Two Freedoms. Hugh Segal

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ Canadian troops and civic relations officers, over seventy-five local elders listened to and engaged the visiting Canadians. Respectful pleasantries were exchanged and the local governor, who had been a force for stability and co-operation, invited the local elders to share their concerns and aspirations.

      One elder had with him a grandson who needed medical care. Another spoke of the need for more schools. Yet another elder rose and, in a very clear and precise way, explained the need for local gainful employment. He followed his talk by presenting a petition for Canadian investment so that electricity and the fresh water resources necessary for a pomegranate juice plant that would generate income and employment could be developed. The amount of money required would not have been more than the cost of running the NATO air base at Kandahar for one day. The request was duly noted and taken under advisement by the ranking Canadians present. But, in the end, it was outside the purview of Defence officials to deliver.

      Ensuring freedom from want is, however, as much a part of the rational remit of defence and security planning as ensuring that there is no risk of military threat or invasion. Putting off this most basic realization and failing to redesign our foreign policy to address it is the height of folly. Global and national security requires the bolstering of freedom from want!

      3

      Freedom from Fear: A Definition

      To build a world without fear, we must be without fear. To build a world of justice, we must be just. And how can we fight for liberty if we are not free in our own minds? How can we ask others to sacrifice if we are not ready to do so?[1]

      — Former U.N. Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld

      Freedom from fear is not just another freedom, like freedom of the press, freedom of religion, or freedom of association. It is the threshold freedom — a vital gateway to the other cherished freedoms.

      The tactic most used by illegitimate governments, under pressure from opposition parties, the media, or dissident groups, is to deploy the instruments of fear. People are fired from state-controlled university jobs, institutes are closed, media voices are silenced by abducting journalists or by intimidating licensed media owners; extra-judicial killings and abductions abound, and religions are suppressed. In order to execute this tactic, such governments will often facilitate the creation and operation of militias or roving gangs of pro-government, but not formally controlled forces. This allows the enemies of freedom, in or out of government, to claim deniability as a targeted reign of terror is deployed against the proponents of freedom or peaceful change.

      This violence produces a state of fear, not only amongst those who are the principal targets of such forces but also amongst the population generally. Being afraid is the first precondition for paralysis, inertia, or, while others are targeted, looking the other way — a crowd impulse on which dictatorships and authoritarian juntas always depend. Fear also serves as a strong motive for conforming, in order to avoid falling prey to governmental persecution. To lead an ordinary life, citizens are required to pledge obedience to the party or group in power. One could not, in places like pre-perestroika Eastern Europe, teach in the public school system or at university, or practise one of the professions, without being a member of “the party.” The same is also true in Syria or in the “state-owned enterprises” of China or in North Korea.

      Oxford defines freedom as “the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants” and “the absence of subjection to foreign domination or despotic governments.” Fear is defined in many ways but usually as “an unpleasant emotion caused by the threat of danger, pain, or harm.”[2]

      In the absence of freedom from fear, it is only fear that remains and the manipulation of events, lives, communities, and prospects by the purveyors of fear. Totalitarian and authori-tarian administrations depend on fear — it is their lifeblood.

      When freedom from fear is diluted or destroyed, other freedoms are reduced as well. The military juntas that ruled in Argentina and Chile in the recent past understood and the authoritarian regimes in Cuba, Syria, Libya, North Korea, and Iran today understand the leverage that the weight of fear can exercise, when expertly applied, to the scope of freedom. The fear of a confiscatory, punitive, and capricious government, accountable to no electorate, court, elected legislature, or media becomes the basis used by the fearful to negotiate for their own economic or physical survival; it is, of course, a context defined by the fear-dispensing regime itself. The currencies demanded by such regimes for escape from the punishments they threaten are typically loyalty, subservience, silence, material support, or cash. The agents of fear in such regimes, almost universally corrupt, all have whims to be indulged, and, depending on their rank and level of power, significant or relatively insignificant, are able to demand from citizens seeking service or attention or justice something “extra.” They are able to tell those seeking help, “You had better negotiate.” This was true in pre-perestroika Eastern Europe. It is still true in modern Russia or today’s China. It is neither surprising nor new that the greater the degree of authoritarianism of an administration, the greater the level of corruption exhibited by agents of the administration. Average citizens must face daily examples of dishonesty and corruption in their dealings with the state, greatly increasing the level of fear in their lives. Usually the only way to deal with such situations is through the payment of bribes; indeed, in most authoritarian states the need for such transactions is found in almost every aspect of life. Those with little resources to negotiate are the ones who are most afraid.

      In Russia, for instance, corruption is rampant, and freedom from fear is not remotely a reality. The rich and powerful oligarchs who control much of the Russian economy are friendly with the Kremlin; part of the essentially corrupt economic structure, they are able to do well. Those who choose not to be part of that system, however, or who do not show sufficient fear of authority, place themselves in danger of being jailed. Falling afoul of the justice system is something that instills great fear amongst Russians; for them, knowing who amongst the police, the local administration, or the armed forces can be trusted to be honest and fair is a difficult if not impossible task. Despite the fact that there are laws and a parliament, Russia does not offer a fair and just home to its citizens. Purporting to be a democracy does not mean you are a democracy.

      Another freedom diminished when there is a lack of freedom from fear is that of freedom of expression and freedom of the press. Looking at Russia again, it now stands 172nd out of 197 nations in the world in the “freedom of the press index,” next to Zimbabwe, Gambia, and the Congo. On July 13, 2012, the Russian Duma brought in a new law that changed libel from a civil offence to a harshly punished criminal one. It introduced particularly severe financial penalties for anyone who might criticize public officials. The Putin regime has targeted websites, NGOs, journalists, and think tanks. The message from all of these actions is that no one is safe who is not loyal to Putin.

      To be fair, historically, authoritarianism has never been very far from Russia’s soul. The tsars who ruled the country earlier and the Communist leaders who replaced them all relied on terror and a culture of fear to maintain their grip on power. Maintaining that culture of fear today takes consistent and dili-gent application. Threatening freedoms and spreading fear can take no holiday when democratic legitimacy is sketchy at best. But redeploying fear does not sustain legitimacy. It weakens it.

      ❖

      Healthy freedom from fear, when present, underpins a society of robust achievements. Freedom from fear allows for freedom to innovate and change. Freedom from fear results in a democracy where those elected to public office face genuine competition for those positions at regular intervals and accountability to judicial restraint and process. Freedom from fear goes hand in hand with a presumption of innocence and a police-judicial process that is subject to the rule of law, not just the product of the whims of those who happen to be in office. Freedom from fear in a democracy permits a broad spectrum of media and press who owe no fealty except to the media organizations СКАЧАТЬ