Harper is right on the Middle East
Stephen Harper could have taken the safe route. When fighting broke out in the Middle East, it would have been easy to stick with the usual Canadian formula: denouncing the violence on both sides, calling for a ceasefire, proposing peace talks. Prime ministers down the decades have done precisely that, tiptoeing between the usual American support of Israel and the usual Arab denunciation.
Instead, Mr. Harper did something unusual and refreshing: He said what he thought. He didn't denounce the violence on both sides; he denounced Hezbollah violence and said that Israel had a right to defend itself. He didn't say there should be a ceasefire; he said Hezbollah was primarily responsible for starting the fighting and must be primarily responsible for ending it. He didn't call for peace talks; he called on Hezbollah to return kidnapped Israeli soldiers and stop attacking Israeli civilians.
Mr. Harper's opponents in Parliament find this shocking. NDP Leader Jack Layton says he has ruined Canada's reputation for diplomatic neutrality. The Liberal's Bill Graham attacks him for lacking "nuance". Well, diplomacy and nuance have their place, but shouldn't Canada also be able to call a spade a spade? Isn't that part of the repetoire of a middle power?
What we're seeing in the Middle East is not an ordinary "cycle of violence", with each side equally to blame. It started with an unprovoked attack across a recognized international border. When Hezbollah killed eight Israeli soldiers and kidnapped two more, then rained missiles down on Israeli civilians, it was not fending off an Israeli attack or resisting Israeli occupation. Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon six years ago. This was a deliberate act of aggression by extremists sworn to destroy the state of Israel. Israel had every right to respond.
Harper is right not to fall into the trap of saying that because Israel's bombs are killing civilians, it is just as much to blame as Hezbollah. There is a world of difference between those who deliberately kill to make mischief and those who kill in response. When an Israeli airstrike gone wrong killed innocent civilians, Israel issued a heartfelt apology. When Hezbollah rockets kill Israeli innocents, its supporters hand out candies.
This is not always an easy distinction to talk about when civilians are being killed all around. To his credit, Mr. Harper insists on making it. No one would be dying on either side without Hezbollah and its twisted belief "that through violence it can bring about the destruction of Israel". But violence, he said, "will only bring about more violence and inevitably the result of violence will be the death of primarily innocent people". That is the real cycle here. Those, like the Israelis, who defend themselves against unprovoked attacks are not perpetuating the violence. The instigators alone are to blame for that.
That is the important point Mr. Harper was trying to make when he broke from the pack to support Israel so forcefully in the current conflict. It may not have been the safe thing to say, but it was the right one.
- Anonymous Author
posted by Josh at 12:47 p.m.
10 Comments:
Let's not forget the timing of this attack...just as the G8 summit was beginning.
What would have been number one of the geopolitical agenda? Iran.
This conflict was a perfect distraction of the real conflict in Iran, and this was deliberately done by Ahmedenijad to take some steam off him.
Let's not forget Mashaal as well. He instigated the Gaza kidnapping of Gilad Shalit in order secure his power on the outskirts.
It is important that we connect the dots.
Wow. I can honestly say that I am shocked at the perspective of the author. While Harpers stance is principled (which I can say that I admire), it is not moral. The great despots of history, (Hitler, Mussolini, Pol Pot, and Bin Laden) had principles, but their actions cant be said to be moral.
The rest of the article is a joke. Yes Hezbollah should be punished. But Hezbollah is not equal to Lebanon, which the Israeli army seems to think it is. Even cursory research shows that Northern Lebanese HATE hezbollah, but they are being punished as well. Whole neighbourhoods are flattened, without consideration of the level of Hezbollah support that residents harbour. For the sake of two kidnapped soldiers (who do need to be returned), we see this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/06/middle_east_beirut_destruction/html/1.stm
So please lets not talk about Israel being in the right in this issue. While I can see justification in the past for some Israeli actions, Israel is taking advantage of the Lebanese lack of military might. More than state bullying, this is a war atrocity.
I will end with this note. What would Israel do if, for the same justification, Haifa was bombed to the level of Beirut?
to romesh,
hezbollah exists inside lebanon and enjoys living under a fragile government that is weak. it is a proxy of iran and syria, and has no reason to be fighting israel. israel left lebanon in 2000, and article 1559 of UN legislation declares that the lebanese gov't must disband hezbollah, since there is nothing left to fight for (internationally accepted blue line has been drawn at the border). if the lebanese government is not capable of disbanding murdering zealots who want nothing more than to see the destruction of israel, than the jewish state has every right to destroy such an entity that shoots at israeli civilians while hiding behind their own civilians.
the link you posted is interesting, but where is the link which shows the destruction israel has faced in its 58 years of existence? where are the pictures of israeli civilians blown to bits by extremists who have been wronged and ripped off by their governments and told that the jews are why they live with nothing and are poor?
destruction you see in lebanon? that is due to a prime minister and gov't who represent the country of lebanon and asks that israel be dealt with rather than hezbollah. if lebanon consisted of a moral government and truly wished for hezbollah to be disarmed, they would be fighting alongside israel. instead, the cowards cry to the world for israel to stop, as well as offering to help hezbollah should israel troops stage a ground offensive. these are not the words of a country who rejects hezbollah, but rather a country that embraces anything which will kill israelis anywhere, anytime, and across any agreed upon borders.
- dave
to sam,
rationality should never be given in war such as this. he who rationalizes with terrorists will lose to terrorists. your comments about negotiating with terrorists is quite scary. if you negotiate, terrorists win, and you can be sure they will return to abduct more soldiers the next time they want something. this war is necessary. unless the terrorist infrastructure is dismantled, hezbollah will return and israel will be drawn into another battle. terrorism is like cancer - remove it entirely or run the risk of it returning. and to destroy it, you must destroy those who aid and abed it.
- dave
Dave,
Firstly read the article. The article isnt trying to justify the invasion. Rather it is saying that Harper did the 'moral' thing by giving carte blanche support to Israel (I dont know how to say the same thing in English).
As for the rest of your comments, you not dealing with the invasion, rather with history.
First para. Lets not talk about Lebanon and the disobedience of UN resolutions. Notwithstanding the fact that Lebanon could not disband Hezbollah because IT WAS OCCUPIED BY SYRIA till last year , Israel has not listened to many UN resolutions until they saw it fit to listen. Look at the aftermath of the 1967 war for one instance. Also, according to your criteria, all Lebanese agree with their elected government and therefore are guilty of their government. Thats like saying we all agreed with Paul Martin when he was in power. Smart.
Second para. On pure quantities, more Arab people are hurt than Israeli. On this war alone, less than a hundred Israelis have been killed, while hundreds of Lebanese have been killed. Interesting that you choose not to mention the differences that are done in regards to damage in infrastructure and businesses, that are essential to allow ppl to live a healthy life. Maybe the reason why Israel has been hurt so much through suicide bombings et al, is because the same mistakes have been committed over and over again (and Im not saying Israel is the only one to blame... same thing should be told to the Palestinians).
Third Para. Im not going to waste my time with it. Really flippant, but this would require a whole post.
I do want to comment on your post to Sam. I do agree with you. BUT HEZBOLLAH DOES NOT EQUAL LEBANON . Try learning a little more about Lebanon and the diversity of opinion it has. By arguing terrorist infrastructure, Israel bombs Lebanese infrastructure most of whom dislike Hezbollah immensely. You just never heard their displeasure with Hezbollah until AFTER the war started. Thats almost like liberals saying lets punish Ontario because Alberta produces a lot of oil.
I really wish I could continue with this dialogue. But I have had many conversations with supporters of the war, all who argue in similar fashion, and have had nothing to say. Thanks Josh for the opportunity to debate an interesting perspective. Hope things are well with you and we should meet up soon.
I can't resist.
To sam,
I didnt lay blame on anyone. I just said Isreal shouldnt be bombing the whole of lebanon. By indiscriminate bombing, Israel in the long run is plunging the area into instability. Imagine someone just blew your whole house apart and killed some loved ones. The next day he comes, apologises and expects you to forgive them immediately. Can you?
To MI
There are members of the NDP in the Canadian government. Do they agree with the Conservatives on everything? Or even better. With your reasoning, the Conservatives are just as indecisive as Paul Martin because they were in the same government.
When a group of people - Israeli - vote to be represented by terrorists, (Likud ) they are making a conscious decision to join with hatred. These groups of "citizens" cannot turn around later and cry foul when they begin to pay the consequences of their actions. If I came up to you and beat you up without provocation, would you not defend yourself? How about if I did this consistently for over 75 years - while killing members of your family along the way? How long would it take for you to fight back? Why must Israel be held to a different standard than anyone else in this world?
When a group declares war, no one has the right to tell the victims that they cannot defend themselves with whatever they have within their means. The fact that Israel still bombs civilians, who may/may not have weapons hid, shows that Israel doesnt value life.
---
I just copied and pasted your argument, and altered it to show a pro -Arab argument. This is by no means my opinion, but it would reflect the opinion of a Lebanese in the current conflict.
All I am seeking to do is show that both sides who hate each other with the utmost ferocity actually have many of the same concerns.
To live in peace. To have a safe and secure home for their family. Ability to secure a living for their family. Enjoy life.
The problem is each side sees the other as being enemies that prevent these rights from being obtained. So for example, one side kills a family. That family's people gets angry and kills a family from the other side. Repeat.
This is not about passion, its about reason. All my analogy of Martin and Conservatives sought to show was that in a democracy one cannot speak of the 'Canadian' people because the Canadian people have diverse opinions on the subject as shown by the variety of parties elected. To make the analogy a little better, the political party, Yisrael Beytenu ( who has seats in the Knesset) adopts a hardline position against Palestine and Arab states. If an Arab state took Israels perspective, they would be able to bomb ALL OF Israel because of the words and actions of a party that plays a small role in Israeli politics. (Granted the party would need to kidnap a couple of Arab soldiers, but play along...)
Ok, Im done for good. Promise.
Unfortunately, there seems to be a need to clarify the nature of Hezbollah because some people are still a little confused: Hezbollah is a terrorist group that blatantly targets innocent civilians. Hezbollah, (as stated in its charter) ultimately wants to destroy the state of Israel through any and all means at its disposal – terrorist incursions are among its principal military tactics. Hezbollah tactics also include the kidnapping and execution of innocent civilians and soldiers and missile attacks against dense civilian population centers. Hezbollah is currently pursuing a missile firing campaign directed at Israeli cities. The purpose of this campaign is to kill as many Israeli civilians as possible. On the home front Hezbollah deliberately places its infrastructure, “militants,” and weapons within dense civilian population centers in order to avoid conventional combat and accrue political support from the inevitable civilian casualties that result from this abhorrent policy. The current crisis began after Hezbollah committed yet another murderous act of terror against a sovereign country by crossing the Israeli/Lebanese internationally recognized border, murdering eight of Israel’s soldiers and taking two more hostage. Hezbollah is therefore rightfully classified as a terrorist organization by all major western democracies for both their past and present policies, which violate international norms and laws of war. Hezbollah’s radical religious rhetoric as well as its bloody and illegal tactics combine to make it one of the most loathsome and dangerous threats to regional stability and international peace.
To speak out against Israel's defense measures means playing right into the hands of terrorism. When guerillas take up positions in a country that fails to dismantle their organization, you can expect casualties to mount on both sides. Operating in homes, schools, nurseries, hospitals, and mosques, such fighters have made a cognitive decision to use others as human sheilds. One should never lay blame on those whom defend themselves from an unconventional enemy.
- Josh
Hey Dave,
Great to hear from you. Hope your summer is goin well!
I see what you're saying. I didn't mean for my words to come out quite like that, but I guess they did. I guess what I was trying to get across is that Israel needs to do what Israel needs to do. Civilian casualties are an unfortunate result of war no matter where it's fought. We need to bear in mind the enemy and its strategy, and base our reaction to the current situation on that. I think, like you, that Israel has taken all the proper steps and should continue working towards its end goal.
Hey Sam,
I'm confused and don't think you understood what I wrote. Please explain where I infer that Israeli life is better than other life. I clearly state my position, and reasons why there has been such a tremendous response by Israel. I don't think that means regarding one country as having more right to live than another. In theory, if Hezbollah is eliminated, Lebanon will thrive that much more, and have sovereignty over all its land. Also, please keep in mind that my comments are directed towards an Israel-Hezbollah war, so I'm not sure where you are getting the Lebanon/Palestine comments from.
Post a Comment
<< Home