In the Shadow of Canada’s Camps
| Author | Martin French |
| Published date | 01 March 2007 |
| Date | 01 March 2007 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0964663907073446 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
IN THE SHADOW OF CANADA’S
CAMPS
MARTIN FRENCH
Queen’s University, Canada
ABSTRACT
States engaged in the war on terror have pursued war-time domestic security policies,
as reflected by special anti-terror legislation enacted, for instance, in Canada, the
United States, and the United Kingdom. Taking Canada as a case study, this article
argues that the pursuit of these policies exacerbates existent racial fissures in the social
body. Using elements of Giorgio Agamben’s theory of the state of exception as an
analytical framework, this article interprets empirical interview and survey data, as well
as the Canadian government’s national security policy. It highlights some of the
surveillance methods used by Canadian security forces and concludes that the conver-
gence of these methods with the spectacle of extraordinary detention evinces a shift
towards totalitarianism. For some, it is not the conditions of parliamentary democracy
that constitute the backdrop of political life, but the conditions of the detention camp.
KEY WORDS
Agamben; biopolitics; racism; security; surveillance; war
The totalitarian attempt at global conquest and total domination has been the
destructive way out of all impasses. Its victory may coincide with the destruction
of humanity . . . Yet to turn our backs on the destructive forces of the century is
of little avail. (Arendt, 1968: viii)
INTRODUCTION
IN ADDITION to effecting regime change in Afghanistan and Iraq, the war
on terror has had profound effects on people in countries the world over.
Take the following example as a case in point. In September 2002, Maher
Arar, who is a citizen of both Canada and Syria, was on his way to Montréal
SOCIAL &LEGAL STUDIES Copyright © 2007 SAGE Publications
Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore, www.sagepublications.com
0964 6639, Vol. 16(1), 49–69
DOI: 10.1177/0964663907073446
from Tunis. On a stopover at New York’s Kennedy International Airport,
Mr Arar was detained, fingerprinted, and photographed by the American
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). The INS questioned Mr Arar
for nine hours and accused him of knowing suspected terrorists in Canada –
an accusation he strenuously denied. After being held in solitary confinement
in a Brooklyn prison for over a week, with no access to legal counsel and no
prospect of due process, he was deported to Syria. Mr Arar spent a harrow-
ing 374 days in Syria before he was returned to Canada. For much of this
time he was confined in a chamber that he likened to a grave (Arar, 2003).
Although he was eventually returned to Canada, Mr Arar’s experiences stand
out as a threat in the post-9/11 security society created by the war on terror.
His case sends a clear signal: if you are identified as a suspected terrorist, you
have no rights.
This article is concerned with the effects of the war on terror, not as they
have unfolded in Afghanistan and Iraq, but as they have rippled outwards
through domestic spheres in the war’s aggressor states. It highlights the total-
itarian features intrinsic to contemporary rule, emphasizing their biopolitical
character. These features, at once exacerbated and obfuscated by the spectacle
of the war on terror, intensify systemic racism and pressure already existing
racial fissures. To underscore these claims, this article reads empirical inter-
view and survey data, as well as public policy on national security, using
elements of Giorgio Agamben’s theory of contemporary rule.1
The focal point of this article is Canada. Like the USA and the UK, Canada
quickly enacted austere anti-terror legislation after 9/11. This legislation
makes possible a number of law enforcement activities that would have been
inconceivable before that date. The most egregious of these activities from a
civil liberties perspective are the provisions made for detaining people in the
absence of habeas corpus. Still, in a recent review of this legislation by the
Special Senate Committee on the Anti-terrorism Act, the Minister charged
with its enforcement was able to claim that ‘there have been no arrests without
warrant’ (Canada, Senate, 2004). Not mentioned in this review, however, were
the names of Hassan Almrei (held since October 2001), Mahmoud Jaballah
(held since August 2001) and Mohammad Mahjoub (held since June 2000),2
and Mohamad Harkat (held since December 2002). These men, none of
whom are Canadian citizens, are being held indefinitely, without charge, on
security certificates issued under the authority of the Immigration Act (CAF,
2003). Though they are terror suspects, their cases went unmentioned
because they are not being held under anti-terror laws.
Clearly then, Canada’s anti-terror activities are much broader than is
admitted by Canada’s anti-terror legislation. A number of practices – exem-
plified by the extraordinary treatment of incarcerated terror suspects in
Canada, by the differential surveillance applied to suspect populations, and
ultimately by the spectacle of extraordinary rendition – characterize the post-
9/11 pursuit of security.3These practices go far beyond what is written in law.
To the majority they remain submerged from scrutiny, actively hidden by
officials who claim that to discuss them openly would be contrary to national
50 SOCIAL & LEGAL STUDIES 16(1)
To continue reading
Request your trial