Russia invaded Georgia mainly because it was in its own interest.  Using pretext that Georgia was doing a military operation in one of its own province (the breakaway province of South Ossetia who is de jure part of Georgia but de facto an independent country), Russia just invaded its neighbour.  The operation by the Georgian forces was admittedly a bit foolish, but certainly not a reason for invasion.

Most world leaders have condemned Russia for its bold move against international law on the day of the Olympics openings.  Without exception, George W. Bush is one of them.  But frankly, when it comes to give lessons on respect of international law, the inventor of the “pre-emptive war” is the worst person to give advices.

For its own interest, the US invaded Iraq in 2003.  Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world (after Saudi Arabia).  The Persian Gulf (where both Iraq and Saudi Arabia are located) is well under the American sphere of influence.  The Caspian Sea region has the second largest oil reserves in the world.  During the Cold War, the Caspian Sea was largely under the control of Moscow.  But since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the USA has grown to become a strong influence in the region.

Because of Geography, the Caspian Sea reserves are landlocked inside the Eurasian continent.  To get it out of there, the oil must transit into other countries.  But for a series of reasons going from geography and politics, until recently all the oil from the Caspian Sea and Central Asia transited through Russia.  But a new pipeline was built in 2005, making Georgia the only country outside of Russia where the Caspian Sea oil can be exported.  Russia does not want money or oil (they have both), what Russia wants in dominating Georgia is control.  The control of the world’s second largest oil reserves.

In the last few years, Russia has grown rapidly to be a secluded and authoritarian regime.  Long gone are the times of the early 90s where the country experienced a time of political freedom.  Along with restrictions of liberties, Russia has grown to be more and more defiant to the West.  The Putin regime transformed a promising democracy into an authoritarian regime.  Unfortunately, for most people in Russia, democracy has been synonym with corruption and unemployment while the Putin authoritarianism is associated with order and economic growth.  For this, democracy has almost no chance to succeed in Russia any time soon.

To control the access of Caspian Sea oil to Western democracies, Moscow invaded Georgia.  For the same concept of blind national interest, Bush invaded Iraq five years ago.  In both cases, the reason for the move (protecting ethnic minorities in Georgia; removing WMD in Iraq) has been seen as a weak pretext that did not convince much people.

When he talks about respecting other countries territorial integrity, Bush has absolutely no credibility.  Russia’s move is basically applying the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive strike in its own national interest, without any regard to international law or just plain decency.

Here is the latest text to be published in TheSource:

__________

The Enduring Voices project from the National Geographic Society has recently identified five “global hotspots” where languages are rapidly disappearing. One of these five regions is the Pacific Northwest of North America.

Although many reasons explain the endangered status of Native languages, the main blow was the Residential School System established in Canada by French and British missionaries from the 17th century to convert Native populations to Christianity.

In the beginning, missionaries were encouraged to learn native languages. But from the late 19th century, the use of these native languages was greatly discouraged, mainly by directives coming from the Department of Indian Affairs, and the use of English greatly encouraged if not forced. Schools usually punished children (sometimes quite severely) for using native languages. In addition to punishment, isolation was the main reason for the lost of languages. Children were usually separated from their communities for months, sometimes seeing their families only during the two months of summer.

The Coast Salish people’s homeland is located around the Georgia Straight and Puget Sound and includes the locations of present-day cities of Vancouver and Seattle. The Salish people spoke about a dozen languages; today most are only spoken by few individuals, rarely under 60 years of age. Halkomelem is the language spoken on the territory that is now the city of Vancouver. The Halkomelem language includes three dialects: The Upriver (or Sto:lo) dialect spoken in the Fraser Valley; the Downriver dialect, spoken roughly in what is now the GVRD; and the Island dialect, spoken on the East Coast of Vancouver Island, around what is now Nanaimo.

Halkomelem (all dialects) is spoken by about 200 individuals, of which none are under 15 years old! The Musqueam (downriver) dialect is spoken fluently by only a handful of people. But, according to Larry Grant, Elder of the Musqueam Nation and teacher of Halkomelem at UBC, “a majority of the community’s 1200 members do understand a lot of words in the language.”

Dr Suzanne Gessner, Director of the First Nations Languages Program at UBC, insists on the difference between languages and dialects, because many individuals don’t know the difference very well. Basically, if two people can understand each other, they speak the same language. If they have some different expressions and tones but still can understand each other then they speak two different dialects of the same language. Numbers of speakers, prestige status or having a written form has nothing to do with it. English is a language; Scottish, Australian or Jamaican English are dialects. There are about 37 First Nations languages in BC, of which three have already disappeared, but the other languages can still be learned and passed to the younger generation.

First Nations people are slowly taking control of teaching their respective heritage, culture and languages. But, the effects of colonisation had a profound and sometime twisted impact. One of the major challenges in teaching languages where most speakers are elderly is precisely that elders don’t necessarily have the energy or ability to teach to children. The middle generation needs to intervene to teach themselves the language they are learning from their parents.

The challenges are enormous and pressing. Dr Gessner notices that most First Nations want to educate their children, but they need long-term stable funding. In her opinion, grants and one-time financial settlements, while helpful, are not as essential as long-term stable funding that needs, perhaps, to be incorporated into the Ministry of Education programs. Documentation is required in the form of books for children but also to record and write down the current knowledge of elders. Funding is also necessary for training and teaching and also for computer application. Dr Gessner adds that First Nations should be given the means to take control of teaching their respective languages.

There are some successes that gives hope to save First Nations languages. The Nisga’a have control of their own education and are able to teach their language in school. About 30 children now speak the language. Same for the Shuswap Nation where the Chief Atahm School of Adam’s Lake made it so that about 40 children and teens can speak Secwepemc, and more are learning. The Lillooet Band has also just started a school to teach Stl’atl’imx.

With the First Nations languages disappearing, it’s not just a means of communication that is fading, but also a whole different way to see and understand the universe. But the future of mankind is not written in stone, and the First Nations languages of British Columbia are still alive. However, actions must be taken now to pass this knowledge on to future generations before it is too late.

Published in TheSource (www.thelasource.com) in July 2006.

________________________________________

When I was asked to write an article on a specific cultural experience, it took me a bit less than a second to come up with an idea.

I was born in Québec of French parents. I have been living in the West for six years, and recently went on a trip to South America. Open-minded, curious and always willing to learn about the many cultures of the world, I though that I was (oh, silly me!) immune to what is usually called “the culture chock”.

Recently, I got engaged. Thank you, and no, I don’t know the wedding date. Obviously, I had to inform my future parents-in-law of the good news. Knowing them for almost two years, I thought the situation was under control and I had, in my mind, prepared a few scenarios of what their reaction might be. Just one little detail, my fiancée is Chinese.

My fiancée’s parents are very nice and always treat me with a lot of respect, but they speak very little English and even less French (I exaggerate a little – her mother manages to get by in English). And the eight Cantonese words that I can say without creating too much laughter are not enough to have profound conversations.

Having invited my future parents-in-law to the restaurant with a speech prepared (in Chinese), I shared my intention to marry their daughter. Their reaction was, to my Westerner eyes, very puzzling. In a few seconds, the situation went from “good news!” to “professional interview”.

Their very serious reaction surprised and shocked me. I was asking myself why they think I’m not good for their daughter. What is so troubling to them that they ask me so many questions? In addition, Jenny (my fiancée), was very calm and seemed to be almost enjoying herself. In face of such unforeseen reactions, I opted for cautiousness. I shut up and ate my dim sum!

It is true that it was a bit naïve of me to expect an enthusiastic reaction from them. It has been almost three years since I was dating their daughter. They were expecting sooner or later that we were going to get engaged. Nevertheless, I was shocked.

Later, after talking to my Chinese friends, I understood that her parents’ reaction was normal. For them, asking questions meant that they approved our intentions. They just wanted to know the details of our project: our lives, future, children, etc… all questions to which for which I was not prepared.

In Latin societies, reactions are generally more… joyful. We open Champagne, hug each other, etc. The details of the wedding and married life… we’ll see later, in a few days or weeks. But in Chinese culture, an event so important must be dealt with seriousness, and the ceremony plans must be established as soon as possible. After it is all done, then we can have fun.

I got out of the experience a bit chocked, but more importantly, humbler. Ready for a new experience that is much more difficult: preparing my wedding!

Frédéric Van Caenegem