{"id":590,"date":"2012-10-18T13:57:28","date_gmt":"2012-10-18T18:57:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/library.brown.edu\/modernlatinamerica\/?page_id=590"},"modified":"2012-10-18T13:57:28","modified_gmt":"2012-10-18T18:57:28","slug":"indigenous-mobilization-in-ecuador","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/library.brown.edu\/create\/modernlatinamerica\/chapters\/chapter-6-the-andes\/moments-in-andean-history\/indigenous-mobilization-in-ecuador\/","title":{"rendered":"Indigenous Mobilization in Ecuador"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Emergence of CONAIE
\n<\/strong>By Emma Bainbridge<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Members of CONAIE marching in Quito against the 2002 summit of the Free Trade Area of the Americas, courtesy of Users Donovan and Scott<\/p><\/div>\n

In Ecuador, where the indigenous population has historically lacked political representation, the existence of the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador serves as an important indicator of political and social progress. CONAIE, as the confederation is called, has given indigenous Ecuadorians a voice on the national stage after decades of relative silence, and the organization’s efforts have influenced national politics. CONAIE symbolizes a cohesive effort by a heterogeneous group of indigenous citizens to change the political system through peaceful street protests, constitutional reforms, and electoral politics.[1]<\/a><\/p>\n

CONAIE was established in 1986 and represents legitimate indigenous involvement in the political process, an uncommon trend for most of the Andean nations. Though class-based organizations struggled for social justice and land rights in Ecuador throughout the twentieth century (and before), the 1980s brought about economic conditions that inspired the direct involvement of indigenous actors in elections. Economic stagnation under neoliberal policies, changing government conditions, and the neglect of indigenous tribes and their demands motivated the development of a widespread social movement and an associated indigenous organization. From 1972 to 1979, indigenous issues \u201cbarely appeared in the discourse of the military regimes\u201d that controlled the country, resulting in an essentially nonexistent relationship between indigenous groups and the federal government. When a democratic president was elected in 1979, the rhetoric changed slightly, promoting pluriculturalism. Under this \u201cpluricultural\u201d model of the Ecuadorian population, the new government considered \u201crespect for and support of indigenous peoples and cultures as a key component of national development,\u201d but indigenous activists had little control over what \u201crespect\u201d and \u201csupport\u201d meant in practice, and could not actively contribute to the political agenda asserted by politicians.[2]<\/a><\/p>\n

While tribal activists were clashing with government officials over federal policies and projects, tremendous economic instability made indigenous political involvement all the more pressing. The oil boom of the 1970s provided the Ecuadorian state and foreign investors with significant revenue, but steep decreases in oil prices in the 1980s resulted in an economic downturn and foreign debt. Ecuadorian Indians, who never saw any profit from the oil industry, suffered declines in standards of living, job opportunities, demand for products, and available government services.[3]<\/a> President Leon Febres Cordero implemented neoliberal free-market policies like deregulation that resulted in inflation. His successor Rodrigo Borja Cevallos attempted to address inflation and widespread unemployment through an austerity program and state intervention, but his efforts were futile. The horrendous economic conditions in the country, which overwhelmingly impacted the lower class indigenous population, influenced the creation of organizations that could provide disenfranchised members of the population with political agency.[4]<\/a><\/p>\n

CONAIE was created out of the consolidation of two indigenous organizations, ECUARUNARI and CONFENIAE, in response to the precipitating factors of the 1970s and 1980s, as well as the fragmentation between existing indigenous efforts. At a convention of 500 indigenous representatives in 1986, CONAIE developed and agreed upon a political agenda that centered around economic policy and responded to IMF policies, including the absolution of indigenous debt, freezing of consumer prices and tribal exemption from land taxes. Other notable priorities included indigenous rights, such as land titles from the government for tribes, protection of archaeological sites, as well as funding for bilingual education.[5]<\/a> Lastly, CONAIE called for a public declaration and constitutional ratification explicitly defining Ecuador as a plurinational state. Plurinationalism suggests that indigenous groups have their own ethnicities, cultures, histories, and distinct political rights, including legal rights to ancestral territory as well as separate lawmaking and governmental structures within the federal government framework. In contrast, pluriculturalism, which had previously been embraced by the government, does not specify the political and legal rights of membership of an indigenous \u201cnation.\u201d Rather, pluriculturalism only notes ethnic, cultural and historical differentiation between indigenous groups and the rest of the Ecuadorian population.<\/p>\n

Despite the distinctions between different tribes, CONAIE has successfully united the indigenous population around their shared goals, history, marginalization, and desire for respect and progress. The formation of an allied political bloc through the creation of CONAIE is a notable accomplishment, given that no collaborative efforts between all of the indigenous groups in Ecuador had existed previously.[6]<\/a><\/p>\n

Beginning with the 1990 uprising, CONAIE gained respect by organizing and staging large, nonviolent indigenous mobilizations, generally in protest of federal policies or in celebration of indigenous culture. The group staged uprisings in 1990, 1992 and 1994, and with each of these subsequent protests, the government became more aware of the organization’s capabilities and thus more willing to negotiate. The government conceded 16,000 square kilometers of land to tribes after the 1992 protest, and changed the terms of a controversial neoliberal agrarian reform law after the 1994 protest. As Clark and Becker describe, \u201cthe image of erudite Indians, in indigenous dress, negotiating directly with the national government…is a potent symbol of the changing relationship between Indians and the Ecuadorian state,\u201d indicating that indigenous actors began to integrate themselves into and utilize mainstream political channels while continuing to promote their heritage and culture.[7]<\/a><\/p>\n

Where the series of uprisings in the 1990s gave CONAIE political clout, the 1996 national elections elevated it to an important political constituency. The emergence of CONAIE onto the political scene between 1986 and 1997 prompted the mobilization of a marginalized but essential community in Ecuador and has put indigenous political rights on the national agenda. By utilizing mass uprisings as well as political channels, CONAIE has facilitated the entrance of tribes into official governmental processes and strengthened the leadership and solidarity of indigenous groups. CONAIE has been called \u201cthe premier ethnic organization.\u201d[8]<\/a><\/p>\n

CONAIE has faced numerous hurdles in the last decade, including an official break with former president and mutual supporter Lucio Gutierrez after his government \u201cbetrayed the mandate given to it by the Ecuadorian people\u201d regarding economic policy.[9]<\/a> Despite challenges like the widely publicized break between CONAIE and Gutierrez, the organization continues to empower the indigenous population. The CONAIE model of political engagement and popular mobilization has provided tribes with governmental representation and acknowledgment, and, barring any unexpected setbacks, will provide indigenous tribes with respect and rights in Ecuadorian society.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n
\n

[1]<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 Petras and Veltmeyer, 139.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[2]<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 Clark and Becker, 143.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[3]<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 Petras and Veltmeyer, 139.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[4]<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 Dennis M. Hanratty.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[5]<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 Mijeski and Beck, 1998, 3.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[6]<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 Clark and Becker, 149.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[7]<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 Clark and Becker, 2.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[8]<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 Clark and Becker, 235.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[9]<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 Iza, Cholong and Quenama.<\/p>\n

***********<\/p>\n

<\/strong>Bibliography:<\/span><\/p>\n

Acosta, Andres Mejia. Informal Coalitions and Policymaking in Latin America<\/i>. New York: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group, 2009.<\/p>\n

Adams, David. \u201cFight for Identity, Justice.\u201d St. Petersburg Times. <\/i>February 21, 2000. World and Nation.<\/p>\n

Becker, Marc. \u201cIndigenous Uprisings in Ecuador.\u201d Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern World<\/i>. Oxford University Press: 2008.<\/p>\n

Clark, Kim A. and Marc Becker, editors. Highland Indians and the State in Modern Ecuador<\/i>. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2007.<\/p>\n

Colloredo-Mansfeld, Rudi. Fighting Like a Community<\/i>. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2009.<\/p>\n

Colloredo-Mansfeld, Rudi. \u201cIndigenous Politics and State Formation in Ecuador (Book Review \u00a0\u00a0 of Highland Indians and the State in Modern Ecuador<\/i>).\u201d A Contracorriente<\/i>. Vol. 6, No. 1 (Fall 2008): 232-236.<\/p>\n

CONAIE Website. 2009. <http:\/\/www.conaie.org><\/p>\n

Ecuador Political Constitution of 2008\u00a0<http:\/\/pdba.georgetown.edu\/Constitutions\/Ecuador\/ecuador.html<\/a>>
\n<\/a><\/p>\n

Iza, Leonidas, Humberto Cholongo and Jose Quenama. CONAIE Official Statement. \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u201cIndigenous Movement Breaks with President Lucio Gutierrez.\u201d August 6, 2003. <http:\/\/www.en-camino.org\/node\/13<\/a> ><\/p>\n

Hanratty, Dennis M, ed. Ecuador: A Country Study<\/i>. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1989.<\/p>\n

Mijeski, Kenneth J. and Beck, Scott H. \u201cMainstreaming the Indigenous Movement In Ecuador: The Electoral Strategy.\u201d Document Prepared for Delivery at the XXI International Congress of the Latin American Studies Association, Chicago, September 24-26, 1998. <http:\/\/lasa.international.pitt.edu\/LASA98\/Mijeski-Beck.pdf ><\/p>\n

Mijeski, Kenneth J. and Beck, Scott H. \u201cThe Electoral Fortunes of Ecuador’s Pachikutik Party: The Fracaso<\/i> of\u00a0 the 2006 Presidential Elections.\u201d The Latin Americanist<\/i>. Vol. 5, Issue 2 (29 Aug 2008): 41-59.<\/p>\n

Minorities at Risk Project. \u201cChronology for Indigenous Highland Peoples in Ecuador.\u201d United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. 2004. <http:\/\/www.unhcr.org\/refworld\/docid\/469f38831e.html><\/p>\n

Petras, James and Henry Veltmeyer. Social Movements and State Power<\/i>. London and Ann\u00a0Arbor, MI: Pluto Press, 2005.<\/p>\n

Wessendorf, Kathrin. Challenging Politics: Indigenous Peoples’ Experiences with Political Parties and Elections. International Working Group for Indigenous Affairs, 2001.<\/p>\n

Yashar, Deborah J. \u201cContesting Citizenship: Indigenous Movements and Democracy in Latin America.\u201d Comparative Politics<\/i>. Vol. 31, No. 1 (Oct 1998): 23 \u2013 42. JSTOR.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Emergence of CONAIE By Emma Bainbridge In Ecuador, where the indigenous population has historically lacked political representation, the existence of the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador serves as an important indicator of political and social progress. CONAIE, as … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":37,"featured_media":0,"parent":462,"menu_order":4,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"sidebar-page.php","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-590","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/library.brown.edu\/create\/modernlatinamerica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/590","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/library.brown.edu\/create\/modernlatinamerica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/library.brown.edu\/create\/modernlatinamerica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/library.brown.edu\/create\/modernlatinamerica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/37"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/library.brown.edu\/create\/modernlatinamerica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=590"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/library.brown.edu\/create\/modernlatinamerica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/590\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/library.brown.edu\/create\/modernlatinamerica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/462"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/library.brown.edu\/create\/modernlatinamerica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=590"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}