Acceptable Versus Unacceptable Repression:
A Lesson in Canadian Imperial Hypocrisy
Todd Gordon
June has been a difficult month for progressive activists around the
world.
Mass protests in Iran and indigenous blockades in Peru were met with heavy
repression, while a left-of-centre President in Honduras was ousted in a
military coup. What these tragic events do offer us, however, is a very
clear perspective on Canadian foreign policy.
Consider the Canadian response to the events in Iran. Canada issued three
press releases on the events in Iran, all by Foreign Affairs Minister,
Lawrence Cannon. The first was on June 15 after the repression against the
protests challenging electoral fraud began. It called for an investigation
into the allegations of fraud by the Iranian government and condemned the
government's move to ban protests.
On June <http://news.gc.ca/web/article-eng.do?m=/index&nid=460699> 21,
after perhaps the worst day of violent repression of protesters in Iran up
to that point by government security forces and the government-aligned
militia, in which more than a dozen people were killed, Canada issued a
sharp condemnation of the Iranian government. In the press release, Cannon
stated that:
"Canada condemns the decision of the Iranian authorities to use violence
and
force against their own people ... The Iranian people deserve to have
their
voices heard, without fear of intimidation and violence. Canada condemns
the
use of force to stifle dissent, and we continue to call on Iran to fully
respect all of its human rights obligations, both in law and in practice,
and to conduct a thorough and transparent investigation into the fraud
allegations."
A third statement was released on June 25 calling for the release of
political prisoners and personally criticizing the Iranian official put in
charge of the investigation of the detained reformist leaders.
But what did the Canadian government say following the first rumblings of
a
potential military coup against the moderately left wing Honduran
president,
Jose Manuel Zelaya, on June 25? Nothing. As of the evening of June 29, it
had issued one rather tepid press release late on June 28, more than 12
hours after the coup became known outside Honduras.
And what did the Canadian government say when over 50 indigenous activists
in Peru were gunned down on June 5th by military and police forces for
protesting their government's free trade policies? Nothing. The massacre
of
indigenous protesters in Peru, many of whose bodies were then dumped by
police in a river, didn't rate any mention at all.
So why does Iran rate a sharp rebuke, but a military coup in Honduras and
brutal repression in Peru inspire cautious condemnation and silence
respectively?
Canadian Economic Interests versus Human Rights
For starters, the Iranian government is a part of the "Axis of Evil" in
the
war on "terror," of which Canada is an eager member. Thus Iran is a fair
target for criticism when it moves to crush dissent, as it should be.
(Though we should be mindful that the interests of Canada, like those of
the
U.S. or U.K., aren't necessarily a democratic Iran but a compliant one;
one
need only look at the history of foreign intervention in Iran in the 20th
century to be skeptical about the intentions of imperial powers.)
But the situation is different when it comes to Honduras and Peru.
Protest <http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/b231.jpg>
Protest outside Goldcorp's annual shareholders meeting.
In Honduras, Canadian corporations - largely, though not exclusively, in
mining - are major economic players. According to the Economic Commission
for Latin America and the Caribbean, from 1996-2006 Canada was in fact the
second largest foreign investor in the Central American country. Mining
companies like Goldcorp, Yamana and Breakwater Resources benefit from a
mining law passed in the wake of Hurricane Mitch in 1998 that strongly
favours foreign corporations over the rights of local communities. The
mining law and Canadian investments, particularly Goldcorp's San Martin
open
pit mine, have been the target of large demonstrations and blockades over
the last few years by indigenous peoples and small farmers whose lands and
livelihoods are threatened by the expansion of - well documented -
ecologically-disastrous Canadian mining.
In active support of Canadian capital (and foreign capital more generally)
in Honduras, the Canadian government has supported, through the Canadian
International Development Agency (CIDA), structural adjustment (now
described as Poverty Reduction Strategies). Structural adjustment is aimed
at the neoliberalization of the Honduran government and its public
policies.
Among other things, CIDA committed $1.5-million from 2004 to 2010 toward a
program at the Universidad Nacional de Honduras to assist in the
development
and implementation of the country's Poverty Reduction Strategy process.
The
Canadian government has also been pursuing a free trade agreement (FTA)
with
Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua and El Salvador.
It should come as no surprise, then, that social movements opposed to
mining
investment and reactionary mining laws are a threat to well-established
Canadian interests in Honduras. President Zelaya was also not on the best
of
terms with the mining industry. In his inaugural address in January 2006
he
declared a moratorium on the granting of new mining concessions. While by
no
means stopping existing exploration or halting operational mines, this
move
was nevertheless seen as a threat to the security and stability of mining
in
the country, and industry officials responded with lobbying and
advertising
campaigns to push their interests.
Zelaya's tenure also saw the adoption of a minimum wage increase, measures
to nationalize energy generation plants and the telephone system, and
Honduras's entrance into the Venezuelan-initiated Bolivarian Alternative
for
the Americas, a political and economic formation that seeks to counter
imperialist influence in the region.
Against this backdrop Zelaya, supported by trade unions and social
movements, called a vote for June 28 to determine if a majority of
Hondurans
wanted to have a referendum during the upcoming elections in November on
convening a constitutional assembly. If called, the constitutional
assembly
would seek to replace the current constitution, adopted in 1982 by a
brutal
American-backed military regime, with one more inclusive and democratic.
Such a constitution could very well further jeopardize mining interests in
the country.
But the vote - to decide whether or not to have a referendum - was
strongly
opposed by the anti-Zelaya-dominated Congress and Supreme Court and by the
military, all of whom claimed it's illegal. Their efforts to block the
vote
in the days leading up to it brought thousands of Hondurans onto the
streets, as the first concerns about a potential coup were raised. But
early
in the morning of June 28 the military made its move, violently detaining
Zelaya at his house and then deporting him to Costa Rica. Anti-Zelaya
President of the Congress (and fellow member of Zelaya's Liberal Party),
Roberto Michelletti, read a letter of resignation later in the day
allegedly
signed by the ousted President, but Zelaya denies signing the letter. The
military occupied the country, establishing checkpoints at the entrance of
towns, while the national telephone system, cell phone service and the
energy grid has been shut down in a number of areas.
The threat to the interests of the Canadian government and corporations
has
subsided, at least for the time being.
And so the Canadian government is much cagier around the situation in
Honduras than it is with respect to Iran. The Organization of American
States (OAS) did pass a resolution on Friday June, 26, after the first
rumblings of a coup were heard, which called for the maintenance of
democracy and the rule of law. Yet, at the same time, in the special
session
of the OAS Permanent Council on the situation in Honduras held that same
day
the Canadian representative remained silent. Foreign Affairs and
International Trade issued no press release on the 26th or the 27th
condemning the clear threat to Honduran democracy.
A press release was finally issued by Peter Kent, Minister of State for
the
Americas, very late in the evening of June 28. While Kent condemns the
coup
d'état, he "calls on all parties to show restraint and to seek a peaceful
resolution" to the crisis, as if all parties, including Zelaya and his
supporters, are responsible for the military-orchestrated coup or are
equally unrestrained in their actions. This position is echoed in the
Canadian representative's statement to the OAS Permanent Council following
the coup on the 28th. Canada has thus far failed, furthermore, to call for
the reinstatement of the Honduran President, placing it politically behind
the United States, which has called for Zelaya's return, in its response
to
the coup.
Non-Response to the Massacre in Peru
In Peru, meanwhile, Canadian companies have over $2.3-billion in
investments, ranking fourth among foreign investors in general but first
in
mining, according to Foreign Affairs and International Trade. In an effort
to strengthen the rights of Canadian capital in the Andean nation and lock
in its access to Peruvian resources, Canada signed a free trade agreement
with Peru late in 2008.
CIDA has also been busy at work in Peru, spending over $24-million between
2002 and 2009 on public sector reform (aimed at "improving efficiency"),
developing new institutional and regulatory frameworks in the hydrocarbons
sector (promoting "international private sector investment"), and reform
in
the mineral sector. Export Development Canada (EDC) - a government credit
agency designed to finance Canadian foreign investment - recently posted a
permanent representative for the Andean Region in Lima. EDC President,
Eric
Seigel, proclaimed that "EDC intends to become a permanent member of the
Andean financial community, supporting growth for both Andean and Canadian
companies operating in the region."
And so Canada said nothing when Peruvian President, Alan García, sent in a
600 strong police and military force - including armoured personnel
carriers
and helicopter gun-ships - to crush a blockade of a major highway by 5,000
indigenous activists. The military and police assault led to the deaths of
fifty protesters and the disappearance of many - possibly hundreds - more,
according to indigenous organizations. Nine police officers were also
killed
during the assault when indigenous people fought back in self defense
against the massive government show of brutal force.
While Canada remained silent about the repression in Peru, it couldn't
contain itself when, a mere two weeks later, Stockwell Day, Minister of
International Trade, proudly announced that legislation to implement the
Canada-Peru FTA was passed by parliament. But it was precisely the
neoliberal and Free Trade policies of García that sparked the blockades in
the first place. García, who has a long history of violence and political
corruption that led to his exile in the 1990s, has moved to open up large
swathes of indigenous land in the Amazon to foreign resource companies,
sweetening the deal for Canadian and other foreign companies with low tax
and royalty rates and cheap government-subsidized electricity rates.
The result, predictably, has been a steady growth of Canadian and other
foreign resource firms in the Peruvian Amazon, and increasing
confrontations
between them and indigenous communities. Canada's FTA with Peru, along
with
the American FTA, will only intensify the conflicts surrounding resource
development and indigenous land.
If it's Good for Canadian Business...
It's no accident that the Canadian government quickly and sharply condemns
some instances of repression, such as that in Iran, while it ignores or
tepidly responds to others. If it's good for Canadian business, then it's
okay. This is imperialist Canada in the developing world: exploit people
and
their resources to make a buck, and if some repression is required along
the
way, well so be it. This isn't just an American act; it's a Canadian one
too, and it's becoming all too familiar.
It's also worth noting here that Canadian involvement in Honduras and Peru
(and many more countries besides) extends beyond investment interests and
financing neoliberal reform. Canada has also trained Honduran and Peruvian
military personnel through the Military Training Assistance Programme
(MTAP). The MTAP provides language, officer and "peace support" operations
training to roughly 1,300 military personnel from sixty-three different
developing countries a year. According to its Directorate, the MTAP serves
to "promote Canadian foreign and defence policy interests." It "uses the
mechanism of military training assistance to develop and enhance bilateral
and defence relationships with countries of strategic interest to Canada."
It happens to be the case that many of the participating countries are
ones
with which Canada has, or is hoping to develop, strong economic ties and
which have troubling human rights records, including Peru and Honduras.
The reality of Canadian involvement in the third world is an ugly one, and
deserves greater attention from the Canadian Left. The Honduran and
Peruvian
situations are not the exception to the rule of Canadian foreign policy.
They represent the normal practice of the Canadian government defending
Canadian business interests against the human rights of workers, poor
communities, and indigenous peoples .
Todd Gordon is the author of Cops, Crime and Capitalism: The Law-and-Order
Agenda in Canada. He's currently writing a book on Canadian imperialism.
His
articles have appeared on Znet, The Bullet, Rabble and in New Socialist
magazine. He teaches political science at York University in Toronto, and
can be reached at tsgordon@xxxxxxxxx
_____
Create a cool, new character for your Windows LiveT Messenger. Check
<http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9656621> it out