Dr. Tove Skutnabb-Kangas University of Roskilde, Denmark Åbo Akademi University, Vasa, Finland

1. "Linguistic human rights and linguistic democracy in the Nordic countries (and the rest of the world) - fleeting entities?” Dr. Tove Skutnabb-Kangas University of Roskilde, Denmark Åbo Akademi University, Vasa, Finland http://www.ruc.dk/~tovesk/; skutnabb-kangas@mail.dk

2. Guidelines for USA foreign policy from 1948 Bret-ton Woods, to World Bank & IMF to WTO. George Kennan, main USA BW negotiator in 1948 ’We have 50% of the world’s wealth, but only 6,3% of its population. In this situation, our real job in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which permit us to maintain this position of disparity. To do so, we have to dispense with all sentimentality ... we should cease thinking about human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratisation’

3. Bretton Woods 1944, UN Monetary and Financial Conference. Goal: to make everybody embrace the Unites States' 'elementary economic axiom ... that prosperity has no fixed limits', as expressed by the president of the conference, the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Morgenthau, in his opening speech Hervé Kempf (2002): the fact that the USA ‘has stepped up its military spending while rejecting multilateral agreements is no mere coincidence. There is a structural link between the two. This is because, in the US administration's view, the American way of life, which is based on a very high level of consumption, is not something that should be called into question.’ Link 1944 – 2002: USA unilateral domination

4. The U.S. Council for Foreign Relations, 1944: ‘a global economy, dominated by U.S. corporate interests’ … the USA ‘would need to dominate economically and militarily’ because ‘the U.S. national interest required free access to the markets and raw materials of this area’ (Korten 1996: 21). Condoleezza Rice, President G.W. Bush’s foreign affairs advisor, in Campaign 2000. Promoting the national interest: ’The rest of the world is best served by theUSA pursuing its own interests because American values are universal’ Global domination of USA corporate, national interests is legitimate… they are universal!!

5. USA savings: 19 billion/year 1 Most European countries teach a lot of foreign languages in schools; Britain and the USA do not. The savings (as compared to Europe) because of the very limited foreign language teaching in the USA, with some 38 million pupils in elementary and secondary schools, are minimally around 19 billion dollars per year (Grin & Sfreddo 1997, Grin 2003). They benefit, we pay.

6. USA savings: 19 billion/year 2 These savings are made possible because "people in the rest of the world are willing to devote time, money and effort in learning […] English“ (Grin 2003). And obviously the USA can then invest this saved money (and time) into some other human-capital-enhancing activity that gives their students an edge.

7. Pierre Bourdieu: globalisation is ideological universalisation of particular models France, glorifying the French society as ‘the presumed incarnation of the Rights of Man’ saw ‘the inheritance of the French Revolution … as the model for all possible revolutions’. Building on this example, Bourdieu (2001: 96-97) describes today's globalisation as ‘a pseudo-concept that is both descriptive and prescriptive, which has replaced “modernisation”, that was long used in the social sciences in the USA as a euphemistic way of imposing a naively ethnocentric evolutionary model by means of which different societies were classified according to their distance from the economically most advanced society, i.e. American society. […]

8. Bourdieu: globalisation: the USA universalising its own particularity covertly as a universal model The word [globalisation] (and the model it expresses) incarnates the most accomplished form of the imperialism of the universal, which consists of one society [i.e. the USA] universalising its own particularity covertly as a universal model.’ Bourdieu (2001, 96-97), translation Robert Phillipson

9. Lykketoft, Kurdistan, Denmark and DANIDA In his opening speech at the conference The Kurds: One People - Four States - What Kind of Future? 26 May 2004 at the Danish Parliament, the former Foreign Minister Mogens Lykketoft, defended cultural communities as "fundamental part[s] of our lives as humans" and our duty to "protect the right to enjoy each our own culture, each history and each our language" (Lykketoft 2004: 5). Who could disagree? He also claimed that "it is an infringement of the human rights when Kurds are denied the use of their mother tongue […] No matter whether it happens in Turkey, in Iraq, in Iran - or in Syria" (ibid.) and added, after listing some of the other crimes against Kurds, that "there is no excuse for these crimes. Only condemnation" (ibid.). But when it happens Denmark…?

10. But when it happens Denmark… 1 • Interestingly, Lykketoft did not mention or condemn the fact that Kurdish children are denied the right to use their mother tongue in Danish day care centers and schools. He did not tell the participants that it was his party, the Social Democrats, which, while in power, suggested that the teaching of immigrant and refugee minorities mother tongues should be abolished from schools and the children should have more Danish instead.

11. But when it happens Denmark… 2 • It was one of Lykketoft’s party fellows (Svend Erik Hermansen, Social Democrat Party, chair of the Board of Education and Culture in Høje Tåstrup) who uttered the following memorable words: • 'It is self-evident that refugees who are only going to be in Denmark during a short period should maintain their mother tongue. But when one is born and has grown up in Denmark and will have one's whole existence here, then the mother tongue is Danish - full stop.' (Said to Berlingske Tidende, reported in Information 11 December 1995, p. 7; emphasis added).

12. Denmark supports ”ethnic communities” – but not in Denmark… • It is also interesting that DANIDA, the Danish development cooperation agency, supports the right of "ethnic communities" to organize on the basis of ethnicity, as something positive, in countries like Bolivia or Ecuador… • … while the same type of organization in Denmark (e.g. by Turks or Pakistanis) is called segregation and ghettoization.

13. Denmark supports bilingual education in Latin America – but not in Denmark… • DANIDA also supports bilingual education in several Latin American countries, because it is a human right for children to develop the mother tongue and understand the language of instruction but also because it leads to better results in Spanish… • … while bilingual education for immigrant minorities does not exist in Denmark, not even in its most elementary early-exit transitional form. Children have no right to develop the mother tongue or understand the language of instruction, and better competence in Danish is attempted through methods which have never worked anywhere and are against all solid scientific evidence.

14. Denmark: linguistic diversity is good - in other countries - but in Denmark ”the hegemonic status of the national language” prevails … “Multilingual policies seem to contain […] contradictions, often trying to shore up national languages (especially against the threat of English) in the name of linguistic diversity but dampening linguistic diversity at the local level through the hegemonic status of the national language” (Peter Ives 2004a: 42).

15. Claim 1 • We in the Nordic countries often construct glorifying images of ourselves as havens for democracy and human rights, as compared to the rest of the world. Our development cooperation and some of our roles in international politics as conflict mediators and even preventers strengthen the image of us as those who have more or less arrived - we are at the most developed end of several continua.

16. Question 1 How does this tally with our historical and present-day realities in terms of linguistic human rights and linguistic democracy?

17. Imperialist assimilatory language policies We have a pedigree of imperialist assimilatory language policies towards • the Saami, in Finland, Norway, Sweden • the Inuits in Kalaallit Nunaat /Greenland (Denmark) • the Deaf in all Nordic countries • the Roma • the Finnish speakers in Norway and Sweden

18. CHANGES ? • There are some big changes, though, mostly for the indigenous languages, Kalaallisut (Greenlandic) and the Saami languages, but to some extent also the Deaf and the Finnish speakers in Sweden and Norway. Very few changes have happened in relation to the Romany languages or languages of later immigrant minorities.

19. Language policies: the Inuits in Kalaallit Nunaat/Greenland 1 The Greenlandic flag was introduced in 1985, designed by the Greenlandic artist, Thue Christiansen. The flag shows the symbol of the rising sun over the polar ice, which stands for the return of the light and heat at mid-summer. The colors, red and white like the Danish national flag, are chosen to express Greenland's relations to Denmark and Scandinavia. Kalaallit is the plural form of kalaaleq, which means 'Greenlander'. The second word, Nunaat, means 'country'. In old sources the name inuit nunaat, country of the inuits was used. Greenland is the Norse name which Erik the Red gave the country around 985.

20. Language policies: the Inuits in Kalaallit Nunaat/Greenland 2 Constitution Greenland and the Faroe Islands are part of the Kingdom of Denmark. All three areas have the Danish Royal Family, the Constitution, foreign policy, defence and the judicial system in common. Both Greenland and the Faroe Islands have two seats in the Danish parliament. Each of the three areas has its own language and its own flag. Both Greenland and Faroe Islands have Home Rule. Source. http://www.gh.gl/uk/facts/context.htm

21. Language policies: the Inuits in Kalaallit Nunaat/Greenland 3 Language By Greenlandic law, Greenlandic is the official language. Greenlandic and Danish language may be used in politics and administration. Kalaallisut, Greenlandic, belongs to the East-inuit family of languages and is a polysyndetic language, which means that the meaning-forming sentence elements used in other words are fused into one word which may stand for a whole sentence. Danish is used extensively. English is the third language. Source. http://www.gh.gl/uk/facts/context.htm

22. Language policies; Faroese (Denmark) Section 11 of Act 137, 23 March 1948, on Home Rule of the Faroe Islands: ”Faroese is recognized as the principal language, but Danish is to be learnt well and carefully, and Danish may be used as well as Faroese in public affairs”. Source: http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/EN/cadreprincipal.htm

23. Language policies: the Saami, in Finland, Norway, Sweden Today there are some 50.000-100.00 Saami in the Nordic countries (plus very few in Russia). Nobody knows the numbers. Probably around a third or fewer speak one of the ten Saami languages.The legal situation is fairly good in the Saami administrative areas in Norway and Finland, less so in Sweden. Saami outside these administrative areas have very few rights. The question is to what extent the revitalisation efforts have come too late for most of the Saami languages.

24. Assimilationist language policies: the Deaf 1 Users of Sign languages have in all countries fewer language rights than users of all spoken languages. Invisibilation is one of the big problems for Sign languages; they are often not thought of or counted when languages are listed, or when minority languages are granted some rights (no country has, for instance, signed the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages for any Sign language).

25. Assimilationist language policies: the Deaf 2 Stigmatisation and deficiency-based theorising are other big problems for Sign languages; Signers are mostly treated as handicapped only, and as suffering from a deficiency, rather than being treated as a linguistic minority. Enforced oralism in schools (being taught orally only, to the exclusion of Sign languages) and enforced “integration” (i.e. submersion) into hearing classrooms prevents Deaf students from learning the only language through which they can fully express themselves, a Sign language.

26. Positive Language policies: the Deaf 1 Sign languages are mentioned in constitutions or similar documents and have some at least symbolic protection in a dozen countries (the Congo was the first country to mention them in the Constitution, Finland was the second). From 2005 New Zealand Sign language will most probably be an official language in Aotearoa, on a par with English and Māori.

27. Positive Language policies: the Deaf 2 There are teacher training programmes for teachers of the Deaf. The best one is in Finland, University of Jyväskylä, initiated and directed by Markku Jokinen (President of the World Federation of the Deaf). Entry requirement: native-like competence in (Finnish) Sign language and written Finnish. The aim of the 5-year programme is that teachers will be able to teach the whole comprehensive school curriculum through the medium of Sign language.

28. Imperialist assimilatory educational language policies towards Finnish speakers in Norway and Sweden and Saami in Sweden • The Finnish speakers in Norway and Sweden (and the Saami in Sweden) have extremely few educational linguistic human rights – even when compared to the rights granted to minorities by other European Union member countries

29. Educational linguistic human rights, especially the right to mother tongue medium education, are among the most important rights for any minority. Without them, a minority whose children attend school, usually cannot reproduce itself as a minority. It cannot integrate but is forced to assimilate.

30. Claim 2 • Both indigenous peoples and most linguistic minorities in the Nordic countries still have to struggle to be granted, even on paper and still more in practice, some of those basic linguistic human rights that linguistic majorities take for granted for themselves.

31. Question 2 Do we in the Nordic countries grant educational LHRs for indigenous peoples and linguistic minorities with our ratifications of recent human rights instruments?

32. Human rights instruments with LHRs in education for linguistic minorities • The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, 1998 • The Hague RecommendationRegarding the Education Rights of National Minorities from OSCE's High Commissioner on National Minorities, 1996 (for interpretations, see also the UN Human Rights Committee’s General Comment on ICCPR Art. 27, 1984) • UNESCO’ Position Paper Education in a multilingual world, 2003

33. Who is included and excluded in the (hard or soft law) human rights instruments mentioned? • The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, 1998, explicitly excludes immigrant minority languages. No country has ratified it for any Sign language, even when Sign languages fulfill all the requirements for being included.

34. Who is included and excluded in the (hard or soft law) human rights instruments mentioned? • The Hague RecommendationRegarding the Education Rights of National Minorities from OSCE's High Commissioner on National Minorities, 1996 (for interpretations, see also the UN Human Rights Committee’s General Comment on ICCPR Art. 27, 1984) • UNESCO’ Position Paper Education in a multilingual world, 2003 • BOTH (SHOULD) APPLY ALSO TO IMMIGRANT MINORITIES AND SIGNERS

35. European Charter, Education Article 8, choices for primary education (b) • i to make available primary education in the relevant regional or minority languages, or • ii to make available a substantial part of primary education in the relevant regional or minority languages; or • iii to provide, within primary education, for the teaching of the relevant regional or minority languages as an integral part of the curriculum; or • iv to apply one of the measures provided for under i to iii above at least to those pupils whose families so request and whose number is considered sufficient.

36. Choices made in Education Article 8 for preschool (a)

37. Choices made in Education Article 8 for primary school (b)

38. Choices made in Education Article 8 for secondary school (c)

39. Choices made in Education Article 8 for technical & vocational education (d)

40. Choices made in Education Article 8 for university and higher education (e)

41. How have these (few) rights been formulated in the HRs instruments? Do they grant firm rights?

42. Binding educational clauses of human rights instruments have more opt-outs, modifications, alternatives, claw-backs, etc. than other Articles

43. Council of Europe’sFramework Convention for the Protection of National MinoritiesandThe European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages,both in force since 1998.

44. Council of Europe’sFramework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities • In areas inhabited by persons belonging to national minorities traditionally or in substantialnumbers, if there is sufficient demand, the parties shall endeavour to ensure, as far as possible and within the framework of their education systems, that persons belonging to those minorities have adequate opportunities for being taught in the minority language or for receiving instruction in this language (emphases added).

45. Framework Convention for the Protection of National MinoritiesThe European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages: • ‘as far as possible’ • ‘within the framework of [the State's] education systems’, • ‘appropriate measures’ • ‘adequate opportunities’ • ‘if there is sufficient demand’ • ‘substantial numbers’ • ‘pupils who so wish in a number considered sufficient’ • ‘if the number of users of a regional or minority language justifies it’.

46. Claim 3 • In relation to immigrated minorities, there is no linguistic democracy whatsoever. • Linguistic genocide (defined in terms of the United Nations Genocide Convention, Articles 2b) and 2e) continues in schools

47. Question 3 • Can what happens in Nordic schools in the education of immigrated minorities, be seen as linguistic genocide (defined in terms of the United Nations Genocide Convention, Articles 2b and 2e)?

48. UN International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (E793, 1948)has five definitions of genocide.Two of them fit today’s indigenous & minority education

49. Article II(e): 'forcibly transferring children of the group to another group'; and • Article II(b): 'causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group'; (emphasis added).

50. Human Rights disappearing? Denmark & forcible transfer of children (Genocide Convention) • Integration Chair of the governing party Venstre, Irene Simonsen suggests in an interview that ethnic minority children growing up in Muslim homes should be forcibly taken away from their homes, to be brought up by Danes. The way their parents bring them up, in isolation from the Danish society, cannot be accepted in a democratic society. • Morning News on Danish Radio, 15th September 2004 • My comment: This would violate the UN Genocide Convention; there have been several serious suggestions by politicians in Denmark that HR conventions need to be ”reconsidered and modernised”.