Water or mining?
The dilemma in the face of the extractive industry
20/12/2007
- Opinión
2007 has seen a new outbreak in conflicts between mining companies, the state and communities. Transnational corporations are resorting to all sorts of means in order to achieve their aims. Governments, often, are acting in favor of the mining companies and lack the political will to defend the interests of communities. The latter ultimately understand that what is at stake is water and land, or in other words, their own survival. This explains the radical nature of their resistance.
In recent years, the rising demand for natural resources on the part of China and India principally, and the tendencies of growth in the global economy have been increasing the pressure for more minerals and other raw materials, in addition to energy.
Within this context you have the expansion of mining which implies greater pressure from mining companies onto states in order to obtain the ease, advantages and power necessary to develop new mining districts around the world.
In this recent period, the greatest proportion of investment in mineral exploration has been concentrated in Latin America, making up around 30% of investment in exploration worldwide.1 The massive arrival in the region of transnational mining companies, primarily Canadian, has resulted in diverse reactions on the part of communities and organizations who identify the opening of new mining frontiers in places where this activity has not previously taken place as a threat to sustainability. As a result they are confronting such mining expansion, trying to protect communities and ecosystems from this destructive activity.
In countries such as Peru, Chile, Argentina, Colombia, Guatemala, Honduras and Ecuador, amongst others, movements have multiplied that - making use of a range of strategies - have expanded the opposition to mining. The opposition is based upon the rejection of already well known environmental and social impacts caused by the activity in question, as well as the weaknesses of the extractive model to contribute to local economies and to national development. Added to this is the incapacity and lack of political will to control the mining industry on the part of governments.
The key arguments that the communities present relate to demands concerning property and the use of land and water. Mining violates the right to land for peasants, farmers and first communities, as well as jeopardizing their access to hydrological resources, ever more scarce and in stages of degradation.
Concessions over underground resources, constituted as rights of transnational mining corporations, imply in many cases limitations to rights over land, biodiversity and free movement for people, even on public roadways and community footpaths.
With regard to hydrological resources, along with mining concessions many countries include rights to the use of water, depriving communities of their - often traditional - right to this element.
Mining representatives and authorities show insensitivity toward the impacts, amongst which are included the resettlement of communities and the destruction of towns, churches, cemeteries and anything else that might preclude mineral extraction.2
This unfavorable situation for the rights of citizens and communities has resulted in strong resistance to mining which upon finding no suitable channels to have their demands addressed become chilly conflicts that are then radicalized, and whose outcomes not always are predictable nor manageable.
Faced with what they identify as attacks against their environment, their security and that of their families, the communities develop diverse strategies of resistance to defend the environment and their rights. Among the most important strategies are public protests and demonstrations, mobilizations, blockades and occupation of infrastructure – principally roadways, as well as international court cases, ethical tribunals, allegations brought before international organizations, etc.
A new outbreak of these conflicts
2007 has been characterized by a new outbreak of conflicts between mining companies, the state and communities. After almost a decade of difficult relations between the different actors involved in mining conflicts, the situation is becoming even more complex and risky for the defense of community and environmental rights.
Peru is one example of tense relations between the state and communities, generated by such disputes, which are a product of the initiation of new mining projects and the expansion of previously existing ones.
Various communities in the north and south of the country have rejected mining and have identified agriculture and the protection of water as strategic activities to assure their long term development.
Places such as Cajamarca and Piura in the north and Arequipa in the south have demonstrated open opposition to mining for as long as it is unable to demonstrate that it’s not damaging to ecosystems nor will result in the contamination of water supplies, precious for agriculture in the north and human consumption in the desert south. The mining industry is far from demonstrating what communities are demanding, and as a result, its acceptance is far from becoming a reality. For this reason the conflicts continue to manifest themselves all across the country.
One of the blows dealt to the mining industry and to the government of Alan García Pérez in Peru this year, was the referendum concerning the Rio Blanco project of the Majaz mining company that took place in several locations in the province of Piura. The strong opposition to mining, demonstrated in Tambogrande in 2002, and which resulted in the suspension of the mining project in this area, also in Piura, repeats itself in the case of Majaz.
With more than 90% rejection of mining activities, based upon arguments related to the conservation of water and the development of agriculture, this was a slap in the face to the mining industry and the Peruvian government and led to a quick response on the part of the executive. In less than 2 weeks, the government declared as national priority the development of 20 mining projects across the country, within which of course Rio Blanco was one.3
Without the support of legislators, the legal proposal by García didn’t prosper, nevertheless his article published in the newspaper El Comercio following the presentation of the bill entitled "El perro del hortelano" (the dog in the manger) reveals the vision of this leader with regard to the use and extraction of resources and points specifically toward mining.4
Unthinkable for García is to not be able to extract resources left and right for the supposed benefit of the population, without considering that it’s already been demonstrated in the case of mining that there is no such broad based benefit, but rather only for transnational corporations and a small national group that takes its cut.
Of all the existing social conflicts over mining in the country, half are based upon environmental complaints and demands. This reveals not only the unsustainability of the extractive model in social terms, but particularly in environmental terms.5
Chile is not left behind with regard to resistance and mining conflicts. Its resistance in particular to the Pascua Lama project, better known as the gold mining project able to move glaciers, characterizes mining conflicts in the country. Since 2000, Barrick Gold, the main gold-mining company, has been trying to develop a controversial and contested project, without yet being able to attain its goal, despite high international prices for the yellow metal.
The main achievement of the movement against Pascua Lama last year was to prevent Barrick from becoming sponsors of Al Gore’s conference in Santiago. With this, it was shown that not only the Chilean anti-mining movement considered Barrick’s support of Gore’s environmental conference scandalous, but also that he himself - now winner of the Nobel Peace Prize – considered it a problem to be associated with a company that has an internationally criticized social and environmental record.
Then the programmed visit by Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper took place. He had to enter and leave the offices of Barrick by the back door so as not to have to deal with the groups protesting environmental destruction, which were demonstrating in front of the mining company’s building.6
These and other actions that are regularly undertaken by groups critical of mining, put Chile - considered the spoiled child of mining companies – among those countries with conflicts between communities and extractive activities, contrary to the image national authorities and national mining associations would like people to see.
Ecuador for its part shows widespread rejection of mining in the same way that it has historically demonstrated toward oil extraction. Having not been a mining country up until today, Ecuador now has large expanses of its territory granted as concessions to mining companies, mainly junior companies with little capital and low environmental and social standards.
As such, in the northern highlands, with its high biodiversity, as well as in the warm and tropical southeast, abundantly inhabited by original peoples, the mining concessions and exploration projects are highly resisted by communities.
The confrontations have been characterized by high indices of violence and the results have demonstrated the lack of scruples of the mining companies, which rely on the support of private armed groups, intimidating and repressing the communities that oppose their activities, often of an illegal character.
President Rafael Correa has shown a shifting policy with relation to mining investments in the country. Initially, with Alberto Acosta as Minister of Energy and Mines (today President of the Constituent Assembly), he signaled that he would limit mining activities in the country given the numerous social conflicts and resistance that this activity was generating. At the moment, Correa talks about mining development and investments, labeling those who oppose extractive activity as terrorists.7
The apparent calm in the country with respect to mining conflicts now threatens to give way to widespread confrontation, in which the population will demand its rights, within the context of a society building consensus and long term agreements through the constituent process.
The Bolivian case differs from those above, since it is one of the countries with the least investment in mining exploration over the last decade. The large scale mining projects already in production are not very numerous and those that are starting up or that will begin in the near future are not showing strong indications of conflict. San Cristóbal, located in Potosí, realized a significant process of cooptation of communities, principally of those that were relocated because they were literally on top of the silver deposit.
The situation in Mutún, in the east of the country, is just coming into perspective given that the contract between the Bolivian State and the Indian company Jindal was only recently signed and its work is at the very initial stages.
In contrast, is the situation with the cooperatives whose membership totals more than 50,000 across the country and that have become the voice of transnational mining interests, who themselves as companies remain very quiet. This alliance responds to the potential that this union of small miners sees that it can gain through alliances with transnational companies in bringing about projects of medium and large scale.
This has meant a tough conflict with the government of Evo Morales, since the union supported him in the election process two years ago and is now demanding rights over mining deposits that are officially in the hands of the state.
In any case, just like the topic of hydrocarbons, Bolivia is trying to take back control of mining. With oil and gas companies it was easier, since it didn’t involve such a broad group of cooperatively organized miners that are demanding private economic benefits, without guaranteeing benefits to the state and the people of Bolivia.
Argentina, on the other hand, has become a new attraction for transnational mining companies. Upon signing the treaty for complementary mining with Chile, the distances from deposits to and from the ports has diminished considerably, making mining a highly competitive area.
From five mining projects in operation ten years ago, Argentina now has more than thirty projects, in various stages between production and exploration or installation, generating concern amongst agricultural and wine producing sectors and raising a yellow flag in areas potentially affected by mining. A sign that in many places has changed to red given announcements by the central government and several regional governments who are providing support to transnational mining companies toward future implementation of their projects.
It’s interesting to note that the social movements opposed to mining are utilizing means of organizing that stem from the recent period of political and economic crisis. This makes them less vulnerable to division, corruption and cooptation given that there aren’t clear power structures within the movements of self-organized groups, which jealously guard against being caught in efforts at division and cooptation provoked by transnational companies, thus increasing their social strength and resistance.
The government is taking steps to attract mining investment in the country, however the self-organized communities and organizations and the assemblies are adapting their strategies to prevent mining companies from setting up. They employ diverse strategies, such as the referendum in Esquel in 2003 or the lobby to decree prohibitions against open-pit mining that uses chemicals and toxins.8
Colombia’s internal conflict continues also in the case of mining. Certainly the most important and most well known mining activity taking place in the country is coal mining and specifically the El Cerrejón project. But it’s not the only mining activity being rejected on the part of the local population. However, the nationalization of El Cerrejón is what has generated the social conflict that persists to date.
The difficult relations between military and the militarized forces in the country often obscures and conceals the tense relations between communities affected by mining and transnational companies operating there. While communities suffer the consequences and are unable to sufficiently mount resistance as a result of the violence that reigns in the country, companies use this juncture to impede rejection of their activity. It’s possible that while this situation persists, mining conflicts in Colombia will maintain a relatively low profile given the lack of information and understanding of what’s taking place in this regard.
Central America: environmental impacts
Central America has also been affected by mining conflicts during the recent period. Similar to Ecuador, the Central American countries are especially attractive to junior mining companies. This makes the situation more critical and risky given the low investment that companies of this sort make toward care of the environment and responsibility with respect to local communities.
Recurring conflicts have been taking place in several countries within the region amongst which Guatemala stands out, with resistance to projects in several regions across the country. The most eloquent demonstration was the series of citizen referendums that began with Sipacapa, just over two years ago, followed by Huehuetenango and Ixtahuacan in San Marcos, in 2006 and 2007.
Honduras had the opportunity to debate its mining law, after it was declared unconstitutional. This has put in evidence civil society’s rejection of the way in which mining takes place in the country and the scarce economic and social benefits relative to the high negative environmental and social impacts.
El Salvador is also familiar with mining conflicts. This is probably due in particular to the fact that the most notable mining projects, such as El Dorado, are situated in the most important watersheds of the country, specifically that of the Lempa River. This is causing, in such a small territory, tremendous concern throughout the population and communities that rely on water from these watersheds. It seems unthinkable that mining projects could take place that put at risk almost an entire country.
While it’s true that the potential mineral extraction from all of the Central American countries doesn’t compare with deposits situated in Peru, Bolivia or Chile, nonetheless, in comparison with the size of these countries and their environmental fragility, the impact of mining activities could be of a great magnitude. The small surface area of most Central American countries makes mining an activity that will be tough competition for food security, coffee and cocoa production, as well as that of other agricultural products which are jeopardized by mining and its acute environmental impacts.
Water and land
Water and land are at the heart of conflicts with the mining industry. The traditional use of land by peasant communities, first peoples and farmers of a diverse scale of production doesn’t make sense when sources of water sources are at risk. The territorial dependency of communities and the great environmental risks relate to both the volume of water available and its quality. Mining affects both and for this reason leads to rejection by communities that base their ways of life on scarce land and precious water.
Modern mining in particular, - large scale, open-pit and using toxic chemicals -, is more and more frequently situated at the head of watersheds, or as the peasants say, in “the water factories.” There is not a single conflict between communities and mining that doesn’t share this common element: the struggle for water.
And precisely the fact that this element is so essential for life and is jeopardized by mining, is the reason that resistance and struggles against mining are frequently a subject of life or death.
It’s this that the mining companies, and mainly the governments of Latin America, don’t want to understand. And while this lack of understanding continues to characterize mining conflicts, communities will continue trying to exercise their rights by means of action, although often the results are less than those hoped for.
This will continue being an ongoing issue in mining conflicts, as long as communities don’t have any alternative other than resistance. Finally, governments will have to understand that resistance to mining is a question of defense of life and faced with this vital resistance there are no partial solutions.
The search for a development model that limits mining, as well as most other extractive industries, appears to be on its way in the near future of Latin America.
(Article published in Spanish in the edition 427 of the magazine América Latina en Movimiento, December 2007: http://alainet.org/publica/427.html. Translation: ALAI)
Caesar Padilla works for the Latin American Observatory of Mining Conflicts – OCMAL.
1 Actualidad Minera del Perú, Boletín #90 Cooperacción, Lima, October 2006.
2 Marcela Corvalan P. “Pilas de discordia, Proyecto Andacollo Cobre", OLCA Chile 1999; Emilio Madrid Lara. "Del abrigo de los Mallkus al Frío del Convento", Centro de Ecología y Pueblos Andinos, 1999, Oruro, Bolivia.
3 Grupo Propuesta Ciudadana, Participa Perú, Note # 8, Las medidas de política minera del gobierno.
4 El Comercio, Peru, 28/10/2007.
5 www.conflictosmineros.net/al/html/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=477
6 www.conflictosmineros.net/al/html/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=280
7 www.conflictosmineros.net/al/html/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=466
8 www.conflictosmineros.net/al/html/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=412
In recent years, the rising demand for natural resources on the part of China and India principally, and the tendencies of growth in the global economy have been increasing the pressure for more minerals and other raw materials, in addition to energy.
Within this context you have the expansion of mining which implies greater pressure from mining companies onto states in order to obtain the ease, advantages and power necessary to develop new mining districts around the world.
In this recent period, the greatest proportion of investment in mineral exploration has been concentrated in Latin America, making up around 30% of investment in exploration worldwide.1 The massive arrival in the region of transnational mining companies, primarily Canadian, has resulted in diverse reactions on the part of communities and organizations who identify the opening of new mining frontiers in places where this activity has not previously taken place as a threat to sustainability. As a result they are confronting such mining expansion, trying to protect communities and ecosystems from this destructive activity.
In countries such as Peru, Chile, Argentina, Colombia, Guatemala, Honduras and Ecuador, amongst others, movements have multiplied that - making use of a range of strategies - have expanded the opposition to mining. The opposition is based upon the rejection of already well known environmental and social impacts caused by the activity in question, as well as the weaknesses of the extractive model to contribute to local economies and to national development. Added to this is the incapacity and lack of political will to control the mining industry on the part of governments.
The key arguments that the communities present relate to demands concerning property and the use of land and water. Mining violates the right to land for peasants, farmers and first communities, as well as jeopardizing their access to hydrological resources, ever more scarce and in stages of degradation.
Concessions over underground resources, constituted as rights of transnational mining corporations, imply in many cases limitations to rights over land, biodiversity and free movement for people, even on public roadways and community footpaths.
With regard to hydrological resources, along with mining concessions many countries include rights to the use of water, depriving communities of their - often traditional - right to this element.
Mining representatives and authorities show insensitivity toward the impacts, amongst which are included the resettlement of communities and the destruction of towns, churches, cemeteries and anything else that might preclude mineral extraction.2
This unfavorable situation for the rights of citizens and communities has resulted in strong resistance to mining which upon finding no suitable channels to have their demands addressed become chilly conflicts that are then radicalized, and whose outcomes not always are predictable nor manageable.
Faced with what they identify as attacks against their environment, their security and that of their families, the communities develop diverse strategies of resistance to defend the environment and their rights. Among the most important strategies are public protests and demonstrations, mobilizations, blockades and occupation of infrastructure – principally roadways, as well as international court cases, ethical tribunals, allegations brought before international organizations, etc.
A new outbreak of these conflicts
2007 has been characterized by a new outbreak of conflicts between mining companies, the state and communities. After almost a decade of difficult relations between the different actors involved in mining conflicts, the situation is becoming even more complex and risky for the defense of community and environmental rights.
Peru is one example of tense relations between the state and communities, generated by such disputes, which are a product of the initiation of new mining projects and the expansion of previously existing ones.
Various communities in the north and south of the country have rejected mining and have identified agriculture and the protection of water as strategic activities to assure their long term development.
Places such as Cajamarca and Piura in the north and Arequipa in the south have demonstrated open opposition to mining for as long as it is unable to demonstrate that it’s not damaging to ecosystems nor will result in the contamination of water supplies, precious for agriculture in the north and human consumption in the desert south. The mining industry is far from demonstrating what communities are demanding, and as a result, its acceptance is far from becoming a reality. For this reason the conflicts continue to manifest themselves all across the country.
One of the blows dealt to the mining industry and to the government of Alan García Pérez in Peru this year, was the referendum concerning the Rio Blanco project of the Majaz mining company that took place in several locations in the province of Piura. The strong opposition to mining, demonstrated in Tambogrande in 2002, and which resulted in the suspension of the mining project in this area, also in Piura, repeats itself in the case of Majaz.
With more than 90% rejection of mining activities, based upon arguments related to the conservation of water and the development of agriculture, this was a slap in the face to the mining industry and the Peruvian government and led to a quick response on the part of the executive. In less than 2 weeks, the government declared as national priority the development of 20 mining projects across the country, within which of course Rio Blanco was one.3
Without the support of legislators, the legal proposal by García didn’t prosper, nevertheless his article published in the newspaper El Comercio following the presentation of the bill entitled "El perro del hortelano" (the dog in the manger) reveals the vision of this leader with regard to the use and extraction of resources and points specifically toward mining.4
Unthinkable for García is to not be able to extract resources left and right for the supposed benefit of the population, without considering that it’s already been demonstrated in the case of mining that there is no such broad based benefit, but rather only for transnational corporations and a small national group that takes its cut.
Of all the existing social conflicts over mining in the country, half are based upon environmental complaints and demands. This reveals not only the unsustainability of the extractive model in social terms, but particularly in environmental terms.5
Chile is not left behind with regard to resistance and mining conflicts. Its resistance in particular to the Pascua Lama project, better known as the gold mining project able to move glaciers, characterizes mining conflicts in the country. Since 2000, Barrick Gold, the main gold-mining company, has been trying to develop a controversial and contested project, without yet being able to attain its goal, despite high international prices for the yellow metal.
The main achievement of the movement against Pascua Lama last year was to prevent Barrick from becoming sponsors of Al Gore’s conference in Santiago. With this, it was shown that not only the Chilean anti-mining movement considered Barrick’s support of Gore’s environmental conference scandalous, but also that he himself - now winner of the Nobel Peace Prize – considered it a problem to be associated with a company that has an internationally criticized social and environmental record.
Then the programmed visit by Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper took place. He had to enter and leave the offices of Barrick by the back door so as not to have to deal with the groups protesting environmental destruction, which were demonstrating in front of the mining company’s building.6
These and other actions that are regularly undertaken by groups critical of mining, put Chile - considered the spoiled child of mining companies – among those countries with conflicts between communities and extractive activities, contrary to the image national authorities and national mining associations would like people to see.
Ecuador for its part shows widespread rejection of mining in the same way that it has historically demonstrated toward oil extraction. Having not been a mining country up until today, Ecuador now has large expanses of its territory granted as concessions to mining companies, mainly junior companies with little capital and low environmental and social standards.
As such, in the northern highlands, with its high biodiversity, as well as in the warm and tropical southeast, abundantly inhabited by original peoples, the mining concessions and exploration projects are highly resisted by communities.
The confrontations have been characterized by high indices of violence and the results have demonstrated the lack of scruples of the mining companies, which rely on the support of private armed groups, intimidating and repressing the communities that oppose their activities, often of an illegal character.
President Rafael Correa has shown a shifting policy with relation to mining investments in the country. Initially, with Alberto Acosta as Minister of Energy and Mines (today President of the Constituent Assembly), he signaled that he would limit mining activities in the country given the numerous social conflicts and resistance that this activity was generating. At the moment, Correa talks about mining development and investments, labeling those who oppose extractive activity as terrorists.7
The apparent calm in the country with respect to mining conflicts now threatens to give way to widespread confrontation, in which the population will demand its rights, within the context of a society building consensus and long term agreements through the constituent process.
The Bolivian case differs from those above, since it is one of the countries with the least investment in mining exploration over the last decade. The large scale mining projects already in production are not very numerous and those that are starting up or that will begin in the near future are not showing strong indications of conflict. San Cristóbal, located in Potosí, realized a significant process of cooptation of communities, principally of those that were relocated because they were literally on top of the silver deposit.
The situation in Mutún, in the east of the country, is just coming into perspective given that the contract between the Bolivian State and the Indian company Jindal was only recently signed and its work is at the very initial stages.
In contrast, is the situation with the cooperatives whose membership totals more than 50,000 across the country and that have become the voice of transnational mining interests, who themselves as companies remain very quiet. This alliance responds to the potential that this union of small miners sees that it can gain through alliances with transnational companies in bringing about projects of medium and large scale.
This has meant a tough conflict with the government of Evo Morales, since the union supported him in the election process two years ago and is now demanding rights over mining deposits that are officially in the hands of the state.
In any case, just like the topic of hydrocarbons, Bolivia is trying to take back control of mining. With oil and gas companies it was easier, since it didn’t involve such a broad group of cooperatively organized miners that are demanding private economic benefits, without guaranteeing benefits to the state and the people of Bolivia.
Argentina, on the other hand, has become a new attraction for transnational mining companies. Upon signing the treaty for complementary mining with Chile, the distances from deposits to and from the ports has diminished considerably, making mining a highly competitive area.
From five mining projects in operation ten years ago, Argentina now has more than thirty projects, in various stages between production and exploration or installation, generating concern amongst agricultural and wine producing sectors and raising a yellow flag in areas potentially affected by mining. A sign that in many places has changed to red given announcements by the central government and several regional governments who are providing support to transnational mining companies toward future implementation of their projects.
It’s interesting to note that the social movements opposed to mining are utilizing means of organizing that stem from the recent period of political and economic crisis. This makes them less vulnerable to division, corruption and cooptation given that there aren’t clear power structures within the movements of self-organized groups, which jealously guard against being caught in efforts at division and cooptation provoked by transnational companies, thus increasing their social strength and resistance.
The government is taking steps to attract mining investment in the country, however the self-organized communities and organizations and the assemblies are adapting their strategies to prevent mining companies from setting up. They employ diverse strategies, such as the referendum in Esquel in 2003 or the lobby to decree prohibitions against open-pit mining that uses chemicals and toxins.8
Colombia’s internal conflict continues also in the case of mining. Certainly the most important and most well known mining activity taking place in the country is coal mining and specifically the El Cerrejón project. But it’s not the only mining activity being rejected on the part of the local population. However, the nationalization of El Cerrejón is what has generated the social conflict that persists to date.
The difficult relations between military and the militarized forces in the country often obscures and conceals the tense relations between communities affected by mining and transnational companies operating there. While communities suffer the consequences and are unable to sufficiently mount resistance as a result of the violence that reigns in the country, companies use this juncture to impede rejection of their activity. It’s possible that while this situation persists, mining conflicts in Colombia will maintain a relatively low profile given the lack of information and understanding of what’s taking place in this regard.
Central America: environmental impacts
Central America has also been affected by mining conflicts during the recent period. Similar to Ecuador, the Central American countries are especially attractive to junior mining companies. This makes the situation more critical and risky given the low investment that companies of this sort make toward care of the environment and responsibility with respect to local communities.
Recurring conflicts have been taking place in several countries within the region amongst which Guatemala stands out, with resistance to projects in several regions across the country. The most eloquent demonstration was the series of citizen referendums that began with Sipacapa, just over two years ago, followed by Huehuetenango and Ixtahuacan in San Marcos, in 2006 and 2007.
Honduras had the opportunity to debate its mining law, after it was declared unconstitutional. This has put in evidence civil society’s rejection of the way in which mining takes place in the country and the scarce economic and social benefits relative to the high negative environmental and social impacts.
El Salvador is also familiar with mining conflicts. This is probably due in particular to the fact that the most notable mining projects, such as El Dorado, are situated in the most important watersheds of the country, specifically that of the Lempa River. This is causing, in such a small territory, tremendous concern throughout the population and communities that rely on water from these watersheds. It seems unthinkable that mining projects could take place that put at risk almost an entire country.
While it’s true that the potential mineral extraction from all of the Central American countries doesn’t compare with deposits situated in Peru, Bolivia or Chile, nonetheless, in comparison with the size of these countries and their environmental fragility, the impact of mining activities could be of a great magnitude. The small surface area of most Central American countries makes mining an activity that will be tough competition for food security, coffee and cocoa production, as well as that of other agricultural products which are jeopardized by mining and its acute environmental impacts.
Water and land
Water and land are at the heart of conflicts with the mining industry. The traditional use of land by peasant communities, first peoples and farmers of a diverse scale of production doesn’t make sense when sources of water sources are at risk. The territorial dependency of communities and the great environmental risks relate to both the volume of water available and its quality. Mining affects both and for this reason leads to rejection by communities that base their ways of life on scarce land and precious water.
Modern mining in particular, - large scale, open-pit and using toxic chemicals -, is more and more frequently situated at the head of watersheds, or as the peasants say, in “the water factories.” There is not a single conflict between communities and mining that doesn’t share this common element: the struggle for water.
And precisely the fact that this element is so essential for life and is jeopardized by mining, is the reason that resistance and struggles against mining are frequently a subject of life or death.
It’s this that the mining companies, and mainly the governments of Latin America, don’t want to understand. And while this lack of understanding continues to characterize mining conflicts, communities will continue trying to exercise their rights by means of action, although often the results are less than those hoped for.
This will continue being an ongoing issue in mining conflicts, as long as communities don’t have any alternative other than resistance. Finally, governments will have to understand that resistance to mining is a question of defense of life and faced with this vital resistance there are no partial solutions.
The search for a development model that limits mining, as well as most other extractive industries, appears to be on its way in the near future of Latin America.
(Article published in Spanish in the edition 427 of the magazine América Latina en Movimiento, December 2007: http://alainet.org/publica/427.html. Translation: ALAI)
Caesar Padilla works for the Latin American Observatory of Mining Conflicts – OCMAL.
1 Actualidad Minera del Perú, Boletín #90 Cooperacción, Lima, October 2006.
2 Marcela Corvalan P. “Pilas de discordia, Proyecto Andacollo Cobre", OLCA Chile 1999; Emilio Madrid Lara. "Del abrigo de los Mallkus al Frío del Convento", Centro de Ecología y Pueblos Andinos, 1999, Oruro, Bolivia.
3 Grupo Propuesta Ciudadana, Participa Perú, Note # 8, Las medidas de política minera del gobierno.
4 El Comercio, Peru, 28/10/2007.
5 www.conflictosmineros.net/al/html/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=477
6 www.conflictosmineros.net/al/html/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=280
7 www.conflictosmineros.net/al/html/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=466
8 www.conflictosmineros.net/al/html/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=412
https://www.alainet.org/es/node/124866
Del mismo autor
- Caso asbestos: ¿las barbas en remojo? 27/02/2012
- Agua SI, Conga NO! ... efectos de la resistencia minera en América Latina 14/02/2012
- Minería como sustento de las economías 01/12/2009
- The dilemma in the face of the extractive industry 20/12/2007
- ¿Agua o minería? el dilema ante las extractivas 12/12/2007
Clasificado en
Clasificado en:
