| Submit your comments on this article |
| Axis of Evil |
| U.N. Resolution Desirable, Not Compulsory - Canada |
| 2003-02-04 |
| Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien said on Tuesday a second U.N. resolution was highly desirable before any military action was taken on Iraq, but it was not strictly compulsory. "It is very highly desirable to have a second resolution," Chretien told reporters after a cabinet meeting. But he left the door open to going ahead without one if required: "A second resolution, as I've always said, is not legally necessary." Uh, Jean, I don't remember you saying that. But, thanks anyway, I think. Can we borrow those snipers of yours again? |
| Posted by:Steve |
| #6 Canada, and particularly the Liberal Party from Lester Pearson to Jean Chretien, has made standing behind the UN the key element in Canadian foreign policy. During the Cold War this appeared to be a popular position because it allowed the politicians to work the diplomacy of the UN while playing off the Soviets and Americans. That the Iraqi crisis has demonstrated the futility of the UN in the current world environment is met with denial; fifty years of blind support by Canada has amounted to...nothing. Fifty years of standing behind the UN has also resulted in a decimated military; as long as peacekeeping/policing was the mantra of the UN, why truly defend yourself? Besides, irrespective of any anti-American sentiment in which Canadians could indulge (anyone remember the BOMARC?), we all knew the big "bad" neighbour to the south would never let anything happen to us, cause the other "evil" neighbour were just over the pole. Not having to make hard decisions for yourself is a leftist utopia. At least France, the masters of diplomatic duplicity, created their own independant military, even if they cannot not keep it going all the time. They at least can project force to the Ivory Coast. Canadian Forces can barely shovel snow in Toronto. |
| Posted by: john 2003-02-04 19:20:49 |
| #5 Can we borrow those snipers of yours again? Thats about all we can offer at the moment... or for the next decade probably. |
| Posted by: Rw 2003-02-04 18:59:24 |
| #4 *assorted laughter* "Chretien" and "lead": Oil, meet Water. |
| Posted by: Paul 2003-02-04 15:49:07 |
| #3 Actually, Chretien has said this before. Here's the context: Chretien hates to commit himself to any course of action on any topic. He very much prefers to wait and see how things come out, then pick a winner or (better still) avoid picking altogether. So, on joining the 'coalition of the willing' he has sent mixed messages deliberately - one day, he'll say a second resolution isn't necessary, to cheer up those of us who want Canada to support the U.S. The next day, his idiot foreign minister Bill Graham will loudly agree with the French and Germans and say a second resolution is necesary, to cheer up the CBC and the loony left. But when it gets down to it, what's at stake for the Canadian government is either being on the inside of U.S. military operations - going on joint exercises, exchanging staff, getting access to equipment - or being on the outside. Nobody rational in Canadian defence circles wants to be on the outside, so Canada will have to send a force to Iraq. Many of us up here will approve of that, but will also wish that Chretien had the guts to lead and to put Canada at America's side publicly. |
| Posted by: Patrick 2003-02-04 15:43:26 |
| #2 Don't hold your breath, he's likely to waffle over it again (or have some cabinet clown make a contrary statement in the House of Commons) tomorrow... Paul |
| Posted by: Paul 2003-02-04 15:30:42 |
| #1 The Axis of Eagles picks up another member? Our dominos seem to be falling into place quite nicely. We may actually end up with more support than in Gulf War I. Wouldn't that be loverly? |
| Posted by: Chuck 2003-02-04 13:58:46 |