The Guatemala conflict was chosen for exploration in this project. Guatemala is a highly mountainous country in Central America. It is known for being at the heart of the famous Mayan civilization. The other thing that the country is known for is the genocide that happened in the country several decades ago and whose effects continue to linger in the minds and lives of Guatemalans even today. This paper explores the violence that occurred in Guatemala, the role played by politics and recommendations for peacebuilding with the help of class readings and outside sources.
The Violence That Occurred in the Case
Guatemala’s civil war lasted between 1966 and 1996 (Modern conflicts: Guatemala 1966-1996 1). This was approximately thirty years of civil war and state violence. The conflict claimed the lives of approximately 200,000 individuals and more than 80% of this number comprised indigenous Mayans (Modern conflicts: Guatemala 1966-1996 1). Both the militia and Guatemala government forces committed atrocities against the masses. However, 93% of the violations of human rights in Guatemala can be attributed to government forces (The Center for Justice and Accountability 1). Guatemala’s genocide had immediate and far-reaching consequences. One of the consequences of this civil war is the widespread violence meted on the people on civilians. Things got worse when general Fernando Romeo Garcia became the president of Guatemala. A report by the Historical Clarification Commission indicated that extrajudicial killings in Guatemala increased from 100 to 10,000 in 1978 and 1981, respectively (The Center for Justice and Accountability 1). Apart from the widespread deaths, the other consequence of the Guatemala conflict is the disruption of people’s lives. It is reported that at least 626 villages were destroyed during this conflict (Holocaust Museum Houston 1). Each of the villages accommodated several homesteads. At the same time, the civil war destroyed people’s livelihoods. One of the approaches of the government in regard to the armed conflict was the scorched earth policy. As a result of this policy, government soldiers burned crops and buildings, fouled water supplies, slaughtered livestock, and destroyed cultural symbols and sacred places (Holocaust Museum Houston 1). This is a policy in which the government targeted people’s livelihoods as a way of making them surrender.
An Explanation of the Genocide
Guatemala civil war has its roots in nearly 500 years of ethnic exclusion and violence (The Center for Justice and Accountability 1). The occupation of the country by the Spanish forces disturbed the order of the great ancient Mayan civilization. Spanish explorers took over the Mayan territory in the 16th century (Holocaust Museum Houston 1). The new rulers made the Mayans slaves in their own territory. Even today, the Mayans comprise one of the most underprivileged groups within Guatemala’s society. The Spanish occupants replaced the Mayan administration with a harsh plantation-led economy sustained by forced labor. Despite Guatemala gaining its independence in 1821, the country remained in the hands of a series of military dictators with strong ties with landed oligarchy (The Center for Justice and Accountability 1). The dictators were more than willing to hold onto power regardless of the harm their actions would cause the general public.
The Guatemala armed conflict started when the armed leftist insurgents were mobilized starting in 1960 (Brett 10). Initially, the conflict was not intense but things escalated over time. As of the 1970s, numerous armed groups had emerged in the country (Brett 10). The masses in Guatemala differed in the armed groups that they supported. However, the Guerrilla Army of the Poor military group received the most support from rural Guatemala (Brett 10). As a result, a large number of indigenous communities were coerced into the various ranks of this group.
Political Role
As aforementioned, politics was at the center stage of Guatemala’s conflict. Guatemala held its first democratic elections in 1944 (Modern conflicts: Guatemala 1966-1996 1). Following this election, populists rose to power in Guatemala, giving hope to the residents of this country that they would get justice for the harm perpetrated against them during the colonial era. In an attempt to correct the wrongs done against the Guatemala people, the populist government put into place a host of policies. One of the areas of policies targeted by the populists comprised land and its utilization. While Guatemalans were pleased with their new government, some foreign countries were not happy with the development taking place in this country, especially in regard to its land reform policies. As a result, the U.S. sponsored a military uprising in a bid to put to an end the land reforms that it believed threatened the wellbeing of multinational corporations, especially the United Fruit Company. Following his election into the presidency in 1950, Jacopo Arbenz led Guatemala away from international investments through several means, including nationalizing industries in addition to introducing radical land reform (Brett 9). The gist of the reforms was to return the land earlier taken from indigenous people by colonials back to their possession. As early as the first few years of the 1950s, the government had already begun taking land from multinational corporations such as the United Fruit Company and returning it to rural peasants, mainly the indigenous (Brett 9). International entities, mainly the U.S. were not happy with this move. As a result, a CIA-led coup led to president Arbenz in 1954 with the support of the political and economic elites as well as the Guatemalan military (Brett 9). However, the new regime did not serve the interests of the Guatemalan. On the contrary, it repressed dissent and reintroduced the old laws.
Despite comprising about 40% of overall Guatemala’s population, indigenous Guatemala have suffered systematic marginalization since the colonial epoch (Brett 7). They have had their land taken from them not only by the colonialists but als black elites in their country. According to Brett, systemic racism perpetrated against the indigenous Guatemalans has been propagated by military and religious leaders, wealthy landowners and politicians since the colonial era (Brett 7). In an attempt to hold onto power and safeguard their political and economic interests, the elites in Guatemala have constructed belief systems aimed at disfranchising the indigenous communities.
As aforementioned, the violence that occurred during the Guatemalan civil war escalated over time. On this note, guerrilla warfare started in the 1960s but the violence only peaked in the second half of the 1970s and early 1980s (Modern conflicts: Guatemala 1966-1996 1). It took the intervention of the United Nations for the civil war to end. The road to peace in Guatemala started in 1985 after the military government initiated a transition to civilian rule (Modern conflicts: Guatemala 1966-1996 1). They did this as a result of international pressure. The talks between the government and the guerrillas began in 1987 (Modern conflicts: Guatemala 1966-1996 1). These talks were facilitated by United Nations mediators
Theory from Class
As aforementioned, the conflict that resulted in the Guatemala genocide has its roots in the struggle for limited resources, mainly land, between the political and economic elites and the indigenous communities who comprise the largest population of this country. Evidently, conflict theory is best suited to explain the root of this conflict. At the same time, what happened in Guatemala is an example of ethnic cleansing. A report by the Commission for Historical Clarification released in 1999 revealed that 83% of the victims of the Guatemala massacre comprised the Mayans (Sanford 14). At the same time, the Guatemala massacre is a demonstration of the power of the state. The state is the only entity with legitimate power to use violence to influence the behavior of the people. At the same time, the events that occurred in Guatemala represent a culture of terror that was readily discussed in the class materials. For instance, Taussig posits that while terror is a physiological state, it is also a “social fact and a cultural construction whose baroque dimensions allow it to serve as the mediator par excellence of colonial hegemony” (212). At the same time, liberal peacebuilding is pivotal in the case of Guatemala. Liberal peacebuilding entails the democratic rebuilding of states following an armed conflict (Richmond 15). Liberal peacebuilding will be discussed later in the recommendation portion of this paper.
How the Civil Society Responded to the Situation or Conflict
In every conflict, civil society plays a key role not only in pressuring warring parties to resolve their issues amicably but also helping those caught in the tension. Civil society takes many forms, including non-state actors, such as trade unions, members of professional bodies, and non-governmental organizations. Civil society was severely compromised during the Guatemalan civil war. Since the start of the civil war, non-state actors in Guatemala were driven underground (Brett 8). Some of these organizations ceased to operate as their leaders feared for their lives and those of their employees. Other organizations choose to operate clandestinely.
However, civil society has been the cornerstone of peacebuilding in Guatemala. According to Brett, “the formal inclusion of civil society actors in peacemaking logically challenges the state-centric dynamic of Track One Diplomacy, a dynamic determined by the explicit assumption that power is located in the state and derived from the barrel of a gun” (P. 7). The state is considered to be the primary provider of security, goods and other essentials that the public needs. Also, it possesses legitimate influence and power to negotiate with armed groups threatening its integrity and legitimacy.
Recommendation
One of the things that ought to happen is to create institutions and structures of peace. These structures and institutions should be based on cooperation, equity, and justice (Richmond 21). Much harm has happened in Guatemala in terms of loss of lives, destruction of livelihoods, and heated animosity between the masses and the governments. As aforementioned, the conflict that resulted in Guatemala’s genocide has its roots in the colonial era. Besides, conflicts over resources mainly land have paved the wave for widespread animosity between the poor indigenous communities and the political and economic elites. As such, the way forward when it comes to facilitating peace in Guatemala is to ensure that historical justice is realized in the country. This may take many forms, including facilitating for poor indigenous communities to have their land back. At the same time, those behind the genocide and other atrocities committed during the Guatemala genocide should face the law. More importantly, peacebuilding in Guatemala should bring together different entities, including civil societies, government officials, and representatives of the poor minorities, especially those from indigenous communities. At the same time, peace building in Guatemala should focus on empowering the government. This is in line with the tenants of liberal peace building. It should take many forms, including ensuring that there is a strong judiciary and legislature to check on the excesses of the executive.
To sum up, armed conflicts are devastating not only when it comes to human casualties but also the massive destruction of the way of life of the people in addition to creating animosities between different groups. Peace building should begin with justice and the truth. One aspect of peace building is reparation, and the Guatemalans deserve more of it for their healing and economic and political prosperity.
Works Cited
Brett, Roddy. “In the aftermath of Genocide: Guatemala’s failed reconciliation.” Peacebuilding (2022): 1-21.
Brett, Roddy. “The role of civil society actors in peacemaking: The case of Guatemala.” https://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/10023/16304/Brett_JPD_12_1_Peacemaking_AM.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
From Civil War to Civil Society: The Transition from War to Peace in Guatemala and Liberia. The World Bank and the Carter Center, n. d.). https://www.cartercenter.org/documents/1200.pdf
Holocaust Museum Houston. “Genocide in Guatemala.” https://hmh.org/library/research/genocide-in-guatemala-guide/
“Modern conflicts: Guatemala 1966-1996.” University of Massachusetts Amherst, n. d. https://peri.umass.edu/fileadmin/pdf/Guatemala.pdf
Richmond, Oliver P. “A genealogy of peace and conflict theory.” Palgrave advances in peacebuilding. Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2010. 14-38. file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/Richmond_Book.pdf
Sanford, Victoria. Buried secrets: Truth and human rights in Guatemala. Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.
Taussig, Michael T. “Culture of terror—space of death: Roger Casement’s Putumayo Report and the explanation of torture.” Society for Comparative Study of Society and History, 1984.
The Center for Justice and Accountability. “Guatemala.” https://cja.org/where-we-work/guatemala/
write