Militarisation presents an extreme technique in which the state legitimates and exercises its power. It is a form of controlling the people, a strategy of national security and of counterinsurgency; a tactic to control the streets; demonstrating the violence which is naturally produced in a capitalist system. It is one of the ways this system can ensure its dominance and reproduce systematic orders which violate and subordinate the population in general but in particular, women. It is a further manifestation of patriarchitism.

The consequences of militarization for women are multiple and complicated. Sexual abuse, physical and psychological violence and forced displacement present just a small number of them.

Militarisation as State Policy
On the 1st of December of 2006 with the beginning of the presidency of Felipe Calderon, the entrance of the extreme right into power was accomplished in Mexico. Even if this situation was initiated during the presidency of Vicente Fox prior to Calderon, the systematic violence and repression has reached whole new levels under Calderon. This has been made possible by the incursion of the armed forces into public security, enabling exclusive competition within the body of the police force.

With this change in the federal administration, a series of actions have been initiated under the guise of combating organised crime and, in particular, narco-traffic, by the Mexican army.  A strategy of “national security” has been undertaken, meaning we have had to face the real power of a state sold to military institutions. In clear violation of article 129 of the constitution, which establishes that “in times of peace no military authority can exercise their authority in functions which are not precisely connected with the military discipline,” the military was assigned tasks within public security. This situation is provoking a grave social crisis in relation to human rights, the polarisation of society, greater violence against women and the criminalisation of social protest.

The depth of the militarisation which we have been living since 2006 is rooted in the search to legitimate the presidency of Felipe Calderon who, for a large number of the population, usurped the presidency of the republic. It was evident from the beginning that the military and the police would become dominant characteristics of his term, bringing with them a number of consequences. Throughout more than two years we have suffered military operation on a huge scale across a number of states in the republic. This has generated extreme situations of violence for the population, and on various occasions these consequences have been fatal. This abuse goes from illegal body searches, physical aggression, fire arms attacks, torture, sexual violence and arbitrary detentions. The politics of fear and the “normalization” of the presence of the armed forces in the streets is part of the state’s strategy to legitimate the violence which is brought by the militarization of the country.

In the beginning, military operations against organised crime were well received in some sectors of national and international public opinion. These operations were accompanied by media displays which made reference to the achievements that had been made in the area of public security. Nevertheless, the general perception across the population is that the indices of violence and insecurity have not reduced; in contrast, the population is experiencing a triad of:  insecurity, narco-traffic and militarisation which in very powerful ways, violates the everyday lives of the Mexican population.

The consequences and effects of these military operations have been documented by various civil organisations. The cases of human rights violations have considerably increased since Calderon’s war against narco-traffic begun. Following a report by the Centre of Human Rights Miguel Agustin Pro Juarez (1), based in national mediaticas it has been noted that, since January 2007 until November 2008 more than 100 cases denouncing military abuse were presented. The greatest number of complaints presented was in the states of Tamaulipas, Chihuahua, Michoacán, Guerrero and Sinaloa. The majority of the victims were women and youths. Taking into consideration that this report only includes those cases which were denounced, it is likely that the real number could be much greater.

The National Commission of Human Rights (CNDH in Spanish initials) has received, during Calderón’s term so far, 2, 461 complaints against the military. This is the highest number out of the last four presidential periods (2). The CNDH does not refer to the defence of human rights for women, but appears to be maintaining a timid and subordinate position, favouring the impunity of building smoke-screens which, in extreme cases, has sustained stories that women who have died due to military rape in fact died of gastritis,, like the case of the feminicide of an indigenous women named Ernestina Asencio

The armed forces in Mexico are the largest in Latin America where the majority of federal budget is assigned. In accordance with the third report given by the government of Felipe Calderón, by June 2009 the armed forces refers to 254, 705 elements: 202, 355 counts for the army and air force and 52, 350 counts for those armed in Mexico. The federal budget approved by the Sedena for 2010 will be 590.9 million pesos, of which 43, 320 pesos is assigned to the Mexican army (3).

Feminicide Violence and Militarisation

The context of militarisation favours the reproduction of the structural violence against women and intensifies impunity. Women continue being the target of institutional and social violence who pay the highest cost in this simulated war.

In 2002, two indigenous tlapaneca women were sexually violated and tortured by militaries in Guerrero. Inés Fernández and Valentina Rosendo were faced with the humiliation and stigmatisation of their communities. Both were obliged by their husbands to abandon their houses and their families. After presenting the corresponding denouncements before the public ministry, both cases were turned out by the ministry, who claimed the reports did not provide sufficient information to warrant an investigation into the claim that the accused were members of the armed forces. The cases were taken before the Interamerican Commission for Human Rights in 2003 elaborating a series of recommendations that were ignored by the Mexican state. After being referred to the Interamerican Court of Human Rights, the cases are awaiting sentencing in 2010. This situation undoubtedly demonstrates the absence of justice for women in Mexico. In Valentina’s words: “all this time I have searched for justice in Mexico but there is none, for this reason we had to go to the Interamerican Court for Human Rights to make our denouncements and this is what we are working on now. I am going to follow this through until the end, I have waited so much time that I am going to be there when we arrive at the final consequences. I never returned to my community and I will not go back until justice is made.” (4)

On the 11th July 2006 in Castaños, Coahuila, a group of militaries, physically and psychologically tortured and raped on many occasions, 14 sex workers in the so-called "tolerance zone".  As a result of these acts of rape, one of the women became pregnant and another suffered an abortion as a consequence of this sexual aggression. Out of the twelve militaries who the victims pin-pointed to have directly participated in the acts of rape and a further eight members of the army who “watched over” the operation, only four were declared responsible for their crimes. Furthermore, the decided punishment for these four was far lighter than the punishment that should have been given considering the weight of the crimes committed.

A case which symbolises the violence of military feminicide against women is that of Ernestina Ascencio, a 73 year old indigenous woman who was tortured and tumultuously raped by militaries in the Sierra Nahua of Zongolica in Veracruz. On the 25^th February 2007, Ernestina was attacked by army members of military zone 26, resulting hours later in her death.  Following this brutal attack, the elderly lady was able to denounce her aggressors and indentify them as members of the military. Even though the legal doctors and forensics held that she died as a consequence of the sexual and physical attacks she received, the case was closed and concluded that Ernestina Ascencio died due to a severe gastrointestinal problem deriving from gastritis. Nevertheless, in the same zone a minimum of three registered cases of women assassinated by the military have been reported showing the same characteristics as Ernestina’s case.

In the case of female political and social activists the transgression represented by leaving the domestic space, questioning their traditional role and demanding their involvement in  political and public spaces, carries the consequence of systematic repression and in particular, bodily aggression. There have been too many recent cases where social movements have been brutally reprimanded and where women have represented the trophies of war. For instance, the case of Atenco is known for the sexual abuse of, at least 26 women in an operation which took place in May 2006. Many more women were abused in operations which took place in Oaxaca during the popular movement. None of the police members who participated in these repressive operations have been charged with torture or rape. The most that the state authorities have done is charge a handful of members of the police force for lightweight crimes such the “abuse of authority”.

In all of these cases, the absence of the access to justice for these women is almost a constant along with discrimination, hatred and impunity. This situation favours systematic and patriarchal violence by not creating the social and political conditions in order to guarantee the lives of women.

This structural violence against women has deep historical, cultural and political roots which cross many levels and are expressed in diverse forms. An absence of access to opportunities, strengthening of “traditional” roles, gendered stereotypes, differentiation between working conditions and abuse and sexual harassment are just a handful of examples of the manifestation of this violence. Violence against women links conditions of oppression, hatred and sexism. It is an exercise of masculine power through the submission and control of women in public and in private. Violence against women is not “natural” or intrinsic; a social responsibility exists which sustains the patriarchal system through this gender violence as well as an institutional responsibility which favours social, economic and political conditions guaranteeing systematic violence against women.

Feminicide is an extreme manifestation of economic, political, social and gendered structural violence. It is the assassination of women by men for the single reason of being women. This violence is placed in socially and politically permitted contexts, displaying a threshold of collective tolerance and negligence favouring and augmenting its reproduction. The concept of feminicide allows for the revaluation of gender violence through taking it out of the “private” realm and identifying it within the realm of state responsibility.

The figures counting the number of women murdered in the last few years are terrifying. Throughout Vicente Fox’s presidential term (2000-2006) approximately 6000 women were assassinated. From the start of Calderon’s term until June 2007, 1088 women were murdered. For more than a decade the border state of Chihuahua and in particular Ciuadad Juárez, have become symbolised by the sheer number of female murders which have taken place within these areas. From 1993-2007, 553 cases of female homicide were been registered in the aforementioned cities. Following official data from the attorney general of the state of Chihuahua, 206 women were murdered from January 2007 until November 2008 in this northern state. In the first semester of 2008, the figures of female homicide in Mexico went beyond the total number of female murders counted in the whole of 2007. Figures provided by the National Commission of Human Rights report than in Ciudad Juárez, 504 women have been murdered and disappeared up until April 2009. In total, across all Mexican territory at least 10 000 women in the last ten years have been murdered.

The sentence presented by the Interamerican Court for Human Rights declaring the Mexican state to blame for eight feminicides in Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua, without a doubt will set the precedence in the sphere of female justice. Nevertheless, impunity functions at many levels, not only in relation to institutional justice, but also the conditions which prevail in society such as gender stereotypes, masculine supremacy and the objectification of women which naturalise gender violence, making it part of life. What is needed is to combat the structural causes of female violence which are being sustained via the existence of institutional and social patriarchitism.

Militarisation and Violence Against Women in Chiapas

The position of Chiapas as a border state has enabled the phenomenal expansion of militarization across the state to be referred to in terms of a geo-political strategy due to the location of Chiapas. Rooted in the armed uprising of the EZLN, the conditions of militarization and paramilitarisation have intensified, converting Chiapas into a laboratory of counterinsurgency strategies. In the last ten years the Mexican government has raised its personal military by 50.5%, coincidentally this has also been paired with an increase in popular uprisings, particularly Zapatista uprisings. Today it is believed that the number of effective militaries in Chiapas ranges between 25 and 30 thousand.

The consequences of militarisation for the lives of women are varied and complicated. Militarization appears to cause a persistent increase in prostitution in areas surrounding military bases, placing women in a situation of stigmatisation and discredit within their communities. Moreover, they become subjected to sexually transmitted diseases, in particular HIV. These contexts increase social, community and familial tensions which then become expressed in an increase in interfamilial and domestic violence. This circle of militarisation – violence – narco-traffic places women in particularly vulnerable situations. Social and familial ties are destroyed; women do not leave their house due to fear and in many cases the fear of having to face the military presence in their community alone.  Children stop going to school, the milpas stop being sowed, poverty worsens and alcoholism increases.

Violence against women in the context of militarisation, as a tactic of war, is exacerbated. Since the beginning of the armed conflict in 1994 the cases of sexual violence, torture and harassment against women have increased by 50%. Sexual violence is a method of torture used to undermine and subjugate women of the enemy; it is a way to intimidate, pressurise, threaten and humiliate the victim on the basis of the condition of their gender. It is also a method of punishment for some and one of warning for others. Militarization involves gender politics, sexual violence against women as a strategy of war and the bodies of women as war spoils.

Of the documented cases of violence against women exercised by the military in Chiapas, there is one case which has reached international recognition.  On June 4^th 1994 army elements arbitrarily detained Ana, Beatriz and Celia González who at this time were 20, 18 and 16 years old respectively and their mother Delia, in the municipal of Altamirano Chiapas. The three tzeltale sisters were taken to a house where the soldiers beat and raped them on repeated occasions, meanwhile forcing them to confess that they were members of the EZLN. Medical examinations showed that the three women had been sexually abused and had suffered grave physical and psychological damage. The González sisters denounced these events in front of the PGR, who declared their case to be unworthy of investigation and referred them to the public military ministry. The military authorities closed the case in Septemeber 1995. The sisters took their case to the Interamerican Commission for Human Rights, who determined in 2001, the Mexican state as responsible for the arbitrary detention, torture and violation of the sisters. They also issued a recommendation with the aim to guarantee an impartial and effective investigation to determine responsibility and called for the case to be placed in the hands of civil justice. Nevertheless, more than eight years on, the process continues in the hands of the attorney of Military Justice, reproducing the impunity by which these trials are characterized.

Sabina Patricia was 24 years old. She was studying in her 7^th semester of Economics in the Faculty of Social Sciences in San Cristobal de las Casas. After years of suffering domestic violence she decided to abandon her conjugal home with her five year old son. She was murdered on 2^nd April 2008 by her concubine, Moisés Alfaro a member of the military posted in Rancho Nuevo, in an act of revenge as Sabina had decided not to return to the life of violence which he was offering her. This transgression cost her her life. A man so blinded with a complex and fear of loosing the masculinity that the patriarchal system bestowed upon him, for the life of a woman, “his” woman.

On August 26th 2009, the murderer was condemned to 32 years in prison, a sentence granted without any precedents for being a member of the military. The sentencing of Sabina’s case was not a concession of the system of justice. It was the result of pressure, the denouncement, the visibility and the continuation of the case by feminist groups and women’s organizations in the struggle for the right to a life free from violence and injustice for women.

Chiapas occupies the 6th national position for feminicide. The Fiscal General of the State (presently the Minister of Justice) registered in the period from 1994 to 2004, 612 cases of female murder, in contrast with the figures from the Special Commission of Feminicide who documented 1456 women murdered from only 2002 to 2004 (7). In the last three years we have known of various cases of women murdered in Chiapas, and this situation has worsened throughout 2009. Reports exist of at least 40 women disappeared and 6 murdered in Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Chiapa de Corzo and San Cristóbal de las Casas. The disappearances have similar physical characteristics with ages ranging between 14 to 23 years old. All of them left their houses in the direction of their work and schools and never arrived at their destination. The invisibility of these stories is preserved under the naturalness of just “one more”. A reference to normality has been lost, that of astonishment and social responsibility. Bias, stigmas and complicit silence place women with the symbolic charge of responsibility for the violence that we ourselves are suffering.

Patriarchy and Militarisation

It is essential to understand patriarchy as a system of domination whose purpose is to control the lives of women, especially their bodies and their identity. Militarization reproduces and reinforces this patriarchal domination; it is the greatest representation of masculine power acting to molest, humiliate and subordinate. At the point where patriarchy and militarization cross over, it is difficult to distinguish if militarization is an expression of patriarchitism or if it is patriarchitism which sustains militarisation...or both. It is a symbiosis, they mutually nourish one another and they both need the other to maintain supremacy, exercising power and influencing the population through controlling the bodies and sexuality of women.

The cases of violence against women exercised by the military are not part of the past. The use of sexual violence as a weapon to defeat an enemy, as a method of pressure to obtain information, as a way to punish women for their involvement in politics and as a mechanism of coercion to force women to return to their “natural” place in the private sphere, are common-place today, just like the military reality that we are living. They are real demonstrations of hatred of women and the patriarchy which exists.

The ability of the military to maintain a low profile is determined by the absence of access to justice for those women who have been raped or murdered by the military. Before the incompetence and the subordination of the civil judges, the cases are sent to military tribunals where they themselves install the judges and write the reports, thereby protecting military institutionalisation and guaranteeing impunity. It is necessary to modify article 57 of the Code of Military Justice so that the violations committed by the militaries are judged by civil jurisdiction.

The patriarchal abuse and violence practiced by the military is an exercise of power, a manifestation of superiority, authority and hierarchy. The patriarchal system assures a social learning which discusses the right to “property” when referring to women, affirming that the historical prerogative is granted to the male gender, making a woman’s body accessible, at the same time transforming it into a battlefield and a form of military spoils. This war of hatred and sexism acts to control our willpower. Call the military a murderer, call  a policeman a rapist, call a “comrade” a harassing companeras. What lies at the source is the exercise of power and the coercion of women. The connotations and the methods may be different but the patriarchal power exists in both. It is a feminist responsibility to name them and to continue reminding the state however many times it is necessary.

In the presence of violence, we women react in different ways. The women who have been raped go through stages of blame, shame, fear and rage. Due to the patriarchal systems of justice, a small amount of women denounce their cases  and those who do, have to confront being discredited and humiliated. For women who have been attacked in the streets, we change our routes, we adapt to the violence. It is us who have to consider the space, the manner and the time. The women raped by "compañeros" of civil organisations, of social movements need to be intelligent….the "compañero" who rapes, who harasses, who shouts is not the same as a military assault. Those who dare to suggest to us that we must pardon or forget our aggressors who, due to their condition and the situation of gender, will never be assaulted by militaries, harassed in the streets or assaulted by their organizations. Never, due to the power of the patriarchy, with all its privileges, will it be permitted for them to be placed in such positions.

In 2004, various women’s groups and feminist collectives prepared a political strategy against violence against women in Chiapas. In the document they asserted that “with the exercise of violence men impose their limited power on us and prevent the development of our own potentialities, looking to resolve their own insecurities.” Existing just as much as an actual than a structural presence. If we understand the phenomenon of militarisation as much more than military presence on the streets, if we assume a far reaching feeling which refers to the control, the obedience, the submission and the criminalisation of the right to decide about our bodies, it must therefore be considered as an expression of power and military control, which violates our freedom and the free determination of women.

It is the moment to build new ways to exercise our rights, to test strategies which empower women. No one other than ourselves can take our destiny and the justice for our lives into their hands. The freedom to decide, a life free from violence and freedom of conscious constitute the defence of our freedom as fundamental and necessary human rights. Rights which reside in the auto determination of our lives and rights which women are not liable to hand over.

“After eight years there is no justice and there are many women who have suffered sexual violence at the hands of the military but they do not denounce their cases due to fear, shame, the likely consequences within their families and communities, or as in my case, those who are married may be left by their husbands. I am telling all women that you must not have fear, that you must break free from the chains of suffering, you must fight….Be strong, we know it is not easy but there are many women who are here to care for us and support us, as in my case. We are not alone, we are many more women. They took away many things but no one can take away my dignity” (Valentina Rosendo, 3^rd October 2009).

Notes:

1. Centro de Derechos Humanos "Miguel Agustín Pro Juárez", A.C.: ¿Comandante supremo? La ausencia de control civil sobre las Fuerzas Armadas al inicio del sexenio de Felipe Calderón; México, D.F., enero de 2009:
http://www.centroprodh.org.mx/Publicaciones/InformeAbusosMilitaresC...

2. Periódico La Jornada del Viernes 24 de julio de 2009, p.8: "Se disparan en este sexenio quejas ante la CNDH contra militares, admite el Ejército" de Gustavo Castillo García:
http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2009/07/24/index.php?section=politica&am...

3. Periódico La Jornada del jueves 19 de noviembre de 2009: "Habrá menos recursos para seguridad pública y la Sedena", de Gustavo Castillo García:
http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2009/11/19/index.php?section=politica&am...

4. Entrevista a Valentina Rosendo realizada por Marissa Revilla el 3 de octubre de 2009. 5. Informe del Observatorio Ciudadano Nacional del Feminicidio, noviembre 2008. 6. Comunicación e Información de la Mujer, 11 de noviembre de 2009: "Mujeres de negro exigen detener violencia feminicida"
http://www.cimacnoticias.com/site/09111111-Mujeres-de-Negro-ex.3997...

7. El Feminicidio en México y Guatemala. Informe Misión Internacional de Investigación, Federación Internacional de los Derechos Humanos, abril 2006, pp. 20. 8. "Documento de posicionamiento político frente a la violencia contra las mujeres en San Cristóbal de las Casas", en Olivera, Mercedes (coordinadora), Violencia Feminicida en Chiapas, UNICACH, Centro de Derechos de la Mujer de Chiapas, México, 2008, pp. 451-471.