Who are these so-called indigenous Argentinians, where do they come from and what do they want? As has already been sufficiently and irrefutably proven, the self-styled Mapuches were invading and homicidal tribes made up of foreign Indians (Chilean Araucanians), who did not appear on the Argentine territorial scene until well into the 19th century1 , exterminating and forcibly banishing the native aborigines from our lands. They came to settle at the very gates of Buenos Aires, living by raiding, pillaging, robbery, murder, rape, abduction of women, and destroying and setting fire to the populations of our natives – particularly the Tehuelches. In this predatory campaign of pillage and irruption they were supported by Chilean militiamen and Pincheira royalist guerrillas, as Roberto Porcel2 notes. We owe the liberation and pacification of the usurped territory to General Julio Argentino Roca and our army (unanimously supported in their mission by all citizens, including the Tehuelche)3. In this respect, it is particularly interesting to hear the testimony of the Chilean army and the Chilean army that they were able to liberate and pacify the usurped territory.
Particularly interesting in this regard is the testimony recently offered by Roberto Chagallo, a direct descendant of Tehuelches, where, after denouncing the several thousand of his brothers murdered at the hands of Mapuches, he asks: “do knowledgeable scholars know that in 1806, the Araucanian invader Choroy with a powerful cavalry and spears razed the Tehuelche infantry, who defended themselves with bolas?” The true intentions and face of the enemy within and without4 that vindicate these Chilean Indians do not escape their knowledge:
From 1670-1902 the Chilean Nguluches/Araucan invaders, mysteriously, surprisingly and untimely changed their name to Mapuches and this does denote a real question mark; catalogued as a Chilean political manoeuvre and which was one of many stratagems experimented with. (…) After the border dispute with CHILE in 1902, it was very common to send trained Araucanians to confuse and convert the Puelches to their cause, taking advantage of their ignorance or lack of political knowledge. In addition, the Universal Power managed by the English, French, Russians and North Americans who promote with cunning, skill and alternative resources the ethno-cultural and territorial disintegration of the Argentine Republic.5
The Mapuche flag at the center of Chile protests in 2019
We know, as the National Constitution clearly states, that in order for an indigenous group to be considered Argentine, it must meet the following conditions: 1) That they are native indigenous communities. 2) The lands must have been traditionally occupied by them. 3) That they were occupied at the time of its enactment6. The so-called Mapuche do not meet any of the required conditions. It is clear then that they are not Argentines, ergo, their claims for territorial recognition in our nation are not valid. Moreover, they should first apologise to our native Tehuelches for their campaigns of extermination and usurpation.
And what have the British got to do with it? The adage Divide et impera belongs, as we well know, to Julius Caesar, but we could well attribute it, closer to our era and particularly in the political sphere, to Machiavelli. Its most perfect factual application, to the British Crown in its pseudo-diplomatic manoeuvres and tactics outside the walls. Its “native” agents or fifth column in our country (in this particular case): the Mapuche. At least this is what the neat compilation of certain facts, objective and verifiable,7 suggests.
The word “Mapuche”, as Jorge Mones Ruíz rightly points out, was created for a specific purpose: “This voice from the ancient Arauco does not correspond to any ethnic type or partiality, or family or culture, whether these designations are used in particular or in general”. We do not find records of this name until the beginning of the 20th century. The Strategy and Organisation graduate goes on to say:
This term was created by Chilean scholars and interested English agents, who, by using the word Mapuche to apply to the indigenous peoples of both Chile and Argentina, made old ethnic groups such as the Araucanians, Pampas, Huiliches, Pehuenches or Tehuelches disappear, agglutinating them under the name of Mapuche, which was used to refer to the indigenous peoples of Chile and Argentina, by agglutinating under the name of Mapuches all the partialities that were Argentinean, erasing them from the mountain valleys and Patagonia, in order to gain possession of a vast and fertile Argentinean territory, which centuries before had been invaded by Chilean Araucanians.
Map of the so called Mapuche nation.
This “Mapuche creation” equated everyone and was, and is, an expression that many unsuspecting people fail to understand. It was a “geostrategic invention” and today it is a problem that has been reinforced by foreign interests. Admiral Fraga refers to the “Mapuche question” as a particularly important circumstance in the geopolitical and geostrategic approach to Patagonia. It is worth noting that the supposed “Mapuche nation” encompasses an area that includes under the same region a portion of Chilean and Argentine territory (in the latter case in the province of Neuquén and its projection on the other side of the Andes)8.
And what do the Mapuche want? As they themselves have stated on several occasions, they are seeking the creation of a fully autonomous Mapuche state within our country9. Several Mapuche organisations are demanding recognition of the right to self-determination, arguing that they are entitled to it as “original peoples”. Referring to the Mapuche lobby in Europe, we read the following in the newspaper La Nación: “Through alliances with pro-independence parties in Europe, among them Batasuna, Mapuche ambassadors are seeking support to carry out in Chile the model of autonomy in force in Spain, as a prior step to full independence”10.
According to the latest reports, the Mapuche have to date expropriated hundreds of fields, installations and thousands of hectares, claiming no less than hundreds of thousands more (no less than a quarter of the current territorial extension of the Republic of Argentina)11. On 16 August 2009, the Argentine daily La Nación reported:
The resurgence of indigenism can be seen at a glance in homes and rural establishments in Jujuy, Neuquén and Río Negro, where the flag of the Tawantinsuyu (Inca Empire), in the north, and that of the Mapuche, in the south, are increasingly seen flying. These symbols speak of a desire for more than just a place to live: they refer, practically speaking, to an “independent region (…) There have been rumours for some time about the entry of Chilean Mapuche activists to participate in conflicts in Argentinean camps (…).
We are certainly not dealing here with peaceful claims or harmless militants. Their terrorist methodology has been causing terror in Argentine society and, very particularly, in Chilean society. Chile does not escape the territorial ambitions of the Mapuche. The perks enjoyed by these criminal hordes are limitless. A recent case shook the Chilean public when the Chilean state authorised the Mapuche prisoner and murderer Celestino Córdova to celebrate the Mapuche New Year in prison by inviting more than 100 guests. Celestino Córdova is in prison for having murdered, together with other indigenous people, a married couple (Luchsinger-Mackay) on 4 January 2013. As reported by a newspaper in that country, he is also accused of involvement in another armed attack in the same commune on 22 December 201212. According to official statistics, in 2012 alone there were 287 reports of threats, arson, seizures and bomb attacks in the areas of Chile claimed by the Mapuche, including two deaths: that of Carabineros sergeant Hugo Albornoz and that of Héctor Gallardo13.
The links and direct links between the Mapuche and organisations, manifestly and ostensibly terrorist, such as FARC, ETA14 and the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo are clear, who, among other things, provide the former with military training, weapons and economic funding15. It would be a grave mistake to underestimate this supposedly native people, their intentions and the skill and determination of their militants: we are not dealing with dispersed and disorganised groups, but, properly speaking, with a self-sufficient, foreign and enemy army based in the very heart of our beloved, pretended and envied Patagonia16.
If the matter is not settled promptly and with determination, Argentina – and to some extent Chile – will be plunged into a scenario similar to that of Spain, where terrorism, bloodshed and movements destructive of national unity are commonplace.