Friday, January 29, 2010

Vindication?

There's nothing a blogger likes more than being proven right, so...

On August 17th 2007, I argued that western powers should try to buy peace in Afghanistan.

Well, it looks like buying peace is finally in. There has been a meeting in London this week of international leaders, and they have agreed to the creation of a 200 to 300 million dollar fund to give the Taliban cash and jobs in exchange for peace.

This truly is a major change in strategy for an international community that was still recently refusing to contemplate even negotiating with the Taliban. As this Globe cartoon shows, it still hasn't won unanimous approval!


Ok. Finished bragging for today.

Sunday, January 24, 2010

Stuff!

A few little bits of information to let you know that I'm still alive and blogging!

First, this link to a fantastic article by the Globe and Mail's best journalist, Doug Saunders, on the outcome (or lack thereof) of Canada's foreign policy under Harper.

Next, I noticed that CNN is offering an interactive online virtual tour of Port-au-Prince in the wake of last week's earthquake. Their program allows people like you and me to make our way through Port-au-Prince and witness the extent of devastation right on our screens. Although I wasn't around in the 70s, this strikes me as a modern equivalent of the TV footage of the Vietnam War that so turned public opinion against the US military presence. I'd be curious to know what kind of effect this program and its equivalents are having on relief efforts and public concern for this crisis.

We all know how difficult it is to imagine life in a foreign land. Many westerners who would be the first to rush to the aid of their fellow citizens find themselves less moved by the suffering of fellow human beings in countries like Haiti, because places like Haiti feel almost unfathomably distant. Although TV footage helps, this new technology is better. There is a huge difference between watching the news, as it is reported by journalists on TV and other media, and discovering it yourself by wandering through Port-au-Prince on your computer screen. It's never good to speculate, but I think it's fair to hope that this new technology will encourage the development of a more global conscience, and provoke more immediate responses to crises like this one.

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Just A Thought

The repercussions of the Republican win in Ted Kennedy's old seat are mind-boggling. Everyone agrees that it is a serious hit to Obama's presidency that is likely to jeopardize his health-care reform plan.

I remember Jean Chrétien boasting in his memoir that Bill Clinton sometimes claimed that Canadian Prime ministers have more power than the US Presidents. He was obviously joking, but on a day when Stephen Harper was able to shuffle his cabinet yet again (after having prorogued Parliament, yet again) without any opposition, the contrast with the situation in the US is worth noting.

Monday, January 11, 2010

Le drainage des cerveaux

Un article terrifiant sur Cyberpresse: http://www.cyberpresse.ca/environnement/201001/10/01-937798-les-cerveaux-du-climat-desertent-le-canada.php

En conséquence de la décision des conservateurs de mettre fin aux subventions de la Fondation canadienne pour les sciences du climat et de l'atmosphère (FCSCA), nos meilleurs chercheurs sont obligés de changer de domaine ou de quitter le pays.

Alors que pratiquement tous les gouvernements du monde reconnaissent que les sciences du climat sont celles de l'avenir. Alors qu'ils multiplient les subventions pour attirer chez-eux les meilleurs chercheurs et se tailler une place de choix dans l'économie verte que tout le monde annonce. Alors que tous les pays sont tournés vers l'avenir, Harper, lui, estime que le Canada peut bien s'en passer.

Sunday, January 10, 2010

Une question de perception

Certains lecteurs ont peut-être remarqué combien l’Accord de Copenhague est perçu différemment en Europe que chez nous. Si, objectivement, il est évident que ce sommet s’est soldé par un échec cuisant, il s’agit malheureusement d’une évidence que seuls nos cousins européens ont su relever. Au Canada, et bien sûr aussi aux États-Unis, les médias ont pour la plupart avalé la duperie de leurs politiciens en acceptant la légitimité de ce pseudo-accord qui n’engage personne et ne règlera rien.

On a presque l’impression que nos journalistes portent des œillères qui les empêchent de regarder où que ce soit d’autre que vers l’avant, c'est-à-dire vers les États-Unis.

C’est précisément ce qui a permis à Stephen Harper d’expliquer tout sereinement en entrevue avec Joël-Denis Bellavance, de La Presse: ‘’Sur l'environnement, c'est malheureux que certains Canadiens aient critiqué le Canada à Copenhague, mais franchement, je n'ai pas vu de critiques de la part des acteurs étrangers ou des négociateurs.’’

Plus le mensonge est gros, mieux il passe. Mais n’empêche, un journaliste plus conscient de l’état du monde (et pas simplement du continent américain) l’aurait certainement repéré.

Les Canadiens ne sont pas plus égoïstes que les autres peuples, mais ils n’ont pas accès à la vérité. Ils ne savent pas que les accords de Copenhague ont la solidité d’un mirage. Ils ne savent pas que, loin d’être ignoré sur la scène internationale comme s’en félicite Harper, le Canada a essuyé plusieurs critiques provenant de chefs politiques étrangers. Il est donc normal que l’environnement ne soit plus un sujet d’actualité. À qui la faute? Comme d’habitude, aux journalistes trop nombreux qui ne font pas leur devoir de recherche, et se contentent de rapporter rumeurs et allégations comme s’il s’agissait de faits.

Thursday, January 7, 2010

Red Herring Par Excellence

Mainstream media has managed to fall into the most glaring of traps by spending the past few days analyzing Harper’s quixotic plans for Senate reform. Journalists are already speculating on what the ‘modernized’ Senate might look like. At the top of today’s Globe, an article details the angry response of Atlantic premiers who are worried that their provinces would lose influence in a ‘new’ Senate.

Here is the cold, hard, fact. Any kind of serious Senate reform (the kind that gets people excited) is impossible without Constitutional reform, and if history is any guide, Constitutional reform is impossible without an existential crisis that puts the future of our nation in peril. So Senate reform, quite simply, is not going to happen.

But notice how, suddenly, no one is talking about Afghan detainees. No one is talking about prorogation or silencing parliamentary committees. Some call it magic. I prefer credulity.