EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- How the US Turned Three Pacifists into Violent Terrorists
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Revealed: How US State Department 'Twists Arms' on Monsanto's Behalf
Popular content
Today's Top News
Canada Mines African Discontent
While Canadians may think of ourselves as best known for owning the Olympic podium, among Africans we may actually be better known — and not particularly liked — for owning their natural resources.
Once beloved on the continent, Canada is no longer so fondly regarded in Africa.
The new, less enthusiastic view of Canada was vividly illustrated last month when more than 1,500 desperately poor Tanzanian villagers picked up machetes, rocks and hammers and stormed the mining compound of Canadian-owned African Barrick Gold.
The uprising — leading to the shooting deaths of seven of the villagers by police and security forces at the mine — is a startling reminder that theories widely held in the West about the benefits of foreign investment for the developing world are not always shared by people on the receiving end.
In theory, Barrick’s arrival in the 1990s has been a boon to the Tanzanian economy, pushing it toward development.
In reality, Tanzania has collected only a pittance in taxes and royalties from Barrick and other foreign multinationals through contracts that are shrouded in secrecy. So, although it sits on massive gold reserves worth more than $40 billion, Tanzania remains one of world’s 10 poorest countries.
A 2008 investigation funded by Norwegian church groups concluded that Tanzania collected an average of only $21.7 million (U.S.) a year in royalty and taxes on more than $2.5 billion worth of gold exported over the previous five years. The investigation also estimated some 400,000 Tanzanians, who formerly mined for gold with nothing but their own picks, shovels and ropes, have been left unemployed by the giant mining operations.
Two months after that report, a government-appointed commission headed by retired Tanzanian judge Mark Bomani strongly urged imposing higher royalties and taxes on the foreign mining companies.
With growing popular pressure for tougher legislation, the Canadian government intervened on the side of the multinationals, pressuring the Tanzanian government and parliament to oppose Bomani’s proposed reforms.
Officials from the Canadian High Commission launched an “intense” lobbying mission with Tanzanian legislators aimed at blocking the reforms, according to reports in the Tanzanian newspaper ThisDay.
Ottawa also sought to head off potentially tougher rules governing Canadian mining companies by pressing for stronger investor protections in trade talks with Tanzania, aimed at securing what Canada calls a Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA).
“Canada’s objective in entering these negotiations is to secure a comprehensive, high-quality agreement to protect investors through the establishment of a framework of legally binding rights and obligations,” says a posting on the website of Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade.
The FIPA is “purely an instrument aimed at protecting the interests of Canadian companies in Tanzania,” according to Zitto Kabwe, a Tanzanian parliamentarian.
All this seems to be a departure from the way Canada used to operate in Africa.
Back in the 1970s, Canada actually gave African countries help, teaching them how to negotiate better deals with foreign multinationals, says Linda Freeman, a political scientist at Carleton University who specializes in African political economy.
Today, Freeman notes, Canada is solidly on the side of the multinationals, pressuring vulnerable African nations to accept deals favourable to multinationals, with negative implications for their own populations.
Do Canadians care about any of this? Apparently not, according to Canadian parliamentarians, who last fall narrowly voted to defeat a private member’s bill aimed at holding Canadian companies operating abroad more accountable here in Canada.
The bill would have made a significant difference in how last month’s violence in Tanzania will be investigated, according to Jamie Kneen, with the Ottawa-based watchdog group Mining Watch.
The killings — and additional allegations of rape — are being investigated by Tanzanian police and by Barrick.
But the private member’s bill would have entitled villagers to a Canadian government investigation, with potential repercussions for Canadian companies found to have behaved improperly.
The tragic defeat of that bill — and the Harper government’s intense focus on championing rights for Canadian corporations — has left Canada flexing its muscle against some of the world’s most impoverished people.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

13 Comments so far
Show AllCanadian mining companies are one of the largest employers of mercenaries worldwide... you don't need to do that when you're one of the good guys.
Canadians are victims of our own brand of what Joe Bageant called "The American Hologram." If the main cry of the US hologram is "We're number one!" the Canadian version is "We're the good guys!" It is very sinister because we are not even close to being the good guys yet so many Canadians still believe it. But as Ms. McQuaig has pointed out, we hold the bully's coat... or worse.
We are a country of thoroughly duped people. We need more people like Brigitte DePape.
Canada has come a long way since I was I kid. All through my youth I was told we were peace keepers, and aid givers, and in many ways a foil to what our arrogant southern neighbours were doing. We were multi-cultural and polite, our army cleaned up problems, it didn't contribute to them.
Now with a conservative majority, the Tar Sands, involvement in the Middle East quagmire and all the rest it is clear that Canada's altruistic role has diminished, if it was ever real at all. Don't get me wrong, there is nowhere else I'd rather live and compared to the fascist state that Amerika has become Canada is still a bastion of socialism. We'll all just have to see what Harper manages to swing over the next few years...
Cosmic,
"All through my youth I was told we were peace keepers, and aid givers, and in many ways a foil to what our arrogant southern neighbours were doing. We were multi-cultural and polite, our army cleaned up problems, it didn't contribute to them."
Ironically, this is what we in the US were always told when I was young. And I think many US Americans still believe it.
"We were multi-cultural and polite, our army cleaned up problems, it didn't contribute to them."
That's the hologram talking Cosmic. Peacekeeping has always been a sham. Multi-cultural is a meaningless term. Of course we're multicultural, who cares, it really says nothing about us, other than we're not a mono-culture, which is self evident.
We are arms dealers and spooks (read up on our involvement in Vietnam: http://www.canadianvietnamveterans.ca/INVOLVEMENT.html), the good cop in the story of global policing is still enforcing imperialism, (read some dissenting opinion on UN peacekeeping: http://www.iss.co.za/pubs/asr/5no5/Monnakgotla.html). We sell asbestos to foreign countries, our mining companies are one of the largest employers of mercenaries in the world, they rape and pillage the globe and create economic slaves of local people. All this has been going on for much longer than our couple month old conservative majority.
A bastion of socialism? Not by my definition comrade... turn off the hologram.
I haven't been convinced by the "hologram" for years now. I had a Lt. from the Canadian military tell me to my face that we were in Afghanistan "to get a place at the big table," and our men were dying to purchase us a piece of the spoils when the dust settled. What I am trying to imply is that this "hologram" of which you speak has become clearly illusory, the old pretences that Canadians used to rely on have disappeared entirely..
I don't feel that your critique of multiculturism is completely accurate. There is a definite lack of racial tension in Canada compared to our closet neighbours for example. Do we still have racial profiling, etc.? Of course we do but the attitudes that surround race in Canada are, to my experience, far more accepting and generous. Same with my comment on socialism; is Canada perfect? Hell no, read some of McQuaig's other material, she documents it quite clearly. But again, compared to our southern neighbours, who could face a fascist coup any day now and few people would be surprised, we still have some good things going. Like healthcare, and our social security net. Our houusing market isn't being gutted by subsidized bankers and, where I live at least, people aren't afraid of losing their livlihoods and living on the streets until placed into privatized prisons.
Again it ain't perfect, but what the hell, the Greens got a seat didn't they?
This much the same reason Canada backed the USA in the coup against Aristide in Haiti. It was to ensure Canadian Mining companies could rape that nation much like they do in Tanzania.
For the life of me I do not see HOW anyone can believe that allowing foreign ownership of a countries land or resources is for the good of that country. It is a recipe for disaster.
Chavez knows this full well which is why the Western Press is always trying to discredit him.
Globalization, and allowing capital to move nation to nation and seize control of resources is to be blunt an act of thievery. It is NOT FOR the benefit of the masses. It is to benefit a small handful who in turn own the media that tell everyone that it "Good".
"benefit a small handful who in turn own the media that tell everyone that it "Good"."
I would bet that this handful knows it's a master at hoodwinking the masses and overpowering the weak. And I would also bet that at the same time they know they are doing wrong, they try to sell to themselves as well as to the rest of us a tale that their achievements are for the best the world can be.
Who knows, maybe they ultimately are serving us! Without them demonstrating in the extreme, could we awaken to what is the source of evil within us so that we might learn to overcome the tendency to become corrupt, for once and for all?
"...I do not see HOW anyone can believe that allowing foreign ownership of a countries land or resources is for the good of that country..."
That's the traditional imperialist pretext. A South African once said, "When you (Europeans) first came, we had the land and you had the bible. Now you have the land, and we have the bible."
Also, remember Canada's complicity in the Chile coup in the 70's. It was at that point, I started having doubts about Canada's role as peacekeeper and disaster aid to the world. The problem of Canada's changing role predates Harper by 30 or so years.
It seems the political and moral sludge that America churns out so relentlessly has been oozing over the border for quite some time. It's always mystified me that we here in the True North Strong and Free keep doing this mimi-me lock-step with the world's biggest bully. We ought to rise above it. Of course, it's hard for a mouse to share a bed with an elephant (or a donkey). Maybe the appropriateness-challenged DePape can inspire a little courage in the rest of us. We need more pie.
Linda McQuaig's otherwise admirable critique remains a sop to the conscience of Canadians so long as the situation is not reversed.
For very much too long, centuries now, Western countries have used articles such as this to enable them to claim they are Free countries. All this while the deeds of the Western countries have been antithetical to critiques of this nature.
It has gone on for so long now that articles like this and the narrow loss of the crucial vote can to all intents and purposes be seen as part of an orchestrated campaign, a fundamental agreement to confuse and control opinion. So the Left complains to display the conscience of a nation and deny guilt, but the Left never neglects to chase the money.
In other words, in the vein of some well known figures of dubious humanity such as GW Bush of the USA and Tony Blair of Britain who are thoroughly indicative of Western democracies, Monkey is as Monkey does.
And now this opinion will be more controlled by moneyed interests as the publicly funded payments to political parties based on votes disappears over the next few years. Less funding for independent groups like the Green Party but you can bet the Conservatives will keep on cashing in on other contributions.
As a Canadian it is pretty easy to be lulled into a false sense of security, I am in good health and when I need medical care it's accessible, prompt and free. I work with people every day who live on pretty generous government support and am myself paid in large part by government funds. But certainly we are not immune to the mindstate gripping the western world. Big money is Big Money in Canada too, unfortunately.
Hey CD, please post more Canadian content news! I had the pleasure of hearing Linda Mcquaig at my University a few months back and would advise anyone with a similar opportunity to take advantage.
"In order to perform their class-control function, the media must maintain their credibility. To do that, they must give some attention to the realities people experience. They must deal with questions like: Why are my taxes so high? Why are people losing their jobs? Why is the river so polluted? Why are we spending so much on the military? The media's need to deal with such things - however haphazardly and insufficiently - is what leads conservatives to the conclusion that the media are infected with 'liberal' biases." - Michael Parenti, from "Land of Idols"
"It has gone on for so long now that articles like this and the narrow loss of the crucial vote can to all intents and purposes be seen as part of an orchestrated campaign, a fundamental agreement to confuse and control"
Exactly -- It's called the game of denial, and it's a codependent arrangement to keep society in this darkness.