So the discussion on the Death Penalty continues, this time on the world stage.
Apparently breaking with tradition, again, Canada will not be co-sponsoring the UN Resolution: A Global Moratorium on the Death Penalty. We'll vote for it, but we won't take our usual place as a nation that does all it can to promote Human Rights.
My question is why? This along with our refusal to sign the Aboriginal Resolution and blatantly reneging on Kyoto is truly changing how we are being viewed in the world. What I don't get is, what is in it for Canada?
We are a country that has earned our previous global reputation, why would Harper systematically destroy it? It's easy to understand why he wants to destroy the all the inner workings of government here at home. Those who care to understand his position on such matters are clear on his domestic stance.
So, let's take a look at his International positions. The failure to support the Aboriginal Resolution was inexcusable. They argue that it contravenes laws at home. Absolute nonsense. Couple that with the fact that they apparently were waving the Kelowna Accord around claiming that Canada was ahead of the pack, when they'd already said they would not honour it. The words, disgustingly duplicitous, come to mind.
Kyoto. Both Ambrose and Baird have lied to their confreres at every gathering they've had. Claiming they are doing something, when nothing has been done and in fact we're sliding backwards.
Now this latest news. I'm not sure what went on, but why on earth would we remove ourselves from the position of leader, to simply a vote? Is this another case of being inconsistent with being tough on crime? Are they so deluded that they believe their domestic agenda or more precisely their base at home would be affected by Canada's strong stance on Human Rights? Or is it as simple as they do believe in Capital Punishment but do not have the courage to come out and say that...so they are taking baby steps?
The obvious reason, Harper has no respect for the UN.
At a time when we supposedly want to have influence over our NATO partners, we are backing away from our traditional stance of supporting all things democratic and working in concert with others who hold the same values. How is that helpful?
Frankly it's not and when you think about it, it's no wonder that Canada's pleas are not being responded to. We are losing credibility people, very quickly.
If you are of the mind that all this piddly stuff doesn't matter in the grand scheme, you truly miss the point. The news covers country leaders. The real work and the real dialogue between countries does not happen there, nor does the dissemination of information between countries and where they are headed. No, that happens at a different level and the actions that Harper is taking are going to resonate and not in a good way.
My sense is, we really aren't applying pressure within NATO vis a vis Afghanistan. I've never read what MacKay said at a recent meeting. Have you? Perhaps the truth is we've said we'll be there for as long as it takes and Harper is crafting his way to that end. Certainly we saw the shift from '09 to '11 in the Throne Speech.
I hear fiddle music and in my opinion, the instrument being played is called a Canadian.