The Dominion - foreign policy

Water Inspires Strange Bedfellows

Moira Peters — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 05:07:10 +0000

How a Colombian city united against gold greed

BUCARAMANGA, COLOMBIA—Spirits were high last month among students, environmentalists, businesspeople, and politicians as the news came in that Greystar Resources had revoked its application for a large-scale open-pit gold mine in the mountains of northeastern Colombia.

But just twelve hours later, Greystar’s intentions became clear—it was withdrawing that application to bring in a new one for a redesigned, underground mine.

The short-lived but significant victory for those against the mine was possible thanks to the tireless efforts of the broadest, most diverse coalition in Colombia’s recent history. This coalition brought together an engineer’s association, committed student activists, the head of the local business federation, NGOs, teachers, environmentalists, and water utility employees.

Foreign investments in Colombia’s mining sector grew slowly in the 1990s, but in the eight years of former President Alvaro Uribe’s regime it skyrocketed in part due to a perception of safer exploration conditions. Even the Canadian government showed interest in making Colombia prime for investment needs by having the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) draft Colombia’s mining law of 2001, granting generous privileges to foreign companies. Uribe’s disciple, current President Juan Manuel Santos, has made resource extraction a centerpiece of his economic plan, deeming it the main “motor” of development and plans to follow the lead of Chile and Peru, two truly mining-oriented countries.

Santos’ strategy includes generous tax breaks to mining companies and modifying laws to be more “investor friendly.” It also involves persecuting traditional small miners—some who lack a mining title—aligning them with the neo-paramilitaries and guerrillas who mine illegally to fund their “dirty” work. Mainstream media plays into this dynamic by focusing on illegal mining but remaining silent about the large-scale corporate takeover of Colombia’s resources. Currently, 40 per cent of Colombia´s entire area is under mining permits, some of it on environmentally protected land or Indigenous and Afro-Colombian communal territories.

Into this mining binge came Greystar Resources, a Vancouver-based junior exploration company. (Junior exploration companies typically explore potential mining sites, deal with permit processes, and then sell their acquisition to an actual mining company, making financial speculation their real business.) Among Greystar’s investors are the International Financing Corporation—the World Bank’s private financing arm, and JP Morgan.

The company has mineral rights over 74,000 acres of land in the mountains of California and Vetas, two small and remote towns forgotten by the government, where Greystar has invested in infrastructure and had brought promises of employment and progress. Many locals in that area badly want the mine.

The project is just 40 kilometers northeast of Bucaramanga, Colombia’s fifth-largest city. Greystar plans to dig out an estimated nine million ounces of gold, making its mine one of the largest gold deposits in South America.

But that gold sits under the Santurban paramo, a tropical version of high moorlands. This unique ecosystem supplies water for Bucaramanga and 21 towns. The proposed use of cyanide at the Greystar mine caught the attention of the region’s citizens, who see it as a major threat to their “liquid of life” source: water. In fact, mineral extraction was legally banned in paramos in the amendment to article 34 of the Colombian Mining Law in 2010.

Besides the national effort to render all paramos mine-free zones, various environmental organizations in the Bucaramanga area worked for years to have Santurban declared a protected area, which would exclude mining, logging and cattle grazing from its grounds. More recently, opposition to the mining project gained ground when university students and other environmentalists joined the cause, concerned not only about the threat to their local water supply, but also about the sovereignty and long-term economic implications this mine represented within the national mining policy. They realized that the need for water was shared by everyone, regardless of their political views, and they framed their anti-mining campaign through water’s unifying lens.

The coalition started growing and taking a new shape when the municipal water utility workers union joined. Then they sought support from the state assembly leadership, where their calls landed on receptive ears; the assembly’s president, a member the leftist Democratic Alternative Pole (Polo) party, publicly denounced the mine.

Following this victory, the economic federations of Bucaramanga, which, besides understanding the intrinsic environmental value of the Santurban paramo, came to the conclusion that damaging the city’s water source would have a more negative financial impact in the long term than the ephemeral gains of mining. The state engineers association also opposed the project. At this point, it became clear the general public sentiment in the region was that water was worth more than gold.

“Take to the streets in support of your treasure, the Santurban paramo,” called out members of the coalition during a public demonstration on February 24, 2011. Previous protests had seen low turnouts, but the issue became so well-known and the opposition so diverse, that over 30,000 Bucaramangans marched in their streets, petitioning the Environment Ministry to deny Greystar’s license application. Around this time other segments of the government, including the Attorney General, publicly denounced the mine.

With all eyes on Bucaramanga, the ministry held a public hearing on Greystar’s case. There was a clear division between the small crowd from California and Vetas that was bused there by the company to support the project, and the large, mostly urban majority opposing the mine.

The majority of politicians, most prominently the state’s governor, explicitly called to shut down the project for its technical flaws and risks it posed to the community. Tensions ran high as the hearing progressed. Two attendees started a fight, and the ministry ended the hearing early. Media coverage focused on the fight rather than on the near unanimous resistance to the gold mine.

The hearing was a public disgrace to the company, whose stock value dropped 30 per cent. To top it all off, Colombia’s energy minister and even Serafino Locono, a prominent oil-and-mining CEO, highlighted Greystar project’s flaws at a miner’s conference in Toronto.

Greystar decided to preempt the environment ministry’s decision on the company’s license application, and withdraw its request for the mining operation, only to announce later that Greystar was reconfiguring its project to “address the concerns of the community.”

This company is just one of a group of businesses after Santurban’s gold. Its counterparts include Galway Resources and Ventana Gold Corp, recently purchased by energy billionaire Eike Batista. The success of these companies will likely be impacted by Greystar’s fate.

Laura Galvis, a student member of the anti-mining coalition, says that the group’s lack of hierarchy, its clarity in its position on the issue, and its ability to take an angle that resonated with everyone were essential to the recent success. “It’s not just about the environment, it’s about our very survival,” she explained.

Coalition founders worked hard to bring everyone to the table, and found a common point of interest with their traditional political opponents in the belief that the public’s right to clean water takes precedence over private interests. Through educational campaigns and public demonstrations, they slowly gained ground.

This broad alliance against the mining project is not quite a movement, for it rose to meet a temporary need, and its members have little in common beyond their rejection of the mining operations. The coalition is a something of an interim union aided by current elections, with politicians seeking supporters. Whatever its nature, this grassroots experience opened the door to a multi-party dialogue rarely seen in Colombia.

The most committed segment of the coalition—the students and environmentalists who oppose large-scale multinational mining in general—want to move the argument beyond the threat to Bucaramanga’s water supply. They see a need to adapt to the reconfiguration proposed by Greystar, and to deepen the debate to include other harmful effects the mine would bring, such as a deterioration of the area’s agricultural web and the loss of a local supply of gold for Bucaramanga’s thriving jewelry industry.

Publicly, the coalition’s success in bringing the Santurban case into the eye of the media hurricane has forced Greystar to change its strategy. Whether the coalition is able to stop the mining project compltely and protect its beloved paramo remains to be seen.

Natalia Fajardo is a mining consultant for Cedetrabajo, a political analysis institute in Colombia. Cedetrabajo is a member of Reclame, Colombia’s national network of organizations facing large-scale mining.

This article was originally published by Toward Freedom.

Bedfellows.paramo

bedfellows.water

Lies and War Crime

hillarybain — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 12:35:30 +0000

Guatemalan ex-military accused of war crimes held in Alberta prison

CHIMALTENANGO, GUATEMALA—Jorge Vinicio Sosa Orantes, ex-member of the Guatemalan special forces known as the Kaibiles, was arrested in Lethbridge, Alberta, on January 18, 2011. He was detained at the request of the United States; the US may solicit his extradition to face charges of immigration fraud.

If proven guilty of having lied about his role in the Guatemalan military on his US application for naturalization, Sosa Orantes could face up to 10 years in prison in the United States. Meanwhile, human rights groups in Canada and Guatemala are petitioning the Canadian courts to try him for war crimes.

Sosa Orantes has been implicated in the planning and execution of the massacre at Las Dos Erres, in the northern department of Peten, where at least 252 unarmed civilians were systematically killed on December 6, 1982. This massacre was carried out in much the same manner as the more than 650 massacres committed by the Guatemalan military during the country’s 36-year internal armed conflict, which included widespread rape, torture and the mass killing of men, women and children, most of whom were Mayan.

According to Aura Elena Farfan from the Association for the Relatives of the Detained and Disappeared in Guatemala (FAMDEGUA)—the plaintiff organization that since 2000 has been bringing forward a case against Sosa Orantes and 16 other ex-Kaibiles implicated in the massacre—it is important that he be tried for the more serious crimes against humanity, rather than for the lie he told US immigration officials.

“Of course that lie is important,” says Farfan. “But for there to be justice, it is important that he is not only judged for that lie, but for the serious violation of human rights in Guatemala.”

Even with an unprecedented amount of evidence, including survivor testimonies, exhumation records and the testimony of a repentant ex-Kaibil who took part in the massacre, Farfan does not believe the justice FAMDEGUA seeks is possible in Guatemala.

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has found the Guatemalan government unwilling to live up to its judicial responsibilities to investigate and successfully prosecute those responsible for the massacre. The country is still characterized by widespread violence, while many of the intellectual and material authors—those who planned and those who carried out the massacres—retain high positions of political power in the current government and military.

Even though the Guatemalan Supreme Court issued arrest warrants in 2010 for the 17 ex-Kaibiles implicated in the massacre, Farfan believes this case is stuck in impunity. “It needs to be heard in a place where there does not exist the same danger of being bought off.” Such bribery, says Farfan “is likely to happen in Guatemala.”

Matt Eisenbrant from the Canadian Centre for International Justice (CCIJ) has called on the Canadian government to launch a full criminal investigation against Sosa Orantes.

“Usually, a trial in the place where the abuses occurred is preferable,” he says. “This should only be done, however, if all due-process guarantees can be protected and there are assurances that a fair trial can proceed without being tainted by outside influences.” The CCIJ is calling on the Canadian government to ensure that Sosa Orantes will be held fully accountable by conducting its own criminal investigation into possible war-crime charges, taking this into account when considering the extradition requests.

Legal support for the case first surfaced in 1994, after FAMDEGUA officially received an exhumation request from three families from the area. Within a year, anthropologists had found 162 complete skeletons in a 12-metre grave, 67 of which were from children under age 12.

According to a report released by Amnesty International in 2002, the findings of the exhumation matched up with survivors’ testimonies about the massacre; it involved first the mass and repeated rape of the women and young girls, followed by the killing of the children and then the women, many of whom were pregnant. The men were killed last. Anthropologists’ reports reveal that most of the victims were killed by a blunt object to the back of the head, after which they were thrown into the mass grave.

Both witnesses and FAMDEGUA have received numerous threats for bringing this case forward. Still visibly affected by the case, Farfan says that “[Sosa Orantes] did not have compassion for the victims who were asking not to be killed, not to be tortured.” She expresses the weight of the blood that was spilled in Guatemala, stating that the bodies of the young children and pregnant women should tip the scales of justice further than the lie Sosa Orantes told to gain US citizenship.

“If victims are to be satisfied and if we are to provide deterrence against such abuses happening in the future, perpetrators must be prosecuted to the fullest extent possible,” says Eisenhart.

Sosa Orantes was denied bail on March 9, 2011, by Albertan judge Suzanne Bensler who deemed him too much of a flight risk. His next court appearance is scheduled for April 20, 2011.

Valerie Croft is living in Guatemala, completing a CIDA internship with CEIBA—a Guatemalan environmental advocacy organization that works on issues related to climate justice, food sovereignty and the defense of territory.

Corn and Feet

Ecuador's Fickle Friend

Martin Lukacs — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 05:25:52 +0000

Canada waffles in its support for Latin American democracies

CUENCA, ECUADOR—Ecuador awoke on September 30, 2010 to police protests. Across several highland and coastal cities, police burned tires, shut down access routes and neglected their posts. They said they were protesting the Public Service Law passed the night before, which would affect economic bonuses based on promotion.

By midday, however, efforts to destabilize the Ecuadorian administration became evident. The security detail at the National Assembly closed various entries to the legislature, while a small contingent from the air force shut down the Quito airport.

The focal point of international attention, however, was on President Rafael Correa, holed up for more than twelve hours in a police hospital after personally confronting police in the capital city of Quito. Police shot tear gas at and roughed up the President who, recovering from recent knee surgery, was escorted to the nearby hospital. Rebel police surrounded the building, at which point the president reported that he was under threat and sounded the alarm on an attempted coup.

With memories of the 2009 Honduran coup fresh in collective memory, Spain, France, more than 10 Latin American countries and several regional organizations were quick to issue declarations of support for the small Andean nation's democratically-elected president, and its constitutional order. Spain, a key investor in Ecuador and home to hundreds of thousands of Ecuadorian immigrants, gave further assurance through its foreign affairs minister that it “would mobilize all of its diplomatic arsenal...so that this revolt stops.”

Canada—another top investor in Ecuador, frequently having high level meetings with the Correa government—responded differently. Canada co-sponsored a mid-afternoon resolution at the Organization of American States (OAS). But it was only after the Ecuadorian military joint command declared its loyalty to Correa, the US State Department issued its own statement of support for the President, and just over an hour before a special military and police operation rescued Correa, that Canadian Minister of State of Foreign Affairs for the Americas Peter Kent circulated an independent statement.

“Canada is concerned about the growing unrest in Ecuador and is monitoring the situation closely,” the statement read. “We call on all parties to refrain from violence and any other actions that could imperil the rule of law and the country’s democratic institutions.”

Critics of Canadian foreign policy see Canada's delayed response as a sign of uneasy relations. Despite Correa's public support for Canadian economic interests in recent years, they suggest Canada's backing is by no means guaranteed. They pinpoint geopolitical and economic concerns as potential culprits.

As Latin America has become a foreign policy priority, Canada has shown conditional support for constitutional democracy and national sovereignty in left-leaning countries aspiring to even moderate change. The Canadian government's hand in facilitating a coup against the popularly elected government of President Jean Bertrand Aristide in Haiti in 2004, and its failure to push for the return of President Manuel Zelaya to Honduras in 2009, are notable examples.

Todd Gordon, Associate Professor in Political Science at York University and author of the forthcoming book Imperial Canada, sees parallels between Canada's response to the coup d'etat in Honduras and the statement regarding Ecuador. Canada's statement on the Honduran coup came fairly late the same day, after other countries and bodies had responded, he notes. Despite largely peaceful protests by the coup opposition, Canada in effect laid some blame on Zelaya and his supporters.

“From the time that [then Honduran President] Zelaya [was] deposed until Lobo [was] elected, Canada consistently [called] on all parties, not just the government and the coup plotters [that were the principle source of aggression and human rights violations], to avoid violence and remain peaceful,” Gordon said.

Gordon points to similar language in Canada's statement on Ecuador when it called “on all parties” to show restraint, not specifying that police were the main aggressors.

“They don't want to come out and say we're pro-coup, but Canada's response is a diplomatic way, I think, to say they're not actually that excited about the government that's being threatened,” he said.

Gordon questions if Ecuador's participation in efforts for more independent regional integration, such as the Bolivarian Alternative for Latin America and the Caribbean (ALBA), unsettles Canada.

Department of Foreign Affairs Spokesperson Priya Sinha, however, says Canada's statement should be interpreted as unequivocal support for Correa and says its position at the OAS backs this up.

“  Canada reacted swiftly and strongly in support of the legitimate government of the Republic of Ecuador when it co-sponsored a resolution at the OAS on the afternoon of September 30th,” stated Sinha by email to The Dominion.

The OAS resolution “repudiated” any attempt to oust the Correa administration and called on governments and multilateral institutions in the region to "stop the coup d'etat from becoming a reality.”

On the national front in Ecuador, Canada wields economic clout. But despite the headway that Canada's corporate and diplomatic lobby appeared to be making to secure investments in mining, oil and infrastructure during Correa's administration, Jeffrey Webber, a researcher and lecturer at Queen Mary University of London, believes Correa has never been Canada's ideal option.

“Correa was not the preferred candidate of the Canadian state,” Webber said. “Canada has been happy to see Correa's trajectory to the right, but is nonetheless concerned about his vulnerability to the bases that put him into office.”

Correa was elected on his promise to bring an end to Ecuador's “long neoliberal night.” With regard to mining, a key sector for Canadian investment, pre-existing disputes with affected communities gave rise to a national movement urging Correa's administration to look at alternatives to gold and copper extraction. At the time, no large-scale project had reached production.

After 40 years of oil production that left in its wake environmental destruction and social upheaval, Indigenous and non-Indigenous organizations demanded their country be off-limits to mostly Canadian companies dominating the nascent sector—companies that arrived in Ecuador under favourable conditions created by earlier World Bank-sponsored reforms.

In April 2008, Ecuador's National Constituent Assembly, which was rewriting the country's constitution, decreed that all large-scale mining be suspended and that most mineral concessions be revoked without compensation, because they overlapped with water supplies and protected areas, and because companies failed to consult with affected communities.

The decision represented an important—albeit short-lived—victory for the anti-mining social movement.

Canadian companies fought back with a well-financed public relations campaign in which they promised Ecuadorians “a fair deal.”

According to one company executive, companies also received “tireless” support from the Canadian Embassy to arrange high-level meetings and influence the new mining law. As large scale mining was suspended, President Correa granted Canadian businessmen a privileged seat during mining law negotiations. The mining mandate was not applied to key holdings of many Canadian companies.

Correa, who has made it clear that he intends to make metal mining a source of future state revenue through bolstered state participation, also abruptly distanced himself from Indigenous, campesino (peasant) and environmental groups critical of such policies. He called them infantile, foolish and the greatest threat to his political project, and helped foment rumours about links between such organizations and imperial interests.

This delegitimization campaign, however, did not quash local resistance. Important mobilizations against mining have taken place over the last year in areas where companies such as Toronto-based Iamgold and Kinross Gold are exploring.

But Priya Sinha says Canada looks favourably upon recent mining reforms and makes no mention of social tensions.

“Canada is encouraged by improvements in the environment for mining investments in Ecuador,” the Foreign Affairs representative stated.

Sinha did add that companies want to know how the government will apply new tax rules.

“Clarity in the tax regime with regard to future investments would allow companies to assess the tax implications for their projects and determine whether they remain economically viable,” he stated.

The new mining law restored royalty payments on mining to a minimum of five percent and established a windfall tax of seventy percent on profits made above a base price.

Canadian diplomats have also indicated concern regarding the future of Canada's bilateral investment agreement with Ecuador.

Reforms passed in Ecuador's 2008 constitution mandate that the government will not enter into agreements that defer to international arbitration, unless the arbitration body is in Latin America. In 2009, Canada's bilateral agreement came up for review.

Canada's Ambassador to Ecuador, Andrew Shisko, indicated that this did not sit well with Ottawa. Revision of Canada's bilateral investment agreement “is causing profound concern in Canada. A stable and transparent investment environment is fundamental for the success of Canadian investment in Ecuador,” he stated in a written message to the Ecuadorian-Canadian Chamber of Commerce in Guayaquil.

This could still be a concern. During an in-person meeting in Quito in August, Ecuadorian Foreign Affairs Minister Ricardo Patino told Foreign Affairs Minister for the Americas Peter Kent that “Ecuador will not maintain bilateral investment treaties.”

The National Assembly voted in September to denounce similar pacts with the UK and Germany for not being in line with the new constitution.

Challenges for Canadian interests on the domestic front, together with Ecuador's commitment to more independent regional integration efforts, lead Webber to believe that Canada would not be upset to see different leadership in Ecuador.

“Correa has aligned himself with very fickle friends, who are going to abandon him at the first turn because he's not the preferred candidate of transnational capital,” said Webber.

Any potential destabilization on September 30th was averted. But as political tensions persist in Ecuador, it remains to be seen how the uncertain relations will unfold.

From 2007 to 2010, Jennifer Moore reported from Ecuador as a freelance print and broadcast journalist.

Correa and Harper

Haiti Nine Months On

Martin Lukacs — Fri, 22 Oct 2010 05:18:24 +0000

Donor money spent on a road map no-one can read

PORT-AU-PRINCE, HAITI—“Nothing! Nothing! We’ve seen nothing!” chanted the crowd of internally displaced people (IDP) in Port-au-Prince on October 6. They were pursuing former US president Bill Clinton after his photo-op in their squalid camp. Clinton was on his way to the third Interim Haiti Reconstruction Commission (IHRC) meeting in downtown Port-au-Prince. Ironically, the camp is considered one of the capital's best, thanks to the attention brought to it by actor Sean Penn.

Similar chants were echoed at a demonstration of about 200 IDPs on October 12 in front of Prime Minister Jean-Max Bellerive’s offices, where the IHRC is based. At that action, called exactly nine months after the quake, protesters delivered a letter demanding respect for their Constitutionally guaranteed right to housing, a moratorium on forced expulsions and an end to the “masquerade aid” of non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

The IHRC, co-chaired by Clinton and Bellerive, is the body that decides how to spend money donated to rebuilding Haiti after the January 12, 2010, earthquake. This month’s meeting took place by teleconference, and journalists were invited to follow it by calling a US-based number. This immediately excluded any Haitian who could not afford the three-hour-long international call.

Some journalists crowded into the PM’s press room to listen to the meeting over a small pod-like speaker that looked like an oversized video game joystick. The teleconference’s sound quality was poor, static-filled and at times unintelligible. I was sitting closest to the speaker and straining to make out what was being said. All seven of the foreign white journalists in the room were seated around the conference table where the mini-speaker sat. Only three of approximately 20 Haitians present were seated around the table; the rest were in chairs along the walls of the room, out of earshot of the muffled voices deciding their country’s fate.

As if to underscore this irony, most of the conference was conducted in English. French statements were translated into English, but not vice versa. Nothing was presented in or translated into Kreyol, the national language, making it even more difficult for Haitians to know where the millions of dollars are going. The whole exercise felt amateurish. The conference call plodded along, casual and faltering. The IHRC board did not seem bothered by frequent interruptions and confusion, as though voting on the investment of millions of dollars was a banal hobby.

Reginald Boulos, an industrialist from one of Haiti's most powerful families and a staunch backer of the 2004 coup d'etat against President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, insisted that meetings should begin with a progress update on projects to ensure transparency and accountability, implying that even IHRC board members have little information on the whereabouts of previously approved money. His minor reservations and criticisms were later trumpeted by Clinton as "fierce debate and vigorous participation on the part of the Haitian members of the board."

The session took place during Haiti’s “back-to-school” week, and at the subsequent press conference Clinton claimed that 80 per cent of children who were in school before the earthquake are now back in class. It was unclear how he obtained that figure two days into the new term, and many schools didn’t resume class until the following week.

At its last meeting in August, the IHRC approved $94 million—a much needed investment— to prepare schools for the new academic year. Haiti ranks alongside Somalia and Eritrea as one of the worst places on the planet to be a schoolchild. Only half of Haiti’s children attended (mostly private) schools before January 12; the quake destroyed about 90 per cent of those schools. Only $26 million of the $94 million has been funded. Fewer kids are in class than ever before, and Haiti’s Ministry of Education says it still hasn’t seen any of the money allocated to schools.

The press release given to journalists after the IHRC meeting stated that UNICEF gave $100 million to “support the Haitian government and civil society in the fight against gender-based violence.” But during the meeting, there was no mention of the UNICEF money, only concerns that a $10.6 million UN population fund for women and girls’ “gender equality impact is not yet approved,” according to one of the board members.

It is unclear where UNICEF’s $100 million has gone. Merina Zuluanie of FAVILEK (Women Victims Stand Up), a grassroots organization that has been providing medical, legal, and moral support for women and children victims of sexual abuse and violence for over 15 years, said her group has not received any IHRC or UNICEF funding.

I spoke with Malia Villard Appolon, the coordinator of KOFAVIV (Commission of Women Victims for Victims), a coalition of raped women. KOFAVIV members have taken charge of their own security in camps—organizing escorts to protect women going to the toilets, handing out whistles to women at risk, raising awareness of women's vulnerability and organizing groups of men to take shifts patrolling their areas of residence. Before the earthquake, KOFAVIV had an office with a clinic, doctor, nurse, psychologist, laboratory and everything in place to accommodate rape victims. That was all destroyed on January 12 but since then, Malia says, “we have received nothing from UNICEF.”

None of this might may come as a surprise, nine months on, if you consider that Haiti’s main national hospital in downtown Port-au-Prince looks much like it did in the aftermath of the quake: hallways and pharmacies full of rubble; people waiting outside for treatment; operations being conducted in tents; the pediatrics unit damaged beyond repair. Dr. Claude Surena, the head of the Haitian Medical Association, and regional health director, said he has an 18-month strategy to get the health sector back on its feet, but he can’t move ahead with anything until donor funds arrive. According to the IHRC website, $17 million was approved and funded on August 17. So why is the place still in shambles?

“I think we’re making progress with the road reconstruction and agriculture sectors,” said Clinton, without going into specifics. The IHRC website says $464.8 million in road construction and rehabilitation projects were funded back in August for some 389 kilometres of road. The site's sections on “Job Creation” and “Institutional” assessment of public buildings, indicate $0 funding has been provided. "Housing" has received $13.4 million and "Education," $26 million.

As a recent study by Oxfam (or a visit to any market) shows, Clinton has taken no measures to lobby for a reversal of his administration’s trade policies—policies for which he took personal responsibility back in March—which decimated Haiti’s rice crops by flooding the market with heavily subsidized Arkansas rice.

The Haitian elite on the IHRC has funded itself (thanks to the Inter-American Development Bank and World Bank) with $24.5 million of $35 million over five years to “establish a partial credit guarantee fund for enterprise development,” according to the IHRC website. Meanwhile, the same IHRC board has released no funding for the $65 million earmarked over the next 12 months to “create 300,000 temporary jobs across the country, focusing on populations touched by the earthquake.” Neither has the project to “assess public buildings in the 10 departments”—$1 million over five months—been funded. A mere $13.4 million has been provided for housing, Haiti’s most critical need.

At the post-meeting press conference, when asked “what of the IHRC funding is being given to help people in the camps,” Clinton interrupted the journalist, dodged the question, and spoke of the need to implement a mortgage system. This exchange reveals why Clinton heads the IHRC. His priorities are to facilitate banks providing mortgages, the wealthy elite finding credit, and businesses having roads to bus in their workers and ship out their sweatshop assembled garments and electronics. Job-creation and housing for Haiti’s 1.5 million homeless people suffering in squalid camps will just have to wait.

Isabeau Doucet is an independent journalist, story-teller and artist based in Haiti. This article was originally published by Haiti Liberte.

Clinton in Port-au-Prince

Rights Action in Response to Mr. Peter Kent: Canada's Increasingly Complicit Role in Honduras

Sandra — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 21:24:21 +0000

fotos carlos 2008 001.jpg

[The communities in the Siria Valley, gravely affected by Goldcorp's San Martin mine in Honduras, would argue with Canadian Minister of State of Foreign Affairs for the Americas, Peter Kent, who stated to CBC that "Canadians should be proud of Goldcorp..." Photo: Siria Valley Environmental Committee.]

***********************************************

[re-posted from www.RIGHTSACTION.org email list]:

IN RESPONSE TO MR. PETER KENT:
CANADA’S INCREASINGLY COMPLICIT ROLE IN HONDURAS

Day 36 of Honduran Coup Resistance, August 2, 2009
(Alert#41)

On July 29, The Current radio program, of the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation), aired a 2-part discussion about “Canada’s role in Honduras”: part one with Grahame Russell of Rights Action; part two with Peter Kent, Canada’s Minister of State of Foreign Affairs for the Americas.

To listen: http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/2009/200907/20090729.html

As Peter Kent spoke second, and responded to points Grahame made, we publish this in response to comments made by Mr. Kent.

GENERAL COMMENT: BODY COUNT RISING

Honduran teacher Roger Abraham Vallejo died in hospital on Saturday, August 1, two days after he was shot point-blank in the head by a police officer during a peaceful protest.

As one listens to the 2-part CBC interview and reads the comments below, keep in mind that Mr. Kent represents the government of Canada. He is not speaking in his personal capacity. Keep in mind, also, that the OAS (Organization of American States), one month ago, unequivocally called for the “the immediate and unconditional return” of President Zelaya and his government – “immediate” and “unconditional”.

= = = = = = =
= = = = = = =

Tune in!: Online radio show on media battles in Honduras

Sandra — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:42:55 +0000

IMG_2245.JPG

LISTEN ONLINE TO THE SHOW!

Political upheaval continues in Honduras, after liberal leader Manuel Zelaya was ousted in a military coup in late June. It is a battle that has played out not only in the streets of Honduras, but also on television screens and over radio waves across the world.

Some, including U.S. President Barack Obama and the Organization of American States, have condemned the ouster of the democratically-elected president, saying it was unconstitutional, illegal and a threat to democracy.

Others point out that Zelaya was pushing ahead with a referendum on term limits that Honduras’ Supreme Court had ruled unconstitutional, and consider his removal the result of healthy checks and balances.

The Honduran military has clamped down on pro-Zelaya channels in the country and blocked the signal of Telesur, a left-leaning television network based in Venezuela. Other state-run media across Latin America have broadcast programs in support of Zelaya.

Worldfocus.org’s weekly radio show on explored the coup in Honduras and how Latin America’s media industry — from state-run stations to independent websites — has become a political battleground.

Worldfocus anchor Martin Savidge hosts the following panel of guests:

Sandra Cuffe is an independent journalist and photographer from Montréal, Canada. Sandra has reported from Latin America for several years and is the Honduras correspondent for UpsideDownWorld.org.

Obama's Afghan plan

Van Ferrier — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 00:30:06 +0000

Roy Gutman, Foreign Editor of McClatchy Newspapers says Obama's announcement last week of his strategy in Afghanistan is unprecedented and is a "very good start." He says the problem has been that, "the United States has not had an integrated strategy for stabilizing Afghanistan and Pakistan."

The rights of women in Afghanistan

Van Ferrier — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 00:28:31 +0000

Mavis Leno of Feminist Majority on the need for Obama to focus on the rights of Afghan women. Mavis has been the chair of the Feminist Majority Foundation's Campaign to Stop Gender Apartheid in Afghanistan since 1997.

The secrets of Obama's surge

Van Ferrier — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 00:27:17 +0000

President Obama's highly anticipated new strategy for what the Pentagon now calls AfPak - Afghanistan and Pakistan - is full of grey areas. Most extra troops will be deployed to poppy-growing areas, not to fight al-Qaeda, the President's stated number one objective. The President talks about building trust - but as the US cannot trust the Pakistani ISI, the Pakistani people don't trust the US or even their own government.

Why are we in Afghanistan?

Van Ferrier — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 00:26:32 +0000

The Real News Cafe: Recorded live at the Gladstone in Toronto, a Real News panel takes on the Afghan war This is the first segment of a multi-part series on the Afghan war. Other segments will follow throughout the week.

Dangerous decisions in Afghanistan Pt. 1

Van Ferrier — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 00:22:13 +0000

Sharmini Peries speaks with Senior Analyst Aijaz Ahmad about the dangers of the long-term US involvement in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Ahmad says the only way for Obama to proceed in the region is to withdraw US military presence there and strengthen regional powers for a stable Afghanistan.

On the map with Avi Lewis

Van Ferrier — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 00:18:37 +0000

Oil. Canada has it and the US craves it. But what are the implications of treating Alberta's tar sands as America's security blanket?

All Eyes On Bolivia

hillarybain — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 13:40:22 +0000

US espionage and aid

Since the election of Evo Morales, an indigenous peasant of the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS) party, US involvement in Bolivia’s political sphere has come out of the shadows – if ever there were any idyllic illusions about US intervention in South American politics.

Recent allegations of spies at the American Embassy have the Bolivian media abuzz, and civil society and government alike enraged. Just last week, while strolling with my friend Ramiro in Cochabamba, we ran into an acquaintance of his who took notice of my fair complexion and blue eyes and warned him to be careful around North Americans. Ramiro organizes with Red Tinku, an autonomous group that is heavily involved with grassroots politics.

Ramiro laughed and said I wasn't "one of those gringas," but the woman took a while to be convinced - and rightly so. During the course of her life she has seen perpetual provocation from North American foreign policy that has recently come to a head.

At the end of January, Fulbright scholar Alex van Schaick and Peace Corps volunteers declared publicly that Vincent Cooper, a US diplomat, encouraged them to keep an eye on Cubans and Venezuelans while in Bolivia.

In mid-February, the Bolivian Vice Minister of Government Ruben Gamarra filed criminal charges against Cooper, who has since left Bolivia and may or may not be protected under diplomatic immunity. According to an agreement made February 13 between Philip Goldberg, the US ambassador to Bolivia, and Bolivian Foreign Relations Minister David Choquehuanca, Cooper will not be returning. Investigations against the US will continue, though, and will help determine the next steps to be taken.

On February 15, Alfredo Rada, Interior Minister of the Bolivian government, met with Goldberg to discuss the accusations of espionage. After three-and-a-half hours deemed "difficult" by employees of the government ministry, Rada and Goldberg confirmed the dissolution of the Development of Police Studies (ODEP), formerly known as the Special Operations Command (COPES).

ODEP was an intelligence organization working in parallel with the National Police, and received funding from the US. ODEP received approximately $350,000 per year for ´intelligence´ work. To date, there have been five intelligence organizations ostensibly protecting state security in Bolivia. In light of these allegations their activities will also be scrutinized.

Rada would not speak publicly at the meeting locale, but dramatically rushed journalists in state SUVs with sirens wailing to the now defunct ODEP headquarters, in the wealthy Zona Sur of La Paz.

"After this meeting with Philip Goldberg I am confident that the decision to dissolve COPES is the right one," said Rada once within the walled compound. He added that the dissolution of ODEP had to do with the "structural reorganization of the intelligence section of the National Police.”

"It's the first time as minister I've had to take such a step, and it is to ensure effective work of the National Police concerning crimes, and state security," Rada said.

When pressed for an explanation of how the dissolution of ODEP is related to charges of espionage against the US, Rada said that the matter of espionage is still under investigation and refused to elaborate. He did, however, stress the importance of maintaining good relations with the US, a statement which, in light of such serious allegations, may come as a surprise for MAS supporters who back the government's anti-imperialist agenda

Goldberg was even more reticent than Rada. In Spanish, heavily clad with an American accent, he said slowly and repeatedly, "Neither the embassy nor the United States government is involved with spying […] The majority of our help is against narco-trafficking and terrorism."

Goldberg's statement comes at a time of tense political relations between the US and Bolivia. On the same morning Rada and Goldberg met to discuss accusations of espionage, Morales publicly denounced the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), accusing the agency of supporting Bolivian opposition NGOs.

"The US agency offers money to NGOs on one condition – that they work and mobilize against the Bolivian government," said Morales.

Through both governmental and non-governmental avenues, North American interference in Bolivia is eerily reminiscent of the Cold War era, when the United States sought to undermine Southern governments who rejected the doctrine of free market capitalism.

The Human Rights Foundation, based in New York, recently wrote a letter to the Bolivian government stating that the country's new constitution is contrary to human rights, an accusation the Bolivian government refuted. The HRF website describes the organization's devotion "to defending human rights in the American hemisphere," but focuses almost exclusively on Venezuela, Bolivia, and Cuba, with brief mention of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).

And despite this Fifth Ave, New York City, based organization's statement of commitment to human rights, they make no mention of Guantanamo Bay, of impunity in Guatemala, or of the treatment of indigenous peoples across the Americas.

Contrary to criticisms from the North, Morales did not design the new constitution-- a constitutional assembly comprised of a cross-section of Bolivian society developed it. In addition, two years into his term Morales still has widespread popular support, especially among the poor majority. However, Morales’ "decolonization" project has drawn the attention of US intelligence and aid to right-wing opposition like bees to nectar. As a taxi driver recently told me, "It's like a baby used to getting everything he wants. He is sucking on a candy, and then someone takes it away - of course he is going to kick and scream and cry."

For more information on the US undermining democracy in Bolivia, see Ben Dangl's Undermining Bolivia: A Landscape of Washington Intervention.

Mural In La Paz

Last Chance for War Resisters?

Stuart Neatby — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 21:30:55 +0000

After deliberating for months, the Supreme Court of Canada finally refused to even hear the case of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey, the first two war resisters to have publicly travelled to Canada in order to refuse to fight the US's illegal war in Iraq. They are expected to face deportation proceedings soon.

The War Resisters support campaign held protests in eight Canadian cities over the weekend and is appealing to supporters to bombard Canadian MP's with letters and faxes asking for a parliamentary provision allowing Hughey and Hinzman to remain in Canada.

On Tuesday, November 20th, 2007, a motion in support of Hinzman and Hughey, introduced by Toronto NDP MP Olivia Chow, is expected to be presented before Canada's Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration.

Yves Engler on Canada in Haiti: New Podcast

darren ell — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:16:50 +0000

Yves Engler is the co-author with Anthony Fenton of the most significant book on Canada's involvement in the 2004 overthrow of democracy in Haiti: Canada in Haiti: Waging War On the Poor Majority. The full audio interview with Yves Engler regarding Canada's involvement in the crisis in Haiti since 2004 is now online with the NFB website Citizenshift. The interview develops further ideas not presented in the video interviews published in Darren Ell's Citizenshift dossier about Haiti and Canada. In particular, Yves addresses the role of the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) and the Canadian Embassy in blocking meaningful progress in Haiti.