Photo of salt plain on Dene lands.

Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) Chief Allan Adam has stated: “The Dene have resided in what is now called Wood Buffalo National Park for at least 11,000 years. Our people were forcibly removed from the area and their homes burnt to the ground by Parks Canada and the RCMP in the early 20th century.”

Following that forcible eviction, the park was established in 1922.

It will mark its centenary this coming December.

This ACFN report published in July 2021 notes: “Celebratory narratives about PNAs [protected nature areas] have often ignored the damage they inflict on Indigenous communities, who are usually displaced and dispossessed in the process of their creation.”

It adds: “This history had significant, damaging and intergenerational impacts on Denésuliné families and the community as a whole, which are still experienced to this day.”

Now, Melissa Daniels, a member of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, has received a letter from Parks Canada ordering her to stop collecting about four litres of salt a season to use for her small business Naidié Nezų (good medicine).

Daniels says: “My experience is one small example of the injustice that has been perpetrated against our people for generations. Since the park’s creation, we have been violently driven from our land and seen our ancestral and treaty rights to the land restricted and denied.”

Daniels has also commented: “The implication that my land based, hand-harvested practice is a threat to the natural environment is insulting to me, our nation, our ancestors and the land itself.” Her company adds: “Parks Canada [has] allowed white settlers to commercially harvest fish, granite, lumber & even Buffalo from the Wood Buffalo National Park.”

We also recall that the UNESCO World Heritage Committee issued a warning to Canada that the park could be listed as a world heritage site in danger because of the impacts of the Site C hydroelectric dam and tar sands developments.

At that time, The Narwhal reported Parks Canada shirks UN request for review of Site C dam impacts on imperilled national park.

Conservation by dispossession

Naidié Nezų has stated: “People being forced off their land in the name of conservation is also part of colonialism.”

José Francisco Cali Tzay, who is Maya Kaqchikel from Guatemala and the UN special rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous peoples, has also commented: “Throughout conservation’s checkered history, we have seen exclusionary conservation as a gateway to human rights abuses and militarized forms of violence.”

We have raised this concern with respect to the 30 by 30 initiative backed by the “High Ambition Coalition” of countries, including Canada.

The non-profit environmental website Mongabay has explained: “‘30 by 30’ [is] a plan to conserve 30 per cent of Earth’s land and sea areas by 2030 through ‘area-based conservation measures’ like protected national parks.”

In its critique of the 30 by 30 plan, the Swift Foundation, says: “[It] is a militarized form of conservation. You have guards with guns, people imposing fines, building fences and kicking people out of their traditional lands. And if communities react in defense they are perceived as anti-conservation.”

We continue to follow this situation.

Naidié Nezų products are available here.

Naidié Nezų: “For those unfamiliar with our illegal bath salts, our Borealis Bath Blend contains sustainably harvested wild crafted botanicals & salt that were gifted to us from our ancestors & represents gorgeous relationships with the land we inherited. The salt is hand picked each summer from our giant salt flats with the utmost respect & care.”

Further reading: Canada backs 30 x 30 despite concerns of conservation by dispossession and the militarization of conservation (November 7, 2021)

Canada’s National Parks are Colonial Crime Scenes (Robert Jago, June 30, 2017)

Photo: F-35 warplane.

While the “economic benefits” of a warplane are at best a cold calculation, it is a bar that has been set in mainstream narratives.

Last month, the Government of Canada announced it would be entering negotiations with Lockheed Martin for the purchase of 88 of its F-35 fighter jets.

At that time, the federal Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry François-Philippe Champagne stated: “The resulting economic benefits will help sustain and grow [the Canadian aerospace sector’s] global leadership position.”

And just last year the NDP’s election platform promised: “In contracting for new military equipment, including ships and fighter jets, New Democrats will ensure maximum industrial benefits and jobs. This will help ensure the survival of healthy shipbuilding and aerospace industries all across Canada.”

The CBC has also reinforced this narrative.

Earlier this month, it reported: “More than 100 years after shipyard workers in Lunenburg, N.S., shaped wood and metal to build the Bluenose schooner, the tradition of local, hand-built excellence lives on. But now, instead of fishing boats, it’s fighter jets.”

That article further notes that the Toulouse, France-based Stelia Aerospace facility in Lunenburg has been contracted to, for example, build shims to help open and close the weapons bay doors of F-35s sold to other countries.

But it adds: “The parts being handcrafted at Stelia and other sites across the country could one day be built into planes flown by the Royal Canadian Air Force.”

Only “could” at this point.

This article in La Presse raises more doubts about economic benefits.

It reports: “By opting for the American manufacturer’s F-35 to replace its old CF-18s, the Trudeau government has embarked on a process that offers no guarantee that maintenance and training for these fighter jets will take place in Quebec.”

The article also notes: “In the aerospace industry, sources, who did not want to speak publicly for fear of remonstrances from Ottawa, say they are surprised by the opacity of negotiations to finalize the purchase of 88 fighters at a cost of USD $19 billion. Many deplore the lack of clear prior commitments before starting the dialogue.”

It adds: “Who will be the privileged partners of the multinational? What kind of spin-offs will it be? Where will the work be done? These questions are unanswered.”

For example, it’s unclear if Mirabel-based L3Harris will secure a contract for parts replacement and engine maintenance for the F-35 or if Saint-Hubert-based CAE Inc. will be contracted to provide simulator training for Canadian pilots of the F-35.

The article also quotes David Chartrand of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW) “who fears that there will be only crumbs left on the maintenance side if Lockheed Martin refuses to release [the intellectual property rights-protected technical] data” for the technologically-advanced fighter jet.

On March 28, federal Procurement Minister Filomena Tassi stated the negotiations with Lockheed Martin could take as little as seven months. That means the contract could be signed as early as late-October.

When Tassi made that comment, Ottawa Citizen journalist David Pugliese tweeted: “Govt officials asked what exactly is there to negotiate as previous MOU outlined Canada’s participation in F-35 process.”

He further asked: “Why discuss details about cost after Lockheed Martin has been told their plane is to be bought?”

Several days later, Tassi commented on CTV: “At the end of the day, when this contract is signed, there will be guaranteed industrial benefits.”

Only “will be” even after the F-35 has been selected and the government’s bargaining power with world’s largest weapons company has been weakened.

It is also notable that while the economic benefits may not be certain at this point, Lockheed Martin had implied a loss of current benefits if not chosen.

In August 2020, CBC reported: “Should Canada not choose the F-35, [Steve] Callaghan [Lockheed Martin’s vice-president of F-35 business development] said, the existing contracts [which could include the one in Lunenburg], which are currently worth $2 billion, would be honoured for the duration of their commitment but might go elsewhere.”

Callaghan stated: “Future contracting would likely be placed using industries and best value for those nations that are procuring the F-35.”

The anti-militarism movement in this country rejects how the F-35 would be used given Canada’s fleet of CF-18s were sent on at least 1,598 bombing missions overseas and would be stationed on militarized Dene territory in northern Alberta.

That said, questions and concerns are now being raised even within the considerably narrower frame of so-called economic benefits.

CBC reports: “The [Nova Scotia-based] company [owned by the French transnational Stelia Aerospace] builds many different parts for the aircraft, ranging from panels used as part of the fuselage, to shims used to help open and close the weapons bay doors on the underside of the jet.” It’s not clear if it will get the contract for the Canadian F-35s.

Photo: The banners say: (left) No Swiss money for the wars of this world #wardeals (middle) Stop arms deals/ Stop the arms trade/ Easter march for peace (right) Mess/ Everyone must save for the army/ GSOA (Group for a Switzerland Without an Army).

On April 14, Peace Brigades International-Switzerland posted on their Facebook page: “This year’s Easter March will take place on April 18, 2022. Climate protection and peace policy must be considered together. Let’s make a sign together!”

Their website also includes these points:

– Swiss companies and the Swiss financial centre are held responsible for CO2 emissions, war material exports and human rights violations.

– No investments in billion-dollar armaments projects and no war financing by Switzerland.

– Climate and conflicts are driving millions of people to flee. We demand solidarity, admission and the right to stay for refugees in Switzerland.

– Land and environmental defenders are threatened, imprisoned and killed worldwide. Switzerland must efficiently implement its guidelines on human rights defenders abroad and thus contribute to their protection.

– Switzerland as a trading platform for 80 percent of Russian oil and natural gas is co-financing the war, this must change!

The website for the march further notes:

“In terms of content, we wanted to address the topic of ‘Protecting the climate, creating peace!’ However, due to current events, we feel compelled to have the devastating war in Ukraine in the focus of the Easter March. The flyer therefore represents the focus of this year’s Easter March only to a limited extent.”

For a short video of PBI-Switzerland director Katia Aeby speaking last year about the Easter March, please click here.

Gidimt’en Checkpoint video of police harassment, March 2022.

This week, Gidimt’en Checkpoint tweeted: “Since March, RCMP have sent 6-8 officers into our village site, between 4-8 times each day, in order to harass & intimidate our elders, relatives & supporters.”

They have also tweeted: “Come to the yintah and be a legal observer! RCMP continue to harass our elders and supporters daily. They are now bringing in dog teams to intimidate and need to be held accountable.”

They further explain: “We require a rotating team of upwards of a dozen legal observers. Your time and ethical commitment are the most useful assets; necessary supplies and training will be provided by experienced movement members & legal support organizers.”

The application form is here.

The cost of occupation

This week, APTN News also reported the RCMP Community-Industry Response Group (C-IRG) spent $943,234.00 between November 1 and December 23, 2021, on its operations related to the Coastal GasLink fracked gas pipeline on Wet’suwet’en territory.

That period includes the November 18-19, 2021, militarized RCMP raid against Wet’suwet’en land defenders who were blocking access to the drill pad site where Coastal GasLink intends to drill under the Wedzin Kwa river to lay pipeline.

The Tyee has previously reported that the RCMP has spent $21.3 million protecting the Coastal GasLink fracked gas pipeline on Wet’suwet’en territory. It says $19 million of that was spent from January 2019 to March 31, 2021, while $2.3 million was spent from March 31, 2021, to the end of 2021.

The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has called on Canada to remove the RCMP from Wet’suwet’en territory.

Judge supports criminal contempt charges

On April 12, BC Supreme Court Judge Marguerite Church asked (“invited”) the BC Prosecution Service to consider criminal contempt charges against the 27 people arrested in the November 2021 raid.

CBC reports: “The invitation came at the request of the company’s lawyer, who argued the protesters wilfully breached an injunction Church issued in 2019, knowing their defiance would receive widespread public attention.”

The article concludes: “No date has been set for the B.C. Prosecution Service to announce its decision on criminal contempt charges.”

Drilling to start soon

This past February, a Coastal GasLink spokesperson stated: “We expect that the micro-drilling [under Wedzin Kwa] will take place starting this spring.”

The Terrace Standard adds: “[The] company is getting ready to install a starting shaft which is a deep circulation excavation acting as an entry point on the east side of the [river]. The active tunneling work is expected to take two and half to three months.”

In a December 2021 email to RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki, Chief Superintendent John Brewer, gold commander of the Community-Industry Response Group (C-IRG) wrote: “This area has been undergoing preparation work for drilling under the river to start in February. CIRG will begin planning to remove any protestors at the site as soon as practicable.”

The APTN article also reveals communication between the RCMP and Coastal GasLink’s vice president of operations.

PBI-Canada was present on Wet’suwet’en territories at the time of the two-day RCMP raid in November 2021.

Photo: Solicitor General Sylvia Jones speaks on Bill 100, March 21, 2022.

Bill 100, the Keeping Ontario Open for Business Act, was introduced by Solicitor General Sylvia Jones on March 21, 2022.

The Government of Ontario has explained: “The Keeping Ontario Open for Business Act, 2022 includes legislative measures to enable police officers to better protect international border crossings, which are important to Ontario’s economy and international trade.”

It adds: “The intent of this act is to protect critical transportation infrastructure such as international bridges and airports from unlawful disruptions that, as demonstrated by recent events in Windsor, hurt people and businesses.”

The “recent events” refer to a week-long, anti-vaccine and anti-lockdown protest in February that shut down the Ambassador Bridge between Windsor, Ontario and Detroit, Michigan.

Moya Teklu of the Black Legal Action Centre, Cara Zwibel at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, and Fred Hahn of CUPE Ontario oppose Bill 100.

They write: “It’s one of the oldest plays in the book. A crisis is followed by new laws that are intentionally broad enough to be applied to just about anybody who’s considered inconvenient.”

Teklu, Zwibel and Hahn further note: “We’re worried this legislation will mostly end up criminalizing workers, Indigenous, Black and other racialized people who criticize the government, bad bosses, and the rich and powerful.”

And they conclude: “There are no guarantees [that the expanded police powers granted under this Act] won’t be used against those of us calling attention to injustice, to racism and colonialism, and to economic exploitation.”

The Ontario Federation of Labour briefing against Bill 100 can be read here. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association can be read here.

A similar piece of legislation passed in Alberta that protects essential infrastructure from damage or interference caused by a protest. It came into effect in June of 2020 and was almost immediately challenged by the largest union in Western Canada.

CTV News has reported: “A similar piece of legislation [Bill 1, the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act] passed in Alberta that protects essential infrastructure from damage or interference caused by a protest. It came into effect in June of 2020.”

That article adds: “The legislation was introduced following a series of nation-wide protests that blocked railway lines in support of the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs’ opposition to the Coastal GasLink Pipeline Project in British Columbia.”

The Alberta Union of Provincial Employees (AUPE) challenged Bill 1 in court. That claim was dismissed in December 2021. The AUPE is now seeking a decision from the Supreme Court of Canada.

CTV also notes: “In Manitoba, the government is looking at legislation that would tighten security at the legislature and ban certain activities from the grounds. Security officers would have the power to evict people or fine them up to $5,000 for not complying.”

That article further explains: “The legislation was proposed after two encampments—one that took place after the discovery of unmarked graves at former residential schools and the other against COVID-19 restrictions—were disbanded.”

The Manitoba Energy Justice Coalition has previously noted: “The provincial government introduced Bill 57, the Protection of Critical Infrastructure Act, on November 2, 2020… The bill aims to further criminalize people participating in protests that block roads, railways, and potentially other infrastructure deemed critical.”

The text of that legislation can be read here.

In December 2021, Press Progress reported: “Protests from labour and community groups resulted in Bill 57’s demise in September.”

In contrast to these bills in Ontario, Alberta and Manitoba, Global Witness has highlighted that governments should: “guarantee that defenders’ human rights are protected”, “legally legitimize the role of land and environmental defenders” and “safeguard the rights of defenders and protesters to free assembly and speech, as well as potential recourse to civil disobedience.”

We continue to follow this situation.

Further reading: New legislation further criminalizes land defenders and water protectors in Canada and the U.S. (February 22, 2021).