The Globe and Mail - 25.11.2019

MONDAY,NOVEMBER25,2019 | THE GLOBE AND MAIL O A

OPINION

NEWS |

W

ith the Amazon burning
and politicians regain-
ing impunity after politi-
cal and economic corruption
scandals recede, Brazil’s rule of
law is suffering one sharp blow
after another. Although Presi-
dent Jair Bolsonaro campaigned
as an anti-corruptionist, and as
someone who would crack down
hard on crime more generally,
South America’s biggest country
is sliding rapidly into a slough of
deceit. Modern day brigands are
pillaging Brazil’s environment
while reforms to its justice sys-
tem are being denied.

Mr. Bolsonaro rejects environ-

mental claims on the Amazon

rainforest. With support from

large scale cattle grazers and soy-

bean farmers who want to per-

manently mutilate the globe’s

largest land-based sink of carbon

dioxide and its most valuable ox-

ygen producer so that they can

acquire fresh and cheap land, Mr.

Bolsonaro’s administration has

dialed back regulations against

setting fire to the Amazon’s for-

ests. It has reduced ranger staff

and surveillance; enforcement

efforts of existing laws against il-

legal logging, mining and clear-

ing are down 20 per cent from

last year.

So far, according to Brazil’s

own National Institute for Space

Research, almost 3,800 square

miles of Amazon’s forest cover

have been set alight since Mr.

Bolsonaro became president in

2018. More than 41,000 fires have
      been burning across the vast
      Amazon rainforest (approxi-
      mately 2.2 million square miles in
      size). These fires are even set on
      lands within the Amazon that are
      officially off-limits, being the
      equivalent of state forests or
      parks. Indigenous rights are
      trampled in the process and sev-
      eral of Brazil’s prominent Native
      peoples have been pushed aside

or bullied by corporate invasions

and the despoliation of the rain-

forest. The attack on the Ama-

zon, explicitly condoned, even

encouraged, by Mr. Bolsonaro,

flies in the face of previous Brazi-

lian international promises by

Mr. Bolsonaro’s presidential

predecessors and even, in a weak

moment earlier this year, by him-

self.

Mr. Bolsonaro now says the ec-

onomic value of opening up the

Amazon is what’s important. Ec-

ological reserves “hinder devel-

opment,” he claims, and national

parks are a nuisance. Mr. Bolso-

naro calls his opponents and en-

vironmentalists worldwide (in-

cluding Chancellor Angela Mer-

kel of Germany) “vegans” whose

concerns about deforestation

should be ignored. French Presi-

dent Emmanuel Macron has

called Mr. Bolsonaro a liar for de-

nying what Brazilians are doing

to destroy the Amazonian rain-

forest.

One of Mr. Bolsonaro’s most

popular predecessors, left-lean-

ing former president Luiz Inacio

Lula da Silva (in office 2003-2010)

accepted Brazil’s environmental

responsibilities for the Amazon

and eventually curtailed what

had been a relentless drive to ex-

ploit its forests and cleared

spaces for profit. president Dilma

Rousseff (2011-2016) continued

his policies. So did president Mi-

chel Temer (2016-2018), despite

being otherwise implicated in

vast schemes of corruption, in-

cluding the infamous Lava Jato

corruption imbroglio of 2014-

2018.

Lava Jato also embroiled Mr.

da Silva, and he was sentenced

first to nine years in prison and

then (after an appeal) to 12 years

for taking bribes from the Ode-

brecht construction company.

Presiding over Mr. da Silva’s trial

was Sergio Moro, then the equiv-

alent of a first level trial judge in

the North American federal sys-

tems. Mr. Moro is now minister of

justice in Mr. Bolsonaro’s cabi-

net; he has been having little suc-

cess in passing reforms to Brazil’s

criminal justice system or in per-

suading the country’s Congress

to enact the kinds of changes to

the trial system that would keep

miscreants such as Mr. da Silva

(and the many other politicians

tainted by their participation in

the Lava Jato kickback scheme)

in jail for long periods as a deter-

rent to rampant corruption.

Indeed, earlier this month,

Brazil’s Supreme Court decided

that Mr. da Silva could be re-

leased from imprisonment while

he (and others in similar circum-

stances) exhausted new appeals

in his criminal case. This is the

old pattern that Mr. Moro has

been trying to break. Appeals of

sentences meted out to politic-

ians have for decades been

dragged out interminably in Bra-

zil; impunity or something very

akin to that welcome disposition

has long been the favoured result

of wrongdoing by well-connected

politicians. Mr. da Silva’s release

will set back attempts in Brazil to

reverse corruption among the

political class.

Likewise, because of the

breach of environmental law and

regulations in the Amazon, so

will the unhindered destruction

there give impunity to the corpo-

rate interests that are promoting

deforestation. Mr. Bolsonaro con-

nives in that form of corruption

as well, with much of the result-

ing profits from the clearing of

the Amazon constituting abuse

of public office for private gain.

Some environmental organi-

zations have threatened to boy-

cott Brazilian products, especial-

ly beef and soy exports. But, how-

ever that movement develops,

readers should be aware of how

much Brazil is unnecessarily,

wantonly, contributing to the

warming of the planet.

Brazil’sdeepeningmalaise

AsBolsonarostandsby

andletstheAmazon

burn,theworldisleft

watchingascorruption

engulfsthecountry

ROBERTROTBERG

OPINION

FoundingdirectoroftheHarvard
KennedySchool’sProgramon
IntrastateConflict,aformersenior
fellowatCIGIandpresidentemeritus
oftheWorldPeaceFoundation

W

hat started with coal
miners in the United
Kingdom may serve as a
warning for what could come for
Quebec and the rest of Canada
this winter. With a new minority
Parliament and a Senate in disar-
ray, an inability or unwillingness
to act could trigger Canada’s own
Winter of Discontent.
In the mid-1970s, the British
economy was struggling, a prob-
lem compounded by soaring in-
flation. Wages had not kept pace,
so coal miners began job actions
across Britain. At a time when
most of the country’s electricity
was produced by coal-burning
power stations, the effect was im-
mediate and severe, touching the
lives of families and businesses
alike.
Within a month of the initial
job actions, the Britishgovern-
ment temporarily implemented
a three-day workweek in order to
reduce electricity consumption
and conserve coal stocks. Today,
in Quebec where propane is used
to heat hospitals and long-term-
care facilities, energy supplies
may similarly need to be rationed
if the CN rail strike continues. In
such a scenario, it wouldn’t be
long before the cold set in.
But it was another series of la-
bour strikes, this time across in-
dustries and public services,
touching every corner of Britain,
that brought down a prime min-

ister. With striking rail workers

grinding Canada’s economy to a

halt, the 1979 Winter of Discon-

tent warrants reflection.

It was a particularly cold Janu-

ary when unionized truck drivers

went on strike across Britain. Gas

stations relying on their deliver-

ies went dry and ports country

wide picketed. Essential goods,

primarily transported by road,

became hard to come by and

prices went up. In total, more

than a million British workers

were laid off during these labour

actions.

From railways to hospitals to

garbage collection, services

ground to a halt. Even gravedig-

gers went on strike, resulting in

corpses famously being stored in

a factory. The winter itself was ve-

ry cold, with deep snow and bliz-

zards, limiting the ability for

many who still had jobs to get to

work and further strangling the

economy.

Today, an emergency propane

shortage is threatening Quebeck-

ers with cold December weather

just around the corner. Else-

where in the country, oil, grain,

construction materials and other

goods shipped by rail are slowly

stopping. So too, will the flow of

billions of dollars within our

country’s economy. Reports indi-

cate that within a week, Canada’s

GDP could take a $2-billion hit.

By the time MPs return to Ottawa

on Dec. 5, that could increase to

$3-billion.

Put into everyday terms, this

disruption could quickly affect a

wide range of sectors and regions

across the country. Construction

sites in Toronto may have to halt

work for lack of materials. Agri-

cultural products in the Prairies

could go bad sitting in depots.

Mining jobs in northern commu-

nities could feel the effects of

stockpiles of minerals unable to

get to market. Chemical jobs in

Sarnia, Ont., could be pinched,

and across Canada, gas prices

could increase as supply be-

comes limited.

Many Canadians may not im-

mediately understand the sweep-

ing ramifications of the CN rail

shutdown, but if it continues,

they soon will. Whether you

work in a Mississauga engineer-

ing firm, the stockroom of an

IKEA in Coquitlam, B.C. or a used

car lot in Moncton, your job de-

pends on the steady and reliable

flow of products from coast to

coast. If you work in the public

sector, your job depends on the

government’s ability to collect

tax revenues on that flow of

products. In Canada, tremendous

amounts of those products are

shipped by rail. Increasingly,

those rail lines have also been

shipping a higher volume of oil

and gas as our country grapples

with an inability to agree on

building pipelines.

The CN rail strike poses a tre-

mendous first test for a minority

Parliament to respond to the very

real needs of Canadian families

and businesses. Will the five-par-

ty House and the segmented Sen-

ate work together or will this be-

come our own Winter of Discon-

tent?

TheCNstrikeandourensuingwinterofdiscontent

MELANIEPARADIS

OPINION

DirectoratMcMillanVantagePolicy
Group

StrikingCanadianNationalRailwayworkers,suchastheonesseenpicketinginfrontofthecompany’s

TaschereaurailyardinMontrealonNov.22,aregrindingCanada’seconomytoahalt.

RYANREMIORZ/THECANADIANPRESS

I

n March, 2017, Fiona Hill, the
Russia expert who was about
to become one of Donald
Trump’s advisers on national se-
curity, warned that Mr. Trump
and Vladimir Putin were two
sides of the same coin. As the
KGB-trained Russian President
spent decades honing state prop-
aganda to redefine Russian real-
ity, Mr. Trump sucked Americans
into his own vortex through tab-
loids and Twitter.
“This is a skill set that Putin
acquired,” Ms. Hill explained.
“[But Trump] knows how to get
the media’s attention without
the benefit of a state-controlled
media. He does it all on his own.
Mr. Trump understands how a
free media works.”
Ms. Hill is no longer merely a
scholar of dictators; she is now a
player in their propaganda
through no fault of her own. Her

testimony at the impeachment

hearing Thursday was an at-

tempt to break through their fa-

çade by not only telling the

truth, but explaining to Ameri-

cans how the lies are construct-

ed. “I refuse to be part of an ef-

fort to legitimize an alternative

narrative that the Ukrainian gov-

ernment is a U.S. adversary, and

that Ukraine, not Russia, at-

tacked the U.S. in 2016,” she said.

“These fictions are harmful even

if they are deployed for purely

domestic political purposes.”

In Mr. Trump’s reality-TV

world, positions are not filled

but cast. From the start, Mr.

Trump surrounded himself with

larger-than-life loyalists whose

defining trait was immovable

fealty to the President even as

his lawlessness became more

brazen. Ms. Hill never fit into this

world, and it is surprising that

she lasted as long as she did.

Similar to Lieutenant-Colonel

Alexander Vindman and Marie

Yovanovitch, she is both an im-

migrant American and an expert

on the former Soviet Union.

None of these witnesses took de-

mocracy for granted because

they had witnessed its grim al-

ternative in post-Soviet kleptoc-

racies. As experts, they were a

threat in the administration, and

they remain so outside of it, as

the threats against all three of

them attest.

By late 2017, the Trump ad-

ministration had reached a point

where its prior claim that the

President had “nothing to do

with Russia” had become unten-

able, owing to things such as fir-

ing James Comey for investigat-

ing Trump’s Kremlin ties and

partying with Russian officials in

the Oval Office immediately af-

terward. The Trump strategy

then became to flip the script

and investigate the investigators.

In their inverted world, Ukraine,

not Russia, attacked the United

States.

The witnesses to crimes, not

the perpetrators, are the true

guilty parties. Mr. Trump’s time-

tested tactic of projection – ac-

cuse your opponents of what

you are guilty – was deployed

not only by Mr. Trump himself

but by his backers on Fox News

and other propaganda outlets.

What this meant is that by the

time impeachment hearings

rolled around, Republicans and

Kremlin operatives had spent

two years building an alternative

narrative of 2016 while simulta-

neously engaging in the same il-

licit activity that this narrative

was supposed to cover. The re-

sult is that last week, Americans

watched both impeachment

hearings and an aspiring show

trial. The latter was exhibited in

the opening statements of Devin

Nunes, who recited a repetitive

series of Kremlin talking points

like the dummy of a bored ven-

triloquist.

Similar to other members of

the GOP, Mr. Nunes is not a

watchdog but a lapdog, capable

only of doing Mr. Trump’s bid-

ding. Witness Gordan Sondland,

who candidly revealed the com-

plicity of Trump administration

members, is another example –

and Ms. Hill called him out for it.

“He was being involved in a do-

mestic political errand,” she said,

deploying a euphemism to de-

scribe Mr. Sondland’s complicity

in the Ukraine shakedown. “And

we were being involved in na-

tional security foreign policy and

those two things had just di-

verged.”

In other words, Ms. Hill was

working for the United States,

while Mr. Sondland was working

for Mr. Trump. The darker ques-

tion is who, exactly, does Mr.

Trump work for, and toward

what end. Mr. Trump has de-

signed U.S. policy to please Mr.

Putin while sabotaging any at-

tempt to hold the Kremlin ac-

countable for the 2016 election

interference. This is a profoundly

anti-American position that, as

Ms. Hill pointed out, puts the se-

curity of the 2020 election at risk.

The President’s ability to pull

off another election heist relies

on silencing people such as Ms.

Hill, Lt.-Col. Vindman and Ms.

Yovanovitch, who have seen his

machinations from the inside

and can explain them to the

American public. Impeachment

hearings threaten Mr. Trump be-

cause they happen in an envi-

ronment he cannot control,

where a neutral arbiter can

speak without media interlocu-

tors. Ms. Hill debunked Mr.

Trump’s fictions and followed

federal law. That she did so at a

time where following federal law

renders you a subversive in the

eyes of the President should un-

nerve everyone.

Trump’sstrategy:Investigatetheinvestigators.Willitwork?

SARAHKENDZIOR

OPINION

Co-hostofthepodcastGaslitNation
andtheauthoroftheupcoming
bookHidinginPlainSight