support-hondurasColombia In The Shadow Of Human Rights Abuses

A Special Report by the Colombia Working Group (CWG)

A special section filled with useful resources and information on the historic relationship between Canada and Colombia.

- visit and download all the resources

 

If you support the work that Common Frontiers does, please consider making a donation.


Search This Site


CF Web


 

 Subscribe in a RSS reader


 

Hemispheric News

KairosCanada.org

View RSS feed

Canadianlabour.ca

Council of Canadians

Venezuelanalysis.com

View RSS feed

BoliviaRising

Current Activity Updates

For Previous Current Events items, visit the Archives

August 14, 2017

Media Release

Ad targeting NAFTA to air on The National starting tonight

Ottawa – An ad highlighting the Council of Canadians’ top three priorities for NAFTA’s negotiation will begin a four-day run on CBC’s The National tonight, coinciding with Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland promoting Canada’s NAFTA negotiating plans today before the House of Commons Committee on International Trade.

“The Liberal government needs to go back to the drawing board on its NAFTA position. Unless a renegotiated NAFTA contains real penalties, and sets standards, these talks may just replicate the dangerous provisions of the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” says Maude Barlow, Honorary Chairperson of the Council of Canadians and veteran NAFTA critic. “If Trudeau’s government is truly concerned about the environment, labour and public protection, it should look at the glaring problem: Chapter 11, which has made Canada vulnerable to billions of dollars of corporate lawsuits over our environmental and public policy decisions. Trudeau should be fixing NAFTA’s existing problems, instead of creating new ones.”

The Council of Canadians argues that major changes are needed to protect people and the environment in NAFTA. As the Council has cautioned before, modelling NAFTA’s Chapter 11 on the investor state system of CETA (the Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement) doesn’t alter the substance of this problematic provision.

“It is very dangerous that the Liberal government is going to put CETA procurement provisions in NAFTA, which will get rid of buy local policies,” says Sujata Dey, Trade Campaigner with the Council of Canadians. “Instead, Trudeau should be mirroring Buy American policies so that public money stays in the local economy. We also encourage the government to hold the line on in keeping NAFTA’s cultural exemption and our supply management program.”

The Council of Canadians’ priorities for NAFTA are: 

The Council’s campaign includes handimations in English, French and Spanish like the one airing on The National, fact sheets, and reports which encourage citizens to do their own lobbying on NAFTA 

For more information on the campaign, please see: canadians.org/nafta.


August 13, 2017

Report puts human rights in Honduras and Canada at risk, say civil society organizations

Letter to François-Philippe Champagne
Minister of International Trade

We, the undersigned Canadian civil society organizations, have worked in solidarity with human and environmental rights defenders around the world for many years, including in Honduras and other Latin American countries. We are writing to express our profound concern regarding a recent report produced by the Office of the Extractive Sector Corporate Social Responsibility Counsellor which, we believe, places Canadian and Honduran human and environmental rights defenders at risk.

Last month, the Office of the Extractive Sector CSR Counsellor issued its report of a 2016 visit to Honduras. According to the report, the visit was structured to enable the Counsellor “to meet with a range of stakeholders and permit an open exchange of views, concerns and aspirations.” While the report’s analysis of the situation in Honduras warrants a more thorough critical response, we would like to raise our deep concern with regard to one specific section of the report, entitled “The Canada NGO Connection”. In this section, the Counsellor makes a series of sweeping, unsubstantiated, biased and irresponsible accusations against Canadian CSOs. The Counsellor describes them as having “framed much of the discourse in Honduras”, contributing to the “strained and tense situation” concerning extractive activities in Honduras. Providing no substantiation, the report characterizes Canadian CSOs as being “ideologically positioned against mining,” leading to “confrontational and adversarial approaches when dealing with companies and the Honduran government.”

The CSR Counsellor minimizes the agency of entire communities, local civil society leaders and organizations in Honduras. These actors have long expressed their legitimate concerns about the impact of the extractive sector in that country, regularly mobilizing in defence of their rights and the environment. Through his misrepresentation of the role of Canadian CSOs in Honduras, the Counsellor exposes his fundamental lack of understanding regarding the nature of solidarity relationships between Canadian organizations and local actors.

The report goes a step further by naming specific Canadian organizations that the Counsellor considers problematic, specifically MiningWatch Canada and Rights Action. He suggests that these and other international CSOs could be aggravating or blocking resolution to conflict, manipulating local actors and setting the discourse around mining in Honduras. These serious, unsubstantiated accusations threaten to undermine important solidarity work that facilitates information sharing with mining-affected communities and supports efforts to have their legitimate concerns addressed. The importance of this work in the context of environmental conflicts has been underscored by the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and the Environment who identifies the need to protect speech relating to environmental issues: “[a]ll persons have the right to hold and express opinions and to disseminate ideas and information regarding the environment.”

-Read the entire letter    en français

List of signatories:

Above Ground
Atlantic Region Solidarity Network
Amnesty International Canada
The British Columbia Government and Service Employees' Union
Canadian Council for International Co-operation
Canadian Jesuits International
CoDevelopment Canada
Comité pour les droits humains en Amérique latine/Committee for Human Rights in Latin America
Common Frontiers
Development and Peace
Entraide missionnaire
Friends of the Earth Canada
Horizons of Friendship
Inter Pares
KAIROS: Canadian Ecumenical Justice Initiatives
Maritimes-Guatemala Breaking the Silence Network
MiningWatch Canada
Mining Justice Action Committee
Nobel Women’s Initiative
The Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation
Public Service Alliance of Canada
Rights Action
Solidarité Laurentides Amérique centrale
United Church of Canada


August 4, 2017

Venezuela: Target of Economic Warfare

warfare
Economic Warfare – Image: Jared Rodriguez / t r u t h o u t; Adapted: Pfc. Andrya Hill / U.S. Army, Lomo-Cam

By Joyce Nelson
WatershedSentinel.ca

Most people are horrified to watch Venezuela seemingly on the verge of outright civil war, or worse, an invasion by U.S. military forces. The death toll continues to rise in the violent street protests led by the right-wing opposition, following the July 30 vote on a Constituent Assembly to rewrite the constitution. U.S. President Donald Trump had threatened to take further, unspecified “economic actions” if Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro went ahead with the vote, and Trump added that the U.S. would not stand idly by “as Venezuela crumbles.”

The Canadian Peace Congress issued a statement (July 29) that said, “If the attempt at internal counter-revolution fails, plans are being put in place for direct military intervention by the United States, possibly under the cover of the Organization of American States (OAS).”

Maduro had hoped that the July 30 vote would help to bring dialogue and peace to the country, which has been wracked by violence for more than four months.

According to sociologist Maria Paez Victor, the opposition had been demanding that the Maduro government negotiate with them, so early in 2017 “a Peace and Dialogue Table was set up, facilitated by 2 former presidents of Latin America and one of Spain. They then refused to negotiate, demanding the presence of the Vatican. When the Nuncio arrived, they still refused to dialogue. Pope Francis himself stated the dialogue failed because the opposition would not participate. President Maduro then concluded that if the opposition would not negotiate with the government, they would have to negotiate directly with the people – and called for a Constitutional Assembly to amend the constitution.”

Maduro’s call triggered months of violence in the streets, with more than 100 people killed in the lead-up to the July 30 vote.

In advance of that vote, Raul Burbano, Program Director of the Canadian NGO Common Frontiers, told me by email, “The people of Venezuela will elect 540 constituents who will decide what changes to make to the constitution. These constituents will be elected via sector – i.e., workers, students, peasants, business folks, etc. and also territorially,” thereby broadening the members beyond the elite politicians. Burbano added that the Maduro government would likely want to see constitutional changes such as making the state “less bureaucratic” and “enshrining in the constitution the social programs” created over the past years.

Venezuelan electoral authorities announced a voter turnout of 41.53 per cent, or more than 8 million people on July 30. The opposition claimed fewer than half that figure turned out, and say that the Maduro government is becoming “dictatorial” and “consolidating power” through the Constituent Assembly.

-read the complete article


July 28, 2017

Beats 4 Peace: A Cultural Event

PosterTo bring attention to the situation in Latin America and the Caribbean we are throwing a solidarity party - Beats 4 Peace a cultural event at on Sunday July 30th from 6-10 pm at Luanda House. The themes of the show are Peace, sovereignty, and democracy in Venezuela, Brazil, and Colombia. For more information see Facebook event here

Join us for an evening of art, music, poetry and dance weaving together different themes into an interactive cultural show of solidarity. Music will includes  Brazilian artists, Zeca Polina and Mari Palhares, Mohammad Ali @socialisthiphop, Pablo & Ernesto Latin American musicians, Dj siez swift, and many more artists.

A decade ago a tide of progressive governments, defying Washington and its neoliberal polices took power across Latin American and the Caribbean through democratic means. Today that tide is receding and Latin America ...is shifting towards more conservative neoliberal governments closely linked to Washington. This has led to an increased militarization of the region, support for right-wing coups and return to neoliberal austerity policies.

In Brazil the senate approved neoliberal labour reforms never before seen on the continent that seek to push back workers’ rights for generations. These policies are being imposed through state violence as the Armed Forces were recently used to repress massive street protests clamoring for the resignation of defacto president, Temer.

In Colombia months after signing a historic peace agreement and the FARC rebels turning in all their weapons yet paramilitarism and violence against social movement leaders is on the rise . More than 156 social leaders were killed in the past 14 months. The United Nations said Colombia’s government was undermining the country’s peace process by failing to release imprisoned FARC members and protect disarmed guerrillas as promised.

In Venezuela, U.S imperialism aligned with violent local elites are trying to overthrow the democratically elected government of Nicolas Maduro. For the past three months the opposition have undertaken constant and violent street protests that have resulted in the deaths of over 100 people. The international media with its biased coverage of the conflict in Venezuela is fueling a possible civil war. The Chavistas have responded with a proposal for peace, through a democratic and participatory Constituent Assembly.

On July 30th Venezuelans will elected representatives to help write a new constitution that will determine the path forward for their country.

Fora Temer!

Constituyente por la Paz y por la Vida!

Peace with social justice!


July 26, 2017

Videos on NAFTA from the Council of Canadians

The Council of Canadians (CoC) has produced two NAFTA videos on issues in the upcoming treaty renegotiations with the US: one on the Chapter 11 Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) and another on energy.  Namely, on the proportionality provision which forces Canada to export an assured percentage of energy to Mexico.  There is pressure in the negotiations that Mexico signs on to the same clause.  The narrator is Maude Barlow, the CoC honorary president, and former senior advisor to the UN on water. 


July 14, 2017

Why Can’t the U.S. Left Get Venezuela Right?

by Shamus Cooke
Counterpunch.org

As Venezuela’s fascist-minded oligarchy conspires with U.S. imperialism to overthrow the democratically elected government of Nicolas Maduro, few in the U.S. seem to care.

Instead of denouncing rightwing violence that aims at regime change, many on the U.S. left have stayed silent, or opted to give an evenhanded analysis that supports neither the Maduro government nor the oligarchy trying to violently overthrow it. Rather, the left prioritizes its energy on lecturing on Maduro’s “authoritarianism” and the failures of “Chavismo.”

This approach allows leftists a cool emotional detachment to the fate of the poor in Venezuela, and clean hands that would otherwise be soiled by engaging with the messy, real life class struggle that is the Venezuelan revolution.

A “pox on both houses” analysis omits the U.S. government’s role in collaborating with Venezuela’s oligarchs. The decades-long crimes of imperialism against Venezuela is aided and abetted by the silence of the left, or by its murky analysis that minimizes the perpetrator’s actions, focusing negative attention on the victim precisely at the moment of attack.

Any analysis of a former colonial country that doesn’t begin with the struggle of self-determination against imperialism is a dead letter, since the x-factor of imperialism has always been a dominant variable in the Venezuelan equation, as books by Eva Gollinger and others have thoroughly explained, and further demonstrated by the ongoing intervention in Latin America by an endless succession of U.S. presidents.

The Venezuelan-initiated anti-imperialist movement was strong enough that a new gravitational center was created, that pushed most of Latin America out of the grasp of U.S. domination for the first time in nearly a hundred years. This historic achievement remains minimized for much of the U.S. left, who remain indifferent or uneducated about the revolutionary significance of self-determination for oppressed nations abroad, as well as oppressed peoples inside of the U.S.

A thousand valid criticisms can be made of Chavez, but he chose sides in the class fault lines and took bold action at critical junctures. Posters of Chavez remain in the homes of Venezuela’s poorest barrios because he proved in action that he was a champion for the poor, while fighting and winning many pitched battles against the oligarchy who wildly celebrated his death

And while it’s necessary to deeply critique the Maduro government, the present situation requires the political clarity to take a bold, unqualified stance against the U.S.-backed opposition, rather than a rambling “nonpartisan” analysis that pretends a life or death struggle isn’t currently taking place.

Yes, a growing number of Venezuelans are incredibly frustrated by Maduro, and yes, his policies have exacerbated the current crisis, but while an active counter-revolutionary offensive continues the political priority needs to be aimed squarely against the oligarchy, not Maduro. There remains a mass movement of revolutionaries in Venezuela dedicated to Chavismo and to defending Maduro’s government against the violent anti-regime tactics, but it’s these labor and community groups that the U.S. left never mentions, as it would pollute their analysis.

The U.S. left seems blissfully unaware of the consequences of the oligarchy stepping into the power vacuum if Maduro was successfully ousted. Such a shoddy analysis can be found in Jacobin’s recent article, Being Honest About Venezuela, which focuses on the problems of Maduro’s government while ignoring the honest reality of the terror the oligarchy would unleash if it returned to power.

How did the U.S. left get it so wrong?

They’ve allowed themselves to get distracted by the zig-zags at the political surface, rather than the rupturing fault lines of class struggle below. They see only leaders and are blinded to how the masses have engaged with them.

Regardless of Maduro’s many stumbles, it’s the rich who are revolting in Venezuela, and if they’re successful it will be the workers and poor who suffer a terrible fate. An analysis of Venezuela that ignores this basic fact belongs either in the trash bin or in the newspapers of the oligarchy. Confusing class interests, or mistaking counter-revolution for revolution in politics is as disorienting as mistaking up for down, night for day.

The overarching issue remains the same since the Venezuelan revolution erupted in 1989’s Caracazo uprising, which initiated a revolutionary movement of working and poor people spurred to action by IMF austerity measures. How did Venezuela’s oligarchy respond to the 1989 protests? By killing hundreds if not thousands of people. Their return to power would unleash similar if not bloodier statistics.

-read the entire article on Counterpunch.org


July 4, 2017

Case of Murdered Mexican Environmental Activist Moves to International Sphere

Mariano
In 2009, Mariano Abarca was murdered for his activism against a Canadian mining project. Tired of waiting for justice from the Mexican State, his family is taking the case to the Organization of American States

By Simon Schatzberg
Americas.org

Seven years and seven months have passed since Mariano Abarca joined the ranks of the dozens of environmental defenders that have been killed in Mexico for resisting the destructive mining projects that are tearing apart the Mexican countryside.

In that time, the Mexican government has not brought anyone to justice for the murder. On June 26, Abarca’s family, having lost all faith in the Mexican justice system to prosecute the case, sent a petition to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). The petition accuses the Mexican government of violating Abarca’s right to life, his right to judicial protection and several other rights included in the American Convention on Human Rights.

If the IACHR admits the case, the Mexican government will need to respond to the petition, and there may be a hearing before the Commission. The Abarca family is optimistic that the case will be admitted.

“It’s indisputable that there was a violation of the right to life, that there has been no serious, deep investigation, and that no one has been punished, so in this sense the responsibility of the Mexican state is clear,” said Miguel Ángel de los Santos, a professor at the Autonomous University of Chiapas (UNACH) and legal representative for the Abarca family, in an interview with the Americas Program.

“It’s also clear that the state didn’t fulfill its obligations to guarantee Mariano’s rights, and that the rights of the family are still being violated. Their search for justice has not ended, and that represents frustration, anguish, which also constitutes a violation of human rights.”

“A Death Foretold”

family
The Abarca family is joined by three co-petitioners: the Mexican Network of Mining-Affected Communities (REMA), of which Abarca was a founding member, Otros Mundos Chiapas, and the UNACH human rights center.

As a member of REMA, Abarca was on the front lines of a battle against a barite mine operated by the Canadian company Blackfire Exploration in his hometown of Chicomuselo, Chiapas.

A series of investigations from 2013 by Mining Watch Canada and the United Steel Workers tell the story of the conflict over the mine, showing the complicity of the government of Chiapas, Blackfire Exploration and the Canadian Embassy in the events that lead to Abarca’s death.

Blackfire Exploration, a small, privately-held company based in Calgary, Alberta, obtained mining concessions in the Chicomuselo municipality of Chiapas in 2005.  The concession overlapped with the territory of two ejidos, Ejido Nueva Morelia and Ejido Grecia, which both initially opposed to the project. Officials from the Canadian Embassy traveled to Chiapas several times before the mine went into production, and managed to help Blackfire negotiate land-use agreements with the Ejidos, although many ejidatarios still felt that they had not consented to the project. In late 2007, Blackfire started extracting barite, a mineral used in oil and gas exploration.

Over the next two years, the mine’s operation led to a series of conflicts, relating to barite being extracted from along an access road that the company had built through Ejido Nueva Morelia, in violation of the land-use agreement between the company and the ejido. Abarca, as a leader of REMA in Chicomuselo, organized ejitadarios to defend their territory, and began investigating the company’s connections to local government and the Canadian Embassy.

-read the entire article on Americas.org


June 30, 2017

Canada’s Lamentable Double Standard Towards Venezuela

TrudeauBy Sheldon BirkettResearch Associate at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA)

In Ottawa, on May 1st, 2017, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spoke on the phone with Peruvian President Pedro Pablo

Kuczynski, affirming a commitment to encourage dialogue between the government of Venezuela and the opposition, Mesa Unidad Democrática (MUD). Trudeau offered his support for a democratic resolution on the political and economic crisis in Venezuela. The rumors of an initiative for Trudeau to lead an Organization of American States (OAS) Venezuela mediation effort came from Peru’s Foreign Minister, Ricardo Luna, after stating that the liberal-minded Trudeau holds a “global power role.” However, on May 16, 2017, Trudeau met with Lilian Tintori in Ottawa. Tintori is the wife of the leader of the right wing opposition party Voluntad Popular, Leopoldo López, who was imprisoned in 2015 for inciting violence in the “guarimbas.” At the meeting with Tintori, Trudeau committed to restoring dialogue “as enshrined in the OAS’s Inter-American Democratic charter.” Though the Canadian government continues to push for talks on the Venezuelan crisis through the OAS, a fair and impartial Latin American mediation process ought to exclude the involvement of Canada and United States. Canada and the United States should be excluded because they have been outspoken partisans in this conflict and form part of a bloc of countries lead by a strong supporter of the Venezuelan opposition, who is the Secretary General of the OAS, Luis Almagro.

There is little prospect for talks coming out of the partisan efforts of the Almagro bloc, that seeks to halt the constituent assembly election process in Venezuela, in comparison to the more open-ended call for dialogue advanced by the CARICOM and ALBA countries. This is apparent as the OAS was unable to reach a resolution on the Venezuelan crisis at the meeting in Cancún, Mexico on June 19th. The push for an international commission on Venezuela, initially proposed by Peruvian President Kuczynski, backed by the United States, and headed by Canadian negotiators, shows that Trudeau is only being used to do Washington’s “dirty work” on Venezuela. Certainly, for a Canadian Prime Minister who won the 2015 election on a platform of “Real Change,” Canada’s one-sided pro-U.S. role in the Venezuelan negotiations reflects anything but “Real Change.”

-read the entire article on the COHA website

-download a PDF version of this article


June 23, 2017

Canada’s policy in Venezuela is ‘anything but neutral,’ says national labour coalition

demonstrators
A protester holds a national flag as a bank branch, housed in the magistracy of the Supreme Court of Justice, burns during a rally against Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro, in Caracas, Venezuela June 12, 2017. Photo Credit: Carlos Garcia Rawlins

By Levon Sevunts
Radio Canada International

The Liberal government’s approach to championing human rights and security in the Americas is one-sided and selective, says a Canadian labour and civil society coalition.

Common Frontiers, an umbrella group of labour and civil society organizations, says Canada needs to play a more even-handed role in trying to promote human rights in the Americas and resolve the political crisis in Venezuela.

More than 70 people have died in 12 weeks of street protests across the country, which began after Venezuela’s Supreme Court, dominated by supporters of left-wing President Nicolas Maduro, ruled to strip the opposition-dominated parliament of its powers, accusing lawmakers of “contempt” after allegations of irregularities by three opposition lawmakers during the 2015 elections.

The ruling, which was denounced as a coup by the opposition, was later reversed but massive street protests against Maduro government continued.

As Venezuela’s crisis has deepened, with triple-digit inflation, record shortages of food and medicine and rising crime rates, Maduro has sought to rebuild his popular support by calling for a constituent assembly to rewrite the country’s “anti-capitalist” constitution crafted by his political godfather, the late President Hugo Chavez.

Critics fear this could allow Maduro to postpone the 2018 elections that many think he has good chance of losing amid the economic crisis that has gripped Venezuela. Maduro, however, has vowed that presidential elections will be held in 2018 “come rain, thunder or lightning in Venezuela.”

Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland, who participated at the Organization of American States general assembly in Cancun, Mexico, on Monday and Tuesday, “reiterated Canada’s unequivocal calls for the Government of Venezuela to restore the rule of law and respect the Venezuelan people’s democratic and human rights,” Global Affairs said in a statement.

She has also said that Canada has been instrumental in the passing of several statements and resolutions at the OAS supporting the Venezuelan opposition in their efforts to achieve political and economic reforms.

“Chrystia Freeland’s comments surrounding Venezuela demonstrate an alarming trend that Canada is anything but neutral when it comes to the situation in Venezuela or human rights in the region,” said Raul Burbano, program director at Common Frontiers.

“While the government of Canada takes a hard stance against the democratically elected government of Venezuela over its human rights record, it turns a blind eye to the violence, and violation of human rights perpetrated by some opposition protestors during violent street protest in Venezuela.”

Burbano cited the example of Orlando Figuera, a 21-year-old government supporter who was doused with gasoline and set alight last month at an anti-government protest in Venezuela’s capital Caracas. He died of his injuries on June 5.

While Canada has been very outspoken on the situation in Venezuela it has stayed silent on the “egregious violations of human rights” in Honduras, Mexico and Brazil, where President Michel Temer’s deeply unpopular government faces serious allegations of massive corruption, amid growing  authoritarianism and the use of violence against peaceful protesters, Burbano said.

-read the rest of the story here


June 22, 2017

CTV and Your Morning news segment on Venezuela

Common Frontiers' Raul Burbano was interviewed about Canada's possible role in the Venezuelan Peace Process. Watch the interview below or, if the video box isn't appearing in your browser, use this link to go directly to the CTV News site.


June 17, 2017

Declaración política del encuentro de organizaciones sociales de Canadá, Estados Unidos y México:
Por nuevas formas de cooperación internacional

Por La Jornada del Campo

SierraLas y los participantes en el Encuentro de Organizaciones Sociales de Canadá, Estados Unidos y México, ante el inminente proceso de renegociación del Tratado de Libre Comercio de América del Norte (TLCAN), condenamos este modelo porque ha afectado gravemente el desarrollo nacional, siendo contrario a los intereses de los pueblos, del medio ambiente y de nuestro sistema democrático. Además, los tratados de libre comercio han fracasado políticamente por no haber cumplido con las promesas y expectativas de prosperidad anunciadas para los trabajadores del campo y la ciudad, detonando una severa crisis social.

Apostamos por la construcción de un nuevo modelo de integración, cooperación e intercambio entre los países, que garantice la participación democrática de la sociedad en la negociación de cualquier acuerdo, que sea transparente en todos sus términos y condiciones y que, con base, en la cooperación internacional y la soberanía de cada país, promueva la reconstrucción de las cadenas productivas nacionales, regionales y locales, con pleno respeto a los derechos humanos, políticos, económicos, sociales, culturales y del medio ambiente. Además, debe garantizar el trabajo digno y el salario remunerador, independiente- mente del origen o condición migratoria. 

Ya que desde la implementación del TLCAN en 1994, los trabajadores, las comunidades y el medio ambiente en los tres países han sufrido, mientras que los inversionistas ricos, las grandes corporaciones y sus ejecutivos han cosechado más ganancias y han adquirido más derechos y poder. Ese poder ha tenido un efecto negativo en nuestras democracias. 

Cualquier tratado comercial debe revertir estas tendencias innegables y conducir hacia un desarrollo sustentable, sostenible y ampliamente compartido en toda América del Norte. 

Hasta ahora, no son alentadores los signos de que un nuevo TLCAN contribuya a las necesidades de las personas y las comunidades de América del Norte y al medio ambiente que todos compartimos. Varios funcionarios en Estados Unidos han mencionado utilizar el Acuerdo Transpacífico de Cooperación Económica (TPP) como punto de partida, para su revisión, aunque los trabajadores y las comunidades se oponen ampliamente al TPP con argumentos concretos y buenas razones. 

Las organizaciones, los movimientos de la sociedad civil y las comunidades originarias rechazamos no sólo los detalles técnicos del actual TLCAN y los posteriores acuerdos comerciales dirigidos por Estados Unidos en las Américas, sino también las posiciones beligerantes, militaristas, xenófobas y misóginas del presidente Trump. Por lo que exigimos la plena vigencia del derecho internacional y la no intervención para garantizar la paz mundial. 

Nos oponemos a los muros fronterizos en América del Norte y defendemos los derechos humanos y laborales de las personas que emigran, así como su derecho a no ser obligados a emigrar por la pobreza y la inseguridad.

-leer el resto del artículo


June 13, 2017

Sierra Club Responsible Trade Summit
Ottawa - June 23

SierraOttawa, ON - Sierra Club Canada Foundation is hosting an event to discuss implications of trade agreements on our ability to protect the environment and to formulate a model for sustainable and successful trade agreements of the future. 

Experts attending the event include:

WHEN: Friday, June 23, 9 – 4 pm
WHERE: Ottawa Public Library, Main Branch, 120 Metcalf Ave., Ottawa

TICKETS:  $10 or by Donation. https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/responsible-trade-summit-sierra-club-canada-tickets-35251303598


June 13, 2017

Trump launches NAFTA renegotiations

by Bruce Campbell
June 13 2017

On May 18, U.S. President Donald Trump sent a letter to Congress announcing his intention to renegotiate NAFTA, starting a 90-day waiting period before North American trade negotiators can formally sit down to figure out what a new deal should look like. Policy-makers and big business groups in all three countries have called for a "modernization" of the 23-year-old agreement, though Trump has threatened to walk away from the table, and even tear up NAFTA, if an America-first solution cannot be found. On June 5, the Canadian government launched a public consultation on the matter, presumably to inform its negotiating position, but clearly all three countries hope to have a NAFTA-plus framework in place before the talks officially begin later this summer.

NAFTA transformed the economic and social landscape of North America. That much we can agree on. But views diverge significantly on whether or not the transformation has been for the better. The elite consensus is that NAFTA has greatly benefited Canada and its partners, since a major increase in cross-border trade produced millions of jobs. Implied here is that without NAFTA, supply chains would rupture, trade would collapse, jobs would disappear. There is substantial evidence this isn’t the case.

NAFTA has also played an important role in the growth of job insecurity and precarious work; in the dramatic increase in income and wealth inequality; in wage stagnation and the hollowing out of the middle class; in the weakening of public services and shrinking of Canada's social safety net. NAFTA is not solely responsible for these changes, but it was a key strand in a web of mutually reinforcing policies that have facilitated the "structural adjustment" of the Canadian state in line with the demands of the "new global reality."

Some former government insiders saw it coming. The late Mel Clark, Canada's former deputy negotiator for the GATT (the forerunner of the World Trade Organization), warned that NAFTA was most importantly an investment agreement, reflecting the ascendance of the forces driving the corporate globalization project. The deal’s key provisions protect and enhance the private property rights of internationally mobile corporations, impose constraints on policy flexibility, allow corporations to directly sue governments, and lock these and sibling policies prior to NAFTA in a treaty to prevent future governments from backsliding. 

-read the rest of the article

Bruce Campbell is the former director of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA). The CCPA will be submitting comments to the government’s public consultation on a NAFTA renegotiation, which you will be able to find at www.policyalternatives.ca.


June 10, 2017

Trade Justice Network participates in tri-national NAFTA meetings in Mexico City

Mexican declarationMEXICO CITY — On May 25-27th, the Trade Justice Network (TJN) participated in a tri-national meeting of social organizations from Canada, Quebec, the US and Mexico ahead of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) renegotiations. 

Over 300 people gathered in the stunning Palacio de Medicina in the heart of Mexico City to discuss the impacts of NAFTA and to develop coordinated strategies for moving forward. Participants included representatives of labour, environmental, agricultural/farming, Indigenous, migrant, feminist, education, human rights, social justice and other civil society organizations. 

The Canada and Quebec delegation included representatives from Common Frontiers, the Council of Canadians, Réseau Québécois sur l’intégration continentale (RQIC), the Canadian Labour Congress, Unifor, the Canadian Union of Public and General Employees (CUPE) National, the United Steelworkers, Public Service Alliance of Canada, BC Teachers Federation, Fonds de solidarité (FTQ), Confédération des syndicats nationaux (CSN), Centro international de solidarité ouvrière (CiSO), the National Farmers Union, and the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, many of which are member organizations of the TJN. Elected officials lent their support to the meetings of the tri-national coalition, including MP and Green Party Leader Elizabeth May (via video), Amir Khadir of the National Assembly of Quebec, and Ana Collins (representing MP Romeo Saganash).

During the public portion of the meetings, including a press conference, we heard from both expert researchers and on-the-ground organizers and workers on the effects of NAFTA in all three countries. While NAFTA has had negative impacts on workers, farmers, and the environment across the continent, there is no question that Mexico has suffered most greatly. A statement by Mexican social movement organizations noted that “NAFTA has been a source of poverty and inequality, deprivation of natural resources and loss of land of campesinos and Indigenous peoples.”

Beyond simply criticizing NAFTA, a common sentiment in the civil society meetings was the need to oppose the current model of international trade and the neoliberal political economic model which underlies it. However, in opposing (or calling for alternatives to) NAFTA, participants—particularly those from Mexico—were sure to emphasize that they did not espouse isolationism or nationalism. Instead, many proposed an alternative model for economic integration to the current one represented by NAFTA. 

Such an alternative model must be based on principles that have largely disappeared from the current international trade regime: democratic participation, transparency and the guarantee of the rights of workers, the environment and all peoples. 

Constituting a strong and diverse delegation, representatives of Canadian and Quebec organizations called for the protection of labour rights (including those of migrant workers), human rights, farmers and rural communities, public education, public services, Indigenous rights and knowledge, and the environment in any new agreement.

Although there were different perspectives on whether to participate in the NAFTA renegotiation process or to call for eliminating the agreement altogether, there was consensus on a vital point: the need for tri-national solidarity. This involves denouncing the nationalist and xenophobic rhetoric that has resurfaced with Donald Trump and recognizing that it is the current model of international trade—which expands investor/corporate rights at the expense of workers, public services, Indigenous sovereignty, the environment and democracy—that has harmed peoples across the continent; it is not our neighbours who should be the target of our frustration. 

Rather than falling into an us-versus-them dynamic, we must come together at this important political juncture to demand a trade relationship that puts people and the environment at the centre. We must work together across sectors and across borders to form a political movement that is diverse, inclusive and unified. 

In a joint statement that came out of the three days of meetings, participants declared a commitment to tri-national solidarity and the implementation of a tri-national action plan, the seeds of which were sown during the meetings. The coordinated action plan, including strategies for mobilization, campaigns, political action, and proposals, aims to effect change in the international trade regime and develop alternatives for fairer economic integration and sustainable development.

Read the full text of the tri-national declaration here: Tri-national Declaration


June 8, 2017

NAFTA Renegotiations Must Be Done Through The Lens Of Climate Change

By John Dillon

Canada, and not just Mexico, may be in for a rough ride when it renegotiates NAFTA with the United States. A draft letter from the U.S. Trade Representative to Congress outlining renegotiation objectives, which was leaked on March 30, reveals that the U.S. agenda goes far beyond the modest tweaking implied earlier by President Trump.

When it comes to fighting climate change, however, the ride will be rougher. Trade provisions will likely continue to be a stumbling block in any efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

Observers note that the U.S. has no intention of doing away with the notorious investor state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions that allow corporations to sue governments when they deem public policies -- such as those aimed at fighting climate change -- to be a threat to their profits. Corporations, chiefly chemical and resource extraction companies, sued Canada 39 times under this mechanism, collecting more than $215 million in compensation. Ottawa will likely not push for the elimination of ISDS from NAFTA since it has agreed to a slightly modified ISDS system in the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement with the European Union.

Additionally, a crucial chapter incorporated into the original Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA), and now part of NAFTA, has escaped notice in current debate. Chapter Six on energy gives the U.S. unfettered access to Canadian energy resources. 

During the 1993 election campaign Jean Chrétien promised that a Liberal government would renegotiate both the FTA and NAFTA and abrogate both agreements unless Canada were to obtain "the same energy protection as Mexico." 

A careful reading of the energy chapter in NAFTA shows that the only significant difference in the treatment of Mexico and Canada is the former's exemption from the application of the proportional sharing clause (Article 605). This provision obliges Canada, under certain circumstances, to continue exporting oil and gas to the U.S. in the same proportion as in the previous three years, even if such exports cause domestic shortages. 

After Chrétien won a majority government some perfunctory talks were held with the U.S. before this campaign promise was quietly shelved allowing the proportional sharing clause to remain unchanged.

While this clause has yet to be invoked, it very well could be in the near future if Canada fulfills its commitments under the Paris climate agreement. If Canada is serious about keeping the increase in global temperatures below 2.00 C, and as close as possible to 1.50 C, it will have to curb the unfettered growth of fossil fuel exports and carefully allocate remaining reserves of conventional oil for domestic use as part of a planned transition to a low-carbon economy.

Measures to conserve exhaustible natural resources for domestic use are permitted under Article XX of the GATT, which is now part of the World Trade Organization's provisions. But they would run afoul of the proportional sharing clause.

Will the current Liberal government include the withdrawal of the proportional sharing clause in its agenda for the renegotiation of NAFTA? Not likely. During his visit to the White House, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau did his utmost to assure President Trump that it is in U.S. interests to continue the current trading relationship with Canada. 

In Trump's mind Canadian oil is not "foreign oil." Consider the president's words, spoken in the oval office in the presence of Russ Girling, TransCanada's president, as he issued the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline:

"It's a great day for American jobs and a historic moment for North American ... energy independence. This announcement is part of a new era of American energy policy that will lower costs for American families -- and very significantly -- reduce our dependence on foreign oil."

The additional emissions that would occur within Canada as a result of four recently approved fossil fuel export projects -- Enbridge's Line 3, TransCanada's Keystone XL and Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain pipelines as well as the Pacific Northwest LNG terminal -- would nullify all the emission reductions that could be achieved through the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change announced last December by federal, provincial and territorial first ministers. The emissions that would occur abroad from combustion of the oil and gas exported by these four projects would not be counted as "Canadian" emissions. Nevertheless, they would add two times as many GHGs to the atmosphere as the amount emitted within Canada.

The time frame during which Canada can continue to emit GHGs at current rates and still keep temperature increases near 1.50 C is quickly narrowing. If Canada continues to extract fossil fuels at 2014 levels it will exhaust its share of a global carbon budget in just 11 years if the goal is to keep temperature increases below 1.50 C. According to Marc Lee, a senior economist for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, in this scenario, there is only a 50 per cent chance of keeping increases below 1.50 C. For a 50 percent chance of staying below a 2.00 C increase, Canada could extract fossil fuels at the 2014 rate for 32 years. Any new hydrocarbon export projects would shorten these time frames.

While no one was thinking much about climate change back in the eighties when the FTA was negotiated, today the threat it poses to life on Earth must be a lens through which any new deal is evaluated.

John Dillon is Ecological Economy Program Coordinator at KAIROS Canada.


May 31, 2017

SOCIAL ORGANIZATIONS FROM CANADA, THE UNITED STATES AND MEXICO AGREE TO WORK TOGETHER IN THE FACE OF THE THREAT POSED BY BOTH TRUMP AND THE RENEGOTIATION OF NAFTA

- Organizations from all three countries denounce the impacts that NAFTA has had on their people, during a Tri National Forum;
- They firmly reject the current model of 'free trade' agreements;
- They challenge the lack of transparency associated with the renegotiation of NAFTA.

The Gathering of Social Organizations from Canada, the United States, and Mexico took place May 26-27 in the historic building known as the Palace of Medicine in Mexico City, part of the patrimony of the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM). More than 100 organizations from the three countries were in attendance (list can be provided) along with legislators concerned about these types of treaties. Also present and backing this initiative, were the Rectors of two universities (UAM-I and Chapingo) who took the opportunity to underscore the fact that whatever new negotiation takes place has to be open and transparent to the public, and they promised the support of academia.

Present as well were important research centres focusing on the elaboration of alternatives in support of the work that social organizations are carrying out around trade. Over the course of the two days, this Gathering discussed and assessed the serious negative impacts that since its inception the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) on each country's peoples, communities and individuals. Time was also devoted to exchanges around the strategic objectives and the directions needed for stronger future relations among the three North American nations.

This magna event condemned the 'free trade' model for setting back national development and being contrary to peoples' best interests. The organizations, social movements and indigenous communities present not only rejected the technical details of NAFTA, but also the orientation and philosophy that underpins it. There was agreement that participants were working to build a new model of 'bottom-up' integration, cooperation and exchange that would guarantee everyone's well being including the  full respect of human rights. To achieve this, it is critical that all sectors of society participate in NAFTA discussions, not just the CEOs of large corporations.

While in plenary the organizations agreed to work together to challenge the threat posed by the current government of the United States led by President Donald Trump by strengthening their networking and communications. These joint efforts are critical given that the governments of the three countries are promoting the 'modernization' of NAFTA as a pretext for incorporating new themes and deepening others, all the while using the Trans Pacific Partnership as the blue print.

Such as had been done in the lead up to NAFTA's implementation in 1994, all those present at this 2017 Gathering, that included representatives from campesino/small farmer organizations, indigenous peoples, unions, migrant work, human rights, digital rights, and environmental defence groups, all agreed on the urgency of building tri national alliances and networks. They were also reminded that it was this type of articulation across borders that led to the defeat of the FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas) in 2005, and more recently to the derailing of the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership). There was a generalized commitment to work on creating constructive ways of carrying out joint international-level action beginning with the social organizations themselves. These combined efforts would support workers, farmers, and indigenous peoples, and the population in general, and would be based on the care of our fragile environment and the full respect for human rights in all three countries.

Following this Gathering, all the various social organizations that had participated resolved to return to their respective countries to share the information gathered and to build on the initial contacts in order to deepen the action agenda to be carried out at both a national and transnational level. This process of involvement of each organization's membership will help legitimize and strengthen civil society's hand in the upcoming renegotiation of NAFTA. With a view towards the future the participating organizations made it clear that this was just the first of many tri national initiatives and gatherings to come to be aimed at turning back the Trump threat to our future not only in the North American region, but globally as well.

This Gathering calls on the populations from all three countries to build a broad and diverse movement capable of developing strategies and policy proposals focused on sustainable development that can lead to the greater degree of grass roots influence needed to re-orient the direction that globalization has taken. 

After being able to consult with their organizations and networks, the participating organizations in this Gathering will socialize what their 'plan of actions' will include. These will range from mobilizations to campaigns buttressed by declarations enabling peoples voices to be present at an international level.

The Mexican host organizations shared their Mexican Declaration at the beginning of the two-day mega event outlining their main concerns and the initial positions they have taken in the face the current international conjuncture and the challenges posed by NAFTA.

Alliance of Social Organizations - Mexico better without FTAs.


May 29, 2017

Social Movements From All 3 Countries to Protest NAFTA in Mexico

“The economic, social and environmental impacts of NAFTA have been devastating to people in all three countries," said a Trade Justice network spokesperson.

Social movements from Canada, the U.S. and Mexico are traveling to Mexico City Friday to protest a meeting held between Mexico and Canada Tuesday to discuss reforms to NAFTA, which has had a disastrous impact on all three countries' Indigenous populations, farmers, campesinos, labor unions and migrant groups, among others.

Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland held a meeting with Mexico's Foreign Affairs Secretary, Luis Videgaray. Since U.S. president Donald Trump's inauguration, there have been 235 meetings between Canadian and U.S. government officials, Freeland told the Huffington Post. Canada has been trying to work towards renegotiating the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement.

Earlier in March, Freeland was questioned over her stance on negotiating with Trump and inclining towards a U.S.-first trade policy, ignoring Mexico, "There is no negotiating process yet initiated. In fact, the United States does not even have a team in place to begin those negotiations. So let’s not put the cart before the horse," according to the Globe and Mail.

Nadia Ibrahim of the Trade Justice Network in Canada said in a statement, “The economic, social and environmental impacts of NAFTA have been devastating to people in all three countries, including an increase in poverty and inequality, the weakening of labor rights while corporate rights have been strengthened, and the erosion of environmental protections."

Freeland has consistently downplayed any suggestion of the NAFTA renegotiation that would give Canada an opportunity to do a side deal with the Trump administration, against Mexico's wishes. She said it is will simply be common sense that the 23-year-old agreement is "modernized" by all three members. "We don't even feel this is a contentious issue. It's just a matter of common sense. NAFTA can be modernized only with the agreement of the three parties," Freeland said, according to Huffington Post.

“Since the implementation of NAFTA, we have witnessed an unprecedented increase in profits, and economic inequality in Canada — it’s time for alternatives to the current neoliberal free trade model,” said Raul Burbano, Program Director of Common Frontiers in a statement.

“For 30 years, NAFTA has been a backroom deal for those at the top. So far, the pattern has repeated itself, with the Canadian government enlisting the support of corporate Canada and former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney. Yet, NAFTA affects not only our jobs but the planet,” explained Sujata Dey, Trade Campaigner from the Council of Canadians.

"The renegotiation process has to be transparent and participatory and any NAFTA replacement must ensure respect for human rights, improve peoples’ lives and livelihoods, and protect the environment in all three countries,” said Ronald Cameron, coordinator of the Quebec Network on Hemispheric Integration.

-Read complete article and view video


May 24, 2017

Open for Justice

We have the pleasure of inviting you to the 4th Annual Anti-Chevron Action! Indigenous people and farmers from the Ecuadorian Amazon are kicking off days of Anti-Chevron action against corporate impunity with events around the world. #AntiChevron #DiaAntiChevron #TexacoNuncaMas #JusticiaYa

View Complete Information on Facebook

Poster


May 24, 2017

Media Release

NAFTA serves corporations: Civil Society will hold their own discussions in Mexico City May 26-28th

PosterMontreal, Ottawa and Toronto - While Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland undertakes private NAFTA renegotiation meetings in Mexico City, civil society will also hold their own discussions in the same city from May 26-28th.

Networks from Canada and Quebec, representing labour unions; Indigenous, farmers, and migrant groups; environmentalists; women’s organizations; international solidarity groups; student movements; and human rights organizations will join their American and Mexican counterparts at the historic Antiguo Palacio de Escuela de Medicina in Mexico City. 

“Since the implementation of NAFTA, we have witnessed an unprecedented increase in profits, and economic inequality in Canada – it’s time for alternatives to the current neoliberal free trade model,” said Raul Burbano, Program Director of Common Frontiers.

“The economic, social and environmental impacts of NAFTA have been devastating to people in all three countries, including an increase in poverty and inequality, the weakening of labour rights while corporate rights have been strengthened, and the erosion of environmental protections," said Nadia Ibrahim of the Trade Justice Network.

“For 30 years, NAFTA has been a backroom deal for those at the top. So far, the pattern has repeated itself, with the Canadian government enlisting the support of corporate Canada and former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney. Yet, NAFTA affects not only our jobs but the planet,” explained Sujata Dey, Trade Campaigner from the Council of Canadians.

The renegotiation process has to be transparent and participatory and any NAFTA replacement must ensure respect for human rights, improve peoples’ lives and livelihoods, and protect the environment in all three countries,”  said Ronald Cameron, coordinator of the Réseau québécois sur l’intégration continentale.

A paradigm shift from the current global economic model is imperative in order to mitigate the threats of economic and environmental disaster.

- 30 -

Contact information:

Canada
Sujata Dey, Council of Canadians, sdey@canadians.org, 613-796-7724 (ENG, FR)
Raul Burbano, Common Frontiers, burbano@rogers.com, 416-522-8615 (ENG, ESP) www.commonfrontiers.com
Nadia Ibrahim, Trade Justice Network, nadia.k.ibrahim@gmail.com, 204-803-8133 (ENG)

Québec
Ronald Cameron, rqic@ciso.qc.ca, Réseau québécois sur l'intégration continentale (RQIC), 
514-217-0264 (FR, ENG) http://rqic.alternatives.ca

Participating organizations from Canada and Québec:

View Media Release in English   en français


May 20, 2017

Entrevista internacional de Radio Canadá con Jim Hodgson sobre las relaciones Canadá-Venezuela

“Sí, hay una polarización pero no debería haberla. Cuando hay dos polos, cuando hay dos fuerzas que se oponen, hay que buscar una forma de mediar, hay que buscar una forma de diálogo. Yo nunca he entendido por qué el gobierno de Canadá ha tomado una posición tan dura frente a Venezuela. Y esto no es solamente del último mes o dos meses, es de los últimos 10 años prácticamente y quizá más.” - Jim Hodgson

-Escuche la entrevista completa en RCI


May 19, 2017

Venezuela: a Threat to US Energy Hegemony?

By Raul Burbano
Common Frontiers

Since the election of Hugo Chavez in 1999, Venezuela has achieved impressive gains in health care, education, and reduction in poverty, while at the same time wrestled economic and political control from the country’s elite. Today, soaring inflation, a shrinking economy and a hyper-politicized environment are contributing to unprecedented challenges economically and politically - threatening to undo some of the achievements of the past. These challenges can be attributed to many factors, some structural, such as an oil-dependent economy, and a complex monetary arrangement which has given rise to “bachaqueros” who resell price-controlled items at hugely inflated prices  on  the black market. Other challenges are more politically driven - they stem from the existence of a hardline sector of the opposition aligned with U.S. interests who oppose the Socialist government's policies of resource nationalism and wealth redistribution.

The international media with its biased coverage of the conflict in Venezuela has failed to adequately report on violent actions against government supporters by extremist sectors of the opposition. It has however, diligently perpetuated the opposition narrative that the crisis in Venezuela is the sole responsibility of the Maduro  government, a dictatorship on the brink of collapse resorting to violence against peaceful protesters in a desperate bid to hold on to power.  These allegations have little merit, and are similar to accusations made against former president Hugo Chávez. The hardline opposition has never accepted the electoral legitimacy of the Bolivarian governments, and its violent demonstrations have had the full support and backing of the U.S. government. In 2014 alone, U.S government documents show that Obama's administration channelled $5M dollars to opposition groups to help “strengthen” and “protect” democracy in Venezuela. The Trump administration, in turn, has provided unprecedented political support to jailed opposition leader,  Leopoldo López , who has been found guilty of public incitement to violence and association to commit a crime. There has been close coordination between opposition-led National Assembly leaders and White House national security advisor H.R. McMaster on how to address the political impasse in Venezuela.

The international media also puts the blame for the economic crisis facing Venezuela firmly on the government's shoulders. They fail to mention the role of business producers of goods who regularly hoard basic items to create shortages and public discontent. Some believe the economic war contributed to the PSUV’s defeat during the 2015 parliamentary elections - due to the lack of black beans. Black beans are a staple of the Venezuelan diet and for some time before election day these had disappeared completely but the day after voting they were back on supermarket shelves.

Similar to the crisis that precipitated the short-lived 2002 coup against Chávez, leaders of the hardline opposition have made it clear that their goal is “regime change”. Henry Ramos Allup of the opposition Democratic Action party and former National Assembly president declared on the first day he assumed that position that they would remove Maduro from power within six months.  The opposition referred to their march in October 2016 as the “Taking of Venezuela” (La Toma de Venezuela), an inflammatory title. During that march Jose Alejandro Molina Ramirez, a policeman, was killed by opposition gunfire and two others injured; which contradicts the opposition message that their marches are “peaceful”.

-read the complete article on venezuelaanalysis.com

Raul Burbano is the program director of Common Frontiers.
This item original appeared in the May 18, 2017 edition of VenezuelaAnalysis.com


May 11, 2017

Canada should support democracy, not just condemn the government, in Venezuela

Backing a mediation effort would be a good start

By Jim Hodgson & Steve Stewart

Fernando
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, pictured at the UN in New York in 2015. Mark Garten photograph courtesy of the UN

“The Venezuelan people are again dying in the streets as they battle an ongoing coup d’état being carried out by a group of politicians who oppose our government, and who since April 19 have been carrying out acts of violence, killing people and destroying our national patrimony, just as they did in 2002 and 2014.”

These are the words of Bishop Elida Quevedo of the Evangelical Pentecostal Union of Venezuela (UEPV), but hers is not a story that you will see in major media. Instead, facts are distorted to make it appear that it is government forces who repress a “pro-democracy” movement. Bishop Quevedo goes on to describe the April 20 attack on a maternal and child hospital, and sniper shootings of pro-government demonstrators and security forces.

As a coalition of Canadian civil society organizations long engaged in solidarity, social justice, and development work in the Americas, we call for a more even-handed approach to issues in Venezuela than that shown recently by Canada and several other members of the Organization of American States (OAS).

Since early April, opponents of the government of President Nicolás Maduro have participated in demonstrations—some of them peaceful, but many that have included acts of vandalism, arson, and attacks on security forces. Protests began after the Supreme Court suspended some powers of the opposition-dominated National Assembly after it refused to comply with court rulings on electoral corruption and foreign investment. Even though the court decision was almost immediately rescinded, protests continued.

Since then, as many as 37 people have been killed. In cases where public security forces have been linked to violence, investigations are carried out and in some cases, charges filed. The dead include trade union leader Esmin Ramírez, killed after being kidnapped April 23 in the southeastern state of Bolívar, and Jacqueline Ortega, an organizer of an alternative food distribution program in greater Caracas.

Clearly, the situation in Venezuela is marked by polarization. But instead of building bridges to enable dialogue between the government and sectors of the opposition that reject violence, the government of Canada and the House of Commons Subcommittee on International Human Rights have echoed the voice of the OAS secretary general, Luis Almagro, and taken up the cause of the hardline opposition.

On March 28, Almagro had pressed the OAS permanent council to expel Venezuela from the organization. When it was evident he could not rally a majority of members to apply the OAS Democratic Charter against Venezuela, the session ended without a vote.

But on April 3, without the presence of either Bolivia (president of the OAS Permanent Council) or Haiti (the vice-president), just 15 of the 35 members (including Canada) approved a resolution “by consensus”—despite opposition from four other members—declared an “alteration of the constitutional order” in Venezuela and resolved to “urge action by the Venezuelan government to safeguard the separation and independence of powers.”

On April 28, Venezuela served notice that it would begin a two-year process to withdraw from the OAS. With regard to Venezuela, the OAS has consistently failed to fulfil its role as a space for multilateral dialogue to resolve conflicts.

In challenging Venezuela’s democracy, Canada has aligned itself with the governments of Colombia, Mexico, and Honduras—all of which face serious human rights issues themselves— plus several others, including Brazil which, after the removal last year of the democratically- elected president, is also facing waves of popular protest.

The government of Canada should make clear its support for constitutional government, electoral democracy, and the rule of law in Venezuela. It could support a mediation initiative led by former heads of government from Panama, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, and Spain. This initiative proposed last year by the Union of South American Nations and has sparked the interest of Pope Francis.

Canada should condemn foreign intervention in Venezuela’s internal affairs via the funding and training of groups and individuals seeking regime change through violence or other unconstitutional means, and support dialogue as the only appropriate means of achieving peace and reconciliation in Venezuela.

Jim Hodgson is a member of Common Frontiers, a Canadian civil society coalition on trade justice issues. Steve Stewart is executive director of CoDevelopment Canada, a Vancouver-based international development agency.

This item original appeared in the May 10, 2017 edition of The Hill Times


May 6, 2017

Common Ground of Indigenous Struggles in Colombia and Canada

By Heather Neun
From Quaker Concerns

Fernando
CFSC supported a recent tour to Canada by Colombian Indigenous leader Luis Fernando, who came to raise awareness and make connections. Here he meets with Cree MP Romeo Saganash in Ottawa.

There are striking parallels between Indigenous Peoples in Canada and Colombia. This is a hemisphere where efforts have been made since contact to eliminate Indigenous Peoples through policies of physical and cultural genocide. While there are clear differences, the shared experiences are of structural discrimination and destructive policies leading to marginalization, displacement, and barriers to obtaining title and effective control over ancestral territories.
 
“We have serious conflicts with the State about their mining vision. They say that the subsoil is theirs; we say that the land is one with the subsoil; you cannot separate it from a spiritual point of view. This is the war we are waging… to have the air, the land, the subsoil, together.”1
 
This is a statement by the leader of the Cañamomo Lomaprieta Indigenous Reserve of the Embera Chamí people in western Colombia. His words reflect the clash of paradigms inherent in the decades long armed conflict and continuous threats to the survival of Colombian Indigenous Peoples. Colombia is home to more than 100 culturally distinct Indigenous Peoples. Around 70% live in rural areas, many on reservations that cover about 30% of the country’s territory.
 
Colombia’s 1991 constitution provides that the communal lands of Indigenous Peoples and Afro-Descendant communities are “inalienable, inextinguishable, and immune from seizure”. And yet, as in Canada, despite constitutional protection of Indigenous rights, there is minimal enforcement through recognizing land title or obtaining consent to developments affecting their lands. This contrasts starkly with the government’s expedited processes for granting concessions to the extractive and resource sectors. A July 2010 mission of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues recorded that commercial concessions were granted in 80% of the Indigenous reserves without adequate consultation or consent, and without informing the affected communities.2
 
Indigenous communities are extremely vulnerable as a result of centuries of subjugation and dispossession. A 2009 landmark ruling of the Constitutional Court of Colombia3 found that more than one third of Colombia’s Indigenous Peoples are threatened with “physical and cultural extermination”. Of the 100 or more Indigenous groups, 66 were formally declared as being at high risk of disappearance, and 36 were at risk of extermination. These disproportionately heavy effects of the armed conflict are due to encroachment by extractive activities in the mining and energy sectors. Recent government efforts to try to restore lands to those dispossessed are failing – a storyline similar to the ‘land question’ in Canada.
 
In the current era, Indigenous Peoples of Canada and Colombia face increasing pressure from business interests in the energy, mining, and extractive sectors. The imposition of large scale “development” projects without consent is generating conflicts that threaten Indigenous Peoples’ very existence – both from a cosmological and cultural perspective, and through an economic model that imperils their territories, and ultimately, the planet. For the original land defenders, the latest wave of extractive activities has led to intensified conflicts, as respective governments back corporate access to land and resources. We see this in Canada too, where Indigenous Peoples are engaged in frontline struggles to demand that governments obtain their free, prior and informed consent to projects like pipelines and energy projects.
 
Indigenous Peoples in Canada are struggling to ensure that companies are accountable for the environmental harms and human rights abuses caused by their operations. The parallels to Colombia are evident as Canada’s justice system regularly fails, as in the case of the tailings pond spill in August 2014 at Imperial Metals’ Mount Polley gold and copper mine in British Columbia. Indigenous Peoples living near the site rely on the region for food, medicines, and livelihoods, and they are still suffering. The BC government’s failure to investigate and take action against those responsible breaches the rights of those harmed under international human rights law.4 

Paramo de Santurban
Paramo de Santurban, where the company Eco Oro wanted to drill through mountains to extract gold deposits. Photo credit: Jorge W. Sanchez Latorre

In the past few years, the threats have been constant; the objective has been to dispossess the people of their territories. A recent Global Witness report5 chronicles the alarming acceleration of attacks on land defenders, citing Colombia as third in the number of killings in 2015. Indigenous Peoples were particularly vulnerable and made up 40%; at least nine Indigenous leaders were killed in Colombia.
 
The reason for this trend is clear. Those closest to the land are struggling to protect it from predatory businesses, both domestic and foreign. In truth, the armed conflict in Colombia has endured due to persistent conflict over access to land and resources. This intensified in recent years when government efforts to secure conditions for foreign investment perpetuated the violence to make way for megaprojects. Amnesty International observes that forced displacement and misappropriation of land is the “defining feature” of the internal armed conflict.6 These human rights violations were targeted primarily at Indigenous Peoples and other groups closely connected to the land.

This violent context presents another linkage between Canada and Colombia. Canadian corporate mining activity in Colombia is increasing, and according to the authors of Blood of Extraction: Canadian Imperialism in Latin America,7 Canadian mining is “deeply implicated in the war economy of violence and dispossession from which it benefits”. Put plainly, Canadian companies profit from processes that harm Indigenous Peoples.
 
I travelled in 2016 to northeast Colombia, where Indigenous communities and others have organized to oppose the activities of Canadian mining companies. The company Eco Oro was granted a mining concession in a high altitude wetland. This fragile ecosystem is the source of water for over 1.5 million Colombians. The company’s plan was to drill through the mountain to extract gold. Its exploration activities occurred alongside the dislocation of local communities, threatening their livelihoods, food and water security. Through the courageous and unrelenting efforts of land defenders and their international allies, this project has been stopped, although the company has since filed notice of its intention to sue the Colombian government for millions of dollars under the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement.
 
Recent victories in Colombia8 are signs of the promise we see here in Canada as well. This month saw the welcome decision of the Stk’emlúpsemc te Secwépemc Nation (SSN) to withhold their free, prior, and informed consent to the development of lands and resources at Pípsell (or Jacko) Lake (on the outskirts of Kamloops, BC) for KHGM International’s Ajax open-pit copper and gold mine.9 The SSN asserts an irreplaceable historical, cultural, and spiritual connection to Pípsell, which they believe would be irreversibly harmed by the proposed mining operation. The basis of their decision lies in their inherent rights, backed by international human rights law and Canadian law. It lies in the belief system that is shared with the Indigenous Peoples of Colombia, that their territorial rights are founded in sacred connections to lands and waters, which are fundamental and must be protected for the generations to come.
 
Heather Neun is a member of Vancouver Monthly Meeting and CFSC’s Indigenous rights program committee. 

Notes:

  1. Chief Governor of Cañamomo Lomaprieta Indigenous Reserve, cited in Forest Peoples Programme, Pushing for Peace in Colombia: Indigenous and Afro-Descendant Peoples join forces to uphold their rights, address mining related conflict, Executive Summary (2014-2015). (2015, December). p.5. 
  2. ONIC. (2015, July). “Datos extraídos de Informes anuales de Derechos Humanos y DIH 2013, Enero-Septiembre 2014”, procesados por OCHA Colombia, cited in Colombia Working Group, Colombia in the shadow of human rights abuses. p. 20 
  3.  Constitutional Court Order 004. (2009)  
  4.  Amnesty International. Mining and Human rights in BC. https://www.amnesty.ca/our-work/issues/business-and-human-rights/human-rights-at-mt-polley-mine  
  5. Global Witness. (2016, June). On Dangerous Ground. 2015’s Deadly Environment: The Killing and Criminalization of Land and Environmental Defenders Worldwide. 
  6. Amnesty International. (2015, November). Colombia: Restoring the Land, Securing the Peace, Indigenous and Afro-Descendant Territorial Rights. (AMR 23/2615/2015). p.3  
  7. Gordon, Todd and Jeffery Webber. (2016). 
  8. The activities of another Canadian company, Gran Colombia Gold Corp, were recently ceased by a decision of the Constitutional Court on February 28, 2017, ordering the government to engage in consultation with the affected communities. TeleSUR. (2017, March 2). Big Win for Colombian Community Against Canadian Mining Giant.CaribFlame. http://www.caribflame.com/2017/03/big-win-for-colombian-community-against-canadian-mining-giant/ 
  9. Zeidler, Maryse. (2017, March 4). First Nation-led environmental review panel rejects Ajax mine in Kamloops, B.C. CBC. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/first-nation-led-environmental-review-panel-rejects-ajax-mine-in-kamloops-b-c-1.4010569 

May 1, 2017

Council of Canadians share thoughts on NAFTA

By Rick Arnold of the Trade Group,
Northumberland chapter of the Council of Canadians

NORTHUMBERLAND  - Many of us here in Northumberland County have been transfixed by US President Donald Trump's recent harsh rhetoric towards Canada and in response to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's attempt to placate the White House.

Free-trade proponents would have us believe that NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) renegotiations is like a high-stakes game of poker to see who can gain advantage and out-manoeuvre the other. But let's not be fooled for a moment that it's a battle between equals. The renegotiation of NAFTA is not going to be a win-win proposition for either junior partner, Canada or Mexico.

Nor should w in Northumberland believe that these national-level trade negotiations will not affect us.

But before taking a look at what a renegotiated NAFTA might have in store for us down the road, we need to be aware of the impact tat two other recent free-trade deals will shortly have on milk and cheese producers in our area, as well as on our budding local-food movement. In case you haven't heard of these two deals before, they are CETA (Canada-European Union: Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement) and CFTA (Canadian Free Trade Agreement).

CETA is not a done deal, as all European Union nations have yet to ratify it. But effectively, Canada considers it done, and import quotas will soon allow for an increased flow of (for example) cheeses from mega-European factories.

Empire Cheese and Butter, located near Campbellford, is a small co-op that relies for its cheese production on milk provided by eight local dairy farms. Empire products are high-quality and are currently to be found on several shelves in food-related businesses in towns like Cobourg and Port Hope. However, under CETA, Empire's products are in danger of being supplanted by a flood of cheaper European cheeses. Multiply Northumberland's example by the 47 small and medium-sized cheese plants to be found in various parts of Ontario, and one can see that hundreds (if not thousands) of rural jobs are on the line.

CFTA was concluded in early April by Federal, provincial and territorial governments. Business groups argued (successfully) that internal trade barriers are costly to the Canadian economy (despite such barriers being few in number). However, scant media attention has been devoted to another aspect of this deal, one which Scott Sinclair of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives headlines as, “Local food policies are toast.”

Mr. Sinclair goes on to explain that, “...the new CFTA effectively eliminates the ability of provincial, municipal or broader public-sector institutions such as schools, universities and hospitals to use their procurement to favour local suppliers or to encourage any kind of local development.”

This policy direction embedded in the CFTA would appear to run counter to Northumberland's best interests, given that local public bodies should be given a free hand to use their purchasing power to give local food retail and local growers a boost. Were our municipalities consulted prior to this decision?

Washington is about to reopen NAFTA, with acquiescent Canadian and Mexican governments falling into line while trying to save fact by saying that it's time to “modernize” the 23-year-old deal. In reality, President Trump has thus far shown little interest in addressing any new developments since NAFTA was first implemented, focusing his ire instead on having a little give-and-take — where NAFTA's two junior partners to the giving, in order to rectify their having taken “unfair” commercial advantage of the US in the past.

Of course, these assertions by Trump rank high on the “baloney meter.” But we all know the old adage: thems that got the power make the rules.

Sadly, government leaders and their attendant free-trade promoters play down the fact that trade deals like NAFTA have contributed significantly to inequality, unemployment, migration, food dependency and pollution in all three nations.

On April 18, President Trump announced that he was coming after Canada's dairy policies, alleging that they were hurting 75 Wisconsin farmers. Had Trump dug a little deeper, he would have had to face the fact that over-production of mik in the US was pushing dairy prices down and driving those small US farmers into bankruptcy. In fact, the president of the National Farmers' Union Jan Slomp recently explained in a tweet to Trump that, if the US were to adopt their own version of a supply-management system like Canada's, “...it could begin to restore prosperity to rural America.”

Unfortunately, the Trump administration does not appear to let facts stand in their way and, for this reason, both dairy farmers and milk-product consumers in Northumberland need to beware of the upcoming NAFTA renegotiations.

Small and medium-sized dairy farmers both here and across Canada should reconsider whether the traditional strategy of lobbying Ottawa will be sufficient to turn back the “give” tide when the US NAFTA negotiators apply the screws to their Canadian counterparts.

And those of us who enjoy cow's milk also need to be aware that opening up the Canadian market to US and other international dairy-production platforms will surely mean that bovine growth hormones and antibiotics will find their way into our currently unparalleled source of milk.


April 26, 2017

Stop killing social leaders in Colombia, so peace can flourish

stop killing


April 22, 2017

MayDayUnited May Day 2017 Toronto Celebration

PRESENTED BY THE UNITED MAY DAY COMMITTEE

Saturday April 29,
7:00 pm - 11:00 pm, Free
Steelworkers Hall,
25 Cecil Street
Toronto, ON

Doors open at 6:30

Food and Beverage will be for sale

The United May Day Committee keeps alive the tradition of International Workers’ Day by organizing an indoor rally to complement the annual march on the streets of Toronto.

The event brings together prominent labour, political, and international speakers with a rich array of talented dancers, singers, poets and musicians from a variety of cultural backgrounds.

-see event listing on Facebook for more info


April 19, 2017

Solidarity Declaration "One Year Later, Berta Lives, COPINH Continues On"

On March 2, 2016, Berta Cáceres was assassinated in an attempt to silence her voice, bring an end her important leadership and destroy the political project and struggle of a people acting in defence of their territory. The aim was not only to do away with her, but the organization of which she was a part for over 20 years, the Civic Counsel of Popular and Indigenous Organizations of Honduras (COPINH).

But this crime did not succeed to stop this movement. Rather, Berta Cáceres, the legacy of her commitment, resistance and clarity continue to live on in peoples around the world who are confronting the threats of savage capitalism, patriarchy and of a predatory, racist and colonial system.

A year, later 90 organizations and 240 individuals in Canada, the US and other countries have released a "Solidarity Declaration" to support Berta's life and the continuing struggles of COPINH.

The declaration, with specific demands both to the state of Honduras and Canada, was officially delivered at the Honduran Embassy in Ottawa and the Honduran Consulate in Montreal on April 4th. In Canada, the declaration was also sent to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of International Trade, the Canadian Ambassador in Honduras and party critics responsible of international issues in the Parliament.

-read the Declaration in English    en español    en francés


March 31, 2017

Progressive Canadian Groups Slam Right-Wing Attacks on Democracy in Ecuador

Just days ahead of the highly anticipated second round of Ecuador’s elections, trade unions and other progressive organizations in Canada have called out right-wing opposition candidate Guillermo Lasso for raising the false spectre of election tampering.

“The high level of rhetoric by Lasso’s campaign, calling the government a ‘dictatorship’ and unsubstantiated claims of fraud are extremely concerning as they add fuel to an already tense political environment,” reads the statement signed by labor and other Canadian organizations.

Lasso and his contingent have been responsible for making claims of fraud in the election process, despite the Ecuadorean National Electoral Council and over 200 international observers continuing to reiterate that the elections were conducted with complete transparency and no formal reports of fraud.

In addition, on March 22, Ecuadorean journalists uncovered that Cedatos, an official polling company in the country, had published misleading polls that favored Lasso. Lasso, the former banker and a pro-business advocate of neoliberal policies, it was found, has close ties to the company.

“There is also an online petition which refers to the incident as an attack on the democracy in Ecuador and calls for the suspension of Cedatos as official pollster for the elections,” noted the statement, titled “Undermining Democracy in Ecuador.”

For left organizations in Canada that often extend international solidarity toward Latin America, these attacks on democracy by the right-wing opposition are concerning.

“We’re concerned with the process of legitimacy … we realize what’s at stake,” Mike Palecek from the CUPW told teleSUR.

“From Bolivia to Venezuela, throughout Latin America, we support the mass mobilization of people and their challenging of power,” he added, saying that the region is often subject to U.S. imperial interests.

The organizations’ statement highlighted leftist presidential candidate Lenin Moreno’s history of international activism, from his role as the U.N. Special Envoy on Disability and Accessibility in 2013, to his promise to continue his party’s Citizen’s Revolution. Alianza Pais’ Citizen’s Revolution under current President Rafael Correa refers to the program of progressive social and economic transformation launched under the banner of 21st Century Socialism when his government took office in 2007.

In addition, the statement chided Lasso’s proposed changes, writing, “His neoliberal policies include the privatization of the education system through a ‘voucher’ system and firing some of the 300,000 public service employees in order to reduce the size of the state.”

Thus, the organizations conclude, “The attacks against the democratic order in Ecuador are extremely dangerous and unwarranted.”

“We call on Lasso and his party to respect the democratic institutions, process and refrain from unsubstantiated allegations of fraud and calls for street protests that could lead to social unrest,” they declared.

With Ecuador’s second round of presidential elections slated to take place April 2, the country stands at a critical crossroads. South America’s leftist resurgence — commonly referred to as the Pink Tide — has seen recent blows, with neoliberal governments in Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil rolling back progressive gains of recent years. If Lasso is elected as president, Ecuador would be set to course through that same trajectory.

However, all of the latest polls predict a win for Moreno.

For leftists in the country, the hope is that Ecuador will stay on its left-wing path of the past decade.

-read the original post here

 


March 30, 2017

Undermining Democracy in Ecuador

protest

This April 2nd, 2017, Ecuadorians will go to the polls to elect a new president in historic elections that could change the course of the country and have ripple effects across Latin America. The choices are between the left wing, Lenin Moreno from PAIS Alliance and conservative Guillermo Lasso from the Creating Opportunities party.

Lenin Moreno one of the world’s few disabled national leaders is well-known for his national and international activism for disability and human rights. In 2013 he was appointed UN Special Envoy on Disability and Accessibility by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. Moreno promises to continue his parties’ “alternative policies” which include investing in healthcare, education and wealth redistribution. Policies that have contributed to an unprecedented cut in the poverty rate with extreme poverty down 47% under PAIS Alliance over the past decade.

His opponent Guillermo Lasso is a conservative former banker and one of the largest shareholders in Banco de Guayaquil. He was economy Minister during the 1999 financial crisis and critics denounce his links to 49 tax haven companies. Lasso’s campaign promises to implement “fiscal austerity” including large scale privatization. His neoliberal polices include the privatization of the education system through a “voucher” system and firing some of the 300,000 public service employees in order to reduce the size of the state.

On March 22nd Ecuadorian journalists uncovered an unprecedented scheme allegedly aimed at manipulating public opinion in the polls and influencing election results. Evidence leaked by an employee of CEDATOS, an official polling company demonstrated the company published misleading polls favoring Lasso and supressing advantageous polls in Moreno favour during the first round of elections. It was demonstrated that Lasso has close ties with the company through his business ties with Livercostas. CEDATOS for their part have denied any culpability and said it’s an attack on its good name, credibility and institutional image.

Following the revelations, Vice President of the National Assembly, Rosana Alvarado held a press conference detailing the evidence against CEDATOS and submitted a formal complaint to the Attorney General’s office. There is also an online petition which refers to the incident as an attack on the democracy in Ecuador and calls for the suspension of CEDATOS as official pollster for the elections, and an immediate investigation by the prosecutor’s office to determine any complicity by the company and its owner, Ángel Polibio Córdova.

Lasso and his allies consistently raised a false spectre of election tampering during the first round of elections, threatening destabilization if front-runner Moreno was pronounced the winner. Lasso attended protests outside the National Electoral Council (CNE) headquarters urging supporters to stay in the streets while his Vice -presidential candidate, Andrés Paez led a protest that turned violent in front of the CNE forcing employees to evacuate.

Despite the allegations no official complaints of fraud have been submitted to the CNE and the hundreds of electoral observers who partook in elections monitoring praised the elections as transparent.

The attacks against the democratic order in Ecuador are extremely dangerous and unwarranted. The high level of rhetoric by Lasso’s campaign, calling the government a “dictatorship” and un-substantiated claims of fraud are extremely concerning as they add fuel to an already tense political environment.

It is also extremely concerning the comments from Andrés Paez, Vice-presidential candidate indicating his party’s intention to set up a parallel electoral centre that would publish unofficial election results the day of the elections, prior to the CNE.

We the undersigned condemn any attempts to illegally influence voters, electoral institutions or the public perception of the election.

We call on Lasso and his party to respect the democratic institutions, process and refrain from unsubstantiated allegations of fraud and calls for street protests that could lead social unrest.

We condemn any attempt to publish election results without the authorization of the National Electoral Council.

We call on individuals and organizations both national and international to refrain from any attempts to engage in manipulation or subvert the integrity of the democratic system and respect the democratic will of the Ecuadorian people.

We stand in solidarity with the people of Ecuador who seek peaceful elections and the ability to determine their political future free from political interference.

ALBA Canada
America Latina Al Dia
Blue Planet Project
Canadian Union of Postal Workers
BC Government and Service Employees'
Casa Cultural Ecuatoriana
Caribbean Solidarity Network
Council of Canadians
Common Frontiers
Frente de Defensa de los Pueblos Hugo Chavez
Latin American and Caribbean Solidarity Network
Louis Riel Bolivarian Circle, Toronto
Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation
Solidarity Halifax
Socialist Project
Students United in Representation of Latin America

-download this article in English   en español


March 22, 2017

The human rights cost of Canadian extractive industries in Central America:

Canada public speaking tour - March 19-28, 2017

Click on the images below for more details

pic1

pic2


March 17, 2017

March 21-26

Canada Public Speaking Tour:
The human rights costs of Canadian extractive industries in Central America

OttawaFrom March 21-26 this tour will raise awareness about the impacts of Canadian extractive projects in four countries (El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala and Nicaragua) in the Central America region through the testimonies of front line activists who are leading successful campaigns to defend their territory from corporate incursion.

With guest speakers:

-Full details of the tour:

Public Events in Canada:

Ottawa
Public conference
Tuesday, March 21 from 7-9 pm
Amnesty House, 312 Laurier Ave E.
-more details

Montreal
Public Action « Pas de transition écologique sans justice »
Wednesday, 22 mars from 12pm - 2pm
Place Jean-Paul-Riopelle
-more details

MontrealPublic conference
Wednesday, March 22 from 6-9pm
Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM), Room DS-R510, 405, rue Sainte-Catherine Est
-more details

London
Public conference
Sunday, March 26 from 2:25-3:45pm
Organizing Equality international Conference @ Museum London
-more details

Sponsoring Organizations:


March 5, 2017

Cultural, Gender and Territorial Rights
in the context of Colombia's Peace Accords

posterColombia’s Indigenous and Afrocolombian communities, and women in particular, have been disproportionately affected by the consequences of the 52-plus year internal armed conflict in Colombia, yet have been playing a pivotal role in the resolution of conflict and building territorial peace. Ethno-territorial movement organizations successfully established an “Ethnic Chapter” to safeguard cultural, gender and territorial rights and to reinforce their autonomy and jurisdiction in relation to the recently passed Havana Peace Accords negotiated between the FARC guerrillas and the Colombian government. As the accords begin to be implemented in the territories over the coming weeks, strategies for increased visibility and protection of social leaders, community councils and territories – in the face of heightened violence - are underway.
    -click on pic for poster view

Saturday, March 11th 2017 at 6:30pm
Trinity St. Paul’s United Church and Centre for Faith
Main Floor (Chapel Room) 427 Bloor St. West

Presenters

Charo Minas Rojas is an Afro-Colombian human rights defender, member of the Black Communities’ Process in Colombia (PCN), a grassroots nation-wide movement comprised for over 100 local Afro-descendant grassroots organizations and community councils, as well as a representative of the National Afrocolombian Peace Council and the Ethnic Commission for Peace and the Defense of Territorial Rights. She is one of the activists who helped to write the “ethnic chapter” of the Havana Peace Accords.

Sheila Gruner is an activist and professor of community development at Algoma University in Northern Ontario, has been accompanying the work of the Black Communities Process for many years, as well as the Ethnic Commission since its inception and is currently involved in solidarity and alliance building in support of the grassroots indigenous and Afrocolombian territorial movements in peace process and post accord period.

They will speak about the role of the Ethnic Commission in the pre and post peace accord period, as well as the potential role of Canada in monitoring its implementation. Topics to be covered include strategies for increased visibility and protection of Indigenous and Afro-Colombian leaders, communities and territories in the face of heightened violence, and other challenges.

Book Launch

The book Des/DIBUJANDO EL PAIS/aje: Aportes para la paz con los pueblos afrodescendientes e indigenas: Territorio, Autonomia y Buen Vivir (in Spanish) – a collection of Indigenous and Afro-Colombian community perspectives on systemic racism and discrimination in pre and post peace accord contexts will be launched

For more info -see Facebook event


February 27, 2017

Bastón de la Paz – Canadian tour March 5 -12, 2017

posterColombia’s Indigenous Peoples have suffered disproportionately during the conflict as much of the fighting has taken place in or around their territories. Many of these communities have been repeatedly forced off their lands after years of threats and killings carried out by the security forces, paramilitaries often acting in collusion with state forces and other armed actors. Displacement often takes place in areas with potential for economic exploitation, including mining.
   -click on image for poster view

The rights of Indigenous communities and their ability to access and use Colombia’s resource-rich land is central to a lasting peace. Precisely because indigenous People’s make up a disproportionate number of the victims and displaced communities of the conflict, their voices are especially essential for ensuring a just and lasting peace in Colombia.

Luis Fernando Arias of the National Indigenous Organization of Colombia (ONIC) will travel to Canada for an educational tour. He will meet with Labour representatives, civil society organizations, government officials, students and the general public. A central priority of the tour will be to meet with Indigenous groups in Canada. Luis will travel to Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal between March 5 – 12 2017.

- more details about the tour

 

TorontoToronto Event
-click on pic for poster view

Tuesday March 7th
University of Toronto,
100 St. George Street
Sidney Smith Hall 2098
Food will be served
-more details

 

montrealMontreal Events
-click on pic for poster view

Thursday March 9th
7-10 pm
local a-1824,
pavillon Hubert-Aquin,
UQAM.
-more details

 



Friday March 10th
12:15 to 1:45
McGill University
Room 102
New Chancellor Day Hall,
McGill Faculty of Law
Free vegan lunch will be provided
-more details


February 26, 2017

Mexico and the Trump Presidency

Implications for Human Rights, Democracy and Migration

posterDr. Sergio Aguayo
Colegio de México

March 9, 2017
7 - 8:30 p.m.
2017 Dunton Tower
Carleton University, Ottawa

(click on image for larger view)

Dr. Aguayo writes a weekly column in Reforma, as well as 14 other newspapers. Since March 2001, he has participated in Primer Plano, Canal 11's weekly TV show, and from 2009 to 2015 he participated in Carmen Aristegui's Mesa Política radio program broadcasted by MVS. He has written dozens of books and scholarly articles. In 2015 his latest book appeared: De Tlatelolco a Ayotzinapa. Las Violencias
del Estado.


All are welcome!

Sponsored by: Americas Policy Group, CCIC; Common Frontiers; Latin American and Caribbean Studies, Carleton University, PSAC Social Justice Fund; Nobel Women’s Initiative


February 14, 2017

The Centre for Research on Latin America and the Caribbean (CERLAC) Presents:

The Winter 2017 Michael Baptista Lecture:
Violence in Mexico and Canadian Refugee Policy

For its Winter 2017 Michael Baptista Lecture, CERLAC is delighted to host Dr. Sergio Aguayo along with a panel of Canadian immigration experts.

Date: Wednesday, March 8, 2017
Time: 5:00pm to 8:00pm
Place: Sandra Faire and Ivan Fecan Theater – Accolade East – York University

Renowned scholar and human rights activist sergio Aguayo will speak on the deeping humanitarian crisis in Mexico, which has been marked by the targeted assaination of journalists, the mass disappearance of 43 students from a rural teachers college, and the deaths of hundreds of thousands in a war between the state and powerful drug cartels.

To escape criminal violence as well as poverty, millions of Mexicans and Central Americans have fled north to the United States and Canada in recent years. A panel of immigration experts will examine the implications for Canadian immigration policy, at a time when Donald Trump enacts the immigration measures he has long promised, while the Trudeau government lifts the visa requirement for Mexican citizens introduced by its predecessor.

AguayoSergio Aguayo

Born in the State of Jalisco, Mexico, Sergio Aguayo is a research professor at the Centro de Estudios Internacionales (Center for International Studies) at El Colegio de Mexico, where he currently coordinates the Seminar on Violence and Peace. He has taught at universities in Mexico, the US, and Europe and holds a doctorate from John Hopkins University. A leading academic and journalist, Sergio Aguayo has published widely on human rights and violence in Mexico.

The session will be chaired by Alan Simmons and Luin Goldring from York University.

The Panel:

-More details


February 1, 2017

Upcoming Canadian Tour for Luis Fernando Arias

Watch for details coming soon.

Arias


January 31, 2017

TRUDEAU, TRUMP & TRADE: WHAT IS AT STAKE FOR OUR FUTURE?

A Lunch & Learn from the USW 1998 Next Gen Committee

trump-trudeau

How will the Trump administration affect Canada’s trade relations with the US? What can we expect from NAFTA renegotiations?

Please join us for a panel discussion about Canada’s trade agreements. Learn about how policies embedded in these agreements such as ISDS (Investor-state dispute settlement) provisions will negatively impact Canadian workers – and be inspired by how civil society groups mounted successful resistance to the TPP!

Thursday, Feb. 9, 2017 @ 12:10-1:00pm
SS 2108, Sidney Smith Hall,
100 St. George St.
University of Toronto
Speakers

RaulRaul Burbano is the Program Director for Common Frontiers Canada, a multi-sectoral working group based in Toronto that organizes research, educational campaigns, and political action on issues related to hemispheric economic, social, and climate justice.

 

BrittanyBrittany Smith is currently a campaigner with Leadnow and has been a human rights activist for many years, working with NGOs, grassroots groups and the United Nations. She led Leadnow's campaign against the TPP, and runs high-impact rapid response campaigns using a combination of field and digital tactics. This is all in the service of helping hundreds of thousands of people across the country come together to build an open democracy, fair economy and clean environment.

 


January 18, 2017

Media Release

The Canadian Government Should Replace NAFTA, or Scrap it

(Toronto, Ottawa): On January 20, 2017, Donald Trump will be inaugurated as the new President of the United States. He has promised that one of his first acts will be to demand that Canada and Mexico renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has signalled that Canada would accede to that request expecting that this country could "improve” NAFTA.

Common Frontiers, a 27 year old coalition of Canadian social organizations, unions, and environmental groups that has been advocating since the negotiation of NAFTA for a fairer trade model for North America has today issued a strongly worded Statement entitled, The Canadian Government Should Replace NAFTA, or Scrap it. This document highlights the damage that 23 years of NAFTA has already done to the Canadian economy. It also lists some major demands that coalition members insist must be on the negotiating table in replacing NAFTA with a trade arrangement that puts Canadians and human rights ahead of corporate profits.

The statement follows on the heels of the release of a Tri-national statement by groups from Mexico, Canada and the U.S. rejecting efforts to frame the debate in xenophobic and nationalist terms. They view the NAFTA model as an expansion of corporate power which has failed working people across all three countries.

Janet Eaton from Common Frontiers stated “evidence continues to grow showing corporate-led trade and investment agreements like NAFTA fail to benefit people and democratic governance systems while contributing to environmental decline, exacerbation of climate change, global inequality and economic failures”.

-read the Common Frontiers statement   en français  en español
-read the Tri-National statement

For more information or to arrange an interview:
Raul Burbano - Program Director - Common Frontiers, (416) 522-8615, burbano@rogers.com

UPDATE - Listen to this interview from Radio Canada International
A favor de un nuevo paradigma de libre Comercio


January 6, 2017

The Rhetoric and Reality of the Trans-Pacific Partnership - a view from China

by Sit Tsui, Erebus Wong, Lau Kin Chi and Wen Tiejun
MonthlyReview.org

TPP graphicSince announcing its foreign policy “pivot to Asia” shortly after the election of Barack Obama, the United States has made extensive use of its institutional and discursive power to encourage denationalization among developing countries whose economies chiefly rely on manufacturing and trade—part of its global strategic goal of expanding the hegemony of finance capital at the lowest possible cost. The development of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TTP) is a case in point. This article analyzes the TPP’s strategy in targeting China, pointing out that the TPP is a battle for the terms of economic development and discourse in the twenty-first century, as well as an illustration of the ideology of technocracy and soft power. Lastly, we criticize the TPP’s erosion of economic sovereignty, which would effectively relegate the economies of developing countries to a form of semi-colonial extraterritoriality.

-read the entire article


January 5, 2017

Lands to Die For: The Garifuna Struggle in Honduras

You may not have heard of the Garifuna people. They’re people with a unique culture who live mostly in coastal Central America. Descendants of runaway African slaves and local indigenous groups, they have their own language, religion and lands.

But the Garifuna in Honduras say their land is under siege. Several of their leaders have been killed as they fight to defend it. Private investors and even Honduras' government are now after their land. Correspondent Gerry Hadden has their story.

Click on image below to watch the video (opens in a new window)

Lands To Die For


For Previous Current Events items, visit the Archives

(2016 Archive) (2015 Archive) (2014 Archive) (2013 Archive) (2012 Archive) (2011 Archive) (2010 Archive) (2009 Archive) (2008 Archive) (2007 Archive) (2006 Archive) (2005 Archive)