The Canadian national security apparatus, like that of the US and its global allies is on a sweeping offensive. But whose nation and whose security is being defended? In Toronto, in late August, 21 Pakistani men and one man from India were rounded up and detained. They were detained under provisions of the ironically named Immigration and Refugee Protection Act that permit immigration officials to arrest any non-citizens whom they have “reasonable grounds” to believe is a “danger to the public.” Documents presented at their detention reviews claim that there is a reasonable suspicion that they pose a threat to national security. A representative of the Ministry stated that “they might in fact be perhaps a sleeper cell for al-Qaeda.”

No convincing evidence in support of these allegations has been presented. Even the RCMP has stated publicly that these men do not pose a threat to national security. But they are nonetheless trapped in the national security dragnet with virtually no rights. Their treatment demonstrates that once someone is defined as a “national security risk” they lose any pretence of civil and human rights and, in fact, are read out of the fabric of the nation. The war on terrorism is being invoked to sow fear, passivity and acquiescence in the racist denial of human rights.

These detentions serve as a warning to people of colour from the immigrant community, particularly people without status, that they should keep their heads down and stay out of politics or face jail and deportation in the name of “national security” and the “war on terrorism”. Since September 11 borders are being tightened up and more highly policed, paralleled by the extension of policing and surveillance into immigrant communities

The global reinforcement of the national security state is not an accident. The Bush administration’s doctrine of permanent war and the imperialist occupation of Iraq have domestic consequences in the US and Canada. There has been a drastic curtailment of democratic rights and civil liberties in the name of “Homeland Security”. The doctrine of preventative war against Iraq and other enemies spills over into preventative security, immigration measures and policing. The aim is to criminalize and break up “threats” before they start.

The repressive attacks on civil liberties go beyond those with precarious immigration status. During the Montreal anti-WTO demonstrations in July 2003 hundreds of people were arrested. Many were preemptively picked up in the supposedly safe “green” zone, which was a considerable distance from the site of the demonstrations and well after the demonstration had ended. Protesters were forced to post bail and agree to bail conditions limiting their right to be politically active. This is merely a continuation of a trend that has gone unchecked for years, whereby political activists are forced to live under bail conditions – such as non-association conditions with political groups, or conditions that they not be present at “unlawful” demonstrations (whatever that means) – that severely restrict the possibilities for political dissent.

Last year there was an unprecedented crackdown on student’s right to politically organize at Concordia University in Montreal. Anti-war protestors were also arrested at York University. Similar attempts could be launched at other campuses.

Groups, such as the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty (OCAP), that pose an effective resistance are targeted by police. When OCAP lead a march through Yorkville, in Toronto in August, hundreds of police were mobilized in a blatant attempt at intimidation. At the end of the demonstration the police arrested four demonstrators as they attempted to disperse. OCAP organizer John Clarke faces a retrial this October on charges stemming from the “Queen’s Park riot” of June 15, 2000. He is merely the last of over forty activists who were arrested in relation to this demonstration.

In the meantime, the homelessness crisis, which was already at disastrous proportions, continues to grow. Actions such as squats and tent cities have been met by police repression, in Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa, Vancouver, Victoria, Kitchener-Waterloo and Peterborough.

The growing represssion is also hitting aboriginal communities, which have endured long colonial histories of oppression. Military force has been employed against relatively recent struggles from Oka to Gustafsen Lake. Today’s militant aboriginal struggles are vulnerable in a generalized climate of fear, racism, and repression of political dissent and militant fightbacks.

The labour movement is standing on the sidelines in these crucial struggles, in spite of the fact that workers’ rights are very much under attack from reactionary provincial governments. Health care and education workers’ had their contracts ripped up in BC. Back-to work legislation is increasingly invoked and the right to strike in the public sector is badly undermined.

The ruling class offensive banks on a divide and conquer strategy. They believe that they can isolate targets of repression from “national security threats” and “illegal immigrants” to “bad protesters” and that there will not be a unified fightback against the assault on democratic rights and our past social gains. Those within the labour movement and the moderate left who attack “bad” protestors, or label some groups as “violent” or “terrorist” fall into this divide and conquer strategy. They make these groups vulnerable to state attack.