In December 2017, Patricia Bullrich, Minister of National Security, presented a 180-page intelligence report prepared in conjunction with the governments of the provinces of Río Negro, Neuquén, and Chubut, titled "Background, Judicialized Facts, and Implications for Security in the Republic of Argentina." In this report, an attempt is made to justify the existence of a supposed violent and extremist indigenous group called Resistencia Ancestral Mapuche (RAM), however, the evidence presented is weak and lacking factual support.
Bullrich's report highlights the alleged existence of the RAM, linking it to organizations in Chile, anarchism, guerrilla warfare of the FRAC, and Kurdish militarized organizations, despite lacking evidence to support these claims. Furthermore, it indicates the possibility that other radical groups may also be subject to similar actions by the government.
It is argued that the provinces of Chubut, Río Negro, and Neuquén are in a "conflict zone" and efforts are made to prevent the situation from reaching the levels of conflict present in Chile. The main objective of the report is to establish a criminal perspective in accordance with the threat this violent group supposedly represents for society.
According to the report, the RAM would be an organization that seeks to promote an insurrectional struggle against the Argentine state and private land ownership, led by leader Facundo Jones Huala. The RAM is linked to the Movimiento Autónomo del Puel Mapu (MAP) and other groups of Chilean origin are mentioned. Emphasis is placed on the supposed violent methods and military capability without strong evidence to support such claims.
Additionally, a supposed ideological connection between the RAM and anarchist and leftist movements is indicated, as well as with international guerrillas such as the FARC and Kurdish movements. However, these claims lack solid foundations and are based on unfounded presumptions.
Bullrich's actions, based on this report, have been questioned for their lack of compelling evidence and their focus on constructing an internal enemy without clear foundations. The assertions of the report and the subsequent statements from the minister have generated controversy and criticism for the lack of solid evidence supporting the accusations against the RAM and its supposed links to other radical groups.
