|
Wake-up CALL |
|
describes the Inuit fight against chemical pollution that threatens their health and culture. |
| We Inuit are few in numbers there are 150,000 of us resident in northern Canada, Alaska, Greenland, and Chukotka in the Russian Far East but we occupy and use millions of square kilometres of land and ocean in the Arctic. Despite rapid social and economic change in the region, ours remains a land-based culture heavily dependent on traditional country food primarily marine mammals such as seals, walrus and whales.
In the late 1980s preliminary research in northern Quebec and southern Baffin Island suggested that many Inuit in northern Canada had very high levels of PCBs and DDT in their blood and lipid tissues. Canadas Northern Contaminants Programme (NCP) in which Inuit, Dene and Yukon First Nations actively participated generated considerable data throughout the 1990s and showed that the problem was the result of the long-range transport of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) originally released into the environment in tropical and temperate lands. Once they get to the Arctic, POPs degrade very slowly and bioaccumulate, particularly in the marine food web. We ingest them by eating what we hunt. The 1997 Canadian Arctic Contaminants Assessment Report published by the NCP shows that levels of certain POPs in some Inuit is 10 to 20 times higher than in most temperate regions with very worrying implications for public health.
This and other scientific data generated in the Arctic, primarily by Canada, supported the case for a global Convention. The 1997 State of the Arctic Environment report, published by the eight-nation Arctic Council, convinced many of the need for global action and equipped Sweden and Canada, in particular, to press UNEPs Governing Council to sponsor negotiations. Arctic indigenous peoples participated throughout negotiations as a coalition, which included Inuit represented by the Inuit Circumpolar Conference, the Dene Nation and Council for Yukon First Nations. We brought our values and concerns to the attention of decision-makers through comments on the science of POPs and interventions on the Convention floor, in breakout workshops, and through the media. I was the spokesperson for the coalition in all POPs negotiations.
'Imagine for a moment, if you will, the emotions we now feel; shock, panic, grief, as we discover that the food which for generations nourished us and keeps us whole physically and spiritually is now poisoning us. You go to the supermarket for food. We go out on the land to hunt, fish, trap, and gather. The environment is our supermarket. 'As we put our babies to our breasts, we feed them a noxious chemical cocktail that foreshadows neurological disorders, cancers, kidney failure, reproductive dysfunction. That Inuit mothers far from areas where POPs are manufactured and used have to think twice before breast feeding their infants is surely a wake-up call to the world. At all the negotiations we politely but firmly reminded delegates that to us, POPs are a matter of culture and public health as well as of environmental security. We also suggested that Inuit were, in effect, indicators of the worlds health canaries in the mine.
We learned a great deal during the negotiations. Initially, states and non-governmental organizations were highly ignorant of our situation in the Arctic and of us as a people. Over time this changed, largely as a result of our repeated interventions. Eventually, most states became sympathetic to our plight and were anxious to assist, notwithstanding the presence of lobbyists from the chemical industry. UNEP itself and particularly Executive Director Klaus Toepfer took every available opportunity to remind delegates of the need to address our concerns. A carving of an Inuit mother and child, which I presented to Klaus in Nairobi, became the conscience of negotiations, sitting on the chairs table at every session. Many negotiators took me to one side and said how pleased they were that this carving was the central image on the UNEP POPs web site. Host governments provided opportunities for us to illustrate the cultural connections between POPs, country food, and our way of life. The Government of Germany, for example, brought a well-known group of Canadian Inuit traditional dancers and singers to perform in front of negotiators in Bonn. This attracted very useful media and political attention. It meant much to me that my daughter was one of the performers, showing, celebrating and defending her culture.
The mainstream media know little about the Arctic. Nevertheless, they listened to what we said and quite accurately reported our case and concerns. The BBC, for example, came to Iqaluit, capital of Nunavut, to follow up early reports. We took their Washington-based correspondent seal hunting. He soon understood the conceptual connections we were pressing upon negotiators in the cavernous meeting rooms. Environmental organizations used their media savvy and connections to reinforce our advocacy.
We are only 150,000 people, but POPs threaten our very cultural existence. As a result, we insisted on a Convention that would address the public health concerns of mothers in all parts of the globe. Our advocacy was from the heart as well as the mind, but we avoided the often shrill politics of blaming. The Inuit way is to engage in the politics of influence not the politics of protest.
Second, we pressed the Government of Canada and all Arctic governments to propose new institutions to work with developing countries to carry out remediation projects and to monitor implementation. In this way we contributed significantly to acceptance of the Capacity Assistance Network (CAN) eventually included in the Convention. Finally, and at the request of the Secretariat of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) we with the Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North and the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme of the Arctic Council prepared a research programme to assess levels of POPs in country food in Arctic Russia. This was eventually funded by GEF, six of the Arctic states and Canadian foundations, and was repeatedly announced during negotiations.
It says it: Acknowledges, that the Arctic ecosystems and indigenous communities are particularly at risk because of the biomagnification of persistent organic pollutants and that contamination of their traditional foods is a public health issue.
Many countries have committed to ratifying it before the World Summit on Sustainable Development scheduled for Johannesburg in September 2002.
Robert Peary, the famous American Polar explorer once said of Inuit: Of what value to the world are these people? They have no culture to speak of, no written language. They value life only as a fox or a wolf. We have shown the world our value and we hope and intend to do so again on other global issues of importance in the Arctic. We are able to do this because we can draw on our rich and diverse cultural heritage. Hunting, fishing, and trapping continue to provide us with lessons of great relevance. We remain guardians of the natural environment. As we continue to navigate rapid social change it seems highly appropriate that Inuit provide advice to the world on issues that affect the health of our planet. Sheila Watt-Cloutier is President of the Inuit Circumpolar Conference Canada. |
|