in front of the Presidential Palace in Quito, the president met with 100 indigenous leaders and agreed to grant title deeds to 70 percent of Pastaza's land, covering about three million acres of land. Marchers remained camped in the streets for three more weeks, until the documents for title were drawn up.
 
The 1992 accord gave the indigenous communities back some control over their territory. But at the same time, the titled blocks of land were demarcated in an arbitrary and haphazard way that disregarded natural boundaries like rivers and ridges, and ignored specific ethnic claims. This showed a vast disrespect for the concept of indigenous nationality. There is another problem: titled ownership of territory does not supersede the state's right to subsoil resources, which is guaranteed by the constitution.
 
In 1994 the government enacted a new Agrarian Reform Law that was intended to strengthen individual titles to land. As a result, the law made it possible for communal plots to be subdivided and sold. This appeared to threaten the geographical integrity of indigenous communities, and it led to another massive protest.
 
This was the most militant demonstration to date. The roads to more than 50 oil wells throughout the Oriente were blocked and most of the main highways were shut down. At least two dozen people were killed. The president declared a state of emergency, but the protests continued for over a month. In Riobamba, indigenous people occupied the Cathedral with the approval of the local bishop. The government was compelled to negotiate with CONAIE, and the agrarian law was revised.
 
Oil concession leasing did not begin in Pastaza until the late 1980s, and although several blocks have now been auctioned off, the pace of oil exploration still lags behind that of the northern Oriente. Pastaza in 2002 is not Sucumbios in 1970, and the brutal destruction caused by Texaco is unlikely to be repeated today in the central and southern provinces of the Oriente.
 
Both the affected communities and the oil companies have become more sophisticated. Oil companies approach communities saying, 'We are not like Texaco.' Representatives of OPIP and other indigenous organizations have visited the northern provinces of Sucumbios and Orellana to see the destruction caused by oil.
 
At the same time, the activists face many of the same challenges that they have faced in the north. Oil companies are doing their best to divide communities by bribing and threatening people, despite the persistent educational work of activists. They reward communities that allow drilling, while offering nothing to the surrounding region. Entire distinct indigenous cultures are still threatened with sickness, impoverishment, displacement, and extinction.
 
The great fear is that the next round of oil block leasing could open the entire remaining untouched territory of Pastaza to oil exploration. OPIP staff members told the Advocacy Project that they were determined to prevent this from happening. More direct action seems inevitable.
 
'Block 23 is now paralyzed,' said Cesar Cerda, from OPIP. 'We are blocking airports. Staff of the oil companies arrive, but we don't permit them to work. Our people are very angry. Our first condition is that the government comply with promises that they signed regarding Block 10, for example, distributing the benefits of production, including a percentage for development.'
 
Pablo Ortiz, another OPIP activist, was optimistic: 'I think they won't press further exploitation without our approval. They know that they have to be more careful. There have been kidnappings. People took over wells in 1993 and 1998. We have the capacity to mobilize forces to resist. We are also allied to international organizations: Friends of the Earth, the Amazon Alliance, Rainforest Action Network, and the European Parliament.'
 
Mr. Cerda concluded, 'There will be much pressure from the government, and we will continue to resist. We won't give in easily.'
 
References and Resources

 
Glossary
 
Achuar -- An indigenous community of around 5,000, related to the Shuar. Located in Pastaza and Morona-Santiago provinces.
 
Agip -- Italian-owned oil company drilling in Block 10, western Pastaza province.
 
Block -- A concessionary piece of territory where exploration and drilling rights are leased by the Ecuadorian government to an oil company.
 
CONAIE -- Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of the Amazon.
 
CONFENIAE -- Confederation of the Nationalities Indigenous to the Amazon of Ecuador.
 
FINAE -- Inter-provincial Federation of the Ecuadorian Nation of Achuar.
 
FIPSE -- Independent Federation of the Shuar Nation of Ecuador.
 
Huaorani, Zapara, Siona, Cofan, and Secoya -- Pre-Incan indigenous communities of Ecuador whose numbers are threatened by oil development.
 
OPIP -- Organization of Indigenous Peoples of Pastaza.
 
Orellana -- A northern province of the Oriente.
 
Oriente -- The Ecuadorian Amazon; eastern half of Ecuador.
 
Pastaza -- A central province of the Oriente.
 
Puyo -- Capital of Pastaza province.
 
Quichua -- The largest indigenous group in Ecuador; descendants of the Incas.
 
Shuar -- The second-largest indigenous group in Ecuador, pre-Incan.
 
Sucumbios -- Northernmost province of the Oriente.
 
Tagaere -- A sub-group of the Huaorani.
 
Villano -- A municipality in oil concession Block 10, western Pastaza. This Block is controlled by Agip (and formerly by Arco).
 
Yasuni Park -- A national park in the central Oriente inhabited by Huaorani; part of it is protected.
 
In the next issue: Profiles of Resistance II

Back