KAHAR’S TANGENTS

Andres Kahar’s (less personal) take on politics, culture & other inconsequentials

Do Canucks hate freedom?

Posted by arkahar on July 7, 2007

‘Support the troops.’

That’s a recurrent and deafening refrain south of the border, in the United States. It’s become increasingly shrill over recent years, what with Operation Enduring Freedom, the Iraq War and the subsequent Surge. 

Alas, “Support Our Troops” has become something of a refrain and issue here in Canada as well. 

stephen-harper-in-kandahar.jpg

Canadian PM Stephen Harper gets his war on.

______________ 

Traditionally, this kind of unquestioning rah-rah patriotism stoked by pro-war types in the US has helped Canadians differentiate themselves — culturally and politically — from their neighbours to the south.

(This differentiation game is sometimes a case of distinctions without much difference: to live in Toronto, as I do, is to live in a sometimes wannabe New York.)

This rah-rah American patriotism has been perceived by many Canadians — and not just those woolly types on the left — as akin to jingoism.

There are Canadians who revel in a series of self-comforting stories about how Canada is different — kinder, more tolerant, more European — than the US: healthcare, multiculturalism, secular-toned politics, political party choice, unions, public broadcasting, etc. Some of these stories have been worn thin, and even disputable.

But… 

Historically, when it’s come to foreign and defence policies, Canada really has stood apart. Beyond its own borders, the Canadian government could not be accused of imperialism. In fact, we Canucks are still rather proud of our country’s peacekeeping record last century, post-World War Two.

And, right up to a few years ago, when the Bush administration was heading to war in Iraq, our leaders in Ottawa — then led by our Shawinigan tough-guy prime minister, Jean Chrétien — had the temerity to resist Washington’s pressure to join the pro-war march.

 chretien.jpg

Ex-Canuck PM Jean Chrétien had backbone and cojones.

 ______________ 

There was a general feeling that Canadians were immune to that sort of patriotic siren song.  When Dubya & Co. warbled their ‘With us or against us’ jingle to the US electorate (and the world), I think most Canadians shook their heads in condescending disbelief. 

When Dubya pronounces that anyone who disagrees with his administration’s Iraq policy “hates freedom,” I’ve seen many Canadians frown with some apparent smugness. Canadians, you see, are more nuanced than that: we’re multicultural, tolerant, and we don’t deal in such black-and-white distinctions. 

When our (then) opposition leader Stephen Harper criticized Chrétien’s decision to keep Canada out of Mess O’ Potamia — implicitly criticizing Chrétien on US TV, too — it slapped many of us as pathetic pandering to Washington. Canadians were above such saber-rattling. 

Well, so much for that self-comforting myth. 

These days, those on Canada’s right — our own ostensible patriots — are singing American-style hymns to the tune of ‘support the troops’ and ‘with us or against us.’ 

You see, while Canada may not be in Mess O’ Potamia (Iraq), Canada does have combat troops stationed in Kandahar, in southern Afghanistan, alongside other NATO forces. They are there as a contribution to the ‘Enduring Freedom’ fight against terrorism.

In Afghanistan, the ‘terrorists’ exist in the form of the predominantly homegrown Taliban — the fundamentalist Sunni Muslim movement that’s waging a guerilla war against the Afghan government and NATO troops. 

taliban.jpg

Taliban warriors get their war on — with beards!

 ______________ 

For the past several months, Toronto fire trucks and ambulances have sported yellow-ribbon decals with a familiar pronouncement: “Support Our Troops.” The decals were to be removed by September. And Toronto Mayor David Miller — a generally progressive politician — was initially for the removal. 

support-the-troops.jpg

But news of the decal removal caused an outcry. Toronto the good’ was decried as unpatriotic during a time of war. Right-leaning politicians pounced.  

As Adam Vaughn, a Toronto councilor, put it: 

“It’s being used in a political way to say that you’re either with us or against us. You either support the troops or you don’t support the troops and if you don’t put a yellow ribbon on your car, what does that say about you?”[1]

Then, as ever, events intervened:

Three Canadian soldiers were killed in Afghanistan on June 20 — sadly, a recurrent news story on CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) and CTV.

Thus, Mayor Miller and other progressives backed off their decal-removal position: the decals would stay, stuck in place.  

Miller said:

“I think it’s important that Toronto demonstrate its support for the troops given the perception that some how the city wasn’t supportive, which was never true.”[2]

The Afghanistan mission has also become a central issue for the Canadian government, which is now led by Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Polls show that most Canadians want the troops home by 2009, when the mission expires. But, when the parliament ended its session earlier this month, Harper spoke about seeking a consensus for extending the mission.

And, as Canadians received news reports about Canadian soldiers being killed in Afghanistan, we’ve also heard the odd grieving family member or friend saying or writing something eulogistic about the killed soldier’s dedication to democracy and freedom in Afghanistan.

Only an insensitive dick would pollute their grief with political disputation.

Yet, Canada’s right-leaning pundits — like their American counterparts — use this to mangle and muffle debate.

As Sun columnist Peter Worthington writes on June 26 about the death of those three Canadian soldiers by a roadside explosive device:

“The really ‘unfortunate’ thing, is that [description of the deaths by one Canadian general as no 'unfortunate accident'] will likely be used by those who dislike the military, or think we shouldn’t be there, or want us to immediately get out, to reinforce their argument.” [Emphasis added] [3]

For Canadians like myself — who treasure this country, care about Canada’s foreign/defence policies, mourn the unnecessary death of young soldiers — this muffling of debate is extremely distressing.

Of course, this is nothing new, as it’s been the patriotic impulse since time immemorial. And this is an impulse I do kind of understand: most of us want our country to do good; we don’t want our troops to die; and most of us dislike the prospect of our country’s policy being wrongheaded.

Yet, ’supporting the troops’ unquestioningly is equally wrongheaded. Canadians deserve a debate over the question: ‘Why are we in Afghanistan?’ The answer’s not a given. (And I’m not in the answer business — at least not during this blog.)

Yes, I can and do concur with those who point to the Taliban as an unsavoury and brutal movement that’s bad for human rights, women’s rights and security in that ravaged land. But that’s no plain reason for NATO to be there, propping up an Afghan government that governs but by the grace of Washington DC. There are many unsavoury regimes and movements around the world — but that does not mean that Canadian or NATO troops should be there.

Before the start of the Iraq War in 2003, I recall Eric Alterman — one of those woolly progressives from The Nation magazine — articulating his opposition to the democracy-building arguments of American hawks: He was blunt in saying that he cares more about the welfare of US democracy than democracy in Iraq. And that’s the point: An electorate deserves proper debate — not patriotic piffle. Fortunately for Canadians, democratic dissent is still in prospect: The NDP, our left-wing opposition party, has been unequivocal and vocal in demanding a Canadian withdrawal from Afghanistan.

 jack-layton.jpg

NDP leader Jack Layton calls for withdrawal. He is not the Video Professor.

______________ 

And, recently, in Quebec, there were anti-war protests on the eve of Quebecois troops going to Kandahar.

(Quebec Premier Jean Charest channeled Bushismo in his encouragements for the troops: “You are the acting arm of Quebec pacifism. You are liberators.” [4] Of course, Quebeckers’ opposition to entanglement in Canadian military adventures has a long history, so I doubt Charest’s words resonated too widely in la belle province.) 

allons-y-canadiens.jpg

All of this is a longwinded way of expressing my dismay over the resurgence of this unquestioning rah-rah patriotic sentiment in Canada, where it’s always felt out of context (to me and my ilk, anyway). 

When I hear that imperative “Support the Troops,” it reminds me of an equally unthinking command recalled by a one-time cult member I knew: ’Minds, like shoes, must always be left at the doorstep.’



[1] “Toronto to keep ’support the troops’ decals,” CBC News, June 20, 2007. Link: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2007/06/20/ribbon-toronto.html 

[2] Ibid.

[3] Peter Worthington, “Support never more important,” Edmonton Sun, June 26, 2007. Link: http://www.edmontonsun.com/Comment/2007/06/26/4290894-sun.html

[4] “Protesters Rally as Soldiers March in Quebec City,” CBC News, June 22, 2007. Link: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/06/22/scheffer-quebec-070622.html?ref=rss 

______________ 

6 Responses to “Do Canucks hate freedom?”

  1. J. Sears said

    Damned good blog. I am frightened by the Americanization of our political discourse.

  2. Rikken said

    “Support the troops” is one of those phrases that has been stripped of any meaning. It’s as silly as God Bless America (as if we could tell God what to do). But some anti-war types do use it. And personally I DO support them, if they want the support. With a referral to counselling, with grief support, with conscientious objector resources or information on how to get a discharge, etc.
    But yeah, I can only imagine what it must feel like to see this playing out as a Canadian. Heck, even I as americano cringe when I read stuff like Hudson’s Bay Company sold to Yanks.

  3. [...] I’ve been concerned about Canada’s devolved status in the world for a while already. But that concern has become acute since the rise of the Harper regime last year. I hit upon this concern in a recent entry.  [...]

  4. [...] & "Support the Troops" (thoughtful essay by "Canuck" Andres Kahar) http://arkahar.wordpress.com/2007/07/07/do…s-hate-freedom/ Do Canucks hate freedom? Support the troops. Thats a recurrent and deafening refrain south [...]

  5. fma7 said

    support the troops by saying no to our participation in wars of invasion and occupation. Also lets debunk these false myths of Canada as peacemaker,The Canadian government and the military would like us to believe that we are altruistic peacekeepers helping people around the world. But is this accurate? ‘MYTHS FOR PROFIT’ examines how these misconception are maintained and who stands to gain by perpetuating them. By understanding the systems of power in Canada we can move forward in challenging how they operate and collectively create change. Please visit http://www.wideopenexposure.com/M4P.php to view this documentary
    Want to see Canadian pension plan contributions in the armaments industry and a list of Canadian companies that have made cluster bombs that were illegally used in places like Lebanon or former Yugoslavia or hardware parts used in the slaughter of Palestinainsin Gaza go to http://coat.ncf.ca/

  6. I’d like to attempt to “give” you an answer to the following statement: “Canadians deserve a debate over the question: ‘Why are we in Afghanistan?’ The answer’s not a given.”

    While the Taliban were in power, little girls, children, would have a hand chopped off if caught carrying a book. Not reading it, not learning, but simply for the act of carrying one. The logic being that she ‘might’ be reading it. We can’t have that, now can we. That no longer happens there. We have put a stop to it. If people like Jack Layton ever get his way, Afghanistan will fall back into the hands of the Taliban and in five years or so we’ll have to go back and stop them all over again.

    While the left-wingers of our society agonize about the meaning of “support our troups,” the right-wingers are busy stopping genocidal maniacs from destroying their country and culture and threatening their neighbours. Imagine a world where those who protest against war put as much time and effort protesting against genocide and brutal dictatorships. Remember the tens of thousands of protesters back in the mid-90s demanding we do something about Rwanda? Yeah, me neither, because there weren’t any. Those left-wingers didn’t give enough of a shit about Rwanda do drag their arses out of bed and make a statement. But the moment anyone raises a hand to one of these demonic regimes, the protesters drop their bongs and rush out in droves yapping like they actually have a clue.

    North Korea stand as a shinning example of what happens when you choose to do nothing, save for pesky sanctions. Eisenhower placed sanctions on Cuba after Fidel overthrew the country. Here we are 50 years later waiting for them to have an effect. In the case of North Korea, any chance to save those millions of people from this despot nutjob is now gone, thanks to their development of nukes and long range missiles. And we sat back and did nothing. Michael Moore would be pleased.

    In June 1981 many nations were shocked and outraged when Israel bombed the Osirak nuclear facility near Baghdad; yet looking back on it, it was clearly the right decision, both for Israel and the rest of the western world. Dr. Imad Khadduri — Hussein’s top scientist involved in Iraq’s nuclear program from 1968 to 1998 — claims there is little doubt Iraq would have developed nuclear weapons long ago, if not for Israel’s pre-emptive air strike. Imagine Hussein with nukes!

    Bottom line: Don’t waste too much time hand wringing on the meaning of “support our troups.” Life’s too short. People are being butchered every day in some faraway land. The tough question left-wingers should be asking themselves is this, why don’t I give a rat’s ass about the millions of deaths that occur each year under the iron-fisted rule of despot regimes?

    As for the tired argument, why not leave it to the UN; we all know that’s a monumental waste of time. The UN is virtually useless.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>