letter to the PM

Prime Minister Stephen Harper,
Prime Minister’s Office,
Parliament Buildings,
Ottawa, On.,
Canada.

Dear Prime Minister,

Looking back over several decades of Canadian foreign policy, it’s clear that Canada has followed a path independent from the United States. This independence with respect to foreign policy has spanned political ideologies and parties. Both Liberal and Conservative governments have- at different times- supported the uniquely Canadian approach to external affairs matters, enunciated over the years, by various Prime Ministers and Ministers of External/Foreign Affairs.

In recent times, I can think of our decision- almost immediately- to enter World War Two on the side of freedom and democracy, at a time when America was pursuing a quasi-isolationist policy.

Canada did not participate in the Vietnam War, primarily because our government believed it had been expanded on the basis of a flawed Congressional resolution, commonly known as The Tonkin Gulf Resolution. It was the Canadian belief that the expanded war was not being fought on a lawful basis and as a result we gave safe haven to young Americans who did not wish to participate. In fact Prime Minister Pearson made a strong anti-Vietnam War speech in Texas at a time when American bombing of the North was being stepped up.

The Canadian government supported the right of Cubans to overthrow a brutal dictator. Although Canadian assets were nationalized, we continued to maintain diplomatic and trade relations with Cuba, despite the urging of American authorities that we break off those relations and join in an embargo against that country.

The Canadian government did not support the coup d’etat in Chile, in which Canadians suspected (rightly as it turned out), that the United States had a hand in the anti-democratic action of General Augusto Pinochet and his fellow junta members. Canadian authorities gave refuge to supporters of the democratically elected government of that country, when they were being pursued by the junta police.

At a time when the United States was conducting covert, subversive operations against the democratically elected government of Nicaragua, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney took the position that it was not this country’s place to undermine a democratic regime. Mr. Mulroney cited Canada’s traditional position that we make every effort to work constructively with the legitimate authority in any given country.


When the United States and Britain decided to act against the apparent will of the international community and invade Iraq, Canada took the position (correctly), that the weapons inspection process should continue. The Canadians decided not to support the invasion on the grounds that the existing government of Iraq was recognized in international law and a military invasion would be of dubious legality.

Canada’s history of involvement in the Middle East has always been to support the peace process there, to engage in internationally-supported peacekeeping operations and to encourage the development of democratic institutions amongst both Israelis and Palestinians.

Now that the Palestinians have elected a new government through a legitimate, democratic process, Canada has another opportunity to demonstrate its rational, centrist approach to international relations.

A good response to the Palestinian decision to elect Hamas- would be to take a so-called “tiered” approach to the problem. That is to say…we would advocate a short-term period in which we encourage the continuation of aid to the Palestinian people; during that time we would assess the willingness of the new Palestinian government to reject violence and engage in talks with Israel. That short-term period of say, 60-90 days, would be followed by an ongoing, daily assessment of the situation and we would advocate either a continuation of the aid policy or a change of course.
Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, who led a team of election observers for the Palestinian voting, said in a recent interview that the United States and Europe should redirect their relief aid to United Nations organizations and nongovernmental organizations to skirt legal restrictions.
”The donor community can deal with it successfully,” Mr. Carter said. ”I would hope the world community can collectively tide the Palestinians over. It may well be that Hamas can change,” Mr. Carter said.  
”It’s a mistake to abandon optimism completely.”
Carter urged Israel and the world: ”Don’t drive the Palestinians away from rationality. Don’t force them into assuming arms as the only way to achieve their legitimate goals. Give them some encouragement and the benefit of the doubt.”
In my view, this is an issue where you as Canadian Prime Minister have an opportunity to lead, by taking a careful and measured view of how to proceed from here.
I know what a thorny issue this is…from several points of view- moral, political and strategic. I know too, that it is not an issue to be addressed in long-winded speeches, or partisan rhetoric. This is a time for calm, cool-headed leadership.

Finally, we should keep in mind that Hamas has a reputation for wanting to clean up corruption. In large part, Hamas owes its success to a general agreement with that goal, on the part of the Palestinian voting public . We should also keep in mind that although Hamas has a majority of seats, the party was not elected by a majority of the popular vote. The vast majority of Palestinians want Hamas to govern in a clean, non-violent way.
The vast majority of Palestinians…like the vast majority of Israelis….want peace.
I hope that you will be guided in this matter by Canada’s history as a peacemaker…as a diplomatic force in world affairs…and as a reasonable voice in times of crisis.

Sincerely,


James Reed,
1 Erie Street,
Stratford Ontario,
N5A 2M3
519-276-8384