Peace for the long run in Syria

“We’re all fed up with these muscle-flexing exercises… [We need to try] to solve our problems with the mind or the heart, not the muscles”- Rev. Nadim Nassar, Syrian priest of the Church of England

For the past six years the Syrian people have been at the epicentre of multiple complex conflicts, which have drawn in powerful regional and international players.

While the western media focuses on the conflict between the Assad government and groups such as ISIS, the situation is far more complex, with intra-rebel fighting, battles between ISIS and the many other armed groups, regional Sunni-Shia divisions, the Kurdish struggle for a homeland, and so on.

The result: hundreds of thousands of Syrians have been killed since 2011, and millions of people – 65 percent of Syria’s population – have been forcefully displaced from their homes. This includes over 6 million internally displaced peoples and 5.5 million refugees.

In light of these tragic circumstances, how does one even start to think about the possibilities for long-term peace?

A dominant narrative among political decision makers, including in Canada, is that military intervention (or the threat of it) is essential to ending the Syrian crisis. This narrative is echoed by much of the Western media and the general public.

Canada, as part of the Global Coalition against [ISIS], has at certain points called for the removal of President Assad and promoted Canada’s commitment to the defeat of ISIS through the military component of its approach in Syria and Iraq. Like MCC partners,  Rev. Nadim Nassar, a Syrian priest in the Church of England, claims that when it comes to Western-led military interventions in the Middle East, there is often little understanding of the complex context, the ripple effects of such actions on the ground, and what approaches might truly be needed to create long-term peace. Yet, as he laments in a radio interview with CBC’s The Sunday Edition in April 2017, the dominant narrative often takes precedence, drowning out the voices that promote other approaches to building peace.

MCC has been supporting and walking alongside local partners in Syria for over 25 years. These local partners include churches and other organizations with strong roots in their communities and a deep understanding of the complexities of the ever-changing context. Despite the exodus of international NGOs and diplomats, these partners have chosen to remain in Syrai in the midst of conflict, deeply dedicated to long-term peace in their country.

doug_naomi_damascus_syria

In Damascus, Syria, former MCC representatives Doug and Naomi Enns stand on Straight Street (the street we read about in Acts where the Apostle Paul was staying after being blinded on the road to Damascus). Photo courtesy of Syrian Orthodox Church

In April 2017, former MCC representatives for Lebanon and Syria, Doug and Naomi Enns, entered Syria for the first time in five years, spending five days with partners in their home communities. They saw loss and destruction, but they also saw the work for peace and the rebuilding of hope.

They witnessed that life persists: “We saw acts of solidarity between people of various faiths and backgrounds. We saw hope, we saw resilience. We saw hardship and terrible loss. And we saw people really wanting to live.”

MCC and its partners in Syria and the surrounding region believe that the key to long-lasting peace lies in addressing the deep rooted political and socio-economic grievances.

syria_volunteer_staff_damascus

During their visit, Doug and Naomi Enns were thanked by many partners, including this group at the Damascus office of Forum for Development, Culture and Dialogue (FDCD). Photo courtesy of FDCD

Such work involves things like building bridges between different faiths and ethnic groups; supporting those struggling with both physical and mental trauma so they aren’t drawn into cycles of violence; trying to create a sense of belonging for children and promote hope for the future generations; and providing emergency support while investing in long-term development.

MCC’s partners engage in these acts of peacebuilding and resistance even amidst the violence.

As part of their trip, Doug and Naomi visited the city of old Homs – a shell of the old city all but reduced to rubble in a brutal siege in 2012. Despite the destruction all around, they saw hope at a Syrian Orthodox Church – a church that can trace its roots back to 59 AD. Though sustaining significant damage in the conflict, somehow the church continues to thrive. Weekly services continue and the community programs persist, allowing the congregation to reach out and walk alongside the most vulnerable within the community.

oldhomsstreetscenes

Flowers bloom amid the destruction in Homs, Syria, a site where MCC partners with the Syrian Orthodox Church in supporting orphans and providing monthly allowances. MCC photo/Doug Enns

MCC welcomes and supports some of the Government of Canada’s work in the region, including its long-term development and humanitarian relief, and its stated commitment to diplomacy. But the military mission against ISIS, which was recently renewed until spring 2019, is a great concern to MCC. Our faith commitments and our experience around the world over decades have taught us that war does not bring true and lasting peace.

Additionally, along with many Canadians, we note that there is little-to-no transparent direction or specific goals for Canada’s extended military mission. More importantly, MCC’s partners and staff in and around Syria see the military response as counterproductive, failing to address the roots of the conflict and leaving destruction in its wake.

MCC’s partners in the region know that working for long-term peace in Syria is neither easy, nor quick. Syrian peacebuilders do not pretend to know all of the answers. Yet they long to stay and to see the day when their children can live in peace.

Like the slow but steady rebuilding of the ancient church in Homs, peace comes slowly, one brick at a time.

 

By Rebekah Sears, Policy Analyst for the Ottawa Office

“Our land, our rights, our peace”

Nenita Conduz is small in stature and pregnant with her third child. She is also courageous and defiant.

This tiny mother is leading her Subanen people in the struggle to defend their ancestral land in the southern Philippines, where a Canadian owned mining company is harming their land, their community and their way of life.

Because of her commitment to speak truth, Nenita lives under constant threat.

Nenita Conduz

Nenita Conduz. Photo courtesy Antonio Nercua Ablon

Nenita recently visited Canada, as one member of a delegation of 5 leaders from the Philippines, bringing a message of how Canadian mining companies are harming their land and their communities. The delegation met with government officials on Parliament Hill and did a speaking tour of major cities, calling for respect of “our land, our rights, our peace.” I heard Nenita speak in Winnipeg.

The delegation’s visit was sponsored by KAIROS, an ecumenical social justice coalition, of which MCC is a member. KAIROS has been advocating for years for accountability mechanisms for Canadian extractive companies overseas as part of a wider Open for Justice campaign. Canada is a global leader in international extractive industry; but has very weak mechanisms to hold mining companies to human rights and environmental standards.

The Subanen people – one of numerous Indigenous groups in the Philippines – lives on the Zamboanga Peninsula of Mindanao Island in the southern part of the country. Zamboanga is rich in natural resources; it is also one of the most militarized regions in the country.

The Subanen have received certification of their ancestral domain, with the attending right of free, prior and informed consent to any extractive activities on their land. But this has not stopped foreign corporations from accessing the mineral resources or for using armed force to put down the resistance of the Subanen people.

Nenita focused her critique on Calgary-based TVI Pacific and its Philippine subsidiary TVIRD, which is extracting copper from Subanen land. According to her testimony, as well as the findings of a KAIROS delegation to the Philippines in 2014, the company began its operations without the due process of free, prior and informed consent.  Moreover, its arrival in the community coincided with the cancellation of business permits for small scale mining operations, the deployment of armed “security” personnel, and the escalation of widespread human rights violations.

Nenita 3

Philippine delegation with KAIROS hosts. Photo/KAIROS

The reported human rights violations include: extrajudicial killings, illegal detention, kidnappings, destruction of property, homes and livelihoods, forcible eviction, as well as threats, harassment and intimidation. Thousands of people have been affected.

Nenita herself is continually being watched and harassed and is currently not able to return to her home because of fears she could be assassinated.

But this courageous woman refuses to be silenced. “Defending our ancestral land is of prime importance to us,” she says. “We cannot live without our land.”

She notes that land is not just a place for the Subanen people to live. The land defines their life, their health, the social fabric of their community, and their very identity.

Nenita is aware that the struggle of the Subanen people is part of a global struggle by Indigenous peoples seeking to protect lands that are coveted by governments and corporations for their forests, waters and minerals.

“We are calling for respect for Indigenous peoples rights,” she insists. “We hope our efforts to expose what is happening in the Philippines will touch people’s hearts and minds and lead to support for the global struggle.”

open-for-justice-logo-temp-TRANS.PSDThe Open for Justice campaign, which MCC supports, urges the Canadian federal government to take action in two specific ways:

  • to appoint an independent ombudsperson mandated to monitor Canadian extractive operations overseas, to investigate complaints and to take action where needed to uphold human rights (current mechanisms are voluntary and ineffectual); and
  • to allow access to Canadian courts for non-Canadians who have been harmed by the international operations of Canadian companies.

The recently released federal budget failed to allocate funds for the creation of a human rights ombudsperson.

We owe it to people like courageous Nenita – and Indigenous peoples everywhere – to support their call for “our land, our rights, our peace.”

by Esther Epp-Tiessen, Public Engagement Coordinator for the Ottawa Office

Actions speak louder . . . Canada in Iraq and Syria

“Our new policy in Iraq, Syria and the surrounding region reflects what Canada is all about: defending our interests alongside our allies, and working constructively with local partners to build real solutions that will last.”

These words were spoken by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on February 8, 2016. Flanked by the Ministers of Defence, Foreign Affairs and International Development, Trudeau sought to reshape Canada’s involvement in Syria and Iraq—or at least re-shape the messaging of Canadian foreign policy.

Iraq 3

Prime Minister Trudeau with Ministers of Defence, International Development and Foreign Affairs, February 8, 2016. Photo credit/Government of Canada.

Canada’s current involvement in the Global Coalition fighting against ISIS in Syria and Iraq is set to expire on March 31, 2017. Speculation is abounding: Will Canada extend its mission? If so, what will the mission look like? What will the messaging be?

The current context of Iraq and Syria calls for urgent action. There are millions of internally displaced peoples, ongoing strikes including in Mosul; the continued targeting of Yezidis and other vulnerable minority groups; and destruction such as we have seen in Aleppo.

On February 8, 2016, when Trudeau launched Canada’s revised mission, he emphasized integrated government programming to the tune of $1.6 billion over three years. While the Canadian military would still have a significant role, the vast majority of funds was earmarked for humanitarian response and long term development, $840 million and $270 million respectively. The termination of direct participation in airstrikes was arguably the most significant shift.

Iraq 1

A woman and her granddaughter—internally displaced by the Islamic State group in 2014—receive food assistance through MCC and the Canadian Foodgrains Bank. MCC photo/Kaitlin Heatwole

Military action, on the contrary, was the priority the previous government emphasized above all others. This included airstrikes, but also the arming and training of non-state actors like the Iraqi Kurdish Peshmerga. Of course, humanitarianism was also a significant part of the previous government’s mission; Iraq was named a partner country for long term development in 2014. But the need to protect Canadians and the world from “imminent” terrorist threats through military efforts took centre stage.

MCC Canada wrote twice to the Harper Government on Canada’s mission—at the beginning, in October of 2014, and during the first renewal in March of 2015.  Our most significant concern was Canada’s involvement in airstrikes. In 2015 we wrote:

“[N]ot only will air strikes in Iraq and Syria fail to address the deep-rooted ethnic and religious divisions underlying the present violence, but they will exacerbate existing—or create new—economic, social, and political grievances.”

But did things really change under Trudeau?

One glance at Operation Impact’s website, the official government website on the military part of Canada’s ongoing mission, shows the continuing flight missions, or sorties as they are called, of Canadian aircraft. Since February 2016 Canadian fighter jets have not conducted direct airstrikes, but they have continued to regularly participate in refueling and reconnaissance missions. Though not directly striking, Canadian aircraft are gathering intelligence and refueling other aircraft for the purpose of carrying out airstrikes.

Iraq 2

MCC supports this Kindergarten in Erbil, Iraqi Kurdistan for children displaced from their homes by the conflict with the Islamic State group. MCC photo/Kaitlin Heatwole

In other words, the impact of airstrikes has not lessened because Canada is not directly participating. In an MCC letter following the launch of the revised mission in February 2016, MCC again lamented the devastating impacts of airstrikes to destroy life, and vital health and education infrastructure, leaving cities “virtually uninhabitable and fueling massive displacement.”

A final point of contention is the arming of fighters in the region, particularly non-state actors, and the consequences and complexities of this. This question has come up time and time again—from Afghanistan to Libya and now Iraq, particularly with the Iraqi Kurdish Peshmerga. Canada, under Trudeau, has continued to arm state and Kurdish forces.

What happens when the “official” fighting is over? What about the demands of these different groups—and what about the dynamics with other groups in the area? In the case of the Iraqi Kurds, how will arming these groups impact, for good or ill, a unified government in Iraq? A unified and functional government is essential for long term sustainable development. The question is, will providing arms to the Kurds help create this functionality? Or will it continue to destabilize the region? Will it lead to more bloodshed?

In addition, the arming of the Iraqi forces has also raised alarm bells, as both the government forces and minority armed groups have been implicated in violations of human rights.

MCC Canada raised this issue in the first letter to the Trudeau government on this mission and it was the main subject of the most recent letter, from February 2017:

“Training and weapons transfers from the international community are counterproductive to building a unified Iraq in that they are fueling sectarian divisions at the political level and amongst minority groups; contributing to human rights and laws-of-war violations; and further destabilizing the country.”

Where does this complicated situation leave us?

As the Canadian government considers possible renewal of its mission in Iraq and Syria, one lesson we can surely take is this: It is important to look far beyond the messaging of government.  We need to think critically about government actions and their impacts on the region. It may be cliché, but on this and any other government policy, despite what is said we need to adopt that all-critical perspective. Actions speak louder than words.

By Rebekah Sears, Policy Analyst for the Ottawa Office.

 

 

What makes a good (political) leader?

by Monica Scheifele, Program Assistant for the Ottawa Office.  Monica has watched many leaders come and go during her years with the Ottawa Office.

I’ve recently been thinking about leadership qualities. Perhaps that is because today (January 11) is Sir John A. Macdonald Day in Canada or because the U.S. will be marking Martin Luther King Jr. Day on January 16. Or maybe it has something to do with the upcoming inauguration of U.S. President-Elect Donald Trump, or this week’s Government of Canada cabinet shuffle, or the Conservative and NDP leadership races set for later this year. Perhaps a recent Sunday sermon on Jesus’ baptism influenced me.

Whatever the reason, the question of what makes a good leader has been on my mind. What qualities do we look for or need in our leaders, especially our political leaders?

No doubt, qualities of integrity, strength, confidence, charisma, and decisiveness come to mind. Leaders should be passionate, innovative, open-minded, insightful, inspirational, pro-active, and of course good communicators. These are the ideals.

john-a-macdonald

Sir John A. Macdonald was Canadian prime minister 1867-73 and 1878-91. Photo credit Library and Archives Canada

As Canada’s first Prime Minister and a Father of Confederation, Sir John A. Macdonald is generally considered to be a great Canadian leader. Described as charismatic, visionary, while also highly partisan and politically ruthless, he accomplished a great deal during his 19 years as prime minister.

His leadership wasn’t without controversy. There was the Pacific Scandal around the building of the national railway, and the execution of Louis Riel which increased animosity between French-speaking and English-speaking Canadians.

Macdonald also enacted policies toward Indigenous people and Chinese immigrants which we regard today as outright racist. He implemented the Indian Act and laid the foundations for the Indian Residential School  System. He imposed a head tax on Chinese immigrants once the railroad was built and their labour no longer needed.

Macdonald’s heavy drinking was no secret, but at the same time he seems to have been a good husband and father.  All in all, he was very human with good qualities as well as flaws.

Leaders today need a variety of skills and attributes. Political leaders in particular want to stand out from the crowd. Some do so with charisma and vision, while others offer ideas and statements which alienate. Even leaders of movements require some kind of hook to get people’s attention and support for their ideas. For Martin Luther King Jr. it was his ability to move a crowd with his oratory. He didn’t build a nation, but he certainly changed one.

chrystia-freeland

Chrystia Freeland was appointed Minister of Foreign Affairs on January 10.  Photo credit Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press

Whether the leader of a nation or a movement, all leaders need to demonstrate some understanding of who they are leading and why. Whether it is to create something new, bring about significant change, or just exercise power, leaders are responsible to those they lead. Good leaders should engender the trust, confidence, and loyalty of those who support them. Ego, pride, and arrogance are not positive leadership traits, though they may help someone achieve power. Real leaders admit when they are wrong and give credit where it is due.

We hope the women and men taking on new cabinet roles this year, as well as those who are continuing their mandates and those seeking leadership roles, will demonstrate good leadership with vision, integrity, and some humility. This won’t always be easy.

As we follow the leaders of 2017, let us remember to pray for them, asking God to grant them wisdom, strength of character, grace, understanding, and humility to be positive examples for future leaders.

Praying by the prison, Part 3: Forgiveness

This week’s writer is Randy Klassen, national Restorative Justice Coordinator for MCC Canada, based in Saskatoon, SK.    Restorative Justice Week will be held in Canada, and throughout the world, from November 20-27. 

Tricky thing, forgiveness. As I walk the park trail near my home, in the pre-dawn quiet along the wide South Saskatchewan River, I ponder the words about forgiveness in the Lord’s Prayer: “Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us.” Across the river, a line of lights twinkles, marking the Regional Psychiatric Centre (a hospital within the Canadian correctional system) with its high fences and razor wire.

Forgiveness, it seems to me, is as foreign a concept to the criminal justice system as it is the focal point of the Christian message—and practice—of reconciliation. Is there a place for the concept of forgiveness, as we explore what it means to pray near our prisons? Or is the gap too wide, the worlds of faith and justice too distant, divided by a cold river that can’t be crossed?

There are many reasons why forgiveness is a foreigner to our justice system. At its core, the criminal justice system is built on a foundation of the impersonal and abstract. A crime against a neighbour become an offense against the state, symbolized as “the Crown.” The Crown, not the victim, is the principal actor. This was adjusted slightly in 1988, when victims were given a (proxy) voice in the court process, through victim impact statements—although it took another eleven years before victims were actually allowed to read their statements to the court. But in general, the system is designed to keep victim and offender separate; the focus is on the offender alone, on guilt and punishment, and not on the dynamics of the relationship that bind together victim and offender. Forgiveness is fundamentally about what happens between persons on either side of an offense, and criminal justice builds a high wall exactly where forgiveness wants to take up residence.

forgiven-forgotten-promo-pic

If you are in BC (Fraser Valley, Kelowna, or Victoria) Nov 17-27, come see the play, “Forgiven/Forgotten,” touring as part of National Restorative Justice Week. Tour details are available at https://forgivenforgotten.wordpress.com/

There are other reasons why forgiveness is a foreigner: it might be the wide variety of ways people think of forgiveness. Some consider that offering forgiveness to a wrongdoer excuses the offense, undermining its severity or ignoring it altogether. Others are offended by the proverb “forgive and forget”—and I agree with them, for that’s another way we might minimize the very real harm done in an offense. And if we underestimate the harm done to victims, aren’t we actually abetting the offender? We end up re-victimizing the victim, and adding to the original offense. Forgiveness goes sour; rather than a healing balm, it becomes poison.

For those schooled in the ways of Jesus, it seems to me there’s another way in which forgiveness turns toxic. The words of Jesus, right here in the Lord’s Prayer and many other places, urge and even command his followers to forgive. There is no getting around this—Christians are called to forgive. And this can induce huge guilt in a victim. “Am I not a good enough person to forgive?” Or the community can place its expectations on the victim to take the moral high road. “Just get on with your life. You ought to forgive” (and we can almost hear the unspoken conclusion, “…and forget.”) And so forgiveness becomes an unbearable weight, or a volatile fuse.

And yet… and yet, there are people who have suffered unspeakable things, and who forgive their wrongdoers. Such forgiveness is real, and such stories show up everywhere. If we can say anything about authentic forgiveness, it is that it is a mystery, and a gift. We can never demand it of the victim. Like true love, it is intensely personal: each person’s path towards forgiveness is unique. Like true love, we don’t create it (although we can create conditions for it to take root and flourish)—we find it, or even, it finds us. In fact, forgiveness isn’t like true love, it is a form of that divine love.

So, are there ways to bring back the relational element, the dimension of community—preconditions of forgiveness—into the justice system? Many communities (and even some courts) have restorative justice processes that lead in that direction. They add an element of humanity to the journey, giving voice to the victims, and increasing the possibility of offenders taking responsibility for the harm they caused.

And for those in prison? Does this line of the Lord’s Prayer mean anything for them? Two thoughts cross my mind. The first is this: how long do we continue to label someone based on their offense? They have done a bad (even horrendous) deed; must they forever be labelled a horrible person? Do we as society do right to continue to label them? Or do past (and duly recognized) misdeeds have an expiry date? Is there a place and time where we can agree to release people from stigma, from blaming and shaming? That release is part of what Jesus means by forgiveness.

A second and final thought—relating to something I observed at the Willow Cree Healing Lodge, near Duck Lake, Saskatchewan, a federal correctional institution based on Indigenous cultural practices. The men there are not called “inmates,” nor “patients” (as they are at Saskatoon’s RPC). They are n­īcisān (NEE-tsan), Cree for “brother.” They are treated with humanity and dignity: guard and n­īcisān walk side by side (and I was told more than once how very difficult that is for any guard trained in a regular prison). They celebrate Thanksgiving and Christmas feasts together, again side by side. A humane relationship like this creates the space for a new start, for a healthier re-entry into the community.

And it makes me think of another word of Jesus: If someone offends against you, go to him alone. …If he listens to you, you have gained a brother. Even in our prisons, is this not a taste of forgiveness?

Muskrat Falls: An opportunity for respect and reconciliation

This week’s writers are Dianne and Marty Climenhage, MCC representatives in Labrador.

June 27, 2016 was an historic day in Labrador. It marked the first time that all three Indigenous groups–Innu Nation, Nunatsiavut Government representing Northern Inuit and NunatuKavut Government representing Southern Inuit–stood together publicly and asked for a halt to Nalcor Corporation’s Lower Churchill Hydroelectric Project (Muskrat Falls).

It has been our privilege, as MCC workers in Labrador, to stand with Indigenous partners in their call for respect for their land and their lives.

muskrat-river-our-children-sign

Sign at the blockade. MCC photo/Dianne Climenhage

Since 2011, “land protectors” have been warning the public about the potential risks of moving forward with a project of this magnitude. In 2013, the project began with an estimated price tag of $6.2 billion and was expected to go online in 2017. Due to delays, miscalculations and changes in management, the project is now not expected to go online before 2019 and with an estimated total cost of $11.4 billion in an already financially unstable province.

Prior to the start of the project, only one of the three Indigenous groups in Labrador were consulted. The Innu Nation signed an Impact Benefit Agreement, allowing construction with conditions. NunatuKavut and Nunatsiavut were not given the opportunity for involvement on decisions that directly affect their traditional territories.

There are two issues that the Indigenous leaders are calling on Nalcor and the government to consider before moving forward with initial flooding of the reservoir.  First, the rise in methyl mercury levels in the Churchill River system has been reported by Nalcor to increase to the point where consumption warnings are put in place for a minimum of 15 years.  An estimated 2,000 Indigenous people rely on the Churchill River system for their food supply. Fishing and hunting are not only traditional ways of life that must be protected, they can mean the difference between life and death in Labrador. An independent study by Harvard University indicates that if organic material is not removed, methyl mercury levels could increase anywhere from 25%-200% downstream, depending on conditions in the river. This would have devastating results, poisoning the food chain for generations in food insecure northern communities.

muskrat-falls

Muskrat Falls will disappear when the flooding begins. MCC photo/Dianne Climenhage

The second concern is the North Spur. This is a natural barrier that will be used as a wall for the reservoir. The North Spur is made up of layers of sand and marine clay, also known as quick clay. Nalcor has used stabilization methods to reinforce the spur, but there is no precedent for building on marine clay. It is, “moving and alive” according to dam safety expert Jim Gordon. Experts from Quebec, Newfoundland and Labrador and Sweden have all cautioned there is a high likelihood of a North Spur breech and collapse.  This would have devastating effects for communities downstream: lower Happy Valley and Mud Lake.  Mud Lake is an island community in the Churchill River with the only access being boat or skidoo, which would not allow enough time for evacuation according to Nalcor’s emergency timeline.

The provincial government has issued permits to Nalcor allowing initial flooding, up to 25% of the reservoir, to begin any time after October 15, 2016. On that day, protesters from Innu Nation, Nunatsiavut, NunatuKavut and settlers all descended on the main gate of the Muskrat Falls Project in a desperate attempt to halt the flooding of the reservoir until organic matter is cleared. They successfully blocked workers from entering the site over the weekend and on Monday, October 17, nine protesters were arrested for defying a Nalcor court injunction. There are currently 4 people on hunger strikes from Nunatsiavut and NunatuKavut. Three of them–Billy Gauthier, Delilah Saunders and Jerry Kohlmeister–traveled to Ottawa to take part in a rally at the Human Rights Monument on Sunday. On Monday they planned meetings with Amnesty International representatives, Indigenous and government officials.

muskrat-river-brooklyn-woolfrey-allen

Brooklyn Woolfrey Allen drumming for Elders at the blockade.  Photo courtesy Jenny Gear

The number of land protectors has increased on site, communities across the country have held solidarity rallies, and Amnesty International and Idle No More have issued statements, all asking the Federal Government to step in and use this case as an example of how they will implement United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and work toward true reconciliation with Indigenous peoples.

In May 2016, Canada officially adopted UNDRIP. The federal government announced “unqualified support” of the document that ensures Indigenous rights are considered in every decision they make. True Nation to Nation relationships can only be built if the federal government follows through on what it promised.  Now is its chance.

Shirley Flowers, a member of Nunatsiavut and a partner of MCC, has been holding an almost daily vigil, at times alone, at the Muskrat Falls gate since June of this year.  She sees the risks to her own way of life and the consequences of non-action for her children, grandchildren and generations that follow. Shirley says, “If the calls to action from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission are not respected and followed, then the whole process is tokenism.”

Just as this blog post was prepared for publication, Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Government came to an agreement with all three Indigenous Governments and a plan for moving forward together. Though concerns regarding methyl mercury and the North Spur remain, UNDRIP has been considered in the agreement, and Indigenous leadership and knowledge with be part of the process.

“Ingrained in Canadian policy”? Women, peace and security

“The objective is to see the women, peace and security agenda ingrained in the government’s policies and decision-making structures to the point where it informs Canada’s response to any crisis or issue where peace and security is concerned.” -Canadian Foreign Affairs Committee report on Women, Peace and Security, October 2016.

Ingrained in the government’s policy. After months of consultations, on October 6, 2016 the Canadian House of Commons Foreign Affairs and International Development Committee (FAAE) released a report – An Opportunity for Global Leadership – calling for Canada to be a leader on the global stage with the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda.

nigeria-displaced-women

Women and children displaced by violence in northern Nigeria. MCC photo/Dave Klassen

Sixteen years ago the United Nations Security Council passed the famous Resolution 1325 – a watershed action calling for participation of women in peacebuilding and the recognition of the unique experiences and needs of women in all stages of conflict: prevention, protection, participation, and relief and recovery. Since the launch of 1325, six more UN resolutions on WPS have been passed.

Yet, civil society and advocacy groups, as well as the UN lament the limited progress made on the overall global stage: a lack of national leadership, inconsistent funding for grassroots organizations, continuing impunity, and the lack of women at the negotiating table and in leadership roles, among other concerns.

But back to the FAAE’s report. Half of the 17 recommendations call for Canada to strongly promote WPS within multilateral and bilateral contexts. The others call for training, and required financial commitments and programming for WPS within Canadian-directed international programs.

The first recommendation reads: The Government of Canada should make women, peace and security a priority of its foreign policy agenda. And further in the report, that WPS be “ingrained” in Canadian policy directions.

These are powerful words, but what will it take for this goal to become reality in Canada? And more pointedly, is Canada in a place to provide global leadership?

unscr_1325In 2014, at the midpoint of Canada’s first WPS National Action Plan (C-NAP) launched in 2010, the independent organization, Inclusive Security, completed a thorough review. It had many good things to say about the plan. One interviewee described shift of mentality, with WPS going from a “nice to have” element to a “have to have” in foreign policy. But, together with other civil society groups, including the Canadian Women Peace and Security Network, Inclusive Security argued that the WPS agenda has yet to become a central directing factor, guiding and driving overall policy development in Canada.

The next action plan will take effect in 2017. The overarching message of the most recent report by the FAAE calls on Canada to be a help to other countries still struggling to implement WPS – arguably in line with the recent message of Prime Minister Trudeau to the UN, “We’re Canadian and we’re here to help.” But what is the state of WPS within Canada? Is Canada’s own house in order?

One day following the release of the FAAE’s report, the Commissioner of the RCMP Bob Paulson gave an emotional apology and announced $100 million in compensation to the hundreds of women who have experienced sexual abuse, discrimination and harassment by their own colleagues in the RCMP, many who have suffered crippling PTSD as a result of years of harassment. Commissioner Paulson’s apology is a welcomed step, but with abuse so deeply entrenched in the RCMP system, the road to change will likely be long and difficult.

Then there was former Chief of Defence General Tom Larson’s comments in a 2015 interview regarding rampant sexual violence of women in the Canadian military by fellow service personnel. He called this a problem of “biological wiring” instead of addressing it as a systemic issue. General Larson did apologize, but that he would utter these words reveals a tremendous lack of understanding about issues of power, gender and abuse.

IMG_20150510_140851

A poster at an event remembering missing and murdered Indigenous women.  Photo/Esther Epp-Tiessen

Finally, a systemic and glaring stain on Canada’s past and present is the growing number of missing and murdered Indigenous women, over 1200 since the 1980s.  So many families have come forward, lamenting the disappearance or murder of their daughters, mothers and sisters. In many cases there are documented examples of police neglecting to follow through with thorough investigations, and or demonstrating deep indifference and racism. In August, the Canadian government launched a public inquiry into these murders and disappearances. This inquiry will look at the acts of crime themselves, and possibly how these incidents are handled or not handled by law enforcement.

The FAAE neglected to reference any of these or other incidents like them. In fairness, the FAAE concerns itself with international rather than domestic policy. But it is important to note that these domestic issues greatly impact the peace and security of Canadian women. They also raise the issue of universality outlined in the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals – is our own house in order? Moreover, as the quote at the beginning of this post reads, WPS must be ingrained in “any crisis or issue where peace and security is concerned.”

Highlighting these domestic issues is not meant to belittle the scale of violence, exclusion and impunity we see all over the world, but rather to outline some of the challenges ahead for Canada in implementing WPS as truly an ingrained policy.

As a woman – no, wait! as a human being – I am deeply saddened and distressed by these recent and ongoing concerns in my country, as well as my own experiences observing the impact of conflict on women from around the globe. But I am so encouraged by the stories of women peacebuilders worldwide.

This November as part of our annual Peace Sunday, we at MCC invite you to join us in celebrating our partners and the women within our communities in Canada and around the world – women as equal players in the call to peace.  See our resource, Women as Peacebuilders. Also we can be encouraged by champions of peace profiled in the latest publication from Nobel Women’s Initiative, When We Are Bold: Women who turn our Upside-down World Right.

Finally, I hope against hope that the principles of women, peace and security will truly be ingrained not only in domestic and international policies of governments in Canada and around the world but also in our communities, churches and homes.

By Bekah Sears, Ottawa Office policy analyst