[R-G] The United States of ... Canada

[Anthony Fenton]

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9932.shtml

The United States of ... Canada
Hicham Safieddine, The Electronic Intifada, 3 November 2008

People around the world, including those in the Middle East, may have  
paid little attention to Canada's parliamentary elections on 14  
October. This should come as no surprise, as Canadians themselves  
seemed more interested in the developments of the presidential race  
for the White House south of the border. Besides, the Canadian  
election brought little change to the makeup of parliament. The  
Conservatives maintained their lead and formed a minority government  
while the Liberals lost more seats.

But preserving the status quo and the virtual absence of foreign  
policy as a topic of public debate in the run up to the vote  
reinforces the transformation in Canada's geopolitical role in  
relation to the Middle East. And this must be of extra concern today.  
Canada may take on an increasingly active role in light of the partial  
weakening of the United States' ability to maintain its hegemonic  
status across the globe single-handedly following its invasions of  
Afghanistan and Iraq. This is especially so if Barack Obama becomes  
president. Canada is among the nations with the largest military  
presence in Afghanistan. The Conservatives led by George W. Bush's  
protege Stephen Harper have always pushed for a more aggressive role  
by Canada at a time when the anti-war movement is on the wane.  
Harper's policy is more likely to sit well with the public if it is  
marketed in line with the "moderate" vision of an American president  
like Obama who doesn't have Bush's bad reputation and who has  
expressed a desire to shift the war effort from Iraq to Pakistan and  
Afghanistan.

The fact is Canada's current role in aiding American expansionism in  
the Middle East is larger and more complex than what some might think.  
This role simply became more evident when Canada led the international  
occupying forces in the Afghani province of Kandahar. This coincided  
with a gradual shift towards the militarization of foreign policy in  
opposition to the (at least official) policy of focusing on  
peacekeeping and diplomacy. And this shift was adopted by the Liberals  
and Conservatives alike. In 2005, the Liberals promised to increase  
the military budget by 13 billion dollars (all Canadian figures) over  
five years. In 2006, the Conservatives came to power. They announced a  
2 percent annual increase in military spending over 20 years in  
addition to a package of 15 billion dollars aimed at buying new  
equipment and weaponry. With a military budget of 18 billion, Canada  
ranks sixth among NATO countries when it comes to military spending  
and jumped to sixth place worldwide in terms of military exports.

However, Canada's role in aiding the American project isn't limited to  
Afghanistan. For despite the official decision not to join the  
American invasion of Iraq in 2003, Canadian forces took on several  
major tasks during the operation and after. This included logistical  
missions (transportation of provisions, heavy machinery, securing of  
supply lines), training by Canadian federal police of their Iraqi  
counterparts in Jordan, and even taking on leadership positions among  
the troops (Canadian generals such as Peter Devlin held top  
positions). Former US ambassador to Canada Paul Celluci confirmed the  
extent of Canada's complicity when he pointed out during the invasion  
in March 2003 that "ironically, Canadian naval vessels, aircraft and  
personnel ... will supply more support to this war in Iraq  
indirectly ... than most of those 46 countries that are fully  
supporting our efforts there."

The militarization of Canada's foreign policy was accompanied by the  
reshaping of the armed forces ideology that produced the phenomenon of  
the army's former Chief of Staff Rick Hillier. Hillier became a  
popular face in the media and took on a role similar to that of  
American Generals David Petraeus and Tommy Franks as a trusted source  
of authority untainted by political ambition.

Canada's position vis-a-vis the Arab Israeli conflict was no less  
extreme. Canada's increasing support for Israel is on the rise. The  
Canadian government was the first among Western powers to cut aid to  
the Palestinian government following the election of Hamas. The  
suffocating siege on Gaza did not prevent one of the Liberal's leading  
candidates for the election, Ken Dryden, from calling to "stop all aid  
that flows into Gaza" even though it might hurt the Palestinian  
population.

In relation to Lebanon, Prime Minister Harper described Israel's  
aggression against Lebanon in 2006 as a "measured response" while  
Hizballah's military and political wing joined the list of terrorist  
organizations a few years prior.

Domestically, consecutive governments have failed to live up to their  
minimal obligations towards the country's citizen of Muslim origin  
when it comes to the so-called "war on terror." Recent laws have given  
the Minister of Immigration more say in determining status of visa  
application, a move interpreted by immigrant activists as undermining  
transparency and opening the door for ethnic and racial profiling of  
applicants. Moreover, Canada is the only western country allied to the  
US that has failed to repatriate its citizen from Guantanamo. A video  
released this year showed how Canadian diplomats were implicated in  
the torture of the Canadian detainee, Omar Khadr. The release of the  
video did not lead to the public uproar that Khadr's lawyers had  
hoped. This last detail sheds some light on the gap between the  
gravity of the shift in Canada's policy and the public's awareness and  
acknowledgment of such a shift. The image of Canada as an  
international peace keeper remains the dominant one among the public  
imagination. Not that Canada abided by such a peacekeeping role  
throughout its history. Indeed, the country has stood by the US in  
many of its imperialist endeavors, from the Korean War in the 1950s to  
regime change in Haiti and later in Afghanistan. But often, it was  
never as aggressive in its approach as the US, and it did show some  
concern for international law and multilateral diplomacy. That is what  
is eroding.

All this shows that it is misguided to treat Canada as a moderate  
force. Canada today squarely belongs to the neo-conservative US camp.  
And this is the message that politicians, diplomats, and activists  
opposed to US foreign policy in the region need to convey to their  
Canadian counterparts in an effort to reverse this shift. Anything  
less is worthy of blame and possibly prosecution.

Hicham Safieddine is a Lebanese Canadian journalist. This is an edited  
translation of an article that appeared in Lebanon's Al-Akhbar  
newspaper on Thursday, 23 October 2008.