by Bogumił Pacak-Gamalski
(Polish version – not translation – written from slightly different vantage point, will follow shortly at the end of English text)
Cicero would say: hic sunt casus historiae, hence, a short list of historical precedencies.
At the onset of the First World War, Canadian Parliament passed a bill called War Measures Act (in 1914). It was rather draconian legislature prepared to deal with subversion, insurrectionism and all sort of anti-state activities, that could or would pose a serious challenge to constitutional order or territorial integrity of Canada. It was used twice during world wars and only once at peacetime. The war usage of the Act was an unjust (but legal under the Act) overreach of the government, that resulted in interment of thousands of mostly Ukrainians, but also Poles and other ethnic groups that came to Canada from Galicia (western part of today’s Ukraine) and some part of Volhynia. Simply, because they emigrated from territories under Austro-Hungarian rule, which at that time was at war with British Empire. Notwithstanding the fact, that all these territories were taken by force by Austrian Empire and used to be part of Polish Commonwealth since Middle Ages, therefore the locals did not consider themselves loyal to Hapsburg’s empire.
During the 2 world war similar fate happened to Japanese Canadians and, to lesser extent, German and Italian Canadians.
These were the first and for a long time only usages of the War Measures Act. Both of these legal overreaches found their conclusion many years later: in 2008 Canadian Government reached a settlement with Ukrainian community and apologised for these actions. Earlier, in 1988, Prime Minister apologised to the Japanese-Canadians for their interment during 2 world war.
In contemporary history, the last usage of War Measures Act happened in October 1970. The October Crisis, was a political independence movement in Quebec, led by Front de libération du Québec. It culminated with kidnaping of Quebec Deputy Premier, Pierre Lapporte and British Trade Commissioner James Cross. Pierre Lapporte was found murdered; James Cross was liberated. Prime Minister (father of current PM, Justin) Pierre Trudeau saw it as an act of sedition, treason and violent action to overthrow the government and invoked the War Measures Act. Army was sent to Quebec, hundreds of people jailed.
That was the end of the Act. In ensuing years Parliament passed many statutes to govern various times of emergencies in Canada during peace time but never really repealed the War Measures Act, which was a relic of British Council directive from 1914, in a manner of speaking – a colonial legislature.
It was formally replaced in 1988 by current Emergencies Act. Not ever used until now.
Now, an ingression: what sort of act is in the title of this piece, called Martial Law? No, it is not a Canadian legislature. Although, I think, many Canadians, who were adults in 1980ties, were familiar with it. It was an act established by the communist Poland in December 1981 to destroy the independent “Solidarity” movement in Poland and it’s march to freedom, democracy. I write about it here for a reader to understand my viewpoint and my experience with these type of legislations and governments reasons for assuming extraordinary powers for temporary time. And whether history view them as necessary.
Some were, some were not. In most cases – even if the reasoning was rational and caused by urgency of situation – these powers were used excessively and proved to be unethical.
If the actions of actual or perceived protesters, insurrectionists and anti-government forces were truly justified and truly popular, with massive support from entire population – sooner or later the government would capitulate or be replaced either forcefully or by forced new elections.
The case of old War Measures Act in Canada and legislation introducing Martial Law in Poland in 1981 is no longer typical for any XXI century liberal democracy. The modern concept of State and exponential advance of individual rights and freedom protections would not allow truly democratic state to have such draconian laws under any situation (perhaps during a huge war with foreign enemy such legislation could be introduced – but not during peacetime) in modern times.
On the other hand – a reasonable form of temporarily giving the State extraordinary powers in some dangerous situations is a sensible mechanism. Especially in liberal democracy, prone to weaker and constrained form of governments. Constrained constitutionally by other powers (judiciary and parliamentary) independent of Government/Cabinet. In Canada, it is even much more complicated because of our confederate form of government and divisions of powers: provincial and federal. That is the reason our Parliament introduced the new Emergencies Act in 1988, replacing the old War Measures and many temporary, ministerial powers. It is formulated in such a way, that it should be truly treated with outmost caution and consideration and the political pitfalls for government are plentiful. That’s why it was never used until few days ago. It seems a history’s fate, that it is the son of former PM who last used the old Act, the current PM, Justin Trudeau. Justin had long talks with all provincial premiers, long session of entire Cabinet, emergency parliamentary debate and finally called a Press Conference, where he and all major ministers explained it to the press and answered many questions at length. His father, Pierre, had one short answer in 1970: famous ‘Just watch me’.
Was the Declaration necessary in February 2022? It is not for me to make that distinction in an objective and knowledgeable way. I can only answer that as a citizen of Canada and acute observer of political processes. I think it was. Was it politically a rational move? That we will know in a few days’ time. Especially in a minority situation. The government Declaration is only legally binding for seven days. After that time the Parliament must vote it in or out. If it does – the Government will prevail, if it fails – the Government will most likely fall. After the Emergencies Act ( 7 or 30 days maximum) stops being modus operandi, there will be Inquiry about its’ necessities, rationale and achievements/failures. And history will judge, regardless of contemporary verdicts.
who and why
There is few totally exclusive and excluding each other narratives to that protest/occupation/insurrection. Let’s look at some of them.
The first one lies at the very heart of the dispute if Emergencies Act must have been declared.
- It is a democratic protest – and in a democracy people have a guaranteed rights to political protest. Granted. With one exception, sort of glaring and decisive, the word ‘peaceful’ is omitted. And ‘peaceful protest’ lies at the core of this right. There is a multitude of ways to have and maintain peaceful protest.
- Just because one doesn’t shoot or drive a military tank, brings a cannon to that protest, doesn’t mean that it is peaceful or that it is not violent.
I listened intently to one reasonably looking, properly dressed, without horns on his head, protester at the border at Coutts in Alberta. Just few hours after police sized a truck full of military grade heavy guns, ammunition and arrested leaders of a group, who brought that truck. Not one or two crazies. No, organized group prepared and advocating the use of power to overthrow government.
The young man was resigned, sort of sad, his dream of his freedom has just died. He claimed not to have any knowledge of that paramilitary group that was part of the convoy. It is possible he was telling the truth. I hope so. And, in a tragic voice, almost like Hamlet, he said: ‘we came here in peace and we will leave in peace’. Like I said, he didn’t look like a crazy populist, Trump lover or evangelical devil. He even talked properly, in good literary English, suggesting that he possessed some form of proper education. And it fails me to comprehend how such a person cannot understand how he came to that protest. It was not peaceful act, by any means. He came with one reason and determination (apart from any ideological or idealistic convictions that he might or might not have): to prevent access to international border crossing to commercial and private drivers. Not by persuasion, by argument of a speech to those willing to listen and follow. No, he came to physically block that border with a large vehicle used as a barrier. That’s a definition of violent act – to stop someone against their will and right to go about their business. Bodily harm is only one of many acts that could be described as violence. I hope that he was allowed to leave in peace. It doesn’t give me any pleasure in seeing people thrown in jail. But that pleasantly looking young man was lying and lying purposefully: he did not came in peace. He came aggressively, with violence as means to achieve his goals. I choose this man and his sadly misleading statement as description of sizable portion of the insurrection in statu nascendi – an attempt at insurrection.
The second is hard to describe in a short piece (as this one) in a clear chain of actions leading to a goal. It is a religious component, shown very clearly by many members of the protest. The very common usage of words and terminology (‘God’s right’; supremacy of ‘God’s commandments’ over any state laws, et ceatera) coming straight from very orthodox Christian ideology and most visible in American-style Evangelical Churches. It is a terrifying message for any freedom-loving modern democrat. It terrifying for any descendant of European philosophy of Enlightenment and Reason. In short, it represents the Christian version of Islamic jihadist movement. It goes beyond any reason or any attempt of coming to some mutual agreement, some negotiations. It is only ‘us or them’, no middle ground. Orthodoxy defies logic and reason, is not flexible to any argument – hence no common ground could be found. One part of it though, particularly the American style Evangelicals, does require counteraction from democratic State and from society at large: it is the element of white supremacy and racism, central to some of their beliefs. It strikes at the core of modern liberal state of tolerance and inclusion. When the protesters on Parliament Hill starts the day (way too many days now) with their Jericho March – the symbolism is not lost on anyone. The Parliament, the heart of our democracy and state, is being viewed as “Jericho’ – biblical fortress and city that needs to be destroyed and (according to Bible) will be destroyed.
The third part – the most innocent and naïve, perhaps – is the no definable but understandable array of people tired of pandemic restrictions, of being told what and how you should conduct yourself, the medical restrictions. You name it and it is there. Some of it is (specially the medical, scientific facts and undisputable – albeit hastened and somewhat risky – research) difficult to understand for many. Others could be prone to smartly devised and distributed messages contrary to official federal, provincial and Public Health authorities policy. If these restrictions were for month only, even for a year – it likely would not create such a strong opposition. Because the virus doesn’t care about our policies or how people feel about them – it lasted much longer. Huge group of people in Canada, finishes the pandemic (still existing) poorer than it was prior to it. Yes, it is very true, that a sizeable group of lowest earners during the first wave of COVID19, was treated by the federal government with much more generous cheques that their pre-pandemic income. But by the end of 2021 – that generous amounts got smaller, more difficult to obtain and encroaching high inflation left them much poorer than earlier. At the same time – thanks to modern, aggressive capitalism, which is the scourge of liberal democracy – almost all corporations, their presidents and top executives made huge financial advances. Which was like a slap on the face of ordinary citizen. That group and their emotions are the easiest to understand, to sympathize with. The problem is that, for lack of clear distinctions, they were swallowed by the other groups and messages. Just by sharing the same ‘spot, time and pot’ – they co-signed the rest of the convoy insurgency. They never attempted to distinguish their grievances from other, more nefarious messages.
The fourth part is the most dangerous. One that truly pose the greatest risk to the stability of state, perhaps it’s survival. One that existed for many years in Canada and many times posed that threat. It is based on Western separation from Canada, living our Confederation and forming separate state. It is strongly rooted mainly in Alberta (to a smaller extend in Saskatchewan and very small parts in BC), with long tradition. The fundaments are based on Christian faith of evangelical persuasion, unfettered free enterprise, self-reliance, minimal role for state powers, antisemitism, Anglo-Saxon superiority. To name a few. Politically is to the right of the right. Part of their scenario to achieve its’ goals is clearly a slogan, that the road to freedom is marked by hail of bullets. True for most religious zealots and for French and Bolshevik revolutionaries alike.
One of the most prominent activist in that movement is no one other than Pat King. Yes, the same Pat King, who was arrested today in Ottawa. The same one, who was one of the main organizers of the Truck Convoy; who daily personally provided directions and directives to the huge group that occupies Ottawa; who regularly posted podcasts calling for harder stance until full victory. And one must assume that the victory would mean the abolition of the democratically elected Government of Canada, with Royal Assent from Governor General granting the Convoy leadership a new government/directorate introduced by Senate. At least those were the terms in an official letter to Governor General and Senate.
If this does not constitute a formal insurrection and sedition – I am at lost to what does.
In summary I have no clear answer to the question if the Declaration was necessary. Or, to say it more precisely if it could have been avoided. I think it could have been avoided by strong and decisive actions at the very beginning of the protest. Before it truly become insurrectionists and seditious. But nobody did. And by doing so, forced the hand of Federal Government.
I have listed here four main scenarios and narratives of the movement called ‘Truck Convoy’. These that are visible by naked eye, without the use of a microscope. There could be one more. Very sinister and far-reaching. I am sure one that is (or should be) contemplated and studied by national spy agencies and services. Not only in Canada. Here is my sinister, imaginary (?) theory of true conspiracy or unprecedented heavenly coincidences:
many years ago (therefore well remembered by me, as age gives the advantage of the vantage) Preston Manning launched in Alberta a movement to kill the old Progressive Conservative Party and return it to more western-based, Christian value-induced, fundaments. At that time the Conservative party was truly a pan-Canadian institution represented by staunchly pro-federalist leaders on national and provincial stages. They were the descendants of Charlottetown birth of Dominion of Canada.
Manning successfully wrestled the conservative movement in Western Canada from the hands of the progressive wing to more traditionalist, western-based and Evangelical bedrock. That split meant that there would never be a next federal conservative government as the two different factions of conservative movement would split the national vote giving victory to their arch-enemy – the Liberals. Reform Party was born.
Stage was set for young, intelligent and ambitious politician, Stephen Harper. He proposed that both party should form a new one, combining forces together. Thus a new, Conservative Party of Canada was born. Over time, the new party tended to start moving to the West and to more Reform style of politics and policies. The progressive element lingered in Eastern and Atlantic provinces. Strong regionally, weak federally. In 2015 Harper lost his re-election. He could have loose it, very possibly according to polls, to NDP. But a new star was born in Canadian politics. Son of no other than Pierre Trudeau – politician hated in the West with a passion. Justin Trudeau. His victory was stunning and overwhelming. He won subsequently two more elections – but none as huge and impressive as the first one. That means that Conservatists lost three elections in a row. Some understood the simple math – if the party does not move more to progressive policies it might become government-in-waiting permanently. Hence a flirt of last leader, Erin O’Toole, with more centrist policies, less of ultra-right. Unfortunately for the party, O’Toole was not a strong leader nor visionary. The Reform wing of the Western protest grew. Knives were sharpened. Leader, who just won leadership battle (but lost a national election) of the party, met his deathly fate. The date was February 2. Twenty days later a Convoy of Trucks starts driving toward Ottawa… Coincidences? In politics there are very few. The Interim Leader, Ms. Berger and staunchly ultra-right and first candidate for national leader, Mr. Pierre Poilievre, showed friendly and supportive gestures to the Convoy in Ottawa. Poilievre even broadcasted a message: “I’m proud of the truckers and I stand with them”. Perhaps a chance that the trucks would become his vehicle to leadership victory? Maybe my fantasy soars to high … but Machiavelli did not invented politics based on lack of ethics – he just described them in his book. Just read how many Russian tsars died of natural causes … . Just musing, that’s all.
Eh, speaking of tsars and Russia. The Convoy gathered huge financial support from many sources. Mainly from the US. No, not the federal government. From you-know-who and his camp. And gathered enormous international coverage. Some tried to have it repeated in Europe. Very seriously. Yes, during this February, February, when Russian armies congregate en masse on Ukrainian border. First as a serious military threat to international order and peace since the Cuban Crisis during Kennedy’s presidency. That would be convenient if capitals, railways and border connections were to be occupied by convoys, would it be, Mr. Putin? Yes, you Mr. Putin, you, who helped so much Mr. Trump to win the presidency. Just musing, that’s all.
February. Strange month. Exactly on February 2nd in 1982, I landed in Canada. Forty years ago. As a result of Martial Law in Poland. The day of the proclamation of it, I was no longer in Poland. Few months earlier I went to London (had to borrow 100 US dollars from friends to get the visa, and a 100 dollars was a huge amount for me) to study Polish Marshal Jozef Pilsudski documents preserved in London’s Institute by his name (the only military and state leader, who defeated the Soviet army and won war with them in 1920). Being there I was aching to go back to my work in ‘Solidarity” in Warsaw. But my contacts in Polish pre-war constitutional government-in-exile in London and constant talks with friends in Poland were clear that something terrible might happen at any moment. My father, who spent part of his youth in Soviet camp, implored me not to come back saying that one more dead body will not help Poland. I think it was a bit too dramatic, but I was only 20 years old! Dramatics work at that age. In a way he was right, though. Right after the declaration of Martial Law the communist police came for me to my parents’ apartment. But at that time I was already in Italy, waiting for my refuge ticket to Canada. Over the last 40 years my feelings and attachment for my new country grew immensely. I don’t know if they are stronger or even as strong as my feelings in 1982 for Poland. Probably not. When you are twenty years old, your love and passion is not comparable to any emotions in later years. But my love for Canada is a love of an adult, mature man. It is based on observations, judgments, even calculations. Emotions and logic combined. Ethical and practical. It grew much stronger in the last twenty years. Thanks to our strong commitments to tolerance, because of beautiful mosaic of more and more visible races, colours, shapes and traditions. Sometimes irritating, because we are creatures of habit and it is not easy to open oneself to different experiences. But I love it: the array, the choices, the multitudes. If humanity is to survive, I think that our model is the one to follow. Yet, I know that things like that do not happen by accident. They are result of policies, laws. Of choices. Polish national symbols, the flag, the White Eagle are forever enshrined in my soul. And so is the Maple Leaf (with colours was very easy: both are the same – one horizontally, the other vertically). But February is a strange month. In February 2022 I am sick of seeing Canadian flag and Maple Leaf. Of constant parades of this symbol next to vulgarity, next to hateful messages, on trucks glaring at night under the apartments of tired residents of my capital; on trucks and on shoulders of people blocking our border crossings and causing hundreds of millions of dollars losses and lost wages to countless victims of these actions, on back of hooligan dancing on grave of Unknown Soldier on Parliament Hill. In my Canada the Flag is treated with respect it truly deserves. My Canada earned that respect. Earned it the hard way, after many painful mistakes. And no achievement is worth more, no respect more admirable than the one learnt on own mistakes. It is the same emotion as the one young person feels, after getting the first earned wage. Not given but earned. I do hope that by the time most of you will read it – that Canada will be on its way back. We need Her.
> > Pogwarki < < 