|
|Monday Oct. 21, 2001 | BACK | NEXT in politics Preaching in not enough
by
Angelo Persichilli
There is no doubt that Alexa McDonough is sincere when she preaches
peace, warning that military action becomes a breeding ground for more
violence, more terrorists and more fanatics. The NDP leader argues that our
attacks on Afghanistan will only lead more people to join the ranks of those
who have wrongly persuaded that this is some kind of a war between the wealthy
West and several impoverished Arab and Muslim nations.
However, being sincere doesn't automatically mean that she is right.
Secondly, if people do not agree with that position, it is not fair to
automatically assume that they are warmongers. All Canadians want peace, even
though some of them — the majority in fact — have a different view on how
to secure it.
And Ms. McDonough, as a political leader, should pay attention to them.
I am not suggesting that a political party has to change its policies
for the sole purpose of winning an election. However, if the electorate
constantly rebukes you, it is not healthy to always assume that people are
stupid or that the media is to blame for manipulating the message. It's
important to consider the possibility that your message is wrong; that there
is no message whatsoever; or that your message is good, but there is no
effective effort to sell it.
People want their leaders to represent them in Parliament, hoping they
can make changes. And you can make changes if you are in government. Preaching
is not an option in politics, and the NDP has to seriously consider a program
that leads their party to government, not heaven. The New Democratic Party is
occupying an area of the political spectrum that should be used by people
ready to represent Canadians who want their social concerns addressed in
government, not by people wandering on the opposition benches for life.
At the present time the Canadian political system is like a plane
without wings. The right wing is hopelessly involved in a self destructive
plan and many Canadians are giving up on them, while the left wing flies so
high that it has lost contact with the Canadian reality. We are stuck with the
Liberal fuselage roaming all over Canada trying not to crash in these
confusing times.
That's not the best, but that's what's available.
In fact we should be grateful to the Liberals for keeping afloat a
system that would have been completely destroyed if all we had were the
contributions of the opposition.
As for our democratic system, it would be very helpful if the NDP
showed more respect for it. It is, in fact, very concerning when Ms. McDonough
expresses "grave reservations about a coalition of countries being the
judge, jury and executioner. If we suspend the protections of international
law and basically circumvent the important international body that exists to
deal with this kind of a global crisis, then it is not evident to me at all
this is a path to peace and security for the people of the world."
First, the governments of Canada, Unites States and Great Britain, are
democratically elected and have only exercised their democratic rights. The
three governments can't even be accused of being right-wing extremists in a
kind of ideological cahoots. The Democrats support the Bush administration in
U.S.A., the Canadian government is Liberal and the one in England is
socialist: there is no ideological right wing conspiracy.
Secondly, history doesn't support the NDP position according to which a
military action is wrong as a matter of principle. Yes, history tells us about
Vietnam, but we also have World War Two and Bosnia, just to mention a few.
Hitler and Milosevic were bombed first, tried after. And, had Bush Sr. not
stopped the coalition on the border of Kuwait and pushed right into Baghdad,
most likely we would have saved the lives of thousands of children now
starving because of economic sanctions against the barbaric regime of Saddam
Hussein.
And this takes us into the third observation: international law.
Police have to intervene before the trial, not after. You have to
arrest the accused, and then you put him on trial. The military action is not
conducted by a "judge, jury and executioner" but merely by
international police trying to bring a "suspect" to justice.
Then the question is: does the international coalition have the right
to go after Osama bin Laden?
Well, there is a strong enough trail of killings, bombing and threats
against the United States to justify considering this man a
"suspect." And, for those who have doubts about his relationship
with international terrorism, it only takes a few minutes to listen to his
message to the world after the bombings. Furthermore, United Nations and NATO
have already given their approval.
It is based on those observations that millions of Canadians have
concluded that Ms. McDonough is wrong.
It is up to the leader of the NDP to prove not only that Mr. Chrétien’s
position is wrong, but also that her message is not ideologically outdated,
politically confused and historically misleading.
|