对「原住民寄宿學校」的道歉 / Indian Residential Schools Apology

(Foreword: This was written in response to The Inner Space's blog article 【種族文化】 https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=17028869&postID=7213107970715480889)

In the "bad" old days, there were many society values and perspectives that are, by today's standard, unacceptable and wrong. Canadians witnessed on June 11, 2008 the official apology by the elected leader of the nation. The Apology is similar to the one made by the Australian Govt earlier this year but focuses mostly on the forced assimilation and mistreatment of aboriginal children "enrolled" in the Fed Govt's Indian Residential Schools program.

As I mentioned in my previous comments (see Lotusandcedar "殺滅原居印第安孩子的根源" / "To Kill the Indian in the Child"), there are major differences betwn Canada's Indian Residential Schools program and China's treatment of Tibetans. Here are a few key ones:

1. Scope and Applicability: The Canadian Prime Minister's Apology focuses specifically on the estimated 150,000 aboriginal children and the 87,000 living survivors, their parents, families, and the communities that were adversely affected by the Indian Residential Schools policy and program that started in the 1870's. The Settlement Agreement (including the monetary compensation of approx CAD$2B, and the Indian Residential Schools Truth and Reconciliation Commission) was also negotiated specifically for the Indian Residential Schools case. On the other hand, the issue on China's treatment of Tibetans is much broader and encompasses more than just children. It has a lot to do with how China wants to govern the region in terms of, among other things, social and economic reforms and the distribution of power betwn the Han and Tibetan peoples.

2. Timeline: The Prime Minister's Apology is for the duration of the Indian Residential Schools system. However, based on my somewhat limited knowledge of Chinese history, the Tibet issue began in the 1940's and the 1950's. So we are talking about different events that happened on a different scale over a different timeline.

3. Context and Nature of Issues:
The Apology deals specifically with the Indian Residential Schools case; it does not make references to human rights and other broader issues. There are also differences in the context and nature of issues confronting Canada and China. Here are some thoughts.

3.1 The aboriginals are the first peoples who, according to anthropologists, migrated approx 25,000 years ago from Asia to the Americas through the land connection that is now the Bering Straits. Thousands of years later, the Europeans arrived and took over their lands and resources. To the aboriginals, the context and nature of the issues have to do with the negotiations betwn the First Nations and the peoples who came later (e.g. treaties, land and resource claims, self-governance, etc).
(References: See my blog articles re Chief Seattle's Speech http://lotusandcedar.blogspot.com/2008/02/visiting-moose-cree-first-nation-part-2.html), and the one re the Contacts with Europeans. http://lotusandcedar.blogspot.com/2008/02/visiting-moose-cree-first-nation-part-3.html
)

3.2 The PRC recognizes the Tibetans as an ethnic minority group and has always considered them as part of the Chinese family (56民族). So, the context and nature of the issues have more to do with finding the best way to co-exist, either as one nation (PRC position) or as separate nations (Tibet "separatists" position).

3.3 As to issues related to human rights, obviously Canada is apologizing to the survivors of the Indian Residential Schools and the aboriginal communities for wrongs that had been committed before any modern-day Human Right legislations were in place. To this end, Canada is taking actions and is determined to resolving Human Right issues through multilateral forums such as the United Nations and internal legislative bodies such as the federal and provincial Human Rights Commissions. To the best of my knowledge, China does not have any Human Right Commissions and is taking a very different approach in dealing with cases and issues brought to its attention. The real or perceived lack of transparency in this regard has always been a bone of contention with many western countries.

In summary, I would submit that one should avoid drawing a complete parallel betwn Canada's Indian Residential Schools case and the China-Tibet case. Further, Canada's official apology is a positive step forward in healing the wound that was the Indian Residential Schools. While there are challenges ahead, many see it as a signal that the Federal Government is listening and is taking remedial actions. As they say, it is better late than never. I would also submit that the Apology does not therefore undermine Canada's position on the promotion of human rights, nor should one call Canada a hypocrite. To err is human. The important thing is what one does after.

+++++++++++++++++++++++

My additional comments in response to the statement "... 加國有一招好毒 Canada has a poisonous agenda ..." from another blogger:

梁公子: There are social-economic problems in Canada, but I would dispel the notion of "加國有一招好毒!" as if there is currently a country-wide, calculated conspiracy against the aboriginal peoples here in Canada. I have known many aboriginal friends and colleagues who are leaders in their own right, who contribute to the good of their communities and Canada as a whole.Stereotyping First Nation peoples as "drunkard Indians" and laying the "blame" on Canada (presumably non-aboriginals) will lead to further division and not the reconciliation that one wants. (Friday, June 13, 2008 10:18:00 PM)