Are they all in Lebanon for a visit? Hardly.
Most are dual-citizenship Canadians who've chosen to return to the motherland to live as Lebanese -- until trouble strikes and then they want the Canadian government to rescue them, not the Lebanese government.
Under terms of Canada's dual citizenship policy, the country in which people choose to live, or to visit, takes precedence over Canadian law -- which isn't to say we, as a country, shouldn't help people in trouble.
Frankly, any dual-citizenship Canadian who chooses to live in one of the danger areas of the world should not expect Canada to rush to his aid and rescue him and relatives when danger threatens.
Instead, appeal to the government you prefer to live under, rather than the Canadian one.
Now Canada is chartering seven ships and a bunch of aircraft to rescue these citizens, many of whom have chosen not to live in Canada. Does Canada have an obligation to be responsible for them? The cost to taxpayers of removing tens of thousands from Lebanon is enormous.
The situation in Lebanon is a humanitarian crisis, first and foremost. Canada has a moral obligation to help displaced people escape harm whenever possible. The semantic debate over what constitutes a "Canadian" seems entirely irrelevant, as does the callous reference to financial "cost". Quite easy for someone to question why someone would choose to live in an unstable part of the world (couldn't you use the same argument for people emigrating to Israel), especially when you have no emotional attachment to your homeland. The simple fact remains, up until the recent events, the situation in Lebanon was arguably better than it had been in decades, which led many displaced Lebanese to think a return was reasonable.
Worthington argues that if you choose to live in Lebanon, then turn to the Lebanese government for comfort. In case you weren't paying attention, the Lebanese government is a fragile entity, obviously incapable of dealing with a massive humanitarian crisis. In cases such as these, the international community has an obligation to do everything in its power to help. Canada isn't a country that says "you made your bed, lie in it", or at least I hope not. I don't differentiate who needs our assistance by how long they were in Lebanon and their purpose for being there. If they want out, and we are able, do it. Eat the cost, because if we now calculate the price of casualties, then surely Canada has lost its soul. Have they "chosen not to live in Canada", as Worthington's uber nationalism suggests, or have they merely be drawn home by their wanting hearts.
9 comments:
My feeling on this is that citizenship is for life with the exception of naturalised citizens who lied on their naturalisation application - i.e. the way it is right now and the policy of the current evac. Therefore separate rights for different groups of citizens is crap - it's the kind of distinction that could lead to chilling follow-on discrimination in other areas.
I am glad that the Tories are not pushing promissory notes on the evacuees like the Americans and that they are not separating families by not evacing PRs travelling with Canadian family members.
"I am glad that the Tories are not pushing promissory notes on the evacuees like the Americans and that they are not separating families by not evacing PRs travelling with Canadian family members."
Agreed, and McKay has been clear on this point.
I'm also glad that while (many of)the Blogging Tories make waves and try to create a class of second class citizens out of these unfortunate Canadians, that I get NO IMPRESSION WHATSOEVER from either Harper of MacKay that either of them feels that way in the slightest. I think both men see all of these Canadians as Canadians (shocking I know... acknowledging reality!) and will do their best to do whatever can be done to help them, and get them out of this war zone. Things haven't gone smoothly exactly so far, but I still give the government a B+ at this point given the insanity of this situation (and I really don't think it's fair to really judge the evacuation until we get some perspective... maybe August...).
Also, I feel the need to point out that the U.S. is no longer making Americans sign promissory notes, and will be paying for the evacuation in its entirety. The State Department was initially following a statute which is on the books from the 1950s (so they were basically just following the law), but the Department has subsequently announced that they will be covering the costs of the evacuation, and are no longer requiring payment or promissory notes. They came to the right decision under pressure, but they came to the right decision, and good for them.
Finally, just for the record, I'm a citizen of Canada, not a "taxpayer" of Canada, and I think it's high time governments started treating us as citizens, not merely taxpayers.
There's no fee to be Canadian.
I agree completely with what you are saying, but feel like some of the evacuees are acting like babies.
A BCer in Toronto has a good post on the "baby" angle.
I find it sad that people with such an "emotional attachment to [their] homeland" would not be willing to stay and fight for it. If they want to be safe, then move to the north where Hezbollah are not.
John M Reynolds
"would not be willing to stay and fight for it. If they want to be safe, then move to the north where Hezbollah are not."
The simplistic logic of complete detachment from reality and a lack of compassion. Nice.
Very pretty design! Keep up the good work. Thanks.
»
Great site loved it alot, will come back and visit again.
»
Post a Comment