foreign policy

You are currently browsing articles tagged foreign policy.

By Nick Dearden
Counterpunch.org

In recent weeks, Haiti has been gripped by violent protest yet again. And yet again the inhabitants of this impoverished country are suffering the most brutal consequences of the fallout of the global economic crisis. This time it is the rise in global food prices, which has sparked riots in Port au Prince, Haiti’s capital, where UN peacekeepers used rubber bullets and tear gas against protesters attempting to storm the presidential palace. Days later the prime minister was fired.

It is therefore particularly appropriate that on Tuesday this week -the anniversary of the death of Haiti’s dictator, Francois “Papa Doc” Duvalier - hundreds of debt campaigners fasted for Haiti’s debt to be cancelled. Haiti’s fate has been tied up with the issue of international debt more than any other country. Despite the fact that its debt is illegitimate by any standards and despite Haiti’s sorry position as the poorest country in the western hemisphere, it still owes $1.3bn. Every year debt repayments flow from Haiti to multilateral banks, just as its resources once enriched the French empire.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , ,

By Thomas Walkom
The Toronto Star
January 18, 2008

American Defence Secretary Robert Gates may well be right when he says that Canadian and European troops in Afghanistan are not well equipped to fight a counter-insurgency campaign. But what has been lost in the controversy over his impolitic remarks is that we did not sign on to fight insurgents – there or anywhere else.

The International Stabilization and Assistance Force, which NATO now commands and which includes some 2,500 Canadian soldiers, was set up in late 2001 by the United Nations to do just what its name suggests – stabilize a country emerging from years of civil war and assist the fledgling Kabul government in its redevelopment efforts.

Fighting the Taliban (or, as they were called then, the Taliban “remnants”) was a job that Washington insisted on reserving to itself through what it called Operation Enduring Freedom.

Canada helped out in that one too, sending troops to serve under U.S. command in 2002. But in those days, America wanted to keep its sometimes squeamish allies well away from a dark war that was aimed primarily at capturing terror suspects and transferring them to interrogators at Guantanamo Bay.

It was only after 2003, when the U.S. found itself troop-short and bogged down in Iraq, that Washington changed the rules of engagement for its allies. Gradually, Afghanistan became NATO’s war. Washington’s plan then was to gradually reduce its 20,000 troop commitment to Afghanistan and switch them over to Iraq.

Which is why, since 2006, Canadian troops have found themselves under fire in the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar.

It’s worth remembering that we keep sending soldiers to Afghanistan not because Canada has been attacked by the Taliban, but because our friends, the Americans, feel they are at war with them.

The Dutch are in southern Afghanistan for the same reason. So are the British – who have paid a severe price at home for their decision to support Washington’s various anti-Islamist wars.

That’s why Gates’ comments rub so raw in this and other NATO countries. Since 2001, one Canadian diplomat and 77 soldiers have died in Afghanistan. More than 250 more have been wounded in action. Yet this was never our war. It was always America’s.

The U.S. chose to declare Afghanistan the enemy after the terrorist attacks of September 2001. Had Washington elected to avenge 9/11 by invading the country from which most of those terrorists came, Canadian troops would now be fighting in Saudi Arabia.

Their call, their war, their show.

Now, Washington has shifted its focus again. On Tuesday, the Pentagon announced it will send an additional 3,200 Marines to Afghanistan – bringing the total number of U.S. troops there to more than 30,000.

It is in this context that Gates made his remarks. In effect, the American public is being told that its soldiers have to fix Afghanistan because the pusillanimous Europeans and invisible Canadians aren’t up to the job. Or, as the Washington Post noted editorially: “It’s becoming clear that the war must be won by U.S. troops, and not by NATO.”

Which, in the broader scheme of things, is just fine. Let America, freshly confident after its counterinsurgency successes in Iraq and Vietnam, finish its own war itself. Then Canadian troops can come back to Canada. And the North Atlantic Treaty Organization can refocus on the North Atlantic.

Thomas Walkom’s column normally appears Thursday and Sunday.

Tags: , ,

By Dariusz Dziewanski
Briarpatch Magazine
February 2008

In the wake of the 10th anniversary of one of Canada’s greatest foreign-policy successes, the ripple effects of the Ottawa Treaty, also known as the Mine Ban Treaty, are still being felt among the sea of 65,000 south Sudanese refugees living in Ethiopia.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , ,

Canadian photographer Darren Ell has published a new online resource about Canada and the 2004 coup d’√©tat in Haiti on the National FilmBoard of Canada website CitizenShift. The site includes Ell’s short films and captioned photographs drawn from the work he has done in Haiti in the last 18 months. The site also features podcasted interviews, links to important solidarity websites, texts and links to interviews Ell has published about the ongoing impact of the coup d’√©tat, as well as photos by Haitian journalist Wadner Pierre. The focus of the material is Canada’s involvement in the coup, it’s violent legacy, and digital tools for learning more. Ell’s online dossier is called The Damage Done: Canada and the Coup in Haiti.

Tags: ,

Your monthly media supplement of seven recommended readings from beyond the Briarpatch.

Get the B-List in your inbox. Subscribe/unsubscribe at

http://www.briarpatchmagazine.com

1. Is CBC’s new populism perverted?
Why youth fans like me are tuning out
By Elaine Corden
The Tyee
June 21, 2007

Ideally, user participation makes an outlet like the CBC more democratic. But as we all know, the ideals of a democracy can be easily subverted, and an organized and vocal minority can quickly become the most powerful voice in a debate.

http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2007/06/21/CBC/

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , ,

You’d have to read right to the end of this article on Harper’s frontline pep rally to find this gem of a punchline:

But there were visible signs his audience, which crowded around the podium and sat atop armoured vehicles parked behind Harper for the benefit of the cameras, was decidedly non-partisan.

Scores of soldiers began filing out the moment the prime minister finished speaking. An officer stopped them and said: “The prime minister is still here - so that means we’re still here. Get back inside.”

Tags: ,