WRITTEN QUESTION E-0546/04 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Involvement of the EU in a development project in the Mexican federal state of Chiapas which is causing the resumption of an armed conflict.
Date: 2004-02-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, European Commission, Mexico, cease-fire, civil war, common foreign and security policy, development plan, image, indigenous population

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/621

An important element of CAP reform, as decided by the Council in 2003, was to reinforce the rural
2.
development policy in favour of rural areas, by shifting funding from the first to the second pillar.
The more targeted support under the second pillar should certainly help those rural areas still facing a net
out-migration. However, the Commission’s impact assessments show that, while some further exten-
sification of agricultural production is expected, no disruptive impacts on overall levels of EU production
are foreseen.

3.
In its July 2002 Communication, the Commission proposed a 20 % modulation of direct payments,
a higher franchise and a ceiling for direct payments per farm of EUR 300 000. These provisions, and in
particular the proposed ceiling, were not included into the CAP reform package. For the time being, the
Commission has no intention to issue a proposal to change the direct payment scheme in this respect.

There is no doubt that the process of reform of the CAP, begun in 1992, is beneficial for world trade
4.
and offers new opportunities for developing countries. However, the situation and problems of developing
countries are different from country to country and therefore the impact of CAP reform may also differ
between different developing countries. In order to particularly support the least developed countries, the
EU has offered a wide range of highly preferential concessions both on trade and on the more general
issues of development.
Indeed, the EU is the world’s largest importer of agricultural products from
developing countries and the main contributor in the world for financing development and cooperation.
The objectives of these interventions are to reinforce, amongst other things, infrastructure, institutions and
education. In case of emergency aid the EU strictly respects the international rule for a constructive use of
food aids.

(1) COM(2002) 394 final.

(2004/C 84 E/0695)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0546/04

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(26 February 2004)

Subject: Involvement of the EU in a development project in the Mexican federal state of Chiapas which is

causing the resumption of an armed conflict

1.
Is the Commission aware that, according to the Mexican newspaper ‘La Jornada’ of 3 February 2004,
five non-governmental organisations in the south-eastern state of Chiapas consider the European Union to
have been involved in an attack on the village of Nuevo San Rafael, controlled by the Zapatista movement
and occupied by members of the Chol tribe, in the remote nature reserve of Montes Azules, which consists
of primeval forest, on 19 or 22 January, in which attack 23 houses were set on fire, the occupants fled,
the village was permanently cut off from the outside world by soldiers and the land is being returned to
the former big land-owners to enable them to fell the primeval forest?

Does this attack mean that the cease-fire between the armed indigenous rebel movement EZLN and

2.
the government army is over?

3. Was this attack encouraged by the fact that the EU has concluded an agreement concerning a
development project worth EUR 15 million with Governor Pablo Salazar, possibly in part in connection
with Plan Puebla Panama, which comprises major infrastructure projects in Central America from Panama
to nine poor federal states in Mexico, which require the indigenous Indian population to make way for
newcomers and to enable the land to be put to new uses or at least compel that population to give up the
autonomy which it in practice enjoys?

C 84 E/622

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

If the EU has unintentionally become involved in the events leading to this armed conflict, will the
4.
Commission take all requisite measures to eliminate all the reasons for fear on the part of the population
and for a resumption of hostilities?

Sources:

(cid:1) Indymedia Chiapas (http://chiapas.mediosindependientes.org/)

(cid:1) http://chiapas.mediosindependientes.org/display.php3?article_id=107209

(cid:1) http://www.noticias.nl/globalisering_artikel.php?id=244)

(cid:1) http://www.proceso.com.mx/noticia.html?nid=21506&cat=1

(cid:1) http://www.globalinfo.nl/article/articleview/312/1/2/

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(30 March 2004)

The Economic Partnership, Political Coordination and Cooperation Agreement between the EU and Mexico
states in its first article that the:
‘Respect for democratic principles and fundamental human rights,
proclaimed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, underpins the domestic and external policies of
both Parties and constitutes an essential element of this Agreement’. The Commission at all times ensures
that its actions are consistent with this article.

The Commission recently signed a Financing Agreement with Mexico for the ‘Integrated and Sustainable
Social Development Project in Chiapas, Mexico’. Implementation of this project has not yet begun, but is
expected to start in the coming months. The Community contribution amounts to EUR 15 million, and
Mexico will contribute EUR 16 million.

The beneficiaries of the Project will be 155 000 inhabitants of the 16 micro regions located around (not in)
the protected areas of the Lacandona Forest. This population, which is mainly indigenous and rural, has
one of the highest levels of poverty and marginalisation in Chiapas.

The project was designed with the input and participation of local stakeholders who will continue to
participate in the planning and implementation process, in particular through the Micro-regional Councils
(Consejos microregionales) who represent the local communities.

The project is not part of the Plan Puebla Panama (PPP). It has been reported that some local communities
and governments in the South/Southeast of Mexico criticise the PPP as a top-down initiative with
supposedly inadequate consultation of local stakeholders.

With regard to the specific questions that are asked:

1. The Commission is aware of the press reports in question, and considers any suggestion of EU

involvement in any act of violence in Chiapas or elsewhere to be utterly without foundation.

2.

It is not for the Commission to assess whether or not the ceasefire between the EZLN and the
government is over. However, its impression is that it would be wrong, on the basis of the reports in
question, to draw a general conclusion about the status of the ceasefire.

3. No. There is certainly no evidence to suggest that the reported attack was encouraged by the signing

of the financing agreement for this project.

4. The Commission has neither intentionally nor unintentionally become involved in events leading to

this reported attack.