Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2018

The Current Transcript for May 9, 2018

Host: Anna Maria Tremonti

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Listen to the full episode

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

AMT: Today her memoir is a bestseller. Her talent is celebrated and as an Indigenous woman, she doesn't have to run away any more. The author of 'Heart Berries' joins me with her story in an hour. I'm Anna Maria Tremonti. This is The Current.

Back To Top »

'A high-risk, high-reward gamble': What happens next with the Iran nuclear deal?

Guests: Derek Stoffel, Laura Holgate, Behnam Ben Taleblu

SOUNDCLIP

DONALD TRUMP: We will not allow a regime that chants death to America to gain access to the most deadly weapons on Earth. Today's action sends a critical message: the United States no longer makes empty threats. When I make promises, I keep them.

AMT: While scrapping the Iran nuclear deal was indeed something the U.S. president, Donald Trump had promised to do, he'd referred to his predecessor Barack Obama's diplomatic achievement as "the worst deal ever." And now after President Trump's dramatic withdraw from the deal yesterday, reaction around the world has been both swift and fluid. Iran is indicating that it could forge ahead with nuclear plans, but also that it wants meetings with the other signatories. France and Germany have signaled they want to keep the agreement alive. And within hours some saw as a reaction of another kind was playing out in Syria as Israel reportedly bombed an Iranian military site near Damascus. Derek Stoffel is the CBC's Middle East correspondent. He joins us from Jerusalem. Hi Derek.

DEREK STOFFEL: Good morning, Anna Maria.

AMT: Now Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is already on the move. He's in Moscow today, what's the connection?

DS: Well he went to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin and the reason given by his office is that they want to discuss military coordination inside Syria. You know, the Israelis don't explicitly, usually don't explicitly say they've carried out these strikes, but they have had an open line over the last number of years to make sure that there is this coordination. But a big part of his trip is also to try and convince Putin that he shouldn't go down the line and work with Iran to keep the deal alive, the Iran nuclear deal alive, if it does die.

DS: And so was yesterday's bombing in Damascus related?

DS: Well the official policy from Israel's military is they never comment publicly about these strikes, but we do know that there have been a number of airstrikes attributed to the Israelis back in February. There was the rare occasion where the Israelis did admit, yes this was us, after an Iranian drone came into Israeli airspace. And then what is it, a month ago today, when there was a big explosion inside Syria, a couple of bases targeted and then that is the same situation that we seen that happened just hours after Trump spoke in Washington, explosions reported near Damascus. But perhaps the biggest, you know, security threat the Israelis face right now comes from Iran and its buildup, military buildup inside Syria.

AMT: And so what can you tell us about the security situation just over on the other side, in the Golan Heights?

DS: It's tense for sure. We do know that the security situation in the Golan is quite tense and the Israeli forces stationed there are on their highest alert. And just before Trump spoke yesterday the Israel Defense Forces gave us notice that they've opened up bomb shelters for residents in the Golan and we do know that they've moved missile defenses up into the Golan Heights and they've got extra troops patrolling the border. The concern there is that Iranian backed forces might try to infiltrate into Israeli territory. So things are tense up in the Golan with residents being told, yes you can go, go to school today, the schools are open, but they've closed a number of sites that look over the border as there is a concern that you know that a strike from Iranian-backed forces inside Syria is imminent.

AMT: Now you're also tracking Iran's response to what the U.S. has announced.

DS: Yes. And it's sort of, you know, there's more of a moderate response I think I could say from Hassan Rouhani, the Iranian president, yesterday he did threaten that Iran would come out and enrich uranium again, but he also sort of moderated his response when he said, wel, we'll take some time we'll work with the Europeans, the Russians and the Chinese to see if we can keep this deal alive because it's in his interest to keep this deal alive because the economic turnaround that was promised by the lifting of sanctions hasn't happened. We saw certainly a big fall in the value of the currency, the rial, yesterday upon the news from President Trump. So he has to sort of stave off hardliners in the government who will benefit if the deal dies. And in fact it was those hard liners who today were shouting 'Death to America' inside the parliament, burning the American flag outside of it.

AMT: It's interesting Derrick because the President Rouhani has also said you know, he could just start enriching uranium now if he wants. If they want. But he's also dispatching his foreign minister as you say to try to talk to the others and both France and Germany have come out today saying that they believe it's not dead yet, this accord, that they want to find a way to keep it alive.

DS: That's right. And so that's why you've got Netanyahu, you know, you might expect him for he's been, 25 years now he's been fighting against you know Iran and its efforts to build a nuclear bomb, but his fight isn't over and you know for Rouhani you've got this situation where he really does need to sort of keep the deal alive, you know not only to better politics for him, but you know in trying to turn the economy around. So the biggest thing will sort of be figuring out if the deal, if it does stay, what that means for sanctions against European and you know countries that work with Iran. But I think we're going to see a lot of politics. And I should note the other interesting reaction, sort of the Sunni Muslim nations in the Middle East led by Saudi Arabia, well they're lined up with the Israelis and they are thanking Donald Trump for pulling the United States out of the nuclear deal.

AMT: Derek Stoffel, thank you.

DS: You're welcome. Derek Stoffel is the CBC's Middle East correspondent, he's based in Jerusalem. While Donald Trump has described the Iran nuclear deal as defective at its core, others have said it is one of the most successful measures against nuclear proliferation ever concluded. Joining me is the person who served as the chief enforcer of the Iran deal for the U.S., Laura Holgate is the former U.S. ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency. She previously served on the National Security Council as President Obama's top advisor on weapons of mass destruction. Laura Holgate is in Arlington, Virginia. Hello.

LAURA HOLGATE: Good morning, Anna Maria.

AMT: Lots to ask you here as things keep changing. First of all your reaction when you heard the announcement from President Trump.

LH: Well obviously he's been telegraphing this for months. There were still some hope that he might have made a different decision, but yesterday's announcement was not really a surprise, but it was certainly discouraging for all of the people who had been working on negotiating the agreement, implementing the agreement, making sure that Iran stuck to the agreement. To find that that was not an adequate response to whatever the concerns have been from the Trump administration, I think was a major blow to a lot of people and also to American security.

AMT: So what do you make of the reaction of France and Germany saying they want to see if it can stay alive, that Iran is dispatching its foreign minister to talk to all of the other signatories. Can this stand without the U.S. as a party?

LH: From a legal point of view, it could. It really depends on the nature of the U.S. sanctions, whether the Europeans are able to continue to meet their commitments under the agreement, not to abide by sanctions against Iran.

AMT: Why was the Iran deal so important to maintain?

LH: The Iran deal was important because it created the most intrusive inspection regime ever created, to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. The additional protocol is the phrase that's used to describe the International Atomic Energy Agency's highest end inspection regime and that's applied to a number of countries around the world already. And no country that has been inspected under the Additional Protocol has ever been able to create a covert weapons program that was perpetual, there were no sunsets on that. And then there were a bunch of other inspection regimes that were applied on top of that to specific aspects of Iranian behavior, including limits on their enrichment capacity, including removal of their ability to produce plutonium. So there was an enormous amount of inspection and visibility that will now be lost.

AMT: Critics of the deal had always said that it was flawed because it still allowed development of Iran's ballistic missile program. How do you respond to that?

LH: Well it was very clear from the get go that the missile program was not going to be part of this deal. And if you can prevent the missiles from carrying nuclear weapons then you've already made a big dent. But the decision was made in 2013 to focus on the most dangerous aspect of Iran's multiple types of concerning behaviour and that on the basis that if you could contain the nuclear aspect for a number of years, it gives you time to work on the other aspects.

AMT: And so what are the consequences you see of the U.S. pulling out of this deal?

LH: There's many of them. First of all, it completely removes some of the most important limits on Iranian behaviour. They could return to enrichment almost immediately, if they so choose and to ramp up that enrichment capacity and bring them back to being within weeks of making enough material that could make a bomb. So it completely creates a free space for Iran to operate and that will have regional effects. We've heard from Saudi Arabia, we've heard from Turkey that they intend to match Iran's capacity, whatever Iran develops, whether it's simply accelerated enrichment or weapons development. There's a possibility that UAE could be brought into this, you know, kind of slow-motion spiral of enrichment race that then leads to an arms race. So there's a range of regional concerns and then obviously there's the relationship with our closest allies in Europe, where we'll be on opposite sides of yet another issue and where even any sanctions that are returned, the Europeans are going to be begrudging implementers, rather than the really active and engaged partners that we saw in the years leading up to the agreement that created that really extreme set of sanctions that drove Iran to the table. That will not be recreated based on the way that the U.S. has departed this deal.

AMT: So could the U.S. renegotiate or is that not possible, do you think?

LH: Well the Iranians have indicated they're not interested in any renegotiation. That's an essential element of negotiations, is a willing partner. The Chinese and Russian governments were very essential in bringing Iran to the table and at the beginning of this negotiating process, they're going to be weakened in their ability to tell Iran that it's worth negotiating with the United States. The notion that you can inspire new negotiations by breaking off a functioning agreement is not one that has a promising history.

AMT: But the situation you're outlining for me is that Mr. Trump has said that Iran was dangerous and this deal just enabled it and you're arguing that it in fact could enable others, now with the deal gone, it could enable others to get into the race.

LH: Yes, the administration has been completely able to articulate how zero constraints are better than even inadequate constraints, that they perceive the deal offered and why the U.S. and in fact the rest of the world is safer with an unconstrained Iran than a partially constrained Iran. And the notion that you can take from that process of breaking out of an agreement and then thinking that you're going to get a better deal after proving yourself to be an untrustworthy negotiating partner, I just I can't find the logic in that.

AMT: Laura Holgate thank you for your insights into this. Thank you.

LH: Thank you.

AMT: Laura Holgate served on the National Security Council during the Obama administration. She's the former U.S. ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency. She was the chief enforcer of the Iran deal for the United States. She's now a vice president with the Nuclear Threat Initiative. Well I want to bring in another perspective on the Iran nuclear deal, especially as we see more reaction. Britain's foreign secretary has now said that Britain has no intention of walking away from the deal. India is urging all parties to try to resolve the issue. Behnam Ben Taleblu is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a foreign policy and national security institute based in Washington D.C. Hello.

BEHNAM BEN TALEBLU: Good morning.

AMT: Was the Iran deal worth saving in your view?

BBT: I think the Iran deal was definitely worth fixing. There's some interesting language in the deal, particularly when it comes to closing the plutonium pathway to a bomb for Iran. But there is a good predicate in the deal to actually turn limiting Iran's nuclear program into ending Iran's nuclear program. And I think that diplomacy is the best way to deal with Iranian nuclear threat. The JCPOA wasn't the way. That being said I think that a unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA would make it harder for the U.S. to actually set the predicate to renegotiate. Remaining in the deal, adding more nuclear pressure, could have been the way to get the restraints that I would've liked to see on Iran.

AMT: And so what do you make of France and Germany today saying they want to see that deal continue in some form?

BBT: I mean it's highly likely that the E.U. will try to pick up the pieces here and save the deal. The question is will they be able to resist U.S. financial pressure in the short term, that's probably yes, in the medium to long term, that's almost definitely a no. It's really just about the power of the U.S. dollar versus the lack of actual dividends that European countries may get in a protracted escalation spiral with the U.S. of doing business with Iran or doing business with America.

AMT: What do you think President Trump was trying to accomplish with this withdrawal?

BBT: Well I think it was, as much as I disagree with a position of a unilateral withdrawal, it was a strategic move by the president. He, in the past 72 hours in Washington, there was discussion that he would muddle his decision. There was discussion that he would either say one thing and do another with the waiver or be tough on the language and actually waive again. The president restored the sanctions regime that existed at its height in 2013. That point cannot be understated that as much as I am a proponent of fixing the deal, it was at that point economically that the U.S. had the most leverage. So within 90 to 180 days the U.S. will be turning to the peak of its nuclear sanctions architecture against the Islamic Republic of Iran. And I think given the currency crisis that's going on in Iran and given the protests that happened in Iran in 2017, 2018, I think the U.S. was willing to do a high risk, high reward gamble here by restoring those sanctions, given the new factors on the ground and seeing what effect that would have on Iran strategic calculus with respect to its nuclear program, as well as with respect with the other elements of its bad behaviour.

AMT: Interesting because the sanctions, there would be sanctions on oil that would affect European and Asian centres that would be Iran's inability to sell its oil, right. There could be sanctions against Boeing and Airbus, apparently there are contracts that would be nullified under this.

BBT: So I have to interrupt with this. Civilian airliner deal I think would definitely be dead once the full force of U.S. sanctions returns. There is a very, very useful guidance that came out on the tail end of President Trump's speech yesterday that I think if you're a bank or business, this will be your guiding document moving forward. And it was the Treasury FAQ, how you can navigate the restoration of sanctions within this 90 to 180 day wind down period that the administration is calling.

AMT: So this could be Trump's strategy to get Iran to agree to further restrictions in a nuclear deal, in your view?

BBT: I'm not sure if this 90 to 180 day period is the way that they're going to get them to agree to further restrictions because in the short term, the Iranians will huff and puff and escalate their rhetoric and if anything talk about, you know maintaining deal with Europe, while reconstituting select elements of their nuclear program. If I could pick up anything in terms of a long term negotiating strategy from what President Trump said yesterday, it was that he would restore the sanctions all of the sanctions that constitute "nuclear sanctions," let them return to their net effect on the Iranian economy. And he said he would be ready, willing and able essentially, to open up a channel of negotiations with Iran. Essentially at a time of Iran's choosing, which means that once there is sufficient pain to get them to change their calculus he would be willing to negotiate.

AMT: And what's your hope for what will happen down the road then?

BBT: My hope is that at least two or three fold. The first hope is that this rightsizes U.S. policy towards Iran and we begin to implement that more comprehensive strategy that the president laid out in October 2017. The next is that the Europeans actually side with Washington, as opposed to siding with Tehran. Unfortunately for the vast majority of the Trump administration Federica Mogherini, the EU Foreign Policy and Security Chief, her narrative of the deal's implementation and the deal's value was much more closer to Tehran than to Washington. Now when the U.S. can threaten secondary sanctions, I hope that EU banks and businesses can convince EU Politicians to of course, side with Washington.

AMT: OK Mr. Taleblu, we have to leave it there. Thank you for your perspective on all of this.

BBT: Thank you.

AMT: Behnam Ben Taleblu Liu is a research fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. He joined us from Washington D.C. Let us know what you think of what you're hearing our guest say today and where this might be going. Tweet us @TheCurrentCBC. Find us on Facebook or go to our website cbc.ca/thecurrent. And stay with us, the news is next and then I'll be joined by the veteran at the centre of a major story in Canadian politics and society at large. Glen Kirkland will share his story of what he says happened with NDP MP Christine Moore. I'm Anna Maria Tremonti. This is The Current on CBC Radio One, Sirius XM, online on cbc.ca/thecurrent, on podcast and on your radio app.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

In wake of allegations against MP Christine Moore, why don't male victims of sexual harassment report?

Guests: Glen Kirkland, Rick Goodwin, Lenore Lukasik-Foss

AMT: Hello. I'm Anna Maria Tremonti and you're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

AMT: Still to come, I'll speak with the author of a new memoir that's been gaining praise on both sides of the border, from the likes of Emma Watson and O, The Oprah Magazine. It's by Terese Mailhot , the Indigenous woman who grew up in B.C. and has a talent for translating her life experiences into a compelling poetic story.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: I think just because I've had success doesn't mean I'm a model for it. Like I wouldn't advise people to do things in the difficult way I have. I wish they could arrive at those conclusions in their life in an easier way than I did.

AMT: She'll join me in half an hour to discuss her life's path and the success of her new memoir. But first a soldier speaks.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: As leader of the NDP, my primary responsibility is to ensure that the behaviour at the root of these incidents is addressed and that it never happens again and to make every effort to meet the needs of those who are impacted by these actions.

AMT: Well that was NDP leader Jagmeet Singh last week, the incidents in question, allegations of sexual misconduct against NDP MP, Erin Weir. Earlier this year another NDP MP, Christine Moore had sent an email complaining about Mr. Weir's behaviour toward other women, prompting an investigation and subsequent ouster from caucus last week. Now Ms. Moore is facing allegations. Yesterday the party suspended her from her caucus duties, while a third party investigates allegations, she behaved inappropriately toward a Canadian Armed Forces veteran who was severely injured in Afghanistan. That veteran is Glen Kirkland and we have reached Mr. Kirkland at his home in Brandon, Manitoba. Hello.

GLEN KIRKLAND: Hello, how are you?

AMT: Well I'm fine, thank you. I'm just wondering if you can tell us your story. When did you first meet Ms. Moore?

GK: I was sent to testify at a parliamentary committee hearing in 2013.

AMT: And that was a standing committee on defence?

GK: On Veterans Affairs. I was meant to or I was testifying on the treatment of ill and injured soldiers.

AMT: And you were there to talk about what happened to you and your comrades?

GK: Yeah. So I was severely wounded in 2008. I was hit with a rocket and three of my fellow soldiers died and I was supposed to talk or I was talking about what happened to me and how things have affected me and the short comings of Veterans Affairs.

AMT: And so she was on that committee that you were testifying in front of?

GK: Correct. She was one of the Chairs.

AMT: And she talked to you later, did she?

GK: Yes she did. So I will kind of clarify something right away, like this isn't even a news story. This came out right when it happened and everyone knew about it. So Christine Moore invited me back to her office and then I was under the assumption that, you know, she's a Member of Parliament, but she was also told me that her background was as a registered nurse and I've had some severe health issues ever since being hit with the rocket. And when we got to her office she offered me a drink and I said well, actually you know here's the list of medication that I'm on because it can I was under the assumption that I was getting attention towards my medical, so I didn't. And I was on a laundry list of medication, everything from you know opiate painkillers, anti-depressants, to pills to help with infections because of my shrapnel that I still have in my body to this day, including I give myself 8 to 14 needles every day also just to stay alive. So I informed her and she continued to pour me some drinks.

AMT: And what happened after that?

GK: Well like one thing led to another and I started, like between the medication and the drinks I had to go back to my hotel room and she followed me back to my hotel room or walked me back to my hotel room. And yeah the rest is history.

AMT: She spent the night?

GK: Yes she did.

AMT: Was what happened consensual in your view?

GK: Yes, but I wouldn't have been in that position if she wasn't a Member of Parliament and I wasn't a soldier. There is definitely a power imbalance there and I wouldn't have been in that position again, if she wasn't a Member of Parliament.

AMT: And after that interaction, what was your contact with her?

GK: Well, she would be contacting me quite frequently through text and e-mail and every way that you could possibly contact someone and I made it very clear, I'm like, unlike for Mr. Weir there, mine were verbal. I guess Mr. Weir was accused of not being able to get non-verbal cues and I was very verbal and very direct in expressing my lack of intention with her.

AMT: And how did that how did that play out? Did she accept that?

GK: No. She surprised me on a couple of trips, I was just happened to tell her that I was going to go on a golf trip to Kenosee. I just went through a divorce and was going to go and do some golfing and then next thing I know she's there and then again another incident, I'm at my house in Brandon and I get a knock on the door and I'm getting surprised. So it was very, it was pretty disturbing. Again it was all, like I'm not claiming rape here or anything, I want to make sure that that's very clear, what happened is she took advantage of her position. And that's pretty disturbing. If the roles were reversed, if I was a female and it was a male MP and the same thing happened, you know, a female very emotional testimony and then next thing you know, an MP invites, you know, a lady back to his office for drinks, this conversation would be so very different. But again like everyone knew about this when it first happened and nothing happened. And we're not talking just like, well I'll tell you first of all, the media knew. CBC knew, CTV knew, Liberal MPs knew, Conservative MPs knew and NDP MPs knew.

AMT: How do you know that they knew?

GK: Because they were making light of it. There was jokes.

AMT: And you heard about them?

GK: Oh I was in the room.

AMT: Yeah.

GK: Again like I didn't come forward with this, it's not like I, some of the news reports makes it sound like I'm, you know coming forward. There's an article written about this in a satirical magazine years ago. Just now that it's becoming, it's now beneficial for the media to bring it up again because it puts everything in a new light because of Christine Moore's, what she did with Mr. Weir. Now everything's coming out right and it's just good timing on the media's behalf.

AMT: You know and to be clear, it was a CBC report that did bring this forward then why we're talking about it now. So do you feel that on all sides then everyone is kind of like using you for your vulnerabilities.

GK: Well I just think I could, yeah, the only reason I'm doing these interviews too is because how awful the reports have been and I wanted to make sure that said I at least, like the truth was told. They made it sound like I was a rape victim in some instances and that was not the case, but it was definitely a power imbalance and it's the story of a Member of Parliament taking advantage of the position to get what they want. Again if my gender was a female and you know a male MP, think about how different this would be, we'd be talking about like probably jail time or even worse like it is a disturbing story and it kind of speaks volumes about where the culture is going because it was literally put on a shelf until it was convenient to come out and again I'm not coming forward with this.

AMT: Right, I hear what you're saying. So I want to ask you a little bit more about that power imbalance then because you know, the fact that you're a man in going through this and we would automatically assume a vulnerability on a part of a woman, many people would, so talk to me a little bit about how this affected you. You say you're not claiming to be a rape victim, but how has this affected you? What has been the fallout for you personally, quietly?

GK: Well it's troublesome, I mean it hasn't affected my day-to-day life, I don't know, maybe it has. I really don't know. I haven't had much faith in the government from beforehand, so I don't know just cause the treatment of ill and injured soldiers, so I definitely after this incident, don't have any more love for the government. So yeah.

AMT: You were there testifying to the fact that wounded soldiers who returned from Afghanistan weren't getting the treatment or the help they deserved, essentially, right?

GK: You're correct.

AMT: So to have this happen to you underlines something about how MPs might see you.

GK: Well, I guess I mean you could look at it a couple different ways. One, you know, maybe I mean maybe she was just trying to do a service. I'm just joking. But like yeah, I don't know how she couldn't expect anything, but a negative situation come from that. It's been, it was an awful experience like the whole thing from start to finish.

AMT: We did request an interview with Christine Moore to hear her side of this story. She denied interview requests. She issued the following statement and I'm quoting here, "Out of respect for the fairness and the integrity of the process, I will not be commenting further on these allegations at this point." What would you like to hear from her personally or would you?

GK: Oh I don't care. Like again this is old news. I'm not expecting anything. This is just, you know, the NDP clearly set the bar exceptionally high when they kicked Weir out of caucus, so whatever the NDP do, you know as punishment, I'm sure it'll be more than fair. But again time will tell and I hope gender isn't a defining factor in this because it should be an equal balance for everyone.

AMT: So that's what I was going to ask you, what do you want the media and just the general public to maybe learn from what you're saying then. What do you want us to think about?

GK: Well again, like you guys have come to me. This is old news. But what would I would like to be, you know, the lesson learned out of this, I guess it's just MPs have a certain responsibility especially with their position of power and it shouldn't be taken lightly. Any MP outranks the highest rank in the military and I was one of the lowest ranks. I was a corporal. So they need to take that role and their responsibly, you know, very seriously and as things go on, you know it's only going to get worse and at the same time people need to, like in the Weir situation, they have to take things into context also. You know, I don't believe anyone should be losing their job for being a close talker. But again, that's above my pay grade, right?

AMT: Well it's important to hear your voice, Glen Kirkland. Thank you.

GK: Thanks for having me.

AMT: That is Glen Kirkland, a veteran of the Canadian Armed Forces, he's in Brandon, Manitoba, that's where we reached him. His story has been making waves not only because of its political implications, but because of the questions it raises about man in the MeToo movement and just what happens when men come forward with their own allegations. I'm joined by two guests to help look into this, Rick Goodwin is the clinical director of Men & Healing, that's a group that offers counseling services for men who have suffered trauma. He's also a consultant with One-In-Six, which is an international support organization for male survivors of sexual assault. Rick Goodwin is in our Ottawa studio and Lenore Lukasik-Foss is the Chair of the Ontario Coalition of Rape Crisis Centres. She's also the director of the Sexual Assault centre for the Hamilton Area. She joins us from Hamilton, Ontario. Hello to you both.

LENORE LUKASIK-FOSS: Good morning.

RICK GOODWIN: Good morning.

AMT: Rick Goodwin, I want to start with you, what strikes you about what you just heard Glen Kirkland say.

RG: Well a number of things and it strikes me as kind of this topic of you know sexual abuse, sexual assault, sexual coercion, it's just you know, it's so ever present. And you know, is it news? Is it old news? How much is it out there? I think the lens that we're hearing on this story is the lens of gender, which is we've got two fundamentals, we've got Mr. Kirkland and his story, being the recipient of this abuse, coercion, assault, however, you define it and we have the alleged offender of this action being female. And this defies the popular conception of the topic and I think that's news here.

AMT: Lenore, if we move beyond the specifics of his story, how many men are victims of sexual misconduct?

LLF: So like Rick mentioned, him being a part of the One-In-Six organization, we need some more research, but we know that about one in six men will experience sexual abuse in their lifetime, primarily men are at greater risk when they're boys, so when they're younger, but we also know that adult men experience sexual violence as well.

AMT: And do we know anything about the demographics of that, beyond ages then? So you're talking about young boys who are vulnerable, but also men remain vulnerable in some situations.

LLF: Yes. And we know there are there are particular groups of men that may experience, be at greater risk. So we know that sometimes men who are gay or who are perceived as gay as a part of homophobia may experience sexual violence as a part, you know, being against that they're seen as gay. So we know there are groups, we know there are particular men with disabilities, physical or intellectual disability, we know that can be a greater risk as well as sexual violence as an adult.

AMT: Rick Goodwin how accurate is the number then, one in six men are victims of sexual abuse?

GK: Well the one in sex reference is for men who've had that experience as children. So if we looked at men or males throughout their lifetime, we're looking at a higher figure than one in six. If we looked at a conventional definition of sexual assault, which essentially means a crime of penetration, we'd be looking at a one in eight figure for males. I think what's really challenging about this field, is it really depends on how we as practitioners, as researchers, as policymakers, define sexual assault. You know there's compelling research coming out that if we include that in terms of the definition of sexual assault, the term "being made to penetrate," OK I want our listeners to think that through, being made to penetrate and as part of the definition. If we do that then we're looking at relatively equal numbers of women and men having this experience. So there's so much about this we don't know, I support Lenore is that we need to do more research, but it really defies this conventional understanding that victimhood is you know fundamentally an experience of women and girls and that perpetration is essentially a crime of boys and men, it really you know, it takes all that conventional thinking and turns it around.

AMT: Lenore, in your clinic you deal with men and women, am I right?

LLF: Yes we do. Yes.

AMT: And what do you hear from men who come to your clinic about why they, are they reluctant to share their stories, like what do you hear?

LLF: Yeah. So I think I just need to say that we hear the same thing from all survivors. So there are many similarities between women-identified and male-identified survivors. It's a very difficult to come forward and share stories and people might be surprised because we're living in this MeToo moment and think, oh you know there's a space now, survivors can come forward. It is still incredibly hard for most survivors on the ground to come forward. What we know is with the men we serve at the sexual assault centres in Ontario is that there's often different barriers. So barriers around sometimes how males are socialized, that they are not, they don't feel it's OK to seek help. They may not feel comfortable that they, you know, should be able to talk about this. There may be shame in a different kind of way. So we know that there are barriers that men face. And the other thing I want to mention that I, well I understand my colleague what Rick is saying, we still know that there is the numbers just still don't match up. I'm not trying to lessen the victimization that male experience, male-identified focus experience. We know that that's real, but the reality is that women are still more vulnerable. We just know that.

AMT: And what about the men who do not see themselves as survivors, Rick.

RG: Well I would say the vast majority of men who've had this experience, don't perceive themselves as survivors. And that's just part of the, part of the challenge of providing these services, engaging in public education, trying to shift public policy to be more inclusive in terms of gender. I mean it's throughout, I mean if you've got provincial policy that defines sexual violence is again, fundamentally women's experience. In my community here in Ottawa, if a man is sexually assaulted, he could be attempting to receive service from the three publicly-funded agencies in this town that provide sexual assault services and he would be turned around in all three locations because that publicly-funded organization will not work with men. So you know, fundamentally we've got so many barriers to overcome on this matter.

AMT: Lenore I also want to ask you, you know we are seeing a growing list of high-profile men coming forward, Hollywood actors Brendan Fraser, Anthony Rapp, Terry Crews, James Van Der Beek among them. We just saw Junot Diaz, right, about being sexually abused at the age of eight and then also allegations of abuse against him. In this whole, as more people come forward, all of these stories start to mesh, I'm wondering how you see everything.

LLF: Yeah, I mean this is incredibly complex and we understand, we understand that sometimes folks who've experienced this can then be also perpetrators. We know that that is not the norm. The vast majority of men who experience sexual violence, do not go on to become perpetrators. But you know, what we're seeing is, I'm so excited that men, high-profile men, are coming forward as survivors and saying this happened to me and are joining that MeToo commentary because I think we need more space for male survivors to know that it's OK to talk about this and it's OK to come forward. But we also know that there is complexity and that sometimes people are offending and have engaged, perhaps not in behaviour that's criminal, that's assaultive, but is, are abusive, are coercive, are engaged in you know behaviours that some would talk about as toxic masculinity behaviours. And so, I think that this conversation doesn't lend well to sort of sound bites and short dialogue, it's nuanced and complex and has to do with how we're raised and our gender roles and how we are perceived and how we are engaging in relationships and behaviour when we're interested in other people.

AMT: Rick Goodwin do you see more people willing to come forward, more men, now that this conversation has begun.

RG: Yes. We've been doing this work for about 20 years and our services have never been solidly in demand. And this is despite a funding loss of provincial policy that has pulled out funding for the only men's trauma centre in Ontario. I mean there's only four agencies in Canada with this particular focus. So despite all that, yes and I think what the entry points, when we're talking about men, we need to talk about entry points and some men will identify that they've experienced abuse or assault and come forward and we need to provide services in each community for them, for sure. Other men will come forward presenting on other issues, as Lenore mentioned you know, some men may be coming forward on issues of anger management or emotional deregulation. I mean there are guys who carry a lot of rage with them. Trauma is often underlying that. We get men of course, flooding our addiction centres. Well trauma is an underlying factor in much of addiction issues. We have a program called emotional integrity, which is basically learning how to live a good life, a better life, in relation with others. It's very, you know, broad-based in definition. You don't have to identify being a trauma survivor to come into that program, that program is about threefold now in our numbers.

AMT: We have to end the conversation there, but thank you both for your thoughts on this today.

LLF: Thank you very much.

RG: You're welcome.

AMT: That is Rick Goodwin, he's a clinical director of Men & Healing, a group that offers counseling services for men who have suffered trauma. He joined us from Ottawa. Lenore Lukasik-Foss is the chair of the Ontario Coalition of Rape Crisis Centres and the director of the Sexual Assault Centre for the Hamilton Area. She's in Hamilton, Ontario. Let us know what you think of what they had to say and are our guest before them. Tweet us @TheCurrentCBC or write to us at cbc.ca/thecurrent and stay with us. This is The Current.

Back To Top »

'We don't see a person': Terese Marie Mailhot confronts Indigenous stereotypes in memoir

Guest: Terese Marie Mailhot

AMT: Hello. I'm Anna Maria Tremont and this is The Current. We hear a lot today about the goal of reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. And so it's important sometimes to be reminded how wide the gulf can be between two people, even in the space of something as seemingly close as a breakfast table.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: I remember when I spent the night with you once. In the morning I wanted to order a proper breakfast with potatoes and an egg with toast and another breakfast of french toast and maple syrup and butter. You tell me it's too much. You don't think I'm gracious. I ordered the proper breakfast and the server didn't bring me toast. I complained and then she brought cold toast and then I complained again. And then my food went cold, my eyes welled and you looked disgusted. I usually don't care about that look. What right does a man have to look at me like that. I think it's justifiable to hurt someone when they look at me like that. We fought for hours and I didn't say that my mother had spent her life waiting for service. I waited with her in cafes for an order of french fries or something small we could afford. White women didn't greet her or consider our time. We walked into places and sometimes men heckled me. I said I was 12 and they often didn't believe me. My mother and I found solace driving hours out of our neighborhood, where being Indian was not much of a crime. If I told you that, I would also need to stop and note the significance of so many other things. My mind is overwhelmed with breakfast alone.

AMT: That is Terese Marie Mailhot reading from her new memoir, "Heart Berries." She grew up as part of the Seabird Island Band outside of Vancouver, British Columbia. Her poetic new book touches on questions of mental health and motherhood and the relations between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people on a very personal level. Terese Marie Mailhot is a Tecumseh post doctoral fellow at Purdue University where she writes, researches and mentors other native scholars. And she joins us from West Lafayette, Indiana. Hello.

TERESE MARIE MAILHOT: Hi.

AMT: That passage is so devastating. It underlines with something as simple as a breakfast order, all of the weight of what you go through as an Indigenous person in a white world.

TMM: Yeah, I mean, you know my relationship with Casey, often because we're from different cultures and different families, like he's from the Midwest and he had "normal parents," you know. And I think it's been like a learning experience, especially for him to kind of like realize that there is like that disparity and there's that gap in not only in like services, but the way I'm looked at and that sometimes it is in my head, but even that hyper vigilance and anxiety is coming from my past, you know.

AMT: And the way you were been treated and what you remember, just triggers it all. Tell us about Casey. Who is he?

TMM: It's so difficult because he is my husband and he is like my partner in life, which I feel like is a different thing because I didn't. You know he's been a real friend to me, especially after we got married, I realized he wasn't going anywhere, you know. I had never had that type of consistency in my life, you know. So he's a lot of things that I never allowed myself to have, you know.

AMT: And he's not indigenous.

TMM: No.

AMT: And that was something you had to think about?

TMM: Yeah, I had never dated a white man before. Like I had always felt like the experiences were so vastly different that it would take someone very empathetic and I would have to be more empathetic than usual to understand that he had a lot to witness. You know, he had a lot to see about what it's like to live as an Indigenous person. Even, you know in North America, just given the history, right, a lot of people don't understand how the land was stripped, but not only how it was stripped, but the ways in which Indigenous people were subjugated, you know.

AMT: Well I want to go back to that passage. Tell us about your mother, who was she?

TMM: She was, she worked really hard, you know. That's usually the first thing I note is that she had four kids to support, so she would often work on an average 70 hours a week and employment was not consistent. Because there were a lot of initiatives to hire Indigenous people, but those initiatives ran pretty short, you know. So she was always trying to better herself, but it was really difficult, where we're from. It's really difficult to make headway and get out of debt and get off the assistance that we were used to that didn't provide a quality of life any of us enjoyed, you know.

TMM: What kind of work did she do?

AMT: She worked in a group home before she passed away. She was a teaching assistant. She did a lot of outreach work on her personal time. Helping people in our community, doing everything from helping them file for unemployment to like helping them get to a store and she was just constantly there for people, you know.

AMT: Your relationship with her wasn't always easy, was it?

TMM: No. Because you know she put helping the community above her own needs, which was above my needs by proxy, you know.

AMT: What did she teach you about stories and their importance?

TMM: I think that everything begins with a story, like you know if she was writing all night in her downtime, she was putting together little books of pictures from you know our grandmother and great grandmother and illustrating at that moment, what was going on in my grandmother's life with her husband or you know. So everything she did involves story and it taught me a lot about how to create a narrative, you know.

AMT: And how has your view of your mother's own story changed in the years, since she died.

TMM: I think once I started to have, like once my children started growing up and you know, when my son Isaiah turned nine, I started to understand how easy it is to make mistakes. You know, how easy it is to be unable to hide our dysfunctions from our children and the things we've inherited. And I learned to forgive her, which for me I never thought I would do because I was so angry that I kind of needed her so desperately. And I think she knew that, you know and I think she, I really do think she did the best she could and I had never come to those conclusions until I was almost 30.

AMT: Talk to me a little bit more about what you were angry about with her as you were growing up?

TMM: Her choice in men, you know and the fact that we were poor because I thought it was, you know there's so much shame in poverty for me and it's not like we weren't rich in experience or culture, it's that when you literally don't have food in your fridge and it's not fishing season or anything like that, like it's really easy to blame the only person in the house, which is your mother. You know, the only adult there and it's more difficult to blame the people that abandoned you, you know, like like my father.

AMT: And so that was the push and pull with your mom over time? That you saw another side as you became a mom and looked at her as a person beyond the mom.

TMM: Yeah. And you know, I wonder things now like how she was in love and you know, how I know now in my 30s how easy it is to be manipulated into thinking a man's intentions matter and that if he didn't mean it, maybe there's hope for him to better himself. And I know those trappings now, you know, and I think that's why it's easier to forgive her, is that I know how violence, you can acclimate to chaos and violence and allow yourself to be mistreated, you know.

AMT: And not realize there's another way to be either, that there's a way out. What do you think she'd think of you being a published author and a post doctoral fellow at a university?

TMM: I think she'd be proud. But I also think you know, even my brothers and I don't believe it. We can't believe that I went from like being a "welfare mom" to being tied to different labels like post doc, you know. We can't believe it because we, I just hoped to be a receptionist. You know that was or a high school teacher, that was my like ultimate goal. And like none of us and I think she would have been in shock too, you know.

AMT: Well in a way, you stand as a model for other Indigenous women too, right?

TMM: Yeah, it's a little scary though because I think just because I've had success doesn't mean I'm a model for it. Like I wouldn't advise people do things in the difficult way I have. I wish they could arrive at those conclusions in their life in an easier way than I did.

AMT: Let's talk a little bit more about your journey then, why did you leave home as a teenager?

TMM: I didn't feel like I was ever going to make something of myself unless I ran away. I didn't think that I was ever going to break free from who my family was or what people knew of us or anything like that, unless I ran away, as far away as I could from everything and then I ended up coming back home to, you know, take care of my mother's house and my brother because my mom passed away, you know. And then I left again, you know because honestly I couldn't get my high school diploma or even my GED back home. It was too difficult. It felt so burdensome to be in the place where my home used to be. And since my mother was gone, I couldn't ever really go home again. I could never feel that type of love or affection. So I really didn't think I could make anything of myself unless I was just in a place where there was nothing haunting me.

AMT: So it was almost like that you couldn't, that place wouldn't let you move forward in the way that you believed somewhere inside of yourself that you could move. Right?

TMM: Yeah, there were too many unhappy memories and you know like even Vancouver, even the city itself like certain streets are where I walked up and down looking for my mom. And she was with Larry and I mean that was really hard for me because I was just a girl, you know, walking alone up and down a street looking for my parent, you know. And I don't even want to go back, you know, even though I have a loyalty to my family back home and community members that I care about and do advocacy work for. Going back hurts a lot.

AMT: As you go on with your life, I want to talk about your own immediate family. What happened with your oldest son?

TMM: My oldest son was, I had a bitter divorce. I got married at 19 and I had my son, my first son at 20 and by 23 our marriage was over because we too young and we were too unkind to each other. And I mean things are different now because we've grown up, you know, just time itself does heal. It's a very odd thing, if you let it into your heart, you know I think it's possible to repair a relationship with somebody, who honestly our divorce was so ugly. You know it was so ugly and I had to prove that I was worth custody of my son and I wanted to share custody. So I was pregnant with my second son, as we were getting a divorce and I went to provincial court and I won custody of my first son and then I went to supreme and I won. And since my first son was born in the United States, my ex-husband or my husband that I was separated from, took me to the Hague Convention, which is an international court. So what happened is I was going into labor with my second son and then I found out after I gave birth to him that the Hague Convention had decided to deport my first son back to the United States where a custody hearing would happen. And so when I brought my second son home from the hospital, I had to pack a bag and say goodbye to my first. And they took him away with police escorts and since then it's been really difficult because at the time I worked, but I didn't have a real job, you know. And I thought I just need to make something of myself and then I can earn back my child because I knew in the United States, in court, I would look like nothing. You know someone from a, like a Res, who had been on welfare, who had a case file from foster care. It wouldn't look good for me. So it took me almost a decade to become somebody. And by then it was too late to even, even try to get fifty-fifty because it would just change his life so drastically. So I've become a present mother, as much as I can be and we've healed the relationship between my ex-husband and I, so our children often see each other. But it's, I mean it's really a breaking thing, you know and I think a lot of native women go through bitter custody disputes where history of dysfunction or growing up in a cycle of violence that's used against us, in spite of our actions.

AMT: How did that initially affect your relationship with your newborn son?

TMM: It was hard to look him in the eyes because when he was a newborn because I kept thinking like if I look at him and I fall in love like he might leave me too. I didn't feel like, you know I didn't want sole custody. I've never been the type of mother who thinks I need to be a full-time mother because I knew that it would take away time from their father. But for me it was like he didn't want fifty-fifty, he wanted all of it. So I was scared if he ever decided to take away my second son that I shouldn't be too in love. So for three months I actively resisted the urge to really bond with my child, which for me and lives with me forever. And then I realized it was postpartum too, you know, that I had been triggered into a very traumatic and depressing state that honestly there's no way. Like there's nothing that keeps me from loving Casey Jr. right.

AMT: Casey Jr. is your third son?

TMM: Yeah.

AMT: Early in your relationship with Casey, you checked yourself into a mental health facility. What were you trying to do? Why did you do that?

TMM: I thought if I was going to, I don't know. He had kind of labeled me too much, you know, cause imagine all of that history and then this man, this white guy with a semblance of normalcy, who his parents are still together and he's had normal relationships, getting together with someone like me who's like all baggage, right. And I didn't view myself that way. I never did. But he had labeled me too much. And I kind of broke down because I'd never been abandoned like that before and I had never had somebody leave me for being emotionally just too much. And so I checked myself in and I started writing to him and that's basically how "Heart Berries" became a book, is that I had to articulate the truth of my life in a way that rendered art, so that he would know that there is no such thing as too much. There's nobody too broken to be loved or to be accepted, you know.

AMT: And in telling your story you end up exploring stereotypes around Indigenous people as well.

TMM: Yeah, I was able to articulate what it's like to be on the other side of that desk, like the welfare worker's desk or the social worker's desk, like to be on the other side and be a complicated human being, who is can intellectualize things and articulate things and note disparity and what it looks like up close. I was able to do that and confront the idea that there's no such thing as like you know there might be this stereotype of like a single mother with a lot of baby daddy baggage and things like that, but like if you look up close at that story it's actually very complicated and it is the type of thing that's nuanced and deserving of empathy. You know.

AMT: Tell me a little bit more about your dad.

TMM: My dad was, when he died, he was living in a transitional housing, in Hope, B.C. and he was selling paintings on the street. And when I knew him, when I was a child, he was a prolific artist and a drunk, you know. He was also violent. And the reason why he left my family was because my grandmother had paid to have someone kill him. But the man who is my cousin, he just beat him to the point where he actually knew he had to leave. And I'm kind of really thankful for that because had he stayed, I don't know that my mother would have been alive as long as she was, you know.

AMT: And you would have had it, you would have been witness to all of that.

TMM: Yeah.

AMT: You already were. I mean it's worth remembering and you talk about the stereotypes and even how people put you in you know like the caseworker, they didn't know that the young girl they were looking at was smart, that she could find her own way forward, if she had a chance, right.

TMM: Yeah. Often our circumstance dictates how people treat us and I think that's so unfair. You know I think it's so unfair that when we look at somebody who doesn't have a home or a teenager who's at risk, like we see the label, like at risk youth or we see the plight and we don't see the person.

AMT: You know your memoirs are coming out at a time, of course, when Canada is holding an inquiry into missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls. What did your own life show you then as a teenager, about how girls can just go missing?

TMM: It's really easy to like, to go missing. Coupled with like when you have the will to die too, it's really easy because there are constant threats against us. Like when I walked to school at 8, 9, 12, 13, you know or when I walked to our band office in the summer, there was on an average week, there was two or three men that would stop along the highway that I was walking and asked me if I wanted a ride. And they always looked lecherous, you know. They looked like regular men, but the look in their eyes was scary. When you're a native and you're living in a situation like I was, where my parents were, my parent was negligent, mostly because she literally was at work too much, it was really easy to fall into some trap, you know.

AMT: When you talk about those days now, how hard is that? Like what stays with you, how do you move forward, you know does it drag you back? Does it trigger you on any level?

TMM: Aw man. I don't know because the book right, I wrote the book to articulate what I had been through because I wanted to see it up close on a line level. I wanted to do something artistic, you know, with a lot of heart and it was really traumatizing to write what I did, but if I didn't confront it, I would never be able to know it. And then after that I worried on tour, I would be dissociative and that it would trigger a lot of things in me, but all it's done is really strengthen my resolve that these things happen to Native women who come from circumstances like I did. And I want other people cause there are a lot of non-Native women who read the book and understand you know. And I wanted people to feel less alone in the world and to know that they can speak their story too.

AMT: It's really important to hear your story and your voice. Thank you.

TMM: Thank you. This was wonderful.

AMT: Terese Marie Mailhot, author of the memoir, "Heart Berries." She is a Tecumseh post doctoral fellow at Purdue University. She joined us from West Lafayette, Indiana. That is our program for today. Stay with Radio One for Q. After that conversation with Terese Mailhot, we're going to leave you with some new music from an Indigenous artist whose work is similarly very personal. Beatrice Deer is of Innuit and Mohawk descent, originally from northern Quebec, now based in Montreal. CBC Music Indigenous is currently streaming a "First Play" of her new album, "My All To You," which she describes as being about "reconciliation with yourself." So here's part of the title track. This is Beatrice Deer. I'm Anna Maria Tremonti. Thanks for listening to The Current.

[Song: "My All To You" by Beatrice Deer]

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

May 9, 2018 episode transcript

More Stories Like This