Sunday, February 13, 2011

More Duty Than Desire

People are right to point out that Canada hasn't been a substantive "player" in the Middle East for some time. It is also true that Canadians tend to overstate our international influence, demands for commentary and initiative, self congratulatory want that has no little real influence outside our borders. Probably true that we Canadians like to see ourselves as more relevant on the international stage than practically justified. However, none of these "truisms" detract from justified criticism directed towards this government, and their embarrassing shallow and thin responses to many world events, in particular what has happened in Egypt.

The Conservatives display little curiousity about the world; you don't sense any real passion for foreign affairs, cookie cutter, superficial, and sadly amateurish far too often. On the international stage, you can create influence, you can position yourself, you can find a niche and exploit for maximum input. This idea that Canada isn't a factor in Egypt so why bother, is defeatist, as well as self fulfilling. History is full of an overwhelming number of examples wherein middle powers "punch above their weight", but what is required is desire to have influence. This government treats the international stage much like they treat federalism, hands off, only react when threatened, really no "agenda" or overarching philosophy. Defenders will mention Israel, but really most would agree the prominence is more a function of electoral prospects than burning desire. Canada has always been a strong, consistent defender of Israel, the recent controversies are partisan creation rather than bold policy.

Where is Canada making a mark on foreign policy, where is this government distinguishing itself? Everything I read, foreign diplomats openly ask "what happened to Canada?", "where is Canada?", you never read much praise, apart from nuts and bolts acknowledgement of our banking system, other realites that really are separate from this government's outreach.

The Conservatives react to events in Egypt in robotic fashion, here's the statements, bland, more duty than desire. There is no sense of genuine involvement, it has no resonance even domestically, never mind beyond our borders. I would argue that while we are marginal players, the inability to understand diplomatic nuance, the forfeiting of a voice for domestic electoral consideration, has rendered us even less influential, to the point of laughable.

I listen to Rae from the Liberals, Dewar from the NDP and you can hear passion in their voices, as they speak about Egypt. You listen to this government, the deadpan doll eye routine and you realize it's only obligation that motivates. While it's true that we overstate our importance, it's also true that this government's low priority vibe only contributes to a falling stature. Canada might not be a "player", but it's also credible to argue Canada has never been more of a "bit player" than it is today, right now, under Stephen Harper and his simplistic, black and white view of a complicated world.

15 comments:

The Rat said...

"History is full of an overwhelming number of examples wherein middle powers "punch above their weight",

Every time I read a line like that I barf a little in my mouth. What is with Liberals and their pathological love of that phrase? It's not like a Liberal would ever throw a punch, And maybe Liberals should consider that that phrase references boxing, a sport that has become a laughing stock due to infighting and corruption, and perhaps update it a bit. Or leave it alone 'cause it does fit well, a corrupt party brought low by infighting referencing their kindred sport.

Tomm said...

Steve,

I also take issue with what you are selling.

You said... "...you don't sense any real passion for foreign affairs, cookie cutter, superficial, and sadly amateurish far too often"

And then you go on to praise Dewar and Rae..."can hear passion in their voices"

Let's step back a little here. What have we just witnessed? Certainly the uprising of real Eqyptian's causing a huge and dramatic capitulation by what was essentially a "President for Life".

But we have also seen the Generals who have been Mubarek's backbone for 30 years come out even stronger. There is now a direct military dictatorship. We also have a Sharia Law espousing Islamic group now openly signing up new members, and a pipeline of support opening with Iran.

It seems to me that the starry eyed ameteurs in this little drama is more likely Dewar and Rae. The one really casting his gaze into the future is our Prime Minister who is a little more wary of where this all may end.

Whether what happened really makes Egypt more free, democratic and hospitable to the west; or makes it more closed, fanatic, and conspiratorial, only time will tell. I'm glad Rae and Dewar are cheerleaders and not our quarterbacks.

Steve V said...

Okay lightweight ;)

Steve V said...

Rae is an amateur? Wow Tomm, clueless much? You just keep coming dude, and every time you embarrass yourself.

You're the amateur and a bad one. Please don't retort, don't think I can bare another thread ruined with your tripe. Honestly.

rockfish said...

Listening to the CON drones with their defence of Capt' Toothpaste, one wonders if they thought Lester Pearson's actions in the middle east were just more "cheerleaders and not our quarterbacks"?

I suppose if its not 'firewall' talk, it don't matter to that crowd...

Steve V said...

"I think that it's clear to me after watching this government for several years now as foreign affairs critic that this government doesn't really get foreign policy," Rae told Question Period.

"They really only see it as a place in which to practice domestic politics. Whether that works for them or not, I don't know. I can only tell you that as far as the world is concerned I think we're punching well, well, well below out weight, well below our capacity, and well below our traditional strength as a country."


The "domestic politics" comment is similar to the same point I made, there is no vision, just seen as tool for electoral advantage. Oh ya, and the boxing reference was great too!!!

Rotterdam said...

In a revolution, as in a novel, the most difficult part to invent is the end.
Alexis de Tocqueville

Tomm has it right.

Rae sounds like a bandwagon amateur. Harper is measured and mature.
You do not want the 1979 Iranian outcome.

marie said...

Rae sounds like a bandwagon amateur. Harper is measured and mature.
You do not want the 1979 Iranian outcome.

Partisan observations from narrow minded, winded Puppet parrot supporters.
It is plain to see that the world is noticing how much of a dud Harper is and how inadaquet he is as a Pm of Canada.

Rotterdam said...

"It is plain to see that the world is noticing how much of a dud Harper is and how inadaquat he is as a Pm of Canada'

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez,Ismail Haniyeh, Najib Mikati,
and Hassan Nasrallah, would all agree.

marie said...

Oops I forgot to insert
Rae sounds like a bandwagon amateur. Harper is measured and mature.
You do not want the 1979 Iranian outcome.




Harper does sound and is a bandwagon amateur. He does love performing on his piano. The propaganda expert IS measured immature and childish.

Egypt has already stated that they will continue to support Israel. And after 5 years of Harper, I think I can believe Egypt a lot more than the want to be President and dictator.

You do not want the 1979 Iranian outcome. No we don’t but we also do not want it here in Canada.

Egypt has already stated that they will continue to support Israel so your theory is about as false as your liar hypocrite leader and the rest of you trolls. Give your heads a shake. As if anyone here would ever take you jokers seriously.


Partisan observations from narrow minded, winded Puppet parrot supporters.

It is plain to see that the world is noticing how much of a dud Harper is and how inadequate he is as a Pm of Canada.

This is my Sunday rant and just as credible as Tomm, the Rat & Rotterdam.

ridenrain said...

Would Chretien’s war in Afghanistan be a good example of Liberal foreign policy brilliance?
Open conflict on the cheap with no solid end date or measurable winning criteria.

Robert Fowler’s speech at the Liberals Thinker’s conference keeps ringing in my ears.

Steve V said...

Ya, how dare the Liberals have a free thinking conference, unlike the trained seal routine you guys enjoy.

BTW, the ringing in your ears isn't Fowler, unfortunately it's much more serious.

A Eliz. said...

I remember how Canada used to be and it is crying shame what has happened to us. Pearson was one of a kind, and knew the Middle East well. Even Ignatieff knows far more about the world than Harper ever will.Rae is not stupid, either, as some trolls think.

Steve V said...

People can diss Rae, but he towers over anything the Cons have on foreign affairs. Coyne even suggested they recruit him, that's the kind of stature he enjoys. The opinion of the goosestep gang and their simplistic view of the world, who cares...

bubba said...

was that the thinkers conference where they rode iggy in naked on a white horse and proclaimed "lead us to victory great one" or am i thinking of a different conference.If Iggy is so worldly which i dont doubt. Why isn't he bringing it, it's time for him to shine say something memorable. Harper has been uninspirational,I give you that. If this Liberal team is so superior in this area why is it so scared to say anything I don't get it.