Land Rights
The Socio political Context of the Land Claim
The conflict that has developed between Indians and criollos in this area has not happened in a vacuum. There is a context which, in the first place, gave rise to this situation and which now not only permits the conflict, but actually aggravates it.
The dominant attitude to the Chaco Indians, stretching back to colonial times, was first one of fear and repudiation as being fundamentally "uncivilized". During the last century the development of an economy increasingly geared towards foreign markets led in the first place to viewing the Indians as an obstacle to development, that needed to be "removed", since they occupied lands that the developers hoped to put into production. And, in the second place, as the demand for a workforce on the large sugarcane estates rapidely expanded, they were seen as potential workers who simply needed to be domesticated.
By the beginning of this century there were no longer any "wild" Indians left in the Chaco, but the attitudes developed during the last century have continued to influence public opinion and government policy. A Geography textbook, published in 1926 and still in use in secondary schools several decades later, bluntly states, "The Argentine Republic doesn't need its Indians. Those sentimental reasons which propose their protection are quite contrary to national needs"!
Thankfully such an extreme point-of-view is no longer publically acceptable, however the predominant attitude is still depreciative, denying that the Indians might have anything of value to offer Argentine society, and seeing them rather as poor, miserable and basically in need of being integrated into national society so that they can enjoy the benefits of western society. This policy of integration is often profoundly paternalistic and scarcely hides the prejudices that lie behind it. For example, in a debate in the Provincial Parliament of Salta in 1987 on the subject of titling the lands of the Lotes Fiscales 55 & 14, the following comments were made by 2 different MPs:
"Why should we let the Indians go on fishing and hunting? Why don't
we give them a worthwhile job so that they can mantain their families?
Why don't we teach them useful things so that they can get their daily
bread with the sweat of their brow?"
".... nor do we believe that the Indians, with their very limited culture,
are fit to determine what should be done with their problematic situation
with their own families and with their future".
Basically, it is believed that if the Indians are poor it is becasue they haven't yet acquired the values and cultural patterns of the western world that would permit them to improve their material situation.
In the light of these prevailing attitudes, it is obvious that government officials have little time for giving due weight to Indian land claims, especially if they are based on Indian values and the needs of a hunter-gatherer economy. As the parliamentarian's comment above indicates, hunting and fishing are not considered real work! More in line with government thinking is that each community or family be given a reduced plot of land on which they are to be taught how to look after themselves. An important part of this looking after themselves is still thought to be, being useful and cheap labour for others.
Legislation and Rights referring to Indian Peoples
As is commonly found in the history of mankind, laws, however good they may be, don't necessarily guarantee a change of heart! Since the return to elected governments in 1983, there have been a number of new laws passed, both at a national and at a provincial level, which seek to recognize Indian rights. There are also national laws which incoroporate international law, such as the International Labour Organization's Convention 169, "Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries".
In 1994 the National Constitution was reformed and in its Article 75, ? 17, it is stated that the National Congress should:
"recognize the ethnic and cultural pre-existence of the Argentinian Indian peoples; guarantee respect for their identity and the right to a bilingual and intercultural education; recognize the legal status of their communities, and the possession and comunal property of the lands that they traditionally occupy; arrange for the provision of more land that is suitable and sufficient for human development - none of which can be alienated, transferred or liable to taxes or embargos; ensure their participation in the management of their natural resources and in all other matters that affect their interests."
The rights that are recognized in this Article of the National Constitution, along with the contents of the ILO Convention 169 would seem to provide a firm basis, not only for the recognition of Indian land rights, but also for their right to live their lives according to their own values. The reality in Salta is, however, very different.
Lhaka Honhat's Land Claim
In 1984 a group of 20 Indian communities in the Pilcomayo region of the area we are talking about, got together and presented a statement to the Provincial Government in which they request that their property rights be recognized to a single unified tract of land, in other words to a territory, of aproximately 240.000 has.. Nothing came of this, other than a kind of backlash: the criollo settlers started fencing off large areas of land with a view to securing title to these lands.
Deeply disturbed by what was happening and without any very visible support for their own claim against the criollo pretensions, the Indian communities held a general meeting in 1989 to discuss what action to take. By chance, my wife Helena, who had previously lived for a number of years in one of the Pilcomayo communities, was present at that meeting and it was on the basis of her suggestion, that the Indians decided to look for international support for their land claim. This initiative ultimately led to the formation of the small team, mentioned above, that assisted 27 Indian communities in the presentation of their land claim, formally submitted to the Salta Government in August 1991.
Susequently the Provincial Government set up a Commission to look into the issue and the original Indian proposal was developed by a group of University experts into a more detailed plan, which proposed titling 330.000 has. to the Indians in a single block, 210.000 has. to the criollos and keeping 70.000 has. as a reserve and buffer zone between the two populations.
It is not the intention of this background paper to go into all the legal and political details of the struggle of the Indians to have their land claim officially recognized. Suffice it to say that it has involved the Indians in seeking to understand non-Indian ways of negotiating and of using political power; it has involved national and international lobby; it has led the Indian leaders to meet not only successive Governors of Salta Province, but also the Presidents of Argentina and Bolivia; it has included letter and poster campaigns, the making of videos for publicity, presentations to the United Nations and other international institutions, innumerable articles in the local and national press; it has involved the Indians in blockading roads and occupying an international bridge; it has led them to file a legal suit against Provincial and National Governments ; it has involved a great deal of hardship for the Indians and has provoked the support of some and the intense animosity of others; but to the present day it has not achieved its goal: the Salta Government has recently publicly stated that it will only consider handing over title to community plots of land, but it will not tolerate the idea of a unified Indian territory or block of land. In fact the Government has backtracked on a formal commitment that it made in 1991 to hand over title to the communities of a single unified tract of land.
The reasons behind the Government's position on this matter are several. Ostensibly, it asserts that the land can only be handed over provided there is an agreement between the criollos and the Indians as regards who gets what. The principle of agreement between the 2 populations is reasonable enough, however it ignores the fact that the criollos start from a position of relative power and that the Indians do have a prior claim to the land. Official thinking on the issue is clearly influenced by the fact that the area is a frontier zone and so, in theory, constitutes a geo-politically strategic area. Alarm bells sound for some as they imagine the Indians setting up some kind of independent state and so threatening the geographical integrity of the nation. This kind of suspicion has been used again and again throughout Latin America as an arguement against recognizing Indian land rights.
At the same time, over the past few years, we have seen repeated attempts to divide the Indians, to bribe or threaten them, often with official backing. Meanwhile the criollos continue to fence off large areas of land, the natural resources continue to deteriorate and conditions for subsistence worsen day by day.
