Protesting Putin – Thousands Demonstrate Across Russia

Picture: Moscow Times. Young demonstrators call for democracy in the Russian capital on Sunday.

Across Russia yesterday, demonstrators took to the streets in opposition to Vladimir Putin and in support of boycotting the upcoming presidential elections in March. The rallies were called by Alexei Navalny, the politician widely regarded as Putin’s only significant political opponent. From Moscow to Vladivostok, thousands of Russian citizens, especially young people, braved police threats and frigid temperatures to make their voices heard.

The protests were conducted peacefully overall, with 257 arrests but no clashes with police reported across the country. This total is much lower than that of past demonstrations, and is especially impressive considering the general fervor with which police sought to adjourn the events. The most notable arrest was that of Navalny himself. He was forcefully detained immediately upon arrival at the Moscow rally, but urged supporters online to continue on without him. And in fact the protesters seemed completely undeterred by this detainment, with demonstrations in eastern Siberia having already taken place, and many in Moscow stating that they don’t support Navalny’s politics anyway.

Among that latter group are the liberal, globally-minded youth of Moscow. Their presence at the rallies was especially notable and highly charged. A 15-year-old girl, identified only as Nastia by the Moscow Times, said to reporters that “Putin has been president for longer than we’ve been alive. It’s time for a change.” Many of the adult protestors saw the youth not as harbingers of an election upset, but as a glimmer of hope in the more distant future. Their enthusiasm for engagement in civil society could be the greatest possible threat to the overwhelmingly unchallenged rule of Putin.

Navalny, however, presents a less compelling alternative to many of these same citizens. On the one hand, his attacks on the corruption in Moscow resonate widely with the people. He famously called Putin and his oligarchs a “party of crooks and thieves,” a label that more than half of Russians claimed to agree with in a 2013 poll. Navalny has dedicated much of his career to exposing the corruption and ulterior motives of the Russian political elite, and it is on this impetus that he campaigns. He advocates a free press, more spending on education and health, and taxing the oligarchs.

On the other hand, his nationalist views make critics extremely skeptical of his potential as an eventual leader. He has publicly used ethnic slurs, calling Georgians “rodents” while backing their expulsion from Russia. After demands that he apologize became too strong to ignore, the politician did release a statement (in Russian), but the public found it rude, patronizing, and completely insufficient. It is thus important to consider that his ascension to a position of power would inevitably bring along those views, and for many Russians dreaming of a better future, this stipulation is unacceptable. In any case, although he continues to lead the boycott of the March elections, Navalny is legally prohibited from running as a candidate for president.

Although yesterday’s protests were initially triggered by Navalny’s call, it became perfectly evident over the course of the day that the opposition had taken a form far beyond a gathering of his supporters. It was another early look at the budding movement for a free and democratic Russian society. So while it is practically guaranteed that Putin will win the March election and extend the term of his rule, it is equally evident, to those paying attention, that the storm of people power over Russia has begun to brew.

Public transport moves – also in nonviolence

Photo:  Left: “Members of DYFI ride bullock carts and stage a novel protest against the hike in bus fare in Salem on Sunday.” (E. LakshiNarayanan, via thehindu.com) – Right: “Demonstrators in Sao Paulo, Brazil, carry banners that read in Portuguese “Against the Fare” and “No Rise” during a protest against the bus fare increase.” (Andre Penner / Associated Press, via latimes.com, 2015)

An issue that affects almost everyone, that has mobilized people in both the past and present to raise their voices throughout the world, is public transport. This week, hikes in bus fare in Tamil Nadu inspired people to get involved in various cities throughout the Indian state. Students who often led the protests were joined by youth organizations and government employees, among others. Wednesday marked the third consecutive day of protests. Tactics to grab attention, to make their statement against the increase in fares, involved road blocks, demonstrations, the hand-over of a petition – and the riding of bull carts through the streets.

Earlier this month, the Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT) union called for protests at busy train stations throughout the UK over an increase in train fare prices. Late-2017 protesters took to the streets of the Canadian city Winnipeg to oppose a raise in bus fares. Another slightly more dramatic example comes from Peru in 2016. The population of marginal Lima-neighborhood Manchay protested the introduction of a new government-run transportation system that was to replace the existing privately-owned options and would have more than doubled the costs. The inhabitants of Manchay blocked their streets, leading to clashes between police and protestors that involved the use of teargas against civilians, and culminating in injuries and arrests. Resistance by the people did, however, bring the authorities to overrule their decision and keep the old system. Whether one supports such informal solutions or not, for the people of Manchay, the old system had been not only a cheaper option, but had provided a source of income as well.

In yet another case from South America, public transport has not merely been subject of such protests, but rather a trigger for much larger protest movements. In early June 2013 after public transportation fares had been raised, demonstrations erupted in São Paulo, Brazil’s biggest city, largely led by the Movimento Passe Livre (Free Fare Movement) advocating for free public transportation. Day by day and with growing media attention, the protests quickly attracted even more sympathizers with various social and political backgrounds and additional complaints. These qualms included the tremendous amounts of money spent on projects for the then upcoming World Cup and Confederations Cup, at a time when Brazil was struggling with many more basic problems, aggravated by economic downturn and inflation. Other issues brought to the front were those of prevailing corruption, as well as the police’s violent response to the demonstrations.

On June 20, more then a million Brazilians united for the protests, which had by then spread to dozens of cities throughout the country. It was then that former President Dilma Roussef announced concessions to the protesters’ demands. The following years have been witness to numerous large-scale protests in Brazil, but they deserve separate attention. While the violence during demonstrations should be condemned, Brazilian society seems to have become polarized and the country’s political situation is complicated. This particular example simply shows how public transportation became a matter of contention and trigger of mobilization for many.

One of the crucial aspects of nonviolent campaigns is mobilization – if you mobilize an insufficient number of people for your cause, it will be hard for your movement to succeed. It is thus essential to think about issues that concern large swaths of society and can motivate many to get involved, creating an incentive to stand united in support of your campaign. As illustrated by the examples above, public transport has proven to be one of them.

People Power – Women’s Marches Around the World

Picture – Chicago Tribune. “Weekend of women’s marches promises continued momentum”

As CANVAS aims to spread the word of “people power” to the world, nonviolent struggle proves a powerful tool for achieving freedom, democracy, and human rights. In line with CANVAS’s mission, this weekend bore witness to a global Women’s March.

January 21st, 2018 marked the one-year anniversary of the Women’s March in Washington DC last year. Over the weekend, “thousands of women, femmes, and allies” came together around the world in commemoration and advancement of their cause. Their mission, to “Look Back, March Forward and launch [their] collective 2018 Women’s March agenda: #PowerToThePolls”. The goal is to empower women and their allies, first by having their voices heard through their votes, and then further through their inclusion in positions of influence and power, especially in government. Moreover, the marches also highlighted the #MeToo and Time’s Up movements against sexual assault and harassment.

Marching in Solidarity

Women, men, and children around the world marched in solidarity this weekend at over 500 events across six continents including in: France, New Zealand, Kyrgyzstan, Zambia, Spain, Ecuador, Italy, the United Kingdom, the US, and more.

USA Dozens of Women’s Marches filled cities across the United States, at which attendees supported and advocated women’s rights and equality. This year’s main focus was on making people’s voices heard by urging supporters and allies to vote in the upcoming midterm elections. The rally held in Las Vegas, Nevada marked the official anniversary rally of last year’s Women’s March held in Washington DC. The main focus was “using activism to generate concrete action at the ballot box”. Tamika Mallory, co-chairwoman of the national Women’s March organization, proclaimed: “We have to march together, we have to organize together, we have to mobilize together and we have to vote together, even when we don’t like one another”. Other marches were simultaneously taking place in Seattle, Miami, Phoenix and several other cities across the country and even around the world.

Toulouse, France A #MeToo gathering was organized on Sunday the 21st for the Women’s March anniversary weekend. Both women and men gathered to share their experiences, while at the same time learning about others’ experiences, in an attempt to produce ideas for positive change. The vision is to create a world in which the sons and daughters of people around the world are respected and treated equally. Power and change comes from people gathering and sharing their experiences, while at the same time supporting each other.

Athens, Greece The people of Greece marched for change, highlighting that it is time to make a difference and “press for the world that we want”. They marched for women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, equality in the workplace, refugee rights, climate change, gender equality, and religious tolerance.

Munich, GermanyPeople marched from Siegestor to Marienplatz “to rally for the foundational rights and dignity of all people and register US citizens to vote in upcoming elections”. Meghan Driscoll, the Munich chapter chair of Democrats Abroad, emphasized that “while this march supports women taking on greater leadership roles, a fundamental part of that empowerment is to first listen to women and believe in them”. A significant goal of the march was to send a loud and clear message to Washington that “President Trump’s personally abhorrent behavior (accused of sexual assault and harassment) will not be tolerated in the future”.

“Every little step we take together for a good cause will take us into a better future.”

Ethiopian Opposition Leader Merera Gudina Freed from Prison

Picture: Al Jazeera. The Omoro people protest their discrimination and disenfranchisement by the Ethiopian government.

The leader of the Oromo Federalist Congress, the opposition party representing Ethiopia’s largest ethnic group, has been released after spending more than a year in prison. Gudina, a fixture in Ethiopian politics since the 1960s, has spent his career building bridges and fighting for democracy. Along with Gudina, the government has also annulled or pardoned the cases of 115 other politicians.

In December 2016, after returning to Ethiopia from Brussels, Gudina was arrested for charges including “association with terrorist groups” that violated the state of emergency in place at the time. Gudina and his supporters claim that the charges were simply an excuse for the government to lock away the opposition, although Ethiopia has always insisted that it holds no political prisoners.

Their claim proves extremely difficult to substantiate in this case, as the arrest of Gudina was made upon his return from the European Parliament, where he had criticized the state of emergency in a public address. The state of emergency in question had been implemented as a response to protests in the region of Oromo, where the people demanded that the government open up political space, allow dissent, and tolerate different perspectives. These protests left more than 1000 dead and led to countless arrests without charge.

Gudina, among the most prominent of those arrested without clear or justified reason, has long had the Oromo public calling for his release. He has, from his arrest, been a clear ‘political prisoner’ in the eyes of the people. Even though the government has accused him of conspiring to “dismantle or disrupt social, economic and political activity”, they nevertheless deny that he was arrested in December 2016 with internal political motivations.

Many see the release of Gudina and the other politicians as a sign of hope; others are far less optimistic. When news of the planned annulments broke two weeks ago, both local and international news outlets reported on Ethiopia’s plan to release its political prisoners. Almost immediately, government agencies stepped in to correct the news, telling reporters worldwide that Ethiopia does not hold political prisoners.

How then does the country consolidate its denial of oppressive tactics with its current attempts at enhancing democracy? With no other significant developments accompanying the pardons, it seems that the government has not given the prospect as much thought as activists would like to hope. While many western news outlets frame it optimistically regardless, the African newspaper Mail & Guardian covered this development with the headline: “Ethiopia has released a handful of prisoners – but nothing else has changed”. Progress will, in reality, continue to depend on the agency and motivation of the people to hold their government accountable for its serious flaws.

Small Farmers Resist Palm Oil Ban in Malaysia

Picture: Channel News Asia. Farmers take to the street in demonstration at Kuala Lumpur

Indigenous farmers and activists in Malaysia have launched a campaign to combat the European Union’s proposed ban on palm oil in biofuels from 2021. This is an attempt to reduce the demand causing human rights abuses and environmental destruction that comes hand-in-hand with mono-production of palm oil. The European Union looked to introduce this ban as palm oil production in massive quantities causes “socio-environmental disasters without exception.”

Groups of small farmers have united in their approach: a photo campaign accompanied by press release statements, a petition, and a street protest in Kuala Lumpur, the capital of Malaysia. They call for a more nuanced take on the ban, an examination of how palm oil farming appears from an indigenous farmer’s perspective. Yesterday Jan 16, over 1,700 farmers collected in the center of the Kuala Lumpur and marched to the diplomatic offices of European representatives to deliver a petition. The petition had garnered over 103,078 signatures from around the country. The next step is possible retaliation from Malaysia “by banning all EU imports if the ban was to go ahead”.

The organizers of this campaign, Dayak Oil Palm Planters Association of Sarawak (DOPPA), released a statement in which they thank the efforts of NGOs attempting to protect indigenous communities from exploitation, but insist it is time for indigenous peoples themselves to be heard. The group points out that if the heart of the ban on palm oil is to reduce deforestation, and then Malaysia should be an exception to the rule as large swaths of forest are already protected.

DOPPA President Dr Richard Mani uses powerful language, saying the ban is an attack on the well-being of indigenous communities, calling it a ‘Crop Apartheid,’ and comparing palm oil to a lifeline, saying communities “have used palm oil to lift ourselves and our families out of poverty, and build new hope for the future.”

Indigenous movements are often coalition movements, perhaps out of necessity, and use clear methods of nonviolent resistance. In this case, the march in the capital is a classic tactic. The launching of a photo campaign takes advantage of the digital age. This effort may move Malaysian indigenous groups into other indigenous circles globally, those whose livelihoods have been distorted or co-opted – perhaps an angle to locate allies as this campaign continues.

You can find more information here: facesofpalmoil.org

See No Evil, Hear No Evil – Censorship in Lebanon

Since its inception, the film industry has always stirred up controversy within countries. Whether for political reasons or moral ones, film censorship or review organizations uphold standards for the banning of controversial content. More specifically, censorship is a widespread phenomenon in Lebanon. Some films, especially within the last few years, have been explicitly prohibited from public screening, causing great controversy amongst the Lebanese population.

January 2018 – Steven Spielberg BANNED AGAIN

Days before its release, it has come to the attention of the Lebanese citizens that “The Post”, yet another of acclaimed Hollywood director Steven Spielberg’s movies, has been banned. Initially passing the government’s usual screening procedures, the Campaign to Boycott Supporters of Israel-Lebanon (CBSIL) has influenced the government to block the film due to Spielberg’s ties to Israel.

The Arab League’s Central Boycott Office blacklisted Spielberg due to his $1 million donation to Israel at the time of the 2006 conflict with Lebanon. Due to Lebanon’s official status of war with Israel and laws dating back to the early 1930s, any affiliation with Israel is explicitly prohibited and banned. As a result, a six-member committee from the Ministry of Economy relayed their concern to the General Security Agency, a mechanism of the Ministry of Interior. The message was consequently elevated within the Ministry of Interior, which makes the final decision.

Criteria for Censorship

Criteria for censorship in Lebanon are depicted in numerous laws, some of which date back to 1934. At times, these laws are vague to an extent that they are paradoxical: “they permit the censoring institution to censor something, while at the same time allowing it”.

Mainly, the categories under which this censorship criteria fall are: foreign political considerations, foreign relations with friendly countries, relations with enemy states, and material on religion or which contains religious content.

“What the censors aim for, according to one of the laws, is to preserve public order, morals, and ethics and to avoid sectarianism and hurting public sensitivities.”

Controversy Sparked Amongst the Lebanese

Not the first of its kind to be banned, Spielberg’s movie joins both Wonder Woman and the Justice League, which were also prohibited from being publicly screened in Lebanon earlier in 2017. Debate surrounding these bans has become contentious.

On the one hand, people firmly believe that the issue is not up for debate, claiming that “opposition to Israel is not a matter of opinion”. Their motivation is driven by the impulse to resist Israel and to oppose any normalization of relations with a country that is declared to be at war with Lebanon.

Whereas, on the other hand, local civil society organizations such as MARCH Lebanon – a Non-Government Organization (NGO) that advocates for freedom of expression – are speaking up against this practice of censorship and banning. Those who opposed the ban believe that government and religious authorities take advantage of the broadness of censorship laws to repress certain ideologies. Thus, though they are refusing the ban of Spielberg’s recent movie, they make clear that it is not from a pro-Israeli or anti-boycott standpoint, but rather a pro-freedom of expression one. MARCH Lebanon has even sparked controversy with a contentious Instagram post, creating debate amongst the Lebanese people as to whether they are in favor of the ban or not.

Overall, Lebanon’s censorship bureau is active and operating at full capacity. The controversy, however, remains whether the tactics and reasoning for banning actually serve the best interest of Lebanon.

**UPDATE**
As grassroots organizations and NGOs in Lebanon boycotted the banning of the film “The Post” by Steven Spielberg, the government has reversed its decision and the film will be released on January 18th in all cinemas in Lebanon. The initiative to reverse the governments’ decision is part of a larger scale movement by the Lebanese citizens to curb “unjust and inconsistent censorship of arts and culture in Lebanon which has been on the rise recently” (MARCH Lebanon).

Crumbling Democracy and Protest Movements in Evo Morales’ Bolivia

Picture: Early December, an egg-protest depicted the lack of courage to stand up against the Morales-administration. “This is a peaceful protest, we do not get anyone to throw eggs, we only bring eggs to business people if they are missing,” said María Belén Mendívil, spokesperson for the protest. 

Published 10. January 2018

In the last week of 2017, CANVAS wrote about the rising tension in Honduras, after the November 2017 elections turned into a true stand-off. A little further south, in Bolivia, citizens also face an increasingly authoritarian government. As President Evo Morales tries to sideline the country’s constitution to assure himself of another term in office, Bolivian citizens are rising up to restore democracy in their Andean country, using nonviolence as one of their main weapons.

Morales’ path to the Presidency

Evo Morales’ political career originated from protest movements against former President Sánchez de Lozada (in 2003) and his successor Carlos Mesa (in 2005). These movements evolved from the grievances caused by two decades of so called “pacted democracy”, in which three main political parties governed the country in shifting coalitions. Their market reforms, involving liberalization, deregulation and privatization, had an exclusionary bias that caused most of Bolivia’s poor and indigenous people to feel excluded and marginalized. The grievances associated with neoliberal reforms added to this. Already during the 1990s, indigenous and social movements increasingly challenged the system of agreements between elites.

Between 2000 and 2005, a series of political crises caused massive social protests and forced two Presidents out of office. The protest movement also paved the way for Morales, who was a union leader and coca grower himself. Late 2005, Morales was elected President of Bolivia, becoming the country’s first head of state of indigenous origin. Since then, Morales has led a process of decisive political change that has included a profound reshaping of the country’s political system through constitutional reform as well as a change of course in economic, social and coca/drug policies.

A new constitution was drafted and a broad majority (61%) adopted the new document in a referendum early 2009. By significantly increasing the role of the state in the economy, Morales was able to boost economic growth at an average rate of 5.15% a year between 2006 and 2016. His social policies significantly improved indigenous rights, and reduced poverty and inequality.

Crumbling Democracy

Bolivian President Evo Morales and his Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS) are still supported by a broad majority of the Bolivian population. Morales is particularly popular among the so-called “popular sectors”, which includes the country’s diverse indigenous majority. The President was re-elected for a third term in the 2014 elections with more than 60% of the vote, allowing the governing MAS party to maintain its two-thirds majority in Parliament.

But with time, Morales seemed to develop an understanding of democracy that did not apply to him. Despite the fact that the Bolivian Constitution only allows for a President to serve two terms in office, Morales’ 2014 electoral victory was the start of his third consecutive term. Early October 2017, Morales launched his bid to extend legal term limits clearing the way for him to run for a fourth term in 2019. On November 28, 2017, the Bolivian Constitutional Court then annulled Constitutional articles that forbid Morales to run for a fourth term in the 2019 presidential elections, allowing indefinite reelection.

This decision is the more salient, as the Bolivian people has already decided against that exact possibility in a 2016 referendum. The “No” option won nationwide with 51.3% of the votes. Nevertheless, halfway 2017 Morales’ Movement to Socialism ignored the will of the people, and asked the country’s highest court to rescind legal limits barring elected authorities from seeking re-election indefinitely. The party argued that the term limits violate human rights. With the Constitutional Court ruling in favor of that argument, Morales might have gone one step too far.

Pro-democracy Movements

Already in October, thousands of people across the country participated in protest-rallies against Morales’ bid for re-election in 2019. Two months later, as the decision of the Constitutional Court ruled in favor of Morales and his Movimiento al Socialismo, the protest movement revived. According to Jhanisse Vaca Daza, “citizens took to the streets to protest on the day the Constitutional Court ruling was announced, and have stayed active through different means of protest since.”

Several new action groups have appeared in Bolivia over the last year, characterized by certain features not seen before in the Southern-American state. Where male actors used to dominate the Bolivian political space, several activist groups strongly empower women and project them as the new leaders in society. Protests are also turning increasingly creative. A group of female protesters brought eggs to the Chamber of Industry and Commerce as an offering of encouragement to have the “balls” to stand up against the government early December. Around that same time, activists from the Kuna Mbarete group staged a symbolic funeral for the Civic Committee, as that body failed to pronounce itself against the Constitutional Court ruling.

Finally, the nature of the protest-movement opposing the Morales-administration has also fundamentally changed. In the past, movements have backed particular individuals and their battle to facilitate Morales’ fall from the throne. But the Bolivian population has turned its eyes to younger generations looking for new leaders, with new developments mainly concentrated in the city of Santa Cruz. Currently, citizen platforms are organizing themselves in a singular, horizontal group of socially coordinated movements, which seek to “empower not any one individual but the message of struggle for democracy itself,” according to Vaca Daza.

In line with this new strategic direction, over 15 platforms and independent activists united themselves with a manifesto on December 29th. A broad coalition of student unions, female civic resistance groups, health workers, environmental groups and democracy activists pledged to build on the active and interventionist tactics of nonviolent resistance to “resist the tyranny” and called on fellow citizens to join them in making their voice heard. CANVAS will be following the developments in Bolivia closely!

Tension is Rising in Honduras, as Election Standoff Continues

Picture: Supporters of opposition presidential candidate Salvador Nasralla march in protest for what they call electoral fraud in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, Dec. 3, 2017 – Credit: AP Photo/Rodrigo Abd

Mainly outside the scope of the mainstream media, tension has been rising in Honduras, over the 26th of November election results. Most recently, the United States of America have recognized the re-election of Honduran President Hernández, despite massive allegations of fraud. What do you need to know about the developments in the central-American country?

November 2017 Elections

Juan Orlando Hernandez, who became the country’s President in 2012, has not been famous for his stunning human rights record. Several journalists and human rights activists have been killed over the last couple of years, almost always with impunity. Where the Honduran Constitution strictly allows Presidential candidates to only one term in office, those rules were declared “inapplicable” to Hernandez by the Supreme Court in 2015, paving the way for his reelection bid for the 2017 race.

Despite the ruling National Party’s abuse of public resources, the electoral campaign offered Honduran citizens several alternatives for President. The opposition, however, was heavily divided between the center-right Liberal Party and the center-left Opposition Alliance. It was therefore a huge surprise when, with nearly 60% of the votes counted, Salvador Nasralla led by five percentage points. One of the magistrates on the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, called his win “irreversible,” and Liberal candidate Luis Zelaya publicly recognized Nasralla with his victory.

Then, the ruling party’s authoritarian forces started working, and after a 24-hour radio silence, the electoral council announced Hernandez as the winner. This dubious shift triggered accusations of fraud and, subsequently, street protests. As the authorities cracked down on protesters, the state declared a state of emergency early December, establishing a curfew and the right to involve the participation of the armed forces to support the national police in maintaining security and order. At least 14 people were killed during post-election protests, and more than 800 people have been arrested, according to Amnesty International.

Protest Movement got sparked

But the genie seems to be out of the bottle in Honduras. Over the last few weeks, “the disputed election has united diverse opposition groups and sparked a pro-democracy protest movement calling for a full and transparent recount.” Where several protests have led to violent standoffs between activists and security forces, a nonviolent movement has also taken hold of Honduras. The movement has mainly build on Honduran youths, leading peaceful rallies and candlelight vigils, while distributing white orchids to those who are supposed to repress them. The actions have even led members of the Honduras National Police force to refuse orders from the right-wing Hernandez government. Only a week ago, Honduras’ Opposition Alliance called on the protesters to continue their struggle in the streets.

Role Played by the International Community

Despite these hopeful developments, the opposition still faces significant challenges. The international community could play an important role in Honduras’ current struggle. On December 17, the same day that Juan Orlando Hernández was officially declared the winner by the electoral council, the Secretary General of the Organization of American States, declared that the election process was plagued by irregularities, and called for new elections. The US, however, recently validated the results favoring Hernandez’s reelection.

The United States is by far Honduras’ most important international partner, providing large sums of security assistance to its government. Moreover, a large portion of Honduras’ GDP is due to receiving remittances from the States. Despite organizations calling on the American government to denounce fraud and violent repression following the elections, the Trump administration has decided to re-certify the Honduran government as complying with human rights protocols in order to allow the financial assistance to continue. As Steven Levitsky and Carlos Flores write in LA-times, “U.S. officials view the right-wing Hernandez as an ally, [and therefore] they seem willing to give him a pass on democracy and human rights.”

How has the United States policy of promoting democracy in the Americas changed over time? And how could the opposition movement overcome severe challenge for their pro-democracy movement?

Read more about the Honduras-situation here, here, and here.

Inauguration Day Protesters’ Trial Could Set Dangerous Precedent For Government’s Handling of Civil Disobedience

Photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images (Via The Intercept)

On 20 January 2017, the United States saw mass protests against the inauguration of Donald Trump as the country’s next President. Where most protest-efforts, better known as J20, were focused on disrupting the official event in a nonviolent way, over 200 people were arrested in Washington that day. Activists clashed with the police close to the White House, “in an outburst of violence rare for an inauguration,” according to Reuters. Black block anarchists smashed windows, threw bottles and rocks at the police, and set cars on fire. Police encircled a large group of protesters and thereafter arrested them. Now, almost a year later, 194 of those who were arrested face their trials in small groups, with charges including felony property destruction, misdemeanor rioting, and misdemeanor conspiracy to riot.

Salient feature in their process is that the public prosecutors never made the argument that the defendants actually broke the windows or otherwise destroyed property. To make its case against nearly 200 defendants, the prosecution is using the Pinkerton liability rule. This rule attributes every crime committed during what is judged to be a “conspiracy” to all those involved. In this particular case, by marching with those who committed violence, wearing the same style of clothes, and chanting the same slogans, the suspects “provide[d] cover for the ‘sea of black’ and those [who were actually] committing destruction,” argued assistant US Attorney Rizwan Qureshi. A conviction would mean that all defendants on trial for the protests can be sentenced for all crimes committed during the action by mere virtue of their proximity to the crimes committed.

As one author justly asked, is marching in a group the same as driving a getaway car? Defense attorneys have argued that, by failing to make the distinction between lawbreakers and protesters, the case amounts to criminalizing the First Amendment of the American Constitution. This Amendment should guarantee the freedom to associate with each other, and protects US citizens from being prosecuted for being present, walking, wearing clothing or having (antifascist) opinions the government does not approve off, according to the defense attorneys.

The prosecution of one particular protester has given this court-case an even more complicated character. Defendant Alexei Wood, a photojournalist from Texas, whose work focuses on resistance movements, live-streamed the entire demonstration, covering the violent acts amongst other things, before getting arrested. In an interview with The Intercept, Wood stated that part of the government’s case against him revolves around defining who is — and, in his case, who isn’t — a journalist. According to Woods and his attorney, that is not a determination which the state is supposed to make. In addition to undermining the First Amendment right to political speech, specifically Wood’s prosecution is portrayed as an alarming reflection of the government’s attempt to define — and criminalize — journalism.

Out of many, let us choose two points to make about all this. First of all, next to the fact that the charges together carry a maximum sentence of 50 years in prison, the prosecution of these protestors could set a dangerous precedent for the freedom of activists all over the United States. “The dispute comes down to what the First Amendment does or doesn’t protect.” Although CANVAS would never put itself behind any form of violence in a campaign for social change, this court case could put prosecution of civil disobedience on a sliding scale. Where many critics have said that the prosecutors’ strong opinions are a sign of a nationwide toughening stance against protest, a right balance needs to be found between what the First Amendment protects, and public safety. Sentencing activists for vague and seemingly trumped-up charges does not seem to secure any of the two.

Nevertheless, these events show the importance of nonviolence and nonviolent discipline. Where anarchists and Antifa-groups might use destruction of property and other forms of violence as a conscious method in their struggle, this method will withhold them from mobilizing critical masses and building large coalitions needed for sustainable social progress. Nonviolent discipline then will not only save your activists from unnecessary encounters with state-forces, but will also strongly de-legitimize those same forces when a confrontation will prove inevitable.

A jury will now decide over the first batch of prosecuted protesters, including Alexei Wood. The remaining protesters will be put on trial in groups of five or six, over the next year.

Read more about the importance of nonviolent discipline in CANVAS’ Core Curriculum (page 90 and onwards).

Published 21/12/2017

Music as a Tool in Protest and Nonviolence? – Yes!

Photo: “Martello (L) also played with the crowd as he brought his grand piano to what was the center of a battlefield a day earlier.” (Hürriyet DAILY NEWS photo, Emrah GÜREL)

Published on 19/12/2017

Last Wednesday, The Hill featured an article by Judy Kurtz, addressing the topic of protest songs. Making reference to different artists in the past and presence, Kurtz examines the current role of protest-music in what she calls a “noisy political climate”. Different voices made various claims to why, but mostly agreed that protest songs are largely missing in the US today. Not saying they are totally absent, there at least seems to be a lack of big names or wide reach. This is unlike in the 1960s and early 1970s, when songwriters and musicians “gave voice to a generation, as Vietnam sparked violence at home and Watergate toppled a president, by capturing the angst and pain of a tumultuous political climate.”

What is different now? The arguments range from claims of a lesser urgency of what is happening, through a scattered pop culture, to a different media landscape today in comparison to before. Music analyst Bob Lefsetz further claimed that, besides frequently voicing criticism, artists seem reluctant and afraid to be ‘too’ political in their songs, fearing to alienate fans. In this context, Lefsetz makes reference to the country music band Dixie Chicks. Their music was widely stopped from airing on country music stations, after a comment by its lead singer criticizing then-President Geogre W. Bush at a London concert which some fans perceived as “unpatriotic”.

But maybe, it is also a matter of perspective. Pitchfork and Stacey Anderson, drew a slightly different picture in November, stating that “in 2017, ‘protest music’ seemed like a redundant term; when all identities are this politicized, all music feels political.” According to Pitchwork and Anderson, “[t]his year redefined our notions of politically reactive music: what it sounds like, who it comes from, and how much identity ignites its contents. Unlike other modern eras of American populist resistance, there was no single, centralized scene for discordant song […]. Sometimes they explicitly condemned the policies and people who dominated the year. And, just as often, for many artists, visibility itself was the defiance; this was music made by the marginalized voices Trump was working to exclude.” Taking this broader range of styles and topics into consideration for what they would categorize as protest music, Pitchfork and Anderson compiled a list of 20 songs, including well-known names like Eminem, Kendrick Lamar and Beyoncé.

If you were wondering, why discuss the subject of (protest) music? Music has played an important role in nonviolent movements around the world, and different sources have addressed the ‘power of music’ in this context. But before explaining where and how music has played an important role, put on this song from Turkey as your background tune to get inspired by one example of protest music. As PRI described it, this song by the well-known ensemble “Kardes Turkuler” (Songs of Fraternity) became “a sort of anthem for the protests” that happened mostly around Gezi Park and Taksim Square, in Istanbul, 2013. And this “Song of Pots and Pans” was not the only case in which music and humoristic elements took an important part in Turkey’s protests (also see cover photo).

In the US, the aforementioned role of music in the anti-Vietnam war movement is also only one example. Earlier in the United States, the Civil Rights Movement also largely counted on the power of music, even to a degree which inspired the documentary “Soundtrack for a Revolution” to address this topic in 2009. During the Civil Rights Movement, “’freedom songs’ raised courage, stated the goals, declared commitment, united separated communities, and sometimes took melodic aim at notorious police chiefs”, as Mary Elizabeth King put it on Waging Nonviolence in 2011. One of its most powerful and well-known songs has probably been “We shall overcome”.

In Ukraine during its 2004-2005 Orange Revolution, musicians played at rallies, 17 days in a row, day and night, to support those on the streets and give them “staying power”. And more recently at the beginning of the Syrian uprising or elsewhere during the Arab Spring, music also played a role in nonviolent opposition. But one of the most powerful examples of music in nonviolent movements and resistance, has probably been what even became known as the “Singing Revolution” in Estonia, restoring its independence from the Soviet Union at the end of the 1980s, alongside its neighboring Baltic states Lithuania and Latvia.

Reading Mary Elizabeth King’s article as well as listening to interviewees on an event by the United States Institute of Peace which brought together activists, artists and peacebuilders to explore music as a strategic tool in nonviolent resistance, several aspects seem to explain the  power of music in nonviolence. First, the music represents a powerful medium to articulate one’s message. In music, the latter can be expressed not only through the words themselves, but also through its rhythm and melody, something rather universal. It is thus easier to reach people on different levels, including not only their reason, but their emotions as well. Music as a medium to express oneself can sometimes even be the only way to do so, when other mediums are regulated and limited. In this, the internet as a possibility to publish and disperse such music, has also played an important role.

Regarding music’s universal character and ability to affect people more easily, it is also a powerful tool to mobilize people and create solidarity with those who might not have been supporters or even opponents of a cause. And it can certainly act as a crucial means to create unity in a movement and its activities, thus helping to uphold one of the three basic factors of success. And it can also help encourage people to stick to nonviolent discipline and keep faith, especially in otherwise repressive environments. Mary Elizabeth King wrote: “As in the civil rights movement, singing the right song at the fitting moment can involve heart, mind, body, soul—one’s entire being—in making the decision to face fear, stand unflinching in attacking the political power of the adversary, or confronting likely grave retaliation.”

These former examples and arguments have shown, that music can play a vital role in nonviolence on many levels. And it underlines again, that not everyone who wants to make a political statement or contribute to a movement has to be very ‘political’ to start with, or go out to protest in the street. As with the sewing of protest banners, making use of one’s individual talent and creativity, in this case through music, can make a great contribution to nonviolent movements. May it be to inspire people through its lyrics, melody and rhythm, to become a symbol or means of protest itself, or to support the morale in the field.

Find out more about protest songs and music here: