In an effort to curtail the increased drug activity at the Mexican border, President Colom declared a state of siege in Guatemala on Sunday.
It is true that the area that borders Mexico has developed an environment that panders to the flow of illegal activity. The geography of the region is mostly rural, jungle-filled land, which is bought by up in large chunks by those made wealthy in the drug trade. They claim to use the land as farms to raise horses and livestock, when in reality that is what gives them sufficient cover to hide the private runways for small planes used in the drug trade. This has created a hybrid profession that is a narco-cowboy of sorts.
The idea is that declaring a state of siege, which allows the Guatemalan officials to arrest and detain persons without just cause and often involves the use of heavy artillery and automatic weapons, might be an effective – although somewhat blunt – manner to catch criminals. A state of siege in a country like Guatemala, however, has a more brutal history. During the four-decade-long civil war that has its recent end in the mid-90′s, a state of siege was declared and maintained for 2 years. It was a weapon used by the state to covertly kill populations who were portrayed as “insurgent” guerillas but who, in the vast majority of cases, were not crazy anarchist rebels, but rather were simple townspeople hoping that the revolution might improve their pauperism. The Guatemalan state used these terms to construct a false image of the Mayan population so that they could politically justify their genocide (which was, of course, motivated by economic forces – land ownership.)
With that history, a state of siege in Guatemala makes me nervous. While our collective consciousness about human rights is tuned in a way that simply didn’t exist 50 years ago, one can only hope that this state of siege will be used to improve the daily lives of Guatemalans and not to precipitate more violence.










