Archive for the ‘International Politics’ Category

CalgaryLiberal.com heartily endorses Mateusz Trybowski in his nomination to the position of Vice President of the International Federation of Liberal Youth.

I first met Matt in my first year of university within the bounds of the University of Calgary’s Liberal Association, then at numerous regional conferences, and even pitched in a little in his bid for donations for his trip to attend the Copenhagen Conference in 2009. Matt has shown an exemplary ability to organize, to facilitate, and to debate in every instance I’ve seen him in action. I was blown away by his over-capacity town hall he orchestrated and organized in the fall of ’09, the speakers he brought in, and the strong environmentalist message he was able to communicate to the University of Calgary student body and to the province of Alberta.

He is a keen organizer, an ardent environmentalist, a fighter for the liberal cause, and all round good guy. Without a single doubt in my mind he is the perfect man for the job and will stun IFLRY (and people around the world) in anything he endeavours to do.

Vincent St. Pierre

www.CalgaryLiberal.com

I have been mulling over the recent CBC article where Richard Fadden, CSIS head, stated that Canadian politicians and politicians-to-be are being influenced by foreign powers. Specifically, the following two lines caught my interest:

At least five countries are surreptitiously recruiting future political prospects in universities, he said. Middle East countries are also involved.

These countries are recruiting students in university, paying for their trips, and likely coughing up cash for tuition and the like. And there’s probably free ipods somewhere in the deal, too.

One big question that popped into my mind, and likely every other university student in Canada, is, well, where is my foreign backer?

Jeeze. I’m a up and coming young man. I’m in university. I like free trips, etcetera, and I am well acquainted with debate, public speaking, and strategising. I’m a tactical thinker. I can communicate fairly well, both in text and in person. I am fairly charming, or at least I’d like to think so. I don’t look that bad, either. I’ve also been elected to things, showing some talent in the political sphere. Also, I have this blog and, strangely enough, people choose to read it.

So where is my foreign backer? My bills are piling up and I have increased tuition to pay for in the fall (hurray for the deficits, the financial mismanagement, and anti-education folks in Edmonton and Ottawa). I also have to deal with rising costs of books and, well, I’ve never owned an Ipod (or any handheld audio device).

Err… Yeah. Small bit of resentment from this camp at the moment. Am I not good enough for tin-pot dictatorships, communist neocracies, and thuggish kleptocracies? And the Americans–who we trade to the tune of almost 75% of our foreign trade with and have a level of connections between persons and groups likely unseenbefore  in history–why aren’t they barking up my tree? Then all those states that are readily Canada’s allies, whomever is jumping into this exercise, why aren’t they prodding me?

Or, at the very least, setting up a relationship?

Personally, I can understand the Chinese being hesitant about me. I’m a bit of a rabble rouser in my spare time and, well, that’s a tad bit troublesome for a country who has tossed journalists and political threats into jail.

The Israelis probably think I smell funny. And the French think I enjoy too much Argentinian wine (mmmm… I love my malbecs) to be backed. Germany is out by virtue of my Czechslovakian heritage (invade me once, shame on you…).

But those other countries? I’d think Saudi Arabia or Iran would be knocking down my door. Brazil and Italy should be shipping me gold plated soccer balls by the dozen. And the Americans? Well, obviously, they’d be interested in me–probably be able to fund my education outright at one of their Ivy League schools.

Obviously I’m jesting about all of this. Of course I don’t want a spy agency backing me or other things. But, rather, how about a different twist on all of this? Rather than viewing and pushing such connections to a malevolent end.. we could make these connections face sunlight and be utilized by the greater society–we could make it so that these connections were encouraged, tempered by an even hand at the keel, and generate a sizable bit of connections across the world.

It would open up so much opportunity for me. And it’d open up so much opportunity for Canada at large.

Seriously. I’m seeing an upside to this, err, ‘network’ if every student, every Canadian, and every group had dozens of connections and lines to organizations, states or otherwise, outside of Canada. Imagine the support students would get on tuition, knowledge, experiences, heritage, finances, trade, business, and a multitude of other things? And wouldn’t it be a two-way street for influence–ei: couldn’t Canada lead the world by virtue of her connections and placement in it?

If anything, I think Canada should encourage its students to jump out of the crowd and take hold of gaining experience and connections outside of Canada. Imagine the benefits that could be accrued for us–free trade world ’round, businesses forming in Canada to wield an economic throne that stretches out like a web across the planet, and an invigorated public bursting at the seams with both people and ideas!

Of course in all things there are risks. A bad choice here, a misaligned policy there, or a failure in communication or a miss-allocation of resources, could spell a bit of trouble for Canada. But that is simply the rules of any game: for every venture ventured there is a risk that will either end in a reward or a rebuffing of that player. I say play the game and play the world to Canada’s increasingly global talent.

It is a talent, by the way. No other country can boast the group of people who call themselves Canadians. We’re some of the most education people on the planet, holders of resources that’ll be fundamental to prosperity in the 21st century, and, for all intents and purposes, the 21st century is Canada’s to guide.

Obviously you can tell I’ve been reading up on Ignatieff’s Global Network [PDF] policy book. Err, I suppose it wouldn’t be too obvious since only hardcore politicos read 30-page policy manuals on their free time. But here’s a key piece of what Ignatieff and the Liberal Party has put together:

Networks define how the world works today, as hierarchies did in the past. Influence is gained through connectedness, and by being at the centre of networks. That is good news for Canada, because we have a reputation for being able to work with others, we have shaped many multilateral organizations, and our population today reflects the diversity of the world Networks define how the world works today, as hierarchies did in the past. Influence is gained through connectedness, and by being at the centre of networks. That is good news for Canada, because we havea reputation for being able to work with others, we have shaped many multilateral organizations, and ourpopulation today reflects the diversity of the world

So rather than a foreign backer perhaps I can get a foreign friend? Mind you, it’ll mean I’ll likely not be receiving an Ipod but this arrangement, of connectedness around the world, might allot a greater benefit to Canada.

Davies, the deputy leader of the NDP, has said that Israel has been occupying Palestine since its independence day–in 1948. Obviously she means that Israel as a country, with every inch it holds, is Palestinian land and that Israel should be destroyed.

She also called for the divestment, boycotting, sanctions, and isolating of Israel.

She represents the NDP in her anti-Israel behaviour. It is without a doubt in my mind that she and Layton share the same opinion–seeing that he only said her comments were a mistake rather than her point of view was a mistake. Mulcair, the other NDP deputy leader, points out that “No member of our caucus, whatever other title they have, is allowed to invent their own policy,” said Mr. Mulcair. “We take decisions together, parties formulate policies together.”

Steve McDonald of the Canada-Israel Committee says this about Davies’ comments:

She is a senior parliamentarian in that party. She’s obviously concerned or passionate about that issue,” said Mr. McDonald. “I don’t think someone in that position can hide behind a defence of confusion in this case. Especially when we’re talking about something as fundamental as referring to 1948 as when the occupation began.” (…)

“It’s particularly disturbing to see a parliamentarian, who does claim to be educated on the issue, come out and say something that is so far outside the Canadian mainstream,” said Mr. McDonald. “It’s so far beyond Canada’s historical position. It’s so far beyond the international consensus of the two-state solution which we all support at this point. These are the types of comments that hurt the two-state solution.”

She says she was misinterpreted. I disagree.

She didn’t apologize for her stance on boycotting or sanctioning Israel–in fact, she only apologized for people being confused about her opinion. She said she said the date of “1948″ was wrong. That’s not an apology. That’s not clearing up anything: it just re-affirms her anti-Israel position and quite likely anti-Semitic beliefs.

Davies must resign. Bob Rae and Harper both agree on this. Now if only Jack Layton could, too, we can get back to the Afghan detainee issue.

Update:

The video:

So, abortion has been turfed. The banking tax thing was dealt with a long time before the conferences were even set to go.

So, err, what are the nations of the world meeting on at the end of June?

Canadians, according to Nanos [PDF], want the environment to be talked about. But that’s been ditched because Harper thinks it’s a sideshow.

So where’s the cream filling?

TheTyee points out:

But Dimitri Soudas, a spokesperson for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, last month told the Canadian Press that climate change discussions will only happen on the “margins” of the G20 summit. “The primary focus of the G20, as per its mandate, is to discuss the economy and that is the government’s number one priority.”

Err, alright. Talking about the economy. That’s great, and all, but, err, that’s a non-issue now with the rebounding state of most economies in the world.

What I’m getting, at least from the lake gate stuff and the MEPs, is that Harper is creating a grand show to showcase himself to the world. And the G8/G20 is just a soap box to broadcast how he is fantastic, along with the rest of Canada. It seems like a vacuous, nonsensical exercise now with all the cream filling being drained from the conferences.