Indigenous Nations in the Bicentennial of Peru

Roger Merino

Universidad del Pacífico

Introduction

In the bicentennial of Peru, 25% of the population considers itself to be of indigenous origin and the state officially records 4 Andean and 51 Amazonian Indigenous Peoples. The Political Constitution of Peru (Articles 89 and 149) recognise these peoples as native and peasant communities with autonomy over their land, and the capacity of imparting justice within their territorial jurisdiction. Although current policies recognise the cultural diversity of the country, the legacy of centuries of institutionalised racism marginalises Indigenous political and social aspirations. The history of the Republic is, in fact, the history of the denial of indigeneity.

The Inclusion/Exclusion Paradox

During the colonial period and until the beginning of the 20th century, political and military powers subjected indigenous peoples to slavery, extermination, displacement, or degradation in the mines of Potosí and Cerro de Pasco, in the farms of the Andes through forced servitude and in the rubber expeditions in the Amazonia, as just a few examples. In the first half of the last century, the ruling elites introduced the strategy of mestizaje as a discursive mechanism to consolidate the nation-state. They sought to express the Peruvian identity in the ‘mixture of races’, a sort of biological and cultural syncretism. However, political discourses and legal institutions maintained implicit social hierarchies. Racism was institutionalised through paternalistic policies that belittled the native population. In this imaginary, the rural indigenous people must cease to be indigenous and become peasant cooperatives and contribute to the national economy. The displaced indigenous people that ended up in the cities must become cholos living in barriadas (poor neighborhoods), characterised by subsistence economies. 

In the 1980s and 1990s, governments incorporated the strategy of multiculturalism. They imported this conceptual apparatus from Europe and Canada, claiming ‘tolerance’ towards what is different, suggesting the people from Lima should tolerate indigenous collectives. Multiculturalism recognises rights but does not open the possibility of reimagining ourselves as social collectives. It is paradigmatic that multiculturalism enters the country when the terrorist group Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso) and the Armed Forces were deploying a daily genocide against Andean communities.

These strategies have sought to contain indigenous opposition to national policies in areas such as the mining and oil industry, agribusiness, and mega infrastructure projects that impact their territories and livelihoods. Rather than completely reject these activities, many communities seek self-determination, that is, for the right to be recognised as nations with territorial rights and decision-making capacity, not simply as ethnic minorities with very limited property rights (as recognised in the constitution enacted in 1993). The state has historically dealt with these processes through the inclusion/exclusion paradox: formally recognising certain rights, yet, at the same time, substantially excluding such rights through laws, policies or police/military repression if the Indigenous movement sought to give them effective content.

The Appropriation and Overflow of Legality

Indigenous peoples have not been passive recipients of this paradox. In Latin America, through a process of appropriation and overflow of legality, they have historically used various legal institutions (e.g., through the Indigenous reservations or resguardos, the indigenous community, peasant/native communities, collective property, and, lately, prior consultation), seeking to extend the legality towards the limits of their political aspirations. 

Today, the concept of plurinationality as a new form of the state no longer emerges from the adaptation of Indigenous practices to imposed legal models, but rather, through processes of creating new institutions from below. This concept was incorporated into the constitutional and institutional frameworks in Bolivia and Ecuador, where it is being implemented with improvements and setbacks. It is also discussed in the current constituent agenda in Chile and is one of the flags of the regional indigenous movement. These processes force us to reimagine the nation and, as a consequence, to reinvent the state in areas such as Indigenous representation in the parliament, the state territorial governance, intercultural policies, and effective participation of communities in extractive and infrastructure projects. 

Indigenous politics and legality have always been seen with contempt. The Indigenous  agenda is impossible to be translated into the political imaginary of national elites influenced by centuries of racism. However, self-determination is at the basis of manifestos and mobilisations. In Peru, for example, many ignore that the Wampis Nation has declared itself as an autonomous government and that several other nations are following the same process, or that the demand for plurinationality has been on the explicit agenda of the Indigenous movement for years.  

Can a Peasant President Make a Difference?

For the first time in Peruvian history, the 6 June 2021, a rural schoolteacher, peasant, and syndicalist was elected President of the Republic. Pedro Castillo is the first president who has not had any support from the Lima elites. Some explain Castillo’s rise as a mere coincidence, as he was a low-profile outsider who did not receive the onslaught of the electoral competition and who grew exponentially – like Fujimori in 1990 – in the last weeks before the election day. Others, take a structural perspective and perceive him as the vindication of the most marginalised sectors that were strongly hit by the pandemic and the subsequent economic crisis, in a country that occupies the first place in the world ranking of deaths per million inhabitants due to COVID-19. In any case, Castillo comes to power with a strong social agenda according to which the state must play a leading role in the economy and the government must promote a constituent process to approve a new Political Constitution with a social and plurinational character.

With Pedro Castillo’s rise to power, social tensions could be democratically contained. That is, attending to social, environmental, and democratic criteria, the state could not only give a voice to indigenous peoples and local actors, but also channel their aspirations and visions of development into plural and inclusive institutional arrangements. However, if the government chooses not to implement socially-oriented institutions, this could lead to an escalation of social unrest with groups feeling betrayed by whoever promised an agenda for social change.

On the other hand, the institutional precariousness and authoritarian gestures of the political party that brought it to power may accentuate the polarisation between the government and those sectors concerned about the mismanagement of public affairs and macroeconomic stability. In this context, the social project may end up being another lost opportunity between good intentions, populism, and caudillismo; all of which could lead to borderline situations of political tension between Congress and the Executive branches.

It is not an easy task to govern under such conditions. Castillo requires a profound political ability to navigate the turbulent waters of national politics and the acute socio-environmental conflicts at the local level. He also needs the capacity to reach political consensus, while at the same time promote fundamental transformations, with the objective of building a country where we are all substantially equal in rights and dignity. 

Conclusions

In the bicentennial of Peru, with a peasant president, institutionalised racism will not be dismantled, but there is an opportunity to reimagine ourselves as a collectivity, redefine common objectives and build a more inclusive and plural country. It is the responsibility of all political and social actors, starting with the government, to make all the efforts to not miss this opportunity.  

Roger Merino is Associate Professor of Law and Public Policy at Universidad del Pacífico in Lima (Peru)

Suggested Citation: Roger Merino, ‘Indigenous Nations in the Bicentennial of Peru’ IACL-AIDC Blog (19 October 2021) https://blog-iacl-aidc.org/independence-and-indigenous-peoples/2021/10/19/indigenous-nations-in-the-bicentennial-of-peru-w494a.