Canada’s
parliament is currently embroiled in a rather weird partisan sex scandal that
makes all parties look like moral disasters (listen to Harper quote “Canadian
values” now). While that has attracted all the attention of the media, a
small news item emerged from RT News that managed to attract some small
attention from the Canadian Press.
In a short item noted by the National Post, Canada’s representative at the
Third Committee [1] of the UN General Assembly voted “No” for a policy
statement with the voting title “Combatting glorification of Nazism,
neo-nazism and other practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms
of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.”
According to the Post, “Canada objected because the resolution has a “narrow
focus” and it draws on the controversial declarations of the 2009 World
Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa, which Canada regards as
anti-Semitic.” Well, no not really, as the focus of the statement is rather
broad, and the declarations of the 2009 Durban Conference are not
anti-Semitic and cover much territory.
The Post article continues with the Canadian spokesperson saying the
resolution “regrettably includes references which are counterproductive to
this goal, including by seeking to limit freedom of expression, assembly and
opinion.” If the reader cares to read the resolution, it most certainly does
not “limit freedom of expression, assembly and opinion.” Or is Canada
becoming proud of its new fascistic warrior outlook in foreign policy?
The main irony from this article was the vote count. 115 states voted for the
resolution, 3 opposed it, and 55 abstained. Given Canada’s unqualified
support of Israeli actions against Palestinians, the full irony is that
Israel voted “yes” while Canada voted “no” along with the Ukraine and the
U.S. [2] It raises the
question as to what is really going on with Canadian foreign/domestic policy
- or are the Harper Conservatives just being their typical neoconservative
knee-jerk uncritical unanalytical selves? It is difficult to tell.
The current resolution refers to many previous UN resolutions and documents,
the Nuremberg trials, and states in part:
Alarmed, in this regard, at the spread in many parts of the world of various
extremist political parties, movements and groups, including neo-Nazis and
skinhead groups, as well as similar extremist ideological movements….
Reaffirms the relevant provisions of the Durban Declaration and of the
outcome document of the Durban Review Conference, in which States condemned. the
persistence and resurgence of neo-Nazism, neo-Fascism and violent nationalist
ideologies based on racial and national prejudice and stated that those
phenomena could never be justified in any instance or in any circumstances;
Expresses deep concern about the glorification, in any form, of the Nazi
movement, neo-Nazism and former members of the Waffen SS organization, including
by erecting monuments and memorials and holding public demonstrations in the name
of the glorification of the Nazi past, the Nazi movement and neo-Nazism, as well
as by declaring or attempting to declare such members and those who fought against
the anti-Hitler coalition and collaborated with the Nazi movement
participants in national liberation movements;
So Canada is voting “no” to protect its neo-Nazi self? Or to protect the
neo-Nazis in the Ukraine? To pretend it thinks independently of Israel? To
indicate it is still a willing follower of the U.S.? All of the above?
Because this vote refers to the Durban conference frequently, it might be
best to look there.
Indigenous rights are mentioned frequently throughout the Durban statement. This
presents a triple entendre for Canada. Its own record on indigenous rights is
terrible. Its support of Israel denies the indigenous rights of the
Palestinians. Its anti-Russian rhetoric denies the indigenous rights of the former
Russian states of Donetsk and Luhansk.
Another interesting aspect of the Durban document are its statements about
globalization. The negative effects
could include “poverty, underdevelopment, marginalization, social exclusion,
cultural homogenization and economic disparities which may occur along racial
lines.” Canada’s recent acquisition to
‘free’ trade agreements with China and the EU are anything but free, except
for the corporations to rule within their own set of ‘laws’ while ignoring domestic
laws - including the indigenous rights of Canada’s First Nations. I find it
interesting how all these become entangled with one another.
As for Israel, the Durban document states, “We recall that the Holocaust must
never be forgotten….” as well as a single statement on Palestine under the
“Indigenous people” section:
We are concerned about the plight of the Palestinian people under foreign
occupation. We recognize the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to
self-determination and to the establishment of an independent State and we
recognize the right to security for all States in the region, including
Israel, and call upon all States to support the peace process and bring it to
an early conclusion.
The document also includes statements about race, religion, women’s and
children’s rights, xenophobia, discrimination, education and other elements
of a just and fair society, hardly a “narrow focus.”
So what is Canada up to? Probably no good. Not denying fascism - in contradiction of
its usual unqualified support of Israel; protesting against the recognition
of the negative effects of globalization, in particular because of the
“indigenous” components and its ramifications domestically and for Israel; attempting
another poke in the eye for Putin (Russia voted “yes” for the document) while
trying to be the tough guy on the block for the Ukrainian neo-Nazis.
Canada is trying to juggle multiple conflicting and entangled ideas. This
document never made it to mainstream media - the Post only referenced it
because RT News had picked it up and as the neo-cons main media support, was
angling for anti-Putin comments on the blog. That would indicate the
willingness of Canada’s mainstream media to avoid critical thinking and
analysis of Canada’s entangled and bizarre foreign/domestic policies on
multiple issues. As usual for the ‘new’ Canada, command and control affects
the news.
Now as I was saying about sex between MPs….
Notes:
(1) The General Assembly allocates to the Third Committee, agenda items
relating to a range of social, humanitarian affairs and human rights issues
that affect people all over the world.
(2) The 55 abstentions were mostly EU/NATO countries, an interesting
avoidance of concerns about their own rising right wing movements and their
relationships with Russia vis a vis the Ukraine.
This article appeared first in Palestine Chronicle, 2014 11 27.
|