From Armed Insurgency to Sustainable Governance

The Evolution of the Zapatista Movement from 1994-2023

Diya Ajwani is the winner of Historically Modern's 2026 Undergraduate History Essay contest. This essay has been published as submitted.

The Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN), or the Zapatistas, is a social movement whose foundational ideology, “Zapatismo,” advocates for Indigenous autonomy, anti-capitalism, and anti-globalization, operating through self-governing communities and inspired by Emiliano Zapata from the 1910 Mexican Revolution [1]. They are known worldwide for their balaclava uniform, which unifies them as one visually inseparable collective, and for their decolonial, anti-capitalist ideology. Over the years, they have undergone many changes, with some even arguing at various points that the movement has been lost, has died, or has retreated. This essay examines their tactical and ideological evolution as seen through their communiqués and argues that since 1994 the Zapatista ideology has evolved from an urgent, insurgent discourse rooted in armed resistance and local Indigenous demands to a more institutionalized, pluralistic, and transnational praxis. This transformation is visible in their growing emphasis on autonomous governance, education, gender equity, and global networked solidarity. The 2023 restructuring confirms this evolution by demonstrating a strategic transition, including a refinement of their autonomous institutions, and a renewed orientation toward political solidarity building, long term stability, and decolonial world building rather than immediate armed confrontation.

To trace this evolution, this essay divides the development of the EZLN into four key phases, each defined by significant ideological and organizational shifts. Each phase is examined through one to two primary communiqués issued by the EZLN, drawn from their official archival platform (Enlace Zapatista), and supplemented by relevant scholarly literature and, where appropriate, news sources. Through this combination of primary and secondary material, the essay identifies the key changes within each phase and analyzes how these shifts contribute to the broader transformation of the Zapatista movement over time.

The communiqué "Primera Declaración de la Selva Lacandona” outlines the emergence of the Zapatista movement on January 1st 1994, timed to coincide exactly with the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) [2]. At this time their ideology was heavily centered on anti-neoliberalism and anti-colonialism, focusing their struggle against the Mexican government to meet the immediate survival needs of a deeply impoverished population, particularly Indigenous peasants. The Zapatistas framed NAFTA and the extraction of regional resources as an ongoing colonial violence. For instance, they pointed out that while the national entity Pemex extracts tens of thousands of barrels of petroleum and massive amounts of gas from Chiapas daily, they leave the local Indigenous population with nothing but "ecological destruction, agricultural plunder, hyperinflation, alcoholism, prostitution, and poverty" [3]. In response to this exploitation, they issued eleven core demands: work, land, housing, food, health care, education, independence, liberty, democracy, justice, and peace [4].

At the time of their emergence, the EZLN functioned first and foremost as a military group. They spent years secretly training in the jungle for their coordinated attack on Chiapas; the rebels even built a full-scale model of the center of the town in the rain forest to practice their attack [5]. Included in the “First Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle”, was a formal declaration of war against the Mexican federal army, which the EZLN identified as the basic pillar of a 70-year dictatorship headed by an illegitimate executive. In the declaration they outlined the orders given to their military — they instructed insurgent forces to advance on the nation's capital, demand the unconditional surrender of enemy barracks before engaging in combat, and initiate summary trials against federal soldiers and political police accused of treason or repressing the civilian population [6]. The Zapatistas grounded their legitimacy in the Geneva Conventions, demanding recognition as a formal belligerent force rather than bandits or terrorists. To support this legal and moral standing, they invited the International Red Cross to monitor the conflict, ordering their fighters to strictly protect civilians, respect the lives of prisoners, and turn wounded enemies over for medical attention [7]. Yet even within this militarized framework, the foundations of the EZLN’s later transformation were already visible. From the outset, the movement rejected traditional vanguardist aims of seizing state power. Instead, it positioned itself as an armed force intended to open political space for democratic transformation from below; the EZLN did not seek to take the state, but to compel it to make room for alternative forms of governance [8]. Despite this, and despite them demonstrating a degree of unexpected political moderation by entering into peace negotiations with the state shortly after the uprising, the Zapatistas maintained a firm militarized stance. The Zapatistas military command made it clear that they would absolutely refuse to disarm their forces until their core demands were completely met by the state [9].

The 2003–2005 era marks the definitive period of Zapatista institutionalization and their pivot toward a transnational praxis. This transformation was outlined in two foundational announcements. The 2003 communiqué, "Chiapas: The Thirteenth Stele,"  which initiated a transition of power away from the military by creating civilian-run “Caracoles” and officially institutionalized their radical democratic principle of  “mandar obedeciendo” (to rule by obeying). The 2005 "Sixth Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle" transnationalized the movement and called for a "globalization of rebellion" to unite marginalized groups worldwide against neoliberal capitalism. Together, these structural and ideological shifts established the Zapatistas' evolution from an isolated armed insurgency into an institutionalized, democratic, and globally networked social movement.

As outlined in "Chiapas: The Thirteenth Stele", in August 2003, the EZLN took a massive step toward formalizing their autonomy by creating five regional centers called “Caracoles”, each housing a “Junta de Buen Gobierno” (Council of Good Government) [10]. The crucial idea surrounding this decision was the Zapatistas recognition that a politico-military structure (an army) is inherently non-democratic and therefore should not dictate community life. Consequently, the Zapatistas made the decision to create a separation between their military command and their civil administration [11]. The EZLN stepped back to merely accompany and protect the communities, shifting decision-making power entirely to democratically elected civilian authorities. The civil councils took over the functions of a government, including the administration of justice, community health, education, housing, land, and labour. Ultimately, this bureaucratic refinement demonstrates the Zapatistas' evolution from a militant insurgency into an organized, institutionalized movement capable of sustaining its own autonomous society [12].

In 2003, the Zapatistas also enacted their policy of “mandar obedeciendo”, or “to rule by obeying" which is the foundation of Zapatista democracy [13]. Mandar obedeciendo dictates that leadership must be exercised horizontally by following the directions of the grassroots community, rather than imposing decisions from the top down [14]. Walter D. Mignolo, a cultural theorist, in his 2002 journal article titled "The Zapatistas's Theoretical Revolution: Its Historical, Ethical, and Political Consequences" explains, this principle is a profound act of cultural-political reproduction deeply rooted in Indigenous epistemology; derived from the intersubjective structure of the Tojolabal language, it completely detaches the concept of democracy from its Western Enlightenment origins and replaces vertical power with horizontal reciprocity [15]. Furthermore, in the communiqué, the movement announced the creation of the “Juntas de Buen Gobierno” (Councils of Good Government) specifically to ensure that anyone who governs in rebel territory does so by obeying the people, establishing strict monitoring systems to prevent corruption and enforce this principle [16]. In 2005, the "Sixth Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle" further cemented this noting that if a ruler does not obey the people, "they chase him out, he is stripped of authority, and another enters" [17]. Political scientist Richard Stahler-Sholk, observes that this institutionalization of “radical democracy” relies on concrete mechanisms like the frequent rotation of leadership roles, which prevents bureaucratic entrenchment and ensures that leadership is exercised strictly by following the directions of the grassroots [18]. Ultimately, the Zapatistas’ changes translate Indigenous epistemologies into concrete political structures that actively resist hierarchical power and democratize it.

During this period of institutionalization the Zapatistas also transnationalized their movement. In their 2005 "Sixth Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle", the Zapatistas reframed their local grievances by identifying neoliberal globalization as a worldwide "war of conquest," declaring that this systemic destruction must be countered by a "globalization of rebellion"[19]. However, in doing so they attempted to merge their experiences or demands. Mignolo explains, this transnational expansion deliberately rejects the homogenizing "abstract universals" of traditional Marxism or Western liberalism, instead, the Zapatistas champion the decolonial concept of diversality/pluriversality, a world building project envisioning a world composed of multiple worlds [20]. The EZLN explicitly echoed this idea in their declaration, stating their goal is to make a world "so big that all the worlds that resist fit" [21]. Furthermore, in their efforts to globalize the rebellion the Zapatistas distinguished themselves from passive victims by pledging to send their own material aid, such as gasoline and non-transgenic corn to Cuba, or organic coffee and embroidered goods to allied activists in Europe, to support other anti-capitalist struggles worldwide [22]. By replacing isolated armed confrontation with reciprocal global alliances, alongside the bureaucratic refinement and institutionalization of democracy, the Zapatistas established a transnational, coalition-building praxis that has become a defining feature of their modern movement.

The next transformative phase of the Zapatistas was marked by the decentering of their most visible figure, Subcomandante Marcos. Announced in the landmark May 2014 communiqué "Entre la Luz y la Sombra" (Between Light and Shadow), Marcos declared that his persona would "cease to exist," rejecting the need for traditional leaders, caudillos, or saviours [23]. Beyond Marcos's mere departure, this symbolic "death" cemented the movement's structural evolution by shifting power away from a top-down command and further democratizing their institutions [24]. In his farewell address, Marcos outlined a series of internal "relays" or handovers the EZLN had undergone, explicitly confirming that the movement had successfully recentered Indigenous peasant governance to replace its original middle-class mestizo leadership [25]. Furthermore, he emphasized a critical internal evolution away from historical gender marginalization and toward the direct political participation of women, establishing gender equity as a priority of the Zapatista movement [26].

Ultimately, the 2014 “death” of Subcomandante Marcos functioned as a calculated strategic intervention to consolidate what academic Brianne Orr-Álvarez terms an “absolute democracy,” while simultaneously recentering Indigenous governance within the EZLN [27]. By voluntarily dismantling the persona of the charismatic mestizo leader, the movement signaled a decisive break from hierarchical models of revolution, ensuring that political authority remained horizontally distributed among Indigenous communities. In his farewell address (the communiqué), Marcos revealed that his identity had never been that of a traditional commander, but rather a hologram collectively constructed by the Zapatistas as a media strategy to capture attention within a racist society that systematically ignored Indigenous voices [28]. Once this visibility was achieved, the persona was no longer necessary. Its removal thus marked a rejection of individualized leadership, as Marcos says “to rebel and fight, neither leaders nor caudillos nor messiahs nor saviors are necessary”, as well as the culmination of a deeper internal transformation. In the communiqué Marcos outlined through the concept of el relevo (relays), the Zapatista movement had undergone a series of gradual internal handovers over two decades, most significantly a racial and class transition from educated, middle-class mestizo (mixed Indigenous and settler) leadership to Indigenous peasant governance [29]. As political analyst Dan La Botz observes, a new generation of Indigenous leaders replaced earlier mestizo militants rooted in Marxist guerrilla traditions, formalizing a shift that had long been underway [30]. The elimination of Marcos, therefore, did not simply democratize the movement in abstract terms, it solidified the transfer of power to Indigenous communities, illustrating the Zapatistas’ evolution from a mestizo led revolutionary project into a genuinely Indigenous, horizontally organized system of self-governance.

Alongside the recentering of Indigenous leadership, the prioritizing of gender equity is a key transformation in this phase of the Zapatista movement. In the communiqué, Subcomandante Marcos identifies gender equity as a key internal “relay” in the Zapatista movements evolution, emphasizing a transition “from gender marginalization to the direct participation of women”[31]. Orr-Álvarez argues, Zapatista discourse recognized women as “doubly othered” and “doubly dominated,” subjected both to state violence and to entrenched patriarchal norms within their own communities [32]. Zapatista women themselves note they were "oppressed three times over, because we are poor, because we are indigenous, and because we are women"[33]. In response to this multifaceted oppression, the political awakening of women emerged as a central driving force of the movement. Orr-Álvarez characterizes their participation as a “double motor” of a “self-propelled rebellion,” underscoring the role of gendered consciousness in sustaining Zapatista resistance [34]. By centering women’s agency and institutionalizing their participation, the Zaptistas evolved into an intersectional form of political praxis.

The culmination of the Zapatistas' thirty-year evolution from an armed insurgency into an institutionalized, transnational praxis is their large-scale 2023 restructuring. Between October and December of 2023, the EZLN announced a new stage in their resistance, completely reorganizing their autonomous structures in response to extreme violence and internal critiques [35]. The restructuring was communicated through multiple communiqués, however this essay will focus on “Cuarta Parte y Primera Alerta de Aproximación. Varias Muertes Necesarias” (Fourth Part and First Approach Alert. Several Necessary Deaths) as it outlines the most significant transformations. Faced with the unchecked expansion of organized crime and the imposition of government megaprojects, a traditional military insurgency would likely centralize its power and escalate armed conflict. However, the Zapatistas did the opposite—they decentralized their governance to the absolute grassroots level, introduced land-sharing models, and oriented their movement toward a 120-year horizon for survival. This restructuring reflects their ability to engage in self critique and praxis (embodiment of theory through reflection and action) and consolidates the movement as an institutionalized, pluralistic and transnational. 

In the 2023 restructuring, the EZLN announced the disappearance of the Zapatista Rebel Autonomous Municipalities (MAREZ) and the Good Government Councils (JBG), which had been the pillars of their autonomy since 1994 and 2003 respectively [36]. Following a long process of critical analysis they replaced these bodies with Local Autonomous Governments (GAL) situated at the absolute community level, which now serve as the new "nucleus of all autonomy" [37]. These local bodies coordinate regionally into Collectives of Zapatista Autonomous Government (CGAZ) and zone-level Assemblies (ACGAZ), which only act at the request of the local grassroots [38]. This structural shift was driven by a stark self-critique from Subcomandante Moisés, who noted that the previous structure had become too "pyramidal," causing authorities to distance and separate themselves from the communities [39]. By intentionally choosing to "cut the pyramid" and turn it upside down, the EZLN actively corrected their institutional flaws to ensure that the democratic practice of ruling by obeying (mandar obedeciendo) does not become a top-down, state-like bureaucracy [40].

The second major shift in 2023 was the introduction of a new approach to governing the lands regained during the 1994 uprising, termed "the common and non-property". The EZLN established that portions of this land would exist entirely without ownership, neither private, communal, federal, nor state property. Instead of being permanently granted to anyone, this land will be lent to those who wish to work it, explicitly inviting non-Zapatistas and even "sister nations in other geographies of the world" to cultivate it alongside them under shared rules of common use [41]. This dissolution of traditional property lines represents a challenge to western ways of viewing land and is a profound act of coalition-building and transnational praxis. 

Finally, an important aspect of the restructuring was the urgent need to survive an existential threat, as Chiapas descended into "complete chaos" marked by organized crime, blockades, kidnappings, and the violent displacement of communities [42]. The Zapatistas reorganized its structure to ensure that their towns could survive and defend themselves even if completely isolated from one another. They could have also done this by reverting to  offensive military strategy, but instead, the movement framed this new stage around a 120-year temporal horizon. Subcomandante Moisés stated that this new stage is simply about surviving the current capitalist "storm" and "reaching that morning, 120 years from now, where a girl begins to learn that being free is also being responsible for that freedom" [43].  By aiming so far into the future, the Zapatistas confirm that one of their important priorities is long term sustainability, ensuring that their autonomous practices and communities outlast the current devastation so that future generations might inherit a different world.

The evolution of the Zapatista movement is best understood not as a linear progression away from its insurgent origins, but as an ongoing process of praxis, one grounded in reflection, adaptation, and responsiveness to changing material and political realities. Since 1994, the movement has continuously engaged in self-critique, reassessing its strategies and structures in order to remain accountable to the communities it represents. The 2023 restructuring, rather than signaling a retreat from Zapatismo or a dilution of its revolutionary commitments, instead reflects a deepened commitment to its core principles. By refining its autonomous institutions, expanding its pluralistic practices, and strengthening transnational solidarities, the Zapatistas demonstrates a capacity to evolve without abandoning its foundational ideals. Ultimately, the enduring significance of the Zapatista movement lies in its ability to constantly change and adapt, yet remain fundamentally rooted in the same commitments to autonomy, dignity, and resistance. In this way, Zapatismo is not a fixed ideology but a living, evolving project, one that continues to reimagine liberation through practice itself.

Endnotes

^[1] Richard Stahler-Sholk, "The Zapatista Social Movement: Innovation and Sustainability," Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 35, no. 3 (2010): 269, 277.

^[2] Craig Benjamin, "The Zapatista Uprising and Popular Struggles against Neo-liberal Restructuring," Labour, Capital and Society / Travail, capital et société 27, no. 1 (1994): 113

^[3] Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional (EZLN), "Primera Declaración de la Selva Lacandona," Enlace Zapatista, January 1, 1994.

^[4] EZLN, "Primera Declaración de la Selva Lacandona."

^[5] Tim Golden, "How a Revolution Survived: A Mexican Chronicle," The New York Times, February 21, 1994, A8.

^[6] EZLN, "Primera Declaración de la Selva Lacandona."

^[7] EZLN, "Primera Declaración de la Selva Lacandona."

^[8] EZLN, "Primera Declaración de la Selva Lacandona."

^[9] EZLN, "Primera Declaración de la Selva Lacandona."

^[10] Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos, "Chiapas: la treceava estela. Sexta parte: un buen gobierno," Enlace Zapatista, July 21, 2003.

^[11] Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional (EZLN), "Sexta Declaración de la Selva Lacandona," Enlace Zapatista, June 30, 2005.  - The reason it was in the 2005 declaration is because in part of it they looked back and issued an explanation of why they created those 2003 councils. 

^[12] Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos, "Chiapas: la treceava estela. Sexta parte: un buen gobierno," Enlace Zapatista, July 21, 2003; see also Richard Stahler-Sholk, "The Zapatista Social Movement: Innovation and Sustainability," Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 35, no. 3 (2010): 269.

^[13] Marcos, "Chiapas: la treceava estela."

^[14] Richard Stahler-Sholk, "The Zapatista Social Movement: Innovation and Sustainability," Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 35, no. 3 (2010): 284.

^[15] Walter D. Mignolo, "The Zapatistas's Theoretical Revolution: Its Historical, Ethical, and Political Consequences," 254-256

^[16] Marcos, "Chiapas: la treceava estela."

^[17] EZLN, "Sexta Declaración de la Selva Lacandona"

^[18] Stahler-Sholk, "The Zapatista Social Movement," 284.

^[19] EZLN, "Sexta Declaración de la Selva Lacandona."

^[20] Mignolo, "The Zapatistas's Theoretical Revolution," 250, 263.

^[21] EZLN, "Sexta Declaración de la Selva Lacandona"

^[22] EZLN, "Sexta Declaración de la Selva Lacandona"

^[23] Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos, "Entre la luz y la sombra," Enlace Zapatista, May 25, 2014.

^[24] Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos, "Entre la luz y la sombra," Enlace Zapatista, May 25, 2014.

^[25] Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos, "Entre la luz y la sombra," Enlace Zapatista, May 25, 2014.

^[26] Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos, "Entre la luz y la sombra," Enlace Zapatista, May 25, 2014.

^[27] Brianne Orr-Álvarez, "Masking Revolution: Subcomandante Marcos and the Contemporary Zapatista Movement," in Performing Utopias in the Contemporary Americas, ed. Kim Beauchesne and Alessandra Santos (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017), 123.

^[28] Marcos, "Entre la luz y la sombra."

^[29] Marcos, "Entre la luz y la sombra."

^[30] Dan La Botz, "Mexico: Subcomandante Marcos steps down: What's next for the Zapatistas," Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal (originally published in Against the Current), June 14, 2014.

^[31] Marcos, "Entre la luz y la sombra."

^[32] Orr-Álvarez, "Masking Revolution," 122.

^[33] Hilary Klein, Compañeras: Zapatista Women's Stories (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2015), 19. (quoting Comandante Esther)

^[34] Orr-Álvarez, "Masking Revolution," 122.

^[35] Subcomandante Insurgente Moisés, "Cuarta Parte y Primera Alerta de Aproximación. Varias Muertes Necesarias," Enlace Zapatista, November 5, 2023.

^[36] Subcomandante Insurgente Moisés, "Ninth Part: The New Structure of Zapatista Autonomy," Enlace Zapatista, November 13, 2023.

^[37] Jérôme Baschet, The Zapatista Experience: Rebellion, Resistance, and Autonomy (Chico, CA: AK Press, 2024), Postscript, 74.

^[38] Baschet, The Zapatista Experience, Postscript, 74.

^[39] Moisés, "Ninth Part: The New Structure of Zapatista Autonomy,"

^[40] Moisés, "Ninth Part: The New Structure of Zapatista Autonomy,"

^[41] Moisés, "Ninth Part: The New Structure of Zapatista Autonomy," and Baschet, The Zapatista Experience, Postscript, 75.

^[42] Moisés, "Cuarta Parte y Primera Alerta de Aproximación."

^[43] Moisés, "Cuarta Parte y Primera Alerta de Aproximación."

Bibliography

Primary Sources 

BBC News. "Mexico's Zapatista rebel leader Subcomandante Marcos steps down." May 26, 2014.

Comandancia General del Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional (EZLN). "Primera Declaración de la Selva Lacandona." Enlace Zapatista, January 1, 1994.

Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional (EZLN). "Sexta Declaración de la Selva Lacandona." Enlace Zapatista, June 30, 2005.

Golden, Tim. "How a Revolution Survived: A Mexican Chronicle." The New York Times, February 21, 1994.

Marcos, Subcomandante Insurgente. "Chiapas: la treceava estela. Sexta parte: un buen gobierno." Enlace Zapatista, July 21, 2003.

Marcos, Subcomandante Insurgente [Galeano]. "Entre la luz y la sombra." Enlace Zapatista, May 25, 2014.

Moisés, Subcomandante Insurgente. "Cuarta Parte y Primera Alerta de Aproximación. Varias Muertes Necesarias." Enlace Zapatista, November 5, 2023.

Secondary Sources

Andrews, Abigail. “Constructing Mutuality: The Zapatistas’ Transformation of Transnational Activist Power Dynamics.” Latin American Politics and Society 52, no. 1 (2010): 89–120. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40660500.

 Mutuality: The Zapatistas’ Transformation of Transnational Activist Power Dynamics.” Latin American Politics and Society 52, no. 1 (2010): 89–120. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40660500.

Baschet, Jérôme. The Zapatista Experience: Rebellion, Resistance, and Autonomy. Translated by Traductores Rebeldes Autónomos Cronopios. Chico, CA: AK Press, 2024.

Benjamin, Craig. "The Zapatista Uprising and Popular Struggles against Neo-liberal Restructuring." Labour, Capital and Society / Travail, capital et société 27, no. 1 (1994): 109-128.

Klein, Hilary. Compañeras. Seven Stories Press, 24 Feb. 2015.

La Botz, Dan. "Mexico: Subcomandante Marcos steps down: What's next for the Zapatistas." Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal (originally published in Against the Current), June 14, 2014. 

Mignolo, Walter D. "The Zapatistas's Theoretical Revolution: Its Historical, Ethical, and Political Consequences." Review (Fernand Braudel Center) 25, no. 3 (2002): 245-275.

Orr-Álvarez, Brianne. "Masking Revolution: Subcomandante Marcos and the Contemporary Zapatista Movement." In Performing Utopias in the Contemporary Americas, edited by Kim Beauchesne and Alessandra Santos, 111-129. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.

Stahler-Sholk, Richard. "The Zapatista Social Movement: Innovation and Sustainability." Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 35, no. 3 (2010): 269-290.