Canada Gets Chastised for Exclusive Arctic Leadership
Today marked the conclusion of a Summit to discuss issues surrounding the opening Arctic waters. It didn’t end as well as our Foreign Affairs Minister, Mr. Cannon, would have liked, according to the Montreal Gazette. U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton chastised Mr. Cannon, and by extension, the Canadian government, “for excluding aboriginal leaders and three northern nations — Iceland, Finland and Sweden — from the gathering.”
Mr. Cannon defended his exclusionary tactics by commenting that “Arctic Ocean coastal states have an important stewardship role in the region.” Ah yes, and our Conservative government is doing such a good job with their ocean stewardship – if stewardship means voting against attempts at the recent CITES conference to protect polar bears or rapidly diminishing fish stocks like Salmon and Bluefin Tuna or against banning bottom-trawling fishing vessels, which ravage the ocean’s bottom, not only removing all current life but making regeneration almost impossible.
Yup, Canada is surely a beacon of ocean stewardship, what with Victoria and Halifax still dumping raw sewage into their respective harbours and our careful management of the Atlantic cod fishery. Even our refusal to sign the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples a few years ago shines as an example of stewardship of fragile ecosystems and populations.
We should totally be allowed to take a leadership role on the incredibly fragile Arctic while the EU and aboriginal peoples are excluded from the talks because, well, they actually give a darn about the Arctic as more than another area to exploit as thoroughly as possible, arming it and using it for commercial traffic.
Yup, we are very special indeed.
BTW, here’s a quick link to the GPC policy on the Arctic. Yes, we have one. And while it is called the Green Arctic strategy, we certainly would prefer to avoid that – an outcome the governing parties don’t really seem to mind.
Where are the women?
“On his watch, the proportion of women on the government benches has fallen to 11 per cent, from 25 per cent under Paul Martin and 23 per cent under Jean Chrétien.”
I didn’t know that. How interesting. And distressing.
From this article by Carol Goar in the Star discussing Minister Guergis’ less than inspiring performance at the UN this week leading up to Monday’s celebration of International Women’s Day.
I was incredibly happy to hear the government state their commitment to investigating the ‘missing’ aboriginal women – over 500 of them now in both the throne speech and the budget.
I’ll believe it when it happens.
I was incredibly happy to hear the Mr. Harper’s primary objective as head of the G8 this year is to improve maternal and infant health.
I’ll believe it when the numbers change.
Missing Aboriginal Women and Missing Federal Funding
I’m simply passing this information along from the Facebook group, Proud to be a Member of That “Left-Wing Fringe Group” Called Women,* with the fervent hope that you will take action and write to your MPs, Minister Guergis and Mr. Harper. Our country has a very poor record when it comes to the treatment of aboriginal populations and aboriginal women have borne the brunt of this mistreatment.
Please help this group continue its work by making the Conservatives aware that we do care – about every person’s rights and dignity.
Thank you.
{snip}
“We haven’t heard anything,” said Sisters in Spirit director Kate Rexe. “The government is silent on the issue.”
With a grant of $5 million, Sisters in Spirit spent the last five years compiling a database of more than 520 women who have disappeared or been killed over the last 40 years. The group prepared tool kits for families and police to use when a woman goes missing and developed policies and programs to help stop the cycle of violence.
Rexe said the Sisters group is prepared to begin implementing policies and community programs aimed at three specific areas — the justice system, child welfare and poverty. But that’s been on hold for months because Ottawa won’t say if it plans to keep funding the work.
“It’s unbelievably frustrating,” Rexe said. “We have all the knowledge, the momentum. We can actually start to implement change, but we don’t even know if we can keep planning.”
A year ago, Status of Women Minister Helena Guergis said she was working on extending the project. “I want you to know, I’ve already engaged in the process of what Sisters in Spirit Two would look like,” Guergis said at the Status of Women committee meeting Feb. 12, 2009.
But a spokeswoman for Guergis would not say Friday whether funding for Sisters in Spirit is forthcoming, and said in an email Ottawa has asked NWAC to share its database with police.
Please support Canadian First Nations sisters in spirit and write, phone or fax Helena Guergis, the PM, opposition critics, opposition leaders and your MP demanding full funding for this critical initiative. First Nations women must be the leaders in resolving the national shame of missing and murdered Aboriginal women – they are our experts. The RCMP and provincial and local police have miserable track records with respect to these tragedies and must work in partnership with women to create effective strategies for their resolution.
PM Harper
Harper.S@parl.gc.ca
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Telephone: 613-992-4211
Fax: 613-941-6900
Helena Guergis
Minister for Status of Women
guergh@parl.gc.ca
733 Confederation Building
House of Commons
Ottawa, ON
K1A 0A6
Phone: 613-992-4224
Fax: 613 992-2164
Suzanne L. Clément
Deputy Head
suzanne.clement@nlrb.gov
Michael Ignatieff
IgnatM@parl.gc.ca
Anita Neville (Lib MP, Winnipeg South Central & party critic on SWC)
email@anitaneville.ca
Jack Layton
LaytoJ@parl.gc.ca
Irene Mathyssen (NDP MP, London-Fanshawe & party critic on SWC)
mathyi@parl.gc.ca
Libby Davies (NDP MP Vancouver East)
daviel@parl.gc.ca
Olivia Chow (NDP MP Trinity-Spadina)
chowo1c@parl.gc.ca
Nicole Demers (Bloc Québécois MP Laval & party critic on SWC)
DemerN@parl.gc.ca
{snip}
* The name of this group refers to a comment Mr. Harper made in a supposedly closed-door meeting in Thunder Bay where he commented on the cancellation of the Court Challenges program and proclaimed that they had shut down the influence of left-wing fringe groups. It’s at 3:40 of the video though you might enjoy his bragging about the cancellation of universal daycare at about 3:30. Sadly, one of, if not the major beneficiary of the Court Challenges program had been the equity and rights of women through many cases. It was a major loss to equity in this country and it slipped right by, almost un-noticed and un-challenged. We might as well change it to the Minister of State Against the Status of Women
Suddenly, Harper cares about women?!
… oh! Wait. It’s just our uterus’ that he cares about. Okay, no change there.
A funny thing happened a couple of weeks ago. In his inaugural speech as 2010 President of the G8, Mr. Harper proclaimed that he was very, very concerned about maternal and infant health and that, during his term, he was going to champion these two causes (Millennium Development Goals #4 and #5) and bring much needed attention and funding to them – on a global basis. No. Really. He said it.
Immediately, other commentators began to question his good intentions. Mr. Ignatieff, for one, thought it a bit odd and discussed how “Harper has made cuts to the status of women and equality programs, while salary gaps between men and women are increasing in Canada” and that, perhaps, Mr. Harper could “start showing at home in Canada the same commitment to women.”
And this is all well and good. I expect certain people to have problems with everything that Mr. Harper announces.
But when Stephen Lewis has problems with the same announcements, then my ears prick up. Why? Because I have seen no evidence that he is anything other than a profoundly humane and compassionate man in a very challenging and frustrating position, exposed to the most heart-breaking conditions on Earth and managing to carry on year after year. To him I listen.
His critique is that it seems odd that Mr. Harper would trumpet Canada’s burgeoning awareness of the issues of maternal and infant health when the G8 has been working on securing funding for the past year. Note that the MDGs were first developed leading up to 2000 with a due date of 2015 – sometimes it just takes a while to get the ball rolling, y’know.
In addition, Mr. Lewis noted that none of the other MDGs were mentioned and that it didn’t “include sexual violence, child marriage, sexual trafficking, female genital mutilation, economic autonomy, political representation, land rights or inheritance rights. It include[d] none of the panoply of women’s issues which consign women to subordinate positions around the world.”
Anyway, I’m sure that members of the G8 hope that Canada will stop actively opposing humanitarian causes and denying human rights and freedoms to as many groups as they possibly can. I wish I could believe Mr. Harper but I have seen no evidence that he cares about anyone except for white, straight males, and preferably corporate oil executives at that.
Especially since he considers women to be a ‘left-wing fringe group’.
The audacity of Mr. Harper is threatening to make my brain explode – is this his attempt at a kinder, gentler Harper to try and make us forget that he is a cynical, arrogant, autocratic leader who has shown only contempt for Canadian citizens and our democracy. Is this a reaction to the pro-democracy, anti-prorogue rallies that occurred all across Canada last month?
Probably. He honestly seems to believe that we will be easily lulled back to sleep with the belief that he is going to take care of the world’s poorest and most vulnerable citizens. When he doesn’t care about those same people right here.
How about raising the quality of life, or, heck, even the standard of living for our own aboriginal populations? How about taking care of the poorest and most vulnerable right here?
How about that Mr. Harper?
More on aboriginal mass graves (?)
…and then there is this article which questions the claims made by Annett’s group back in April regarding mass graves. It’s pretty long but the comments following are also interesting. There is so much to think about here and so much that is unknown. I didn’t even know who Kevin Annett was until I read this article, now I want to know more. Knowledge is power.
That is why the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is such a great idea. But so is an independent forensic investigation into a few of the supposed grave sites.
The more information we can get into the open, the better. Transparency is the first step towards trust building.
Aboriginal mass graves
I’m really, really trying to be apolitical. I’m really, really trying to keep my mouth shut…
… but I can’t. Not when this keeps happening.
In my own country. I am so ashamed. Mass graves of children. Hundreds? Thousands?
Canada’s Secret Shame.
I am so angry and I transform this anger into a thirst for justice.
And I will stand in solidarity on May 29th.
Chimo indeed.
One final, historical example of exclusion
Again from Hopgood’s article, a few quotes on the project to assimilate ‘the Indian’ in the U.S. back in the 1800s and early 1900s.
The native peoples of America were considered to be like children by the governments in the U.S. during this time period. They were deemed incapable of taking care of their own land and behaving in a civilized manner, therefore, their lands were held in trust until they showed their capacity. Those who could pass the competency test were given “fee-simple titles to the land and thus citizenship during elaborate and heavily symbolic ceremonies conducted by the Indian Office:”
“The crowd would look on while their ‘competent’ brethren were summoned individually from inside the lodge. The candidates for land titles were dressed in traditional costume and armed with a bow and arrow. After ordering a candidate to shoot his arrow into the distance, the presiding officer… would announce ‘You have shot your last arrow’. The arrowless archer would then return to the tipi and reemerge a few minutes later in ‘civilized’ dress. ‘Take the handle of this plow’, the government’s man would say, ‘this act means that you have chosen to live the life of the white man – and the white man lives by work’ ” (from Frederick E. Hoxie, A Final Promise: The Campaign to Assimilate the Indians, 1880-1920. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989: 180).
This process of “cultural suicide” was continued through institutional schooling which in the words of Captain Richard Henry Pratt aimed to “Kill the Indian in him and save the man” (David Wallace Adams, Education for Extinction: American Indians and the Boarding School Experience, 1875-1928. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1995: 212, 52).
“Education serves to both clean the slate and replace it with a new lesson” (Hopgood, 18). The trick is that back in the 1800s, the elites were open and proud of this mission – to replace the savage with the civilized, to create an individual who would be worthy of citizenship and participation in civil society. Today, this intention has had to remain part of the subtle background, elite members of a society can no longer openly proclaim their project to erase the savage and preserve the man but, instead, attempt this aim through the promotion of supposedly universal human rights.
Sigh.
Something important is happening in Burma
If you dig through the National Post you can find it on Page A18. There are protests happening in ‘Myanmar’ or Burma as it was called before the military junta took over decades ago.
The revolt in 1988 was viciously put down by the military and thousands were killed.
Since the middle of August, there have been more and more protests.
Today there are 40-60,000 monks – that’s right, monks – leading protests of civil leaders, students and others demanding democracy. Marching through the streets of Rangoon and other towns. Hundreds of thousands of people rising up and demanding democracy. Literally risking their lives for freedom. Literally, of course, because the government has promised to crack down on the marches. And when they say crack down they mean with bullets, not with flowers.
Visit avaaz.org for more information and to lend you name to a petition to the UN Security Council. While Ahmadinejad is mistreated in New York as the U.S. marches to war against Iran, this issue is ignored. While the U.S. and Canada pick and choose their targets (based on uncooperative governments, I suppose) the very real dictatorship in Burma has been unopposed for decades. DECADES!
To learn more about this issue and one of my favourite people on Earth, here’s the link to Wikipedia for Aung San Suu Kyi.
If you have a bit more time, please send an email to Stephen Harper, he just happens to be in New York this week making an ass of Canada before the UN. Maybe he’ll enjoy an email or two.
Pay attention – the monks are leading the way. It probably won’t hurt to send them your prayers.
Canada’s ‘No’ Vote
Okay, I confess – I’m still steamed about Canada voting NO to the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples at the UN.
Here are some worthy quotes (snipped from September 13, 2007):
In a statement released by his spokesperson, Mr. Ban described the Declaration’s adoption as “a historic moment when UN Member States and indigenous peoples have reconciled with their painful histories and are resolved to move forward together on the path of human rights, justice and development for all.”
{But, obviously Canada is not yet ready to reconcile our painful history which has become our disgraceful present.}
He called on governments and civil society to ensure that the Declaration’s vision becomes a reality by working to integrate indigenous rights into their policies and programmes.
{This is where we, as citizens, can make a huge difference – more to come, I promise.}
Ms. Arbour noted that the Declaration has been “a long time coming. But the hard work and perseverance of indigenous peoples and their friends and supporters in the international community has finally borne fruit in the most comprehensive statement to date of indigenous peoples’ rights.”
{How cool is she?! Yeah for Louise Arbour, the coolest Canadian at the UN, especially when Stephen Lewis is on vacation. For those who don’t know, she is the High Commissioner for Human Rights at the UN.}
Ambassador John McNee of Canada said his country was disappointed to have to vote against the Declaration, but it had “significant concerns” about the language in the document.
The provisions on lands, territories and resources “are overly broad, unclear and capable of a wide variety of interpretations” and could put into question matters that have been settled by treaty, he said.
{grrrrr… Maybe if we had paid any attention to the promises we made in our treaties we wouldn’t be in this situation in the first place. Maybe if we hadn’t lied to our treaty partners, almost right from the beginning and treated them as less than human, right from the beginning we wouldn’t be here. Maybe if we hadn’t tried to force them to assimilate this Declaration wouldn’t be necessary. Maybe if our government had finally grown the courage necessary to rectify past mistakes this wouldn’t be needed. But, of course, we still suck and that is why this Declaration is so important.}
Boo Canada.
Yeah for Indigenous Rights, Boo for Canada
Have I mentioned that Harper makes me feel kindof sick to my stomach. Here then we have a hooray! for human rights trumping the invested corporate interests of big business in Canada, which Harper so devotedly represents.
THE DECLARATION ON THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES WAS OVERWHELMINGLY PASSED TODAY BY THE U.N. GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
Yeah! Here is a report by the CBC. Notice that there were 4 countries who voted against the declaration: Canada (I am so embarrassed), Australia, the United States and New Zealand. Hmmm… I wonder what could have happened to make them vote ‘No!’
You may or may not know (but now you will) that I am taking a Seminar on Indigenous Peoples in IR this semester. Here is my favourite quote so far from the textbook: “Our object is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic and there is no Indian question, and no Indian department.” This was said by Deputy Superintendent-General Duncan Campbell Scott in 1920 (Leslie and Haguire 1978:115 in Niezen “The Origins of Indigenism” 2003:31).
No, I guess we don’t have anything to apologize for. Nothing at all.
Excuse me while I go curl up in a ball and weep.


