Current Issues

Canada recently added Somalia's al Shabaab to its list of banned terrorist groups. While this is good news for Somalis and Canadians alike, the ban exposes unresolved dilemmas associated with proscribing terrorist organizations.

Banning al Shabaab makes perfect sense. Since 2006/2007 it has been the vanguard of Somalia's festering Islamist insurgency. The group is credited with having introduced suicide bombings to East Africa and targets Somalia's UNbacked Transitional Federal Government, African Union (AU) peacekeepers and anybody who gets in its way. Al Shabaab's goal is to establish a Talibanesque Islamic emirate that stretches into Kenya, Ethiopia and Djibouti. It also has global aspirations. Last year it pledged allegiance to Osama bin Laden and foreign fighters are currently running al Shabaab training camps.

Terrorism is al Shabaab's modus operandi. Its bloodiest attacks include a 2009 suicide bombing at a graduation ceremony for medical students (22 killed); a 2009 car bombing of a peacekeeping compound (11 killed); a 2008 triple car bombing attack against the United Nations Development Program, Ethiopia's Consulate and the President's palace (30 killed); and the March 2007 missile attack on an AU cargo aircraft (11 killed).

But it's al Shabaab's influence over the Somali diaspora that is truly unnerving.

The organization has a proven track record of recruiting Europeans, Australians, Americans and Canadians of Somali origin. Since 2007, some 30 Americans have joined al Shabaab. Six have died fighting, including Shirwa Ahmed, the first American to carry out a suicide attack in Africa. The bomber who struck the graduation ceremony was a European recruit, as was the axe-wielding attacker who tried to kill Danish political cartoonist Kurt Westergaard in January. Of the Australians arrested in 2009 for planning homegrown attacks, two are thought to have had links with the group. And in Canada, reports suggest half a dozen Canadians have gone "missing" in Somalia and that one may have been killed in action last week.

The overwhelming evidence suggests that al Shabaab willingly plans acts of indiscriminate violence in East Africa, purposely associates with international terrorist groups and actively facilitates terrorism in the West. By making it a crime to join or assist the organization, we've made it harder for Canadians to easily support its efforts. We also subject the group's assets to seizure, give security officials a free hand to track recruiters, realign Canadian policy with those of our allies and signal our continued interest in combating terrorism. Most importantly, by outlawing al Shabaab we help Somalia's government survive another day.

Despite these successes, flaws continue to hamper the manner in which Canada proscribes groups.

First, our list must reflect global trends. The murky world of international terrorism evolves rapidly. Before 2007, nobody had heard of al Shabaab; today it is an al Qaeda ally. We need to streamline the blacklisting process to ensure that changes in terrorism threats are reflected in changes in policy. Our terrorist list should be a preventive tool. That it took Ottawa years to ban al Shabaab, despite its role in global terrorism and notwithstanding our allies' earlier banning of the group, suggests we were behind the curve on this one.

Second, other groups known to facilitate terrorism are missing from Canada's list. With respect to the checks and balances involved in banning organizations, our list needs some serious updating. Currently, 42 groups are banned. While al Qaeda is listed, its franchises in Iraq, the Islamic Maghreb and Yemen are not. The Taliban is also missing, though it is singled out as an ally of other blacklisted groups, like Hezb-eIslami Gulbuddin, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Lashkar-e-Tayyiba. Does this mean supporting the Taliban is only partially illegal? Likewise, groups that have effectively been eliminated clutter the list. For instance, Aum Shinrikyo and Abu Nidal are both defunct organizations. Neither has been active for decades but both remain listed. Steps should be taken to ensure Canada's list is reflective of actual and emerging threats.

Finally, we should use the list strategically. Banning a group punishes it for facilitating terrorism and restricts its capabilities. What is rarely explored is the effect of taking groups off the list. There might be room to encourage the rejection of violence by promising to remove groups from the list if and when they turn their backs on terrorism. As David Romano explains, "if no amount of sincere change in tactics can get a group off international terrorist lists ... they'll have less incentive to eschew terrorism" in the long-term. The idea is to go beyond using the list only to punish; it should be used to reward behaviour that is in Canada's interests.

Banning al Shabaab was a solid start. But there is a great deal more to be done.

- Alex Wilner is a fellow with the Macdonald-Laurier Institute in Ottawa (macdonaldlaurier.ca) and a senior researcher at the ETH Zurich in Switzerland.

Local Tsimshian report on education funding

By George T. Baker - The Daily News

A new report by a Tsimshian author points to inefficiencies in post-secondary funding for First Nations students and recommends taking the funding away from Canadian band councils.

Calvin Helin of Port Simpson, author of ‘Dances with Dependency’, criticized the way First Nations students are awarded funding for post-secondary school through band councils rather than directly from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada.

He said that, while some band councils run efficient and ethical post-secondary funding programs, the majority of band councils are either too uneducated to do the job right or are too unethical to be trusted with the money.

However, he said he doesn’t think chief councillors could stand in the way of his proposal.

“I don’t see how chiefs can oppose a system which does not change any of the funding whatsoever, but guarantees every registered Indian in Canada will have the monies available to them to complete a post-secondary degree,” said Helin.

His report, co-authored by Dave Snow, points to numerous problems within the post secondary funding, as well as statistics and arguments that echo his book and suggest that Canada’s future is tied to making sure First Nations – especially those living on reserve – are given a chance to reach academic success.

The federal government is constitutionally responsible for First Nations education programs, particularly those on reserve.

According to the report, INAC spends $314 million per year through the Post-Secondary Student Support Program, but there is little transparency tied to the dollars, with band councils left to decide who receives funding and how much is given.

Money is awarded through block funding, or a general fund, with no success benchmarks set, nor any way to track the dollars once given.

Instead, the best way to access the money is through family ties.

“A lot of that money is not getting through to students and it’s not getting through because chiefs and councils politicize the money. They finance some and not others depending on who votes for them,” said Helin. “Something as important as education has turned into a political football.”

Aboriginals living in British Columbia’s Northwest are interested in attaining a post-secondary education.

According to figures published by Northwest Community College, 51 per cent of the entire student population is Aboriginal - 47 per cent for Prince Rupert – and an NWCC spokesperson said that there is a growing appetite for more.

“I think that appetite has been there for a long time and I don’t think its anything new. I have heard a number of aboriginal leaders say that education is the key to their future,” said NWCC Communications Manager Dave O’Leary.

Mark Ignas told the Daily News that the Kitkatla Band Council has devised their own way for awarding money for post-secondary schooling.

“In the administration we have an education coordinator that is ultimately answerable to council. There is a base requirement for fairness. And if that fairness were not achieved, they would be held accountable. Every member has great opportunities to accept post-secondary education and are funded accordingly,” said the Kitkatla band council manager.

So the desire exists, but still, said Helin, the students are not receiving the type of funding support they deserve under current Canadian law.

Instead, what Helin would like to see and what he and Snow argue for in ‘Free to Learn’ is awarding each First Nations child born in Canada $3,000 into a trust account created specifically for that child to earn a post-secondary education. The money would earn interest until the account holder became eligible to draw money out after enrolling in post-secondary.

What if an aboriginal decided he or she did not want to go to post-secondary school? They would have ten years after they graduated to decide. If he or she decided not to go, then their money would be reinvested into a general pool and other newly born aboriginal children.

“We felt that 10 years was long enough for them to decide,” said Helin.

Helin cited a looming demographic change in Canada as being one significant issue that would be addressed through better funding policies.

More than 36 per cent of on-reserve Aboriginals receive welfare compared to 5.5 per cent of non-aboriginals.

In the 2006 census, 38 per cent of Aboriginals aged 25-64 had less than a high school education, compared to 15 per cent for non-aboriginals. Only three per cent of Aboriginals with status cards hold a university degree.

However, First Nations people used $6.2 billion worth of services in 2006 and are predicted to use to $8.4 billion per year by 2026, beyond what Helin believed to be the average for Canadian society.

Helin said those statistics alone should motivate INAC to change given the federal government’s current debt crisis and the aging demographics of the Canadian population, which threatens to create even more receivers than suppliers of Canadian services.

“There is no reason other than bureaucrats are lazy and they like to keep the status quo. A lot of the monies are being used by chiefs and councillors for other purposes - such as travel.”