Politics and its Discontents: Bootlicking Followup

In my previous post, I excerpted criticisms of Mr. Carney’s endorsement of the United States’ embrace of international lawlessness. Sid Ryan, Lloyd Axworthy and Justin Ling offered their responses to this betrayal of Canadian values.

But as they say, talk is cheap. Pundits are readily available and voluble, very happy to share their insights into and analyses of important events. But what about how government members feel about violations like this? Clearly, party discipline and the desire for promotion keep most MPs silent and singing from the same choirbook. It is therefore most extraordinary when a member of the governing party dares to look critically at government policy. Yet that is exactly what has happened with rookie Liberal MP Will Greaves,

arguing Canada “cannot endorse the unilateral and illegal use of military force” while insisting its own sovereignty must be respected.

In a weekend social media video that was “liked” by a handful of other Liberal MPs, rookie Victoria MP Will Greaves said Carney’s support for the strikes, which killed Iranian supreme leader Ali Khamenei and sparked an escalated Middle East conflict, “feels different” from the prime minister’s Davos declaration of a Canadian foreign policy rooted in “independence, consistency and principled pragmatism.”
“We can be clear-eyed about Iran’s human rights record and its abuses and the destructive role that it has played in the Middle East, and still insist on consistency, restraint and the protection of civilians, because that’s what credibility looks like in a fracturing world,” said Greaves, who was an associate professor of international relations at the University of Victoria before his election last spring.
“But Canada cannot endorse the unilateral and illegal use of military force, the killing of civilians or the kidnap and assassination of foreign heads of government while also insisting that our sovereignty, our rights and our independence must be respected.”

This refreshing and principled candour stands in sharp contrast to Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand, who

dodged questions about whether the U.S. and Israeli strikes were consistent with international law, following a condemnation from United Nations Secretary General António Guterres, who said the attack on Iran and its retaliatory actions “undermine international peace and security.”

Apparently, she was taking a cue from boss Mark Carney, who

cancelled a scheduled news conference in India on Monday, came out in support of the military operation Saturday, arguing Iran was “the principal source of instability and terror throughout the Middle East, has one of the world’s worst human rights records, and must never be allowed to obtain or develop nuclear weapons.”

As I said in yesterday’s post, this is quite a departure from both the tone and substance of his Davos speech, which has been rendered hollow and meaningless by his craven support for Amerika’s and Israel’s illegal actions.

I expect more servility to come. My elbows are done.

Source link