I personally think that Canada's role in the entire Middle East conflict should be that of protecting the innocent civillians involved in these disputes and being completely neutral in an epic conflict that has spanned millenia in which we have no part. Give aid and protection to refugees and other non combatants.
I think Harper's move is rather interesting. It led me to investigate past Canada Israeli relations to attempt to determine his motive. Is he acting in concert with past policy, or diverging?
My research led me to a website that spelled out much of Canada's policy during key moments involving Israel in the recent history. Here are some exerpts.
Quote:
Canada adopted a policy of “none is too many” about the absorption of European Jews seeking refugee from Nazi persecution.7 The government of Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King, whether driven by anti-Semitic sentiment or a fear of the domestic political repercussions of large-scale Jewish immigration, was not prepared to deal with the issue. Similarly, it “simply had no desire to get involved” in the controversy surrounding the British White Paper of 1939, which imposed severe restrictions on Jewish immigration to Palestine
***
Having helped bridge the US and British positions on the Palestine debate, Canada then returned to the relative comfort afforded by strict adherence to a policy of non-commitment. Ottawa withheld de facto recognition of Israel until December 1948. Israel failed in its first attempt to gain admission to the UN because Canada abstained when the issue came to a vote in the Security Council.14 Canada granted de jure recognition only in May 1949, once the Jewish state had been admitted to the UN.
***
Since taking office shortly after the Six-Day War, Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau had expressed reservations about what he perceived to be the short-sighted liberal-internationalism that motivated Canada’s post-1945 approach to global affairs. He encouraged a more rational assessment of the costs and benefits associated with policy decisions as well as a tighter linkage between foreign policy and domestic interests.20 This new approach had significant implications for Canada’s post-1973 Middle East policy. Specifically, Trudeau questioned the benefit to Canada of participating in UN peacekeeping forces established in the Sinai and the Golan Heights in 1974 and 1975. Trudeau ultimately agreed to contribute Canadian forces to the UN missions only under pressure from the United States.21
***
While generally supportive of President George W. Bush’s June 24, 2002 call for a fundamental change in Palestinian leadership, Canada joined much of the European Union in declaring that it was not Canada’s business to tell the Palestinians who their leaders should be, and in continuing to recognize Yasser Arafat as the elected representative of the Palestinian people.55 As a supporter of the road map for peace, however, Canada has endorsed the document’s call for democratization, modernization, an end to terrorism, and a viable negotiated settlement with Israel based on the two-state formula referred to in Bush’s speech.
|
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/.../canada.html#1
^Take the validity of this website at face value, I am, but it is the only direct information I've been able to find. And it has extensive citation and documentation.
So it appears the USA has a history of pressuring Canada into siding with Israel in middle eastern conflict. This leads me to grant a modicum of credibility to the claims that Harper's strong stance in favour of Israel despite the deaths of Canadian life at their hands is in part to appease the USA in their mutual alliance with Israel.
I'm afraid I just don't see the benefit of choosing sides in a conflict which can very easily jump to Canadian soil. Especially in the face of Canadian blood spilled by Israeli soldiers.
Harper IS working on getting Canadians out of there with haste, and that is impressing me. *UPDATE BELOW*
I fear I'm being too critical of Mr. Harper. While he was slow in reacting, he has rebounded nicely with the commitment of cruise ships and even his personal plane. It was nice he gave his photographer a ride. Can't miss that photo op eh?
[edit]
It appears as of Thursday's press-time, the Globe and Mail reports that under 300 of the 2000 Canadians stranded have made it on their way home.
For shame.
FURTHER UPDATE
It appears Mr. Harper's office wanted to keep the situation in Beirut out of the news. Sandra Buckler (PM's communications director) issued an edict from the top that the situation was to be kept under wraps.
Also, it appears that SIX of the seven cruise ships have been stopped by the Israeli blockade. Since the Prime Minister has to micromanage everything, all orders had to be run through the PM. This resulted in large scale delays and more than a fair share of frustration.
The PM's office also delayed so long that they were almost last in line to charter cruise ships. This combined with the fact Canada cannot provide a military escort (not the PM's fault) caused the delays at the port. We chartered Lebanese flagged ships and didn't provide an escort. Of course the Israelis were going to give them the rubber glove.
All in all I'm disgusted. Poor poor poor management of the situation.
And does anyone else think his personal trip there reeks of publicity stunt? Why did he himself have to go at all? Just send the plane! Also, he brought far more of an entourage than he first released:
- Three senior communications aides
- Official photographer
- Logistics chief
- Tour director
- Doctor
- RCMP bodyguards
Seems like a lot of unnecessary baggage on that flight.
also:
Countries who have evacuated citizens from Lebanon:
Canada 40,000 - Evacuated: 280
Australia 25,000 - Evacuated 200
United States 25,000 - Evacuated 1500
Britain 22,000 - Evacuated 510
France 20,000 - Evacuated 800
Denmark 5,000 - Evacuated 4000
Sweden 5,000 - Evacuated 1,300
Germany 3,000 - Evacuated 3,000
MacKinnon, M 2,000 wait in port camp for leased ship to arrive. (2006, July 20). The Globe and Mail, p. A1.
Albeit, most of these countries don't have the logistical problems that Canada has trying to get their citizens home.