| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 4:37 pm Post subject: Canada's new foreign policy |
 |
|
| Quote: |
When Israeli defence minister Ehud Barak was in Ottawa last week, his Canadian counterpart Peter MacKay did not, when asked, rule out a mutual defence agreement that would oblige Canada to come to Israel�s aid, if attacked. Officials later said no such arrangement is part of the military co-operation pact on which the two countries are working but Mr. MacKay emphasized Canada�s unequivocal support. �I would argue they could not find a more supportive country on the planet,� he said.
The sense that Canada is now even more supportive than the Americans may surprise, and even unnerve, many Canadians.
True, we already have mutual defence agreements with countries like Turkey and Albania through NATO but they are not talking about pre-emptive strikes on near neighbours, as Mr. Barak has been doing. Israel is a friendly democracy surrounded by autocratic neighbours, and its very existence is threatened by a nuclear Iran, but does Canada have the capacity to rush to Israel�s aid, given the toll taken by 10 years of war in Afghanistan on the Canadian Forces? Would it be in the national interest to do so?
The position of the Harper government on Israel has been consistent since it was elected in 2006, if now even more indubitable.
But the approach to foreign affairs across the board has become noticeably more pugnacious since the election � such as the decision to maintain a Mediterranean naval presence and the aggressive stance on banning all financial transactions with Iran.
Mr. Harper signalled a more active foreign policy in his speech to Conservatives at their post-election convention in June. �Now we know where our interests lie, and who our friends are. We are taking strong principled positions in our dealings with other nations, whether popular or not,� he said.
|
| Quote: |
The suspicion is: that was then and this is now. At the convention in June, Mr. Harper was in hubristic mood. �[Canada�s] views matter, not just because we now have the tools to act, but also the capacity. We are no longer middle of the pack, but among the world�s top performing nations�Strength is not an option. Moral ambiguity, moral equivalence are not options, they are dangerous illusions.�
Many Canadians will applaud the Prime Minister�s tub-thumping and feel pride in his contention that this is a �great country rising.�
But a note of caution should be sounded about foreign policy guided merely by the Prime Minister�s sense of the �struggle between good and bad� � there is a risk of military adventurism.
If Mr. Harper had been Prime Minister in 2003, there is little doubt that Canada would have joined the British and Americans in Iraq, with the likely consequence that hundreds of Canadian soldiers would have been casualties of a questionable intervention. At the time, Mr. Harper claimed joining the �coalition of the willing� was �manifestly in the national interest of Canada.� As the situation in Iraq turned for the worse in subsequent years, he became less vocal in his endorsement of the mission. In the end, we were well out of it.
|
Full Article |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm semi-confused by this. I mean, I can see why Canada would feel closer to Israel than its neighbours, but I've never felt very close to Israel as a Canadian. And I've always been a tad perplexed by the US's apparently blind support.
I'd be curious to see how other Canadians feel about such a possible commitment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
comm
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2011 1:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| I'm semi-confused by this. I mean, I can see why Canada would feel closer to Israel than its neighbours, but I've never felt very close to Israel as a Canadian. And I've always been a tad perplexed by the US's apparently blind support.commitment. |
Well, when a lobbyist and a government official love each other very much... they spend some time together and make a policy! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
everything-is-everything
Joined: 06 Jun 2011
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2011 8:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
I'm semi-confused by this. I mean, I can see why Canada would feel closer to Israel than its neighbours, but I've never felt very close to Israel as a Canadian. And I've always been a tad perplexed by the US's apparently blind support.
I'd be curious to see how other Canadians feel about such a possible commitment. |
I'm in the same boat as you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2011 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| This is the only part of the Harper Government's agenda that really worries me. Middle East adventurism will cost us billions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
No_hite_pls
Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Location: Don't hate me because I'm right
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Afghanistan, Libya, Iran and he would have went to Iraq too if he would have been in power in 2003. This man is going to keep Canada safe from all the evil in the world. I heard the Harper's government is even sending warships in the Arctic to protect us from those godless Danes! Finally a man that will stand up for Canada and not waste money on things like welfare for the poor. God Bless Steven J. Harper! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
riverboy
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
Location: Incheon
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sickens me to be honest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
recessiontime
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't see why Israel has to lobby Canada when they already have the US just itching for reason to attack Iran. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 4:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| recessiontime wrote: |
| I don't see why Israel has to lobby Canada when they already have the US just itching for reason to attack Iran. |
Why do you conflate the neocons with America? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
comm
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 4:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
Why do you conflate the neocons with America? |
Likely because there are just as many neolibs as neocons :- / |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't want to derail a perfectly legitimate thread, but please define your terms. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
recessiontime
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 6:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Canadian military AND economic pressure doesn't add up to much after the US and Britain have already started the economic blockade. While I'm sure many Iranians will struggle because of their economy, it's the same old same old over there.
It's clear the US can't just carpet bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. They'd just make new ones anyway. Even with all it's military might the US does not want to invade a 6th Arab country. They'll have to hope that all the economic pressure sparks a revolution in Iran but I'm not so sure it'll be that easy.
Iran can trade with surrounding countries and all the sanctions can make the country more self reliant. From what I've heard Iran used to buy parts for cars and jets from other countries and now they make their own. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
comm
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 10:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wikipedia wrote: |
| Since 2001, neoconservatism has been associated with democracy promotion, that is with assisting movements for democracy, in some cases by economic sanctions or military action.[1] |
I'd consider neoliberalism to be a left-wing equivalent which is clearly operative in the modern Democrat party, as illustrated by the Libyan conflict and the recent sanctions on Iran. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| No_hite_pls wrote: |
| Afghanistan, Libya, Iran and he would have went to Iraq too if he would have been in power in 2003. This man is going to keep Canada safe from all the evil in the world. I heard the Harper's government is even sending warships in the Arctic to protect us from those godless Danes! Finally a man that will stand up for Canada and not waste money on things like welfare for the poor. God Bless Steven J. Harper! |
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canadavotes2006/national/2005/12/12/harper-american051212.html
| Quote: |
On Iraq, Harper said he supported the removal of Saddam Hussein and applauded the "efforts to establish democracy and freedom."
But he said he would not commit Canadian troops to the country and added his "great disappointment" at not substantiating pre-war intelligence regarding weapons of mass destruction. |
The prior year he gave an interview saying that it was "not feasible" for Canada to join the war.
Just one year into the Iraq war and he was already saying that. True while in opposition he gave sound bites opposing the Liberal stance. But once he came to power he quickly changed his tune...which suggests that his previous "support" for the war was all about scoring political points. Then again that's pretty much par for the course for politicians of all parties. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
No_hite_pls
Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Location: Don't hate me because I'm right
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| No_hite_pls wrote: |
| Afghanistan, Libya, Iran and he would have went to Iraq too if he would have been in power in 2003. This man is going to keep Canada safe from all the evil in the world. I heard the Harper's government is even sending warships in the Arctic to protect us from those godless Danes! Finally a man that will stand up for Canada and not waste money on things like welfare for the poor. God Bless Steven J. Harper! |
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canadavotes2006/national/2005/12/12/harper-american051212.html
| Quote: |
On Iraq, Harper said he supported the removal of Saddam Hussein and applauded the "efforts to establish democracy and freedom."
But he said he would not commit Canadian troops to the country and added his "great disappointment" at not substantiating pre-war intelligence regarding weapons of mass destruction. |
The prior year he gave an interview saying that it was "not feasible" for Canada to join the war.
Just one year into the Iraq war and he was already saying that. True while in opposition he gave sound bites opposing the Liberal stance. But once he came to power he quickly changed his tune...which suggests that his previous "support" for the war was all about scoring political points. Then again that's pretty much par for the course for politicians of all parties. |
I believe he would have sent troops to Iraq. You must believe in him.
| Quote: |
In an interview with the American TV network Fox News, Harper said he endorsed the war and said he was speaking "for the silent majority" of Canadians. Only in Quebec, with its "pacifist tradition," are most people opposed to the war, Harper said.
"Outside of Quebec, I believe very strongly the silent majority of Canadians is strongly supportive," the Canadian Alliance leader says.
In a segment to be broadcast across the U.S. and in 41 countries Friday night and repeated on the weekend, Harper says Ottawa's position on the war is hypocritical.
"We have a government here that says Saddam Hussein is a war criminal and maintains diplomatic relations with him during the conflict," he said.
"We have a government that says they're not supportive of the conflict but it becomes more and more obvious that we have Canadian soldiers and sailors involved in the conflict."
Harper told the House that Canada's position "diminishes only us," and added, "We are lucky to have the Americans as our neighbour, ally and friend.
"They are our biggest asset in this very dangerous world," said the Alliance leader.
|
He's right it is a very very dangerous world with evil-doers everywhere. Thank You so much the likes of Stephen J. Harper, Dick Cheney and George Bush for keeping us safe!
Read more: http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20030404/harper_fox_interview_030404/#ixzz1f9wsF4d0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
