Mr. Speaker, I am deeply touched by the motion put forward by the hon. member for Ahuntsic, who has been very active over the years within the Armenian community.
When we talk about the concept of crimes against humanity, it is crucial to remember the profound significance of what they
represent. However, to define these actions does not explain this kind of almost inhumane behaviour.
I would like to quote the definition given by the Liberal member for Don Valley North, Sarkis Assadourian, last April when he moved a motion similar to the one now before the House. "The first time this term was used was in the London Charter of 1945, the structure and basis for prosecution of major war crimes before the international tribunal at Nuremberg. Crime against humanity presents a distinct category of international crimes. Article 6(c) of the charter defines crimes against humanity as murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population before or during the war; or persecution on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of all in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the tribunal whether or not in violation of the domestic laws of the country where the crime was perpetrated."
So as to not downplay the cruelty of actions taken against civilians, it is essential to remember, at least during the commemorative week, that behind these words are people, friends and faces.
On April 16, 1984, the People's Tribunal concluded that the Armenian genocide occurred in 1915 and 1916. The UN, however, still does not recognize this well known fact because, according to a former Quebec justice minister, Herbert Marx, and I quote from the May 23, 1984 issue of Le Devoir : ``-because of the interventions of the Turkish government within the UN itself, the Armenian genocide is not yet officially recognized''. And yet we know that nearly 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated.
The conspiracy of silence cannot go on, and these actions, as in the case of the Jewish people, must be recognized historically.
Still today, in 1996, over 120 peoples are victims of armed oppression and all kinds of violence from ideological adversaries in religious, racial or political conflicts. The use of military or armed means to resolve human conflicts must be banned from the behaviour of all peoples on this earth.
Canada must, through its democratic practices, continue to set an example and tirelessly condemn any resolution of conflict other than by peaceful, civilized and democratic means. These civilized means are part of the basic arsenal of peoples who respect human rights. Canada must take a stand and promote the resolution of human conflict by willpower, rather than by armed power.
By remaining silent or declining to recognize even a simple week commemorating crimes of genocide, particularly those committed against the Armenian people in 1915, Canada is encouraging the incomprehensible policy of letting time erode memory.
This simple recognition is in no way comparable to the seriousness of these reprehensible actions, but for Canadians it represents an assurance that their country will never support peoples who use these vile means as national policy, whoever they may be.
This symbolic gesture is significant for the entire international community and shows once again that Canada is among the great defenders of human rights. This symbolic gesture does not, however, have the same force of impact as a foreign policy that would, at all times, place human interests above trade interests. In fact, it is our foreign policy that leads us to think that the government will not support our motion; the proof is the amendment introduced for the same reasons that moved them to halt construction of a monument commemorating the genocide in Montreal this year. These reasons have to do with trade and can be found in the report of the joint committee reviewing Canadian foreign policy: non-interference and indifference. This report is quite revealing, with Canada systematically ignoring the importance of universal values of democracy and human rights.
The government's recent dealings with its trade partners makes me fear the worst. Far worse than the rejection of our motion, I fear the rejection of human rights in the name of business. What are we to think when Craig Kielburger, a young Canadian defending the rights of children in India, calls our Prime Minister to reason?
What are we to make of the Prime Minister's silence regarding the war in Chechnya, which is cruelly affecting civilians, during the G-7 summit on nuclear and security matters held in Russia, when well-known organisations for the defence of human freedoms such as Doctors Without Borders were doing nothing less than calling this conflict "the worst war in the world".
Such oversights, such silence are easier, and create no obligation. In a devious way they are promoting the violent resolution of human conflicts and oblivion. I hope I am wrong regarding the government's intentions, and that reason will allow us to have a collective memory so that we will never forget all these atrocities.
To this effect, we, in the Bloc Quebecois, urge the present government to set aside one week commemorating man's inhumanity to man, on the occasion of the 81st anniversary of the Armenian genocide. Only then will we be able to truly say that Canada is a true champion of human rights.
We remember the genocide of Armenians and we want everybody in Canada to remember it forever. This is the reason why we
brought this motion forward. This is a matter of respect for and friendship with the Armenian people and its history.
