[Desperation] A Case for Withdrawal

Recently, a government-mandated commission led by John Manley was asked to prepare a report on Canada's role in Afghanistan and proposals for Canada's future role there. Canada has now effectively been engaged in a war there for six years, and the Manley report has called for an extension of Canada's mission until 2011 (provided NATO kicks in more support for the mission).

As a result, a vote was passed in the House of Commons, in which the Conservatives and the Liberals colluded to extend the mission in Afghanistan, despite the fact that the WAR VIOLATES INTERNATIONAL LAW - as carefully explained by Linda McQuaig in Holding the Bully's Coat.

This war is a travesty, and we Canadians are responsible. We have the death of our own soldiers and 40,000 Afghans on our hands. Since the Canadian mission in Canada plays a huge relief role for the American military, we are implicitly contributing to the Iraq war as well.

The whole idea of our commitment to "international development" there is a total farce. Further, the war is simply being lost, as the Taliban acquires more support against the NATO forces who are seen as foreign invaders.

We have to stop this. I've been meaning to write about Afghanistan, but it takes time to put all the important points together - so I'm still working on it. In the meantime, many others have done an excellent job, so I am posting two good articles on Afghanistan here, below.

I dare anyone to read through this and still claim that Canada has any legitimate purpose there! There's just nothing good about this war, nothing to be gained by it, and all of the arguments in favour of staying there are exposed as pure lies.

*************

WHY WE MUST MARCH AGAINST THE WAR THIS SATURDAY
by Joel Harden

"Courage, my friends, we can still make a better world"

The above quotation comes from Tommy Douglas, former CCF/NDP leader and
longtime peace activist.

It reminds us why we must march, rally, and educate ourselves about
Canada's mission impossible in Afghanistan.

It reminds us why this Saturday marks an important moment in stopping
this war, and truly helping the people of Afghanistan.

We need courage to challenge the bluster of Canada's warmongers, and the
politicians who support them.

Let's face it: Canada's war in Afghanistan is already over. This war
will end in 2009, but not due to any wisdom from the federal government.
It is already a failure and a majority of Canadians know it.

Western reconstruction operations in Afghanistan are a farce. Following
a time-honoured pattern, most of this money leaves in the briefcases of
foreign contractors.

As an aide to Hamid Karzai recently told a Quebec reporter, "the
international community has injected $19 billion into Afghanistan. About
95% of that leaves the country... non-governmental organizations employ
540 foreigners who earn from $5000 ton $35,000 per month. The last
elections cost $395 million. It was the foreigners who organized them,
and the kept the money for themselves."

The balance of "reconstruction" money goes to drug-running warlords who
call the shots in the current Afghan government. These thugs – many of
whom terrorized Afghans in the early 1990s – build mansions for
themselves and their friends, and get NATO to guard their compounds.

Poverty in Afghanistan is at record levels. As foreign contractors
clinked beers in Kabul, a thousand people froze to death this winter.

A million pounds in bombs were dropped on Afghanistan in 2007, and
40,000 Afghans have died since 2001. Not surprisingly, Afghan resistance
to the occupation is growing. Hamid Karzai, in reality, is the Mayor of
East Kabul. No doctored poll by U.S.-government funded agencies can
honestly say otherwise.

Still, after yesterday's vote on the Afghan mission, Stephen Harper will
likely crow about "staying the course." He'll go to NATO with a fistful
of political nerve, claiming widespread support for Canada's so-called
"war on terror."

No doubt, some will throw up their hands and insist that protest doesn't
matter. Polls indicate 61 percent of Canadians are opposed to extending
Canada's war in Afghanistan, but that wasn't reflected in yesterday's
House of Commons vote.

But a funny thing happened yesterday in Harper's pre-fabricated
democracy. Regular people, like you and me, showed up to serve notice
that we will stop this war. We demonstrated that an ounce of bottom-up
activism can challenge the mightiest of bullies.

The Commons galleries erupted in anti-war chanting. Soon after the
Tories voted, "End it, don't extend it!" was heard throughout the
building. Our chanting could even be heard as we were shepherded into
the halls by security.

Dion and Harper were stunned. They didn't expect this intrusion of
democracy. They didn't think us plebes would storm into their "palace,"
and point out that the Emperor has no clothes.

My friends, this Emperor's been naked for years, and their "palace"
belongs to all of us. Let's get on with the task of telling others. This
Saturday, we'll rally, we'll march, and we'll educate ourselves. We'll
build the support and capacity needed for our message of peace.

As veterans from the Vietnam War will attest, peace activism is about
persistence, and appealing to the hearts and minds of Canadians.

Courage my friends: we can, and we will, stop this war.

See you on the streets tomorrow!

There are over 20 cities and towns holding anti-war rallies this weekend
as part of the World Against War days of action. rabbletv will be
bringing you coverage, include a live webcast of the Toronto rally,
right here at rabble.ca from 1:00p.m. to 6:00p.m. EST on Saturday, March
15.

Joel Harden is a member of the Ottawa Peace Assembly.

*********************


WE'RE THERE BECAUSE WE'RE THERE

by Rick Salutin

February 22, 2008
Here are some thoughts for the coming parliamentary debate on
Afghanistan. Consider it the unManley report.

Why are we there? Tom Axworthy, summing up the Manley panel's reasons
for Canada's military mission, says: "The Taliban's return would
threaten regional peace and security; the UN has sanctified the mission;
NATO is committed; and Canada should help failed states." Those are
sentences, not reasons. Here's panel member Derek Burney: "Canada is a
G8 member and, as such, is expected to engage internationally, serving
global organizations to which we belong in a manner befitting our
responsibility ..."

It's sheer pomposity: "sanctified," "befitting." Why are we there? We're
there because we're there. That's it. We went for various reasons. Now
the heavy hitters want us to stay. Because we're already there.

But won't NATO come apart if it doesn't pull this off? So what? Why
shouldn't NATO go back to the North Atlantic, where it's from, and be a
defence alliance, which it was? If that no longer makes sense, let it
disband. Why look for work in places like Kosovo and Afghanistan? What
about saving failed states? This is one of those phrases (like civil
society) that entered public discourse suddenly, and has made mischief
ever since.

All states fail to some degree. Why is it our task to grade this one and
get its marks up? If there's a specific problem, like incubating terror
cells, then take some useful half-measures. Pursue and isolate the
terrorists, cordon off the hot spots and don't think you can solve
everything. There's an arrogance in "nation-building," another dicey
phrase. Send the NATO forces home and let them nation-build there. Life
is mostly half-measures.

"Without security, there can be no development": Wrong, but I know it
sounds right. The problem is, security in this case means occupation by
foreign troops, which doesn't work well anywhere, especially
Afghanistan. First "we" invade and depose their government, which had at
least provided security. Then we impose a government that "invites" us
in (where we already are) and survives only with our support. Our
presence inspires resistance and recruitment to the Taliban or al-Qaeda,
which revive. (Al-Qaeda in Iraq didn't exist till the U.S. invasion; now
it exports to al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.) The more resistance, the more we
the occupiers have to fight, and opposition grows.

This week, bombs killed many civilians in the "Canadian" area. A
district leader said it was the worst day of his life: "What was secure
has now become insecure." This kind of security creates insecurity. Aid,
in turn, is stymied. A recent UN report says general indicators such as
human development and poverty have worsened since 2004.

What about helping women? Isn't that a good idea? Well, the situation
for women was astronomically better under the Soviet-backed government
in the 1980s before "our side" created the mujahedeen, who threw out the
Soviets, assailed women and were, in turn, ousted by the Taliban, who we
then defeated, installing warlords and clerics in their place. No
lasting developmental good has come from foreign occupation; people
there have learned this. They aren't irrational, they're observant.

Can anything be done? Possibly. But it would take a local political
peace, brokered by regional powers such as Pakistan, India and Iran —
not Lithuanians and Canadians. Then the well-meaning Canadians,
including the military, could do their good works, rather than inspire
rebellion.

Those dumb voters: Despite the Harper taunt that Canadians don't cut and
run, and the Manley plea not to shirk our noble international blah blah,
61 per cent still think our troops should leave. Why lecture them about
why they're wrong, instead of assuming they know what they want?
Stéphane Dion says nobody wants an election on Afghanistan. Count me
out. I'd love it.

Originally published in The Globe and Mail, Rick Salutin's column
"The best progressive ideas are those that include a strong enough dose
of provocation to make its supporters feel proud of being original, but
at the same time, altered so many adherents that the risk of being an
isolated exception is immediately averted by the noisy approval of a
triumphant crowd".

[Images] Visions of the Gigaproject

Clear Water Media and White Pine Pictures have made a documentary film about the Tar Sands called Tar Sands: The Selling of Alberta. In their press release they offered some photos, which I am posting here with the captions they provided. This film offers yet more proof that we've got to stop this environmental and social disaster as soon as possible!

File Name: Stig in Helicopter
STIG BERGSETH
Fort McMurray, AB CANADA 2007
“Stig Bergseth, Senior VP of Statoil, in helicopter looking at a North Sea natural gas platform”
Photo Credit: Daron Donahue
White Pine Pictures/ Clearwater Media

File Name: Wihbey in NY
PAUL MICHAEL WIHBEY
New York, USA 2007
“Paul Michael Wihbey (President of GWEST Associates) addresses a group of investors re: global energy insecurity and the Alberta tar sands”
Photo Credit: Randy Tomiuk
White Pine Pictures/ Clearwater Media

File Name: Rudyck fitting pipe
ANDY RUDYCK (R)
Fort McMurray, AB CANADA 2007
“Andy Rudyck fitting pipe”
Photo Credit: Niobe Thompson
White Pine Pictures/ Clearwater Media

File Name: Keng w Syncrude
DR. KENG CHUNG
Fort McMurray, AB CANADA 2007
“Dr. Chung, Professor at the China University of Petroleum, standing in front of the Syncrude upgrader and a Syncrude tailings pond”
Photo Credit: Daron Donahue
White Pine Pictures/ Clearwater Media

[Loop of Hell] The Entrenchment of Neoliberal Policy in Canada

Photo Caption: Heil Harper?

I just read an excellent article by Bryan Evans regarding the Harper government's 2008 Budget, and how this is a tool to consolidate neoliberal economic policies in Canada. I highly recommend that you read this if you have any interest in understanding the basics of how neoliberal governments gut social spending and pave the way for the economic elite to consolidate their power, which leaves the poor with nothing but their own devices to survive.

Check out Canada's Budget 2008: Taxes and the Forward March of Neoliberalism

In my opinion, what emerges from neoliberal policy is what I call a "loop of hell", where a cycle of spending cuts and tax cuts begin to feed off each other. Worst of all, the loop is reinforced by the coerced support of the masses. This is how it works: Cutting taxes tends to be a "popular" move, because nobody likes paying taxes. But, the lost government revenue over the next decade (which in this case amounts to $60 Billion) will mean that any government over the next 10 years has NO CHOICE but to cut spending. As a result, the non-profit sector and the welfare apparatus suffer, the corporate sector is reinforces, non-unionized jobs with no job security nor benefits are favoured over decent working conditions, and everyday Canadians get poorer and as a result, the idea of paying taxes becomes even more unattractive to them. SO then when a progressive government gets elected (yeah right) and says "OK, we're going to put money back into social programs, the welfare state and the non-profit/charitable sector..." the only real way to do it is by a) increasing taxes again (which in our society is a move that is equated with the devil), or b) nationalizing wealth-producing industries (like oil) and transferring profits into the public realm (which is the kind of thing that prompts the CIA to launch coups d'etat and impose American loving conservative governments).

So you see, the loop of hell is a downward spiral, it's a cycle of societal death. This is why it is more important than ever to vote against these kinds of neoliberal budgets NOW, before it's too late. And yet the stupid Liberal party is so afraid of being seen as forcing an election that they don't vote against any of this stuff. It's time people see that it's the CONSERVATIVES that are trying to force elections, they're the idiots who are putting ridiculous legislation on the table - they are to blame here, for the destruction of the few semblances of social consciousness that existed in Canada up until the turn of the millennium, and for enacting legislation that is lining their crony's coffers with cash.

[Election Coverage] Sinking in a Blue Sea

After yesterday's provincial election here in Alberta, I am closer to understanding what it must feel like to be a Maldivian in this era of rising sea levels.

I knew that by virtue of living and working in Edmonton's Old Strathcona neighbourhood, my existence in this province was mostly constrained to the bubble of Alberta's "liberal oasis". In this area of town, almost everyone seems to be on the center-left side of the political spectrum. Before the election, NDP signs were ever present throughout the Garneau and Old Scona neighbourhoods, and indeed, our NDP candidate Rachel Notley took the seat with almost double the amount of votes as the second place Conservative Party candidate. It's hard to imagine that the Conservative-dominated legislature is just on the other side of the North Saskatchewan river - about a kilometer away.

But if you start to move outwards from my riding in any direction, the prevailing political attitudes start to shift to the right. I noticed this while watching the CBC's interactive flash player map of the city during the election coverage. Each riding was coloured-in with the shade of the winning political party. There was Strathcona in the middle of town, saturated in NDP orange. Surrounding this riding on the North West are three ridings coloured in Liberal red, and another NDP orange riding just above that. Effectively, the center of Edmonton went orange and red, but surrounding that is a deep dark sea of Conservative blue, a blue that represents more than 37 years of neoconservative, right wing, social-spending-slashing blue; a blue that conveys the secretive nature of the Energy and Utility Board, which spied on farmers concerned about plans to build power lines on their lands; a blue that connotes the Premier who decided to sue a poor university student for having bought the URL edstelmach.ca; a blue which represents a failing environmental and royalty scheme which will see the expansion of the tar sands - the largest industrial project in the world (and one of the worst emitters of CO2 and pollution on our fragile planet); and a blue which reminds me of a drunken alcoholic Premier who stumbled into a homeless shelter and humiliated the very people who's poverty he had only helped to secure.

Yet despite having been lied to, spied on, cheated on, and left to their own devices for 37 years, 41% of Albertans decided to elect - for an 11th consecutive time - the very bastards who have been doing all the lying and cheating. This has been the lowest voter turnout in the history of the province, and astonishingly, contrary to many pre-election predictions, the conservatives have gained an even stronger position in the provincial legislature, with the NDP losing half of its existing seats, and the liberals losing 7 of their 16 previous seats to the conservatives.

So here we go again - another 4 years of a bad deal. At this rate, this liberal oasis I am currently sitting on - this island of orange and red - will soon sink into the rising blue sea. It's time to light a flare in the hopes of being saved. Or perhaps, like the Maldivians, I should join a coalition of small island states.

[Appeal] The Bullies of the World

What do Turkey, Israel and Colombia have in common?

Well for one, these countries (geographically speaking) are absolutely beautiful, and they all contain an incredibly rich civilizational history. I have been to both Israel and Colombia, and I can honestly say that the extremely warm and caring cultures I was welcomed with made my visits to those countries wonderful.

However, these countries also have this in common: They all made news this week for sending their troops across the border into neighbouring countries, with the intention of assassinating members of rebel forces. And they all succeeded:

• Just last week, Turkish forces entered Northern Iraq in a midnight raid. In the ensuing days they killed over 100 people, whom the government claims were Kurdistan Worker's Party (PKK) rebels, and they destroyed PKK bases. See one of the explanatory stories here.
• Just a few days ago, Israel launched yet another incursion into the Palestinian territories, again with the intention of assassinating members of Hamas. In these few days the Israeli forces have killed over 100 people, most of whom are likely innocent civilians. See the news story here.
  
• And just yesterday Colombian troops entered Ecuadorian territory and assassinated one of the FARC's rebel leaders, Raul Reyes. See the story here.

This kind of action by states is immoral, it is illegal, and these governments should be held accountable. We, the people of this world, should not accept this type of behaviour from any country. It merely exacerbates conflicts, and most likely serves to increase the support for rebel factions.

Those violent factions within the PKK, Hamas, and the FARC are all fighting for their causes in the wrong way - armed struggle is the way of the past. This century should see people's struggles for social justice taking place in the form of peaceful, (truly) democratic movements which seize state power in the most legitimate way - by garnering support from everyday people and civil society, by demonstration that their cause is the most just. And these causes are just: Kurds should have autonomy for their peoples, Palestinians should have a sovereign state and should be compensated for a half century of death and destruction, and Colombian communists should be able to participate in national politics without restrictions. But armed insurrection, kidnappings, rocket attacks - that kind of armed response is only feeding the cycle of violence.

The three countries above also have something else in common: They are historically amongst the top receivers of American military aid. Between 1980 and 1999, Turkey received $11.5 Billion worth of military equipment from the US, not to mention the more than $6 Billion the country received in grants and direct loans during the same period. In 2007 alone Colombia received $584 million in military and police aid from the United Sates, and in the last five years the county has received $3.45 Billion dollars in military aid (and this does not count the hundreds of millions of dollars in other forms of aid). And Israel... conservative estimates indicate that it received $2.28 Billion in military aid from the US in 2006 alone. And, since 1949 the US had handed over nearly $100 Billion in aid to that country.

Is this a coincidence? No. The US publicly uses measured "diplomatic language" with these countries when they use their American-funded militaries to launch illegal raids into other countries. You'll hear Condi Rice saying something like "We caution Israel to use restraint", "We call on Turkey to complete its mission in a timely manner and withdraw its troops". This kind of diplomatic bullshit is tacitly allowing countries like this to break international law!

The United States, by virtue of arming these countries to the teeth, by virtue of giving them nothing more than a little slap on the wrist for such actions, by virtue of providing a horrible example of a powerful state which shows absolute contempt and disregard for international laws and conventions - by virtue of these facts the United States is complicit. In other words, when Israel sends secret agents into Beirut to kill a member of Hamas, when Turkey bombs entire areas of Northern Iraq, and when the Colombian military displaces hundreds of peasants and make villages "disappear" - the United States should also be held accountable.

Shame on you, you bullies of the world!