• Print
  • Send to a friend
  • Comment (0)
  •  

What do we want?

Published on July 28, 2011
Published on July 28, 2011
Topics :
NATO , Dear Editor , Canada , Libya , Europe

Dear Editor;

Canada joined NATO 60 years ago when our allies in Europe were under threat from the Soviet Union.

NATO for the last decade is engaging in military action based of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, “the idea that if a country is unwilling or unable to protect its own people, if it’s responsible for ethnic cleansing or massacres, or if it’s denying relief aid to its own people, then another country should step in and help.”

The “Arab Spring” has seen protests against governments in a number of countries. Only in Libya has there been action. NATO was given the right to create a “no-fly zone” subsequently inflated to the point helicopter gun ships are aiding those now recognized as the legitimate government of Libya by Canada.

Canadians are expected to believe our Foreign Affairs Minister when he says, “Canada – through NATO – has been front and centre in the military mission to protect the Libyan people.” On the ground observers relate a different reality of bombing not limited to military targets.

Canadians are expected to believe our Foreign Affairs Minister when he says, “Canada – through NATO – has been front and centre in the military mission to protect the Libyan people.” On the ground observers relate a different reality of bombing not limited to military targets. - Joe Hueglin

Canada’s Prime Minister is quoted as saying “it’s not just good enough to say, ‘Everybody likes us,’... the ability of our most important allies, and most importantly the United States, to single-handedly shape outcomes and protect our interests, has been diminishing, and so I’m saying we have to be prepared to contribute more, and that is what this government’s been doing.”

In the view of one political science professor, “Harper downplays peacekeeping, bridge-building and mediation, and poverty-eradication, preferring a more robust or muscular foreign policy posture (think bombing runs over Libya and combat operations in Kandahar).”

Is what the Prime Minister values, that we have a “muscular foreign policy” in aid of United States foreign policies, as a Canadian value? I think not. Rather than this having our country acting on what Harper downplays, and being able to say ‘Everybody likes us.’

Joe Hueglin

Niagara Falls, Ontario     

Submit a comment

Submit a comment (we keep all emails private)
Agreement

We ask that users remain courteous. You may not post insulting, discriminatory or inappropriate content, which may be removed at our discretion. We are not responsible for user content and opinions. Use of this site as well as content submission & ownership are governed by our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.

Member organizations should be non-profit in nature, and promote legal activities. Any organization found promoting illegal activities or commercial products or services will be deleted from the site.

I agree with these conditions.

Advertising

Newsletter

Please enter your email to receive our free newsletter

Subscribe to news alerts

Recent Announcements

Current Obituaries in The Charter

Find an Announcement

Find an Announcement

Charter Twitter

loading...

Advertising