LCCC ENGLISH NEWS BULLETIN
August 14/2006
Latest
New from the Daily Star sources for August 14/06
International community backs 1701
Annan: Both sides 'assured' cease-fire compliance
Solana promises 4,000 troops 'in a very, very short time'
Fierce fighting continues ahead of UN-brokered truce
Lebanon's middle class is disillusioned with America
'Bush had no right' to back Israel
Seeing is believing (inshallah): Lebanese have mixed feelings about whether
cease-fire will hold
Civil Defense volunteers risk life and limb to help others
Lebanon can emerge stronger from crucible of war
Israeli raid damages Temple of Bacchus
Why America wants Hizbullah beaten even more than
Israel does -By Henri J. Barkey
Disengage Lebanon from regional turmoil -By
Farid El Khazen
Latest
New from miscellaneous sources for August 14/06
What Makes Lebanon Skeptical about the Peace-TIME - USA
Hezbollah shoots down Israeli helicopter-Houston Chronicle
Australian PM: 'Disarm Hezbollah'-BBC News - UK
Hezbollah arms meeting on hold-News24 - South Africa
Hezbollah rockets kills elderly man-Independent Online
Hezbollah Fires 250 Rockets Into Israel-ABC News - USA
Origin of Hezbollah totally distorted-San Jose Mercury News
Hezbollah gaining strength where democracy once dwelt-Chicago Tribune
Time US changed tack on Syria-The Australian
Solana says EU to help make Lebanon force "robust"Reuters
Son of acclaimed Israeli author killed in Lebanon-Reuters
ANALYSIS-When Israel war ends, Lebanon faces tough challenges-Reuters -
Lebanon divided over Hizbullah disarmament-Ynetnews
Formation of Peacekeeping Force in Southern Lebanon Expected to Voice of
America
Latest
New from miscellaneous sources for August 14/06
Hezbollah fires
250 rockets into Israel-AP
Israel to leave Lebanon only as int'l forces deployed-Reuters
Israel continues to blast Lebanon despite ceasefire statement-Khaleej Times
Army Intel Chief: Syria and Iran Will Continue to Arm Hizbullah-Arutz Sheva
Israel's Cabinet Approves UN
Cease-Fire Resolution-Bloomberg
Israel, Lebanon agree to truce-NEWS.com.au - Australia
Lebanon truce should start now - Arab League chief-Reuters
Olmert faces rebellion over Lebanon-The Age - Melbourne
Parliament will back Italy in Lebanon-Reuters
Relief convoys head south in hope of Lebanon truce-Reuters
Analysis - Arabs and Israelis
Unhappy with UN Resolution-The
Common Voice
The stories of the fallen in Lebanon-Jerusalem Post
Terror plot: Internet cafes raided-CNN
Global investigation focuses on
family ties in terror plot-Chicago
Tribune
Three face terror charges after
1,000 cell phones seized-CNN
Airlines' ire at slow security-Daily
Telegraph
Canada sends another ship to ferry citizens out of Lebanon-Globe and Mail
Rae sides with Harper on Mideast
Canada shirking Middle East diplomacy, Rae says
NB election will be called for Sept. 18, Lord says
Latest
New from miscellaneous sources for August 13/06
Fighting rages in Lebanon as ceasefire nears-Euronews.net, France
UN: Cease-fire between Hezbollah and Israel begins Monday-China
Daily
Israeli cabinet approves cease-fire plan-AP
22 suspects questioned about terror plot-AP
Israeli Deaths Mount in Lebanon Before Cease-Fire-
Bloomberg -
24 IDF soldiers killed Saturday in south Lebanon-Ha'aretz
Israeli Troops Surge Into South Lebanon-ABC
News - USA
UN chief says fighting to end on Monday in Lebanon-People's
Daily Online
Israeli helicopter prangs in south Lebanon: Army-People's
Daily Online
IAF strikes targets along entire Lebanon-Syria border-Ha'aretz
Syria still transferring supply of rockets, missiles to Hezbollah-Ha'aretz
Howard undecided on sending peacekeepers to Lebanon-Irish
Independent, Ireland
Solana says EU to help make Lebanon force "robust"-Reuters
War in Lebanon costs NIS 23b; government to approve budget cuts-Ha'aretz,
Israel suffers highest 1-day toll of war-AP
Israel pours more troops as heavy
fight rages-Pakistan
Dawn
Analysis: Pact Won't Improve US
Image-Washington
Post
Madrid-London flights return to
normal-People's
Daily Online
As Smoke Clears, All Parties
Seem to Have Lost-Washington
Post
Hezbollah Says It Downed Israeli
Copter
This time we were lucky
As in Britain, recent arrests of terror suspects in Canada
suggest we are safe here, but only for now. British security and intelligence
apparently scored a major coup in preventing what a deputy police commissioner
labelled 'murder on an unimaginable scale.'
By DAVID B. HARRIS, Senior Fellow on National Security, Canadian Coalition for
Democracies
Ottawa Citizen Special
Saturday, August 12, 2006
The really good news is that a gang of alleged terrorists was picked up in
Britain.
The really bad news is that there was a gang of alleged terrorists to be picked
up in Britain.
The even worse news is that Canada and the western world are in a situation
that's pretty similar to Britain's: we are infiltrated by Islamic extremists
bent on destroying our civilization.
But, first to Britain. British security and intelligence apparently scored a
major coup in preventing what even a soft-spoken British deputy police
commissioner labelled "murder on an unimaginable scale." This is the alleged
aviation plot to bloody the trans-Atlantic skies. Thanks to intelligence, 24
largely-homegrown young Muslims are in custody, and thousands of the people now
following today's reports will live longer lives. They won't be on or under
detonated airliners.
But the pace and extent of these developments suggests deepening problems on the
British and Western fronts.
This success may suggest that western security agencies are getting a feel for
the challenge. But they have a lot of challenge to get a feel for. We seem to be
catching up with the past, but it is unclear whether we are catching up with the
future. Having failed to anticipate suicide airliners, we've had to be dragged
kicking and screaming to a ban on carry-on fluids -- generations after science
has known about the explosive properties of certain liquids and gels. Meanwhile,
not a word on the crying need for credible airliner countermeasures against the
shoulder-launched missiles that for decades have been in terrorist hands.
To some extent, we have benefited from good luck. Fortune comes in different
forms and a lot of that can involve the sloppiness of the enemy. Some enemies
are so amateur and incompetent that they leave a neon string of clues to their
identity, intentions and capabilities. Was this the case today? We cannot know.
But increasingly we do know who the enemy is: Islamofascist, autonomous and
independent cell units distributed around the world and throughout western
society with varying degrees of competence. The recognition of the hideous
possibilities, the lethal earnestness and fanaticism of the enemy, is evident in
the various subway and bus bombings that have been the catalyst for increasing
co-operation between police forces and joint activity with foreign intelligence
partners.
So let's make the assumption that the British did a good job this week. What
would it take to continue to stay ahead of the terrorist curve? In the future we
can expect that the two distinctive features of Islamic extremism will become
more pronounced: multiple strikes and mass casualties. The nuclearization of the
chief Islamist extremist countries could spell the end of civilization as we
know it. For this development combines the most deadly features of the Islamic
extremist trends: the presence of enemy agents among us and the supplier of the
means to reduce us to dust. This is what compels us to deal with terror
countries like Iran -- by virtually all means necessary. And we must deal with
their proxy spear-carrying terror organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas.
Eventually we will have to come to terms with immigration and refugee numbers to
gain control of those entering our countries and set standards for
absorbability. We must ensure that our infrastructure is protected, particularly
in Canada where energy production and distribution is vital to our survival.
And the public has a right to know. We must educate our public on all aspects of
the threat. Counterterrorism should no longer be a luxury item or curiosity. It
is how we ensure that our children live their full allotment, and how we avoid
having anarchic colonies of mutually hating supremacist groups emerging in our
midst.
Canada's own recent experience raises these issues and similar patterns: the
competence of security and intelligence, but also the long shadow of the terror
presence over our children and institutions. As in Britain, recent arrests
suggest that we are safe. But only for now.
David Harris, former chief of strategic planning with the Canadian Security
Intelligence Service (CSIS), is a senior fellow for national security with the
Canadian Coalition for Democracies.
© The Ottawa Citizen 2006
Perverting Islam for politics
In the mixing of the quests for political power and faith lies
the ruin of both
By SALIM MANSUR, Senior Fellow, Canadian Coalition for Democracies
The Toronto Sun
Saturday, August 12, 2006
Our normal inclination in understanding and explaining events such as the war in
Lebanon is to focus on immediate causes.
Seeking perspective or distance to place events in context is an acquired
discipline. The effort needed to view things and events in perspective is a
ceaseless struggle against one's own inclinations driven by emotions of
familial, nationalist or tribal attachments that undermine universal values.
Since 9/11 -- discounting the prior long history of conflicts in the Middle East
-- debate has raged in the West on the causes of Muslim terrorism. As terrorist
atrocities have mounted, this debate has become increasingly acrimonious with
respect to fixing blame or responsibility for its spread and its mounting
casualties.
Focusing the immediate cause of these political firestorms might be a necessary
recourse for diplomacy -- to put the fires out momentarily and give some sort of
negotiated truce a chance to work. It does not, however, lend itself to
understanding why such firestorms keep repeating, and what needs to occur for
them to end.
Anyone familiar with the Middle East's history must know the current war
triggered by Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah against Israel is part of a long
scenario reaching back to the founding of the Jewish state in 1947. In fact, it
goes even further back to the Balfour Declaration of November 1917, announcing
the British government's support for the establishment of a Jewish home in what
was then called Palestine.
The defining aspect of this history is Arab-Muslim refusal to recognize Jewish
rights in Palestine. Apologists for recent Arab-Muslim history continue to mount
endless arguments over the immediate causes of firestorms like this latest one
--Nasrallah's war as a proxy of his Iranian paymasters -- in a fraudulent effort
to fix blame on Jews, Zionism, or some Israeli version of apartheid and the U.S.
as Israel's staunch defender.
The wars against Israel -- whether mounted from the left by pan-Arab
nationalists such as Egypt's Gamal Abdel Nasser and his acolytes, or directed
from the right by Islamists such as Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini and his followers
-- are motivated by a single purpose. We have heard this goal articulated
repeatedly in recent times by Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, the Iranian president:
Eliminating the Jewish state.
ISRAEL FORCED INTO WAR
Consequently, Israel has been forced into wars since its founding in 1947 for
survival. When we focus only on immediate causes of current conflicts, this
context is missing.
But it seems to me there is also an insidious psychology pervasive in the
thinking and politics of perhaps a majority of Arabs and Muslims. Their
anti-Israeli attitude is saturated with anti-Semitism -- partly borrowed from
Europe and partly reflecting a strain of anti-Jewish bigotry in their own
history. Instead of purging themselves of this bigotry and reconciling with Jews
and Israel, they have perverted Islam into an anti-Jewish faith.
In the mixing of politics and faith lies the ruin of both. The history of
perverting Islam for political purposes goes back to its earliest years, and it
has continued into our times when Islam has been practically emptied by
Islamists of its universal values and made into an instrument of their vicious
politics.
Muhammad, the prophet and founder of Islam, reputedly said: "Islam began as a
stranger and will become once more a stranger." Although I am a Muslim, for me
and many others, Islam in the Middle East has for the longest while -- certainly
during my life time -- been a stranger.
Those Arabs and Muslims who have perverted their faith and pursued politics of
cultivated hatred towards people of other faiths have miserable their own lives
and history miserable. Moreover, as victims of their own bigotry, they remain
blind to their own faults.
In these circumstances, unless there is a change of heart among Arabs and
Muslims as the Koran instructs, peace in the Middle East will remain elusive --
and firestorms will rage every now and then.
Lebanon: A view from within
One million people from all over the south have fled their towns and their
homes. Broke, they hang on to their dignity and move into public schools,
parks, convents, and receive hand outs that consist of clothing, milk, diapers,
bread, canned food, or anything that might allow their family to survive.
If you go down to the Dahiyeh area in the outskirts of Beirut, you see nothing
but total destruction. Standing on city streets, you don’t hear any cars
passing, but only the sound of your own feet walking over all the rubble. Even
the city cats have answered the Israeli pamphlets asking everyone to leave
their homes.
Even those who are attempting to flee their homes are not safe during the trip.
Fighter planes hit a Red Cross convoy attempting to evacuate civilians from
war-torn areas, where a family of fourteen, had three killed and nine wounded,
some of whom have lost limbs and others were brutally disfigured. The bodies of
the dead are still under the rubble one week later, because of the heavy
bombing in that area.
Stories of the ill, the pregnant, the elderly, the hungry, the wounded, the
orphaned and the dead are endless. Over one thousand are dead so far; that
being said, one can only imagine what their families are feeling right now. To
make things worse, they are unable to grieve properly or give a proper burial
because the bombs falling from the sky don’t leave a safe window for the dead
to be buried. One can only pray that this brutal war will not leave an
everlasting mark on one third of our population.
Many Lebanese are taking advantage of other peoples sorrows and rental of homes
in safe areas has skyrocketed in some parts. Gas station owners added to the
shortage problem by withholding gas from the public until the prices went up.
Thankfully, most of the stories we hear are of people opening their homes,
mayors opening their towns and of schools, both public and private, opening
their doors to all the refugees. As co founder of the Lebanese association for
development and growth, I have seen first hand all of the sorrow that has
invaded and raped these people from most everything they hold dear.
We can hate what is happening, and blame whoever we want, but the one thing we
can not do as Lebanese from any religion or background, is to believe that this
is not everyone’s problem. Thirty one years have passed since the thought began
that one sect or one religion can actually eliminate or destroy another in
Lebanon. Turning the blind eye towards what is happening, assuming that this is
only a Shiite problem will end up destroying us all. We simply can’t leave one
million people in need, no matter if we agree with their political or religious
belief or not. Only in unity towards the humanitarian side of this and not
necessarily the political one, can we survive this painstaking blow to our
country.
Our economy has been suffering enough, and many fear that we have been kicked
while we were down; that Lebanon was expecting millions of tourists and
billions in revenue. Many of us also believe that diplomacy was the key to our
problem solving and not a forced war on us all. But one thing is for sure, all
of this should not be directed towards the homeless and the hungry right now.
If we do not act responsibly today, we all may end up losing our country.
Selfish devotion to our own religion, political beliefs, village or whatever it
is we all have will have made us all lose what we love the most, our beloved
Lebanon.
Marc Akouri
New York Times
August 12, 2006, 5:11 pm
Victory and the 'Battle of Forms'
By Chibli Mallat, Lebanon
In the Hezbollah-Israel war, another pattern resulting from the asymmetric
conflict — pitting an armed political party against a state — has been the
"battle of the forms." It is clear that neither party can win the war in the
classical Clausewitzian manner: overpower the enemy and take over its territory.
To overpower Israel, Hezbollah must occupy it. But it does not even envision
advancing into the Galilee. On the other side, Israel rightly hesitates to move
too deep into Lebanese territory, not only because of the high number of
casualties expected against a universally acknowledged brave and effective
resistance. By taking over Lebanese villages, Israel risks turning its
anti-Hezbollah war into anti-Lebanon war of conquest — in other words into a
classical war with a different enemy.
What does asymmetry mean in terms of victory? A concept used by contract lawyers
may be useful on such new terrain of geopolitics: "the battle of the forms."
When offer and acceptance become very close in the formation of a contract, it
is the very last formulation that wins the day, hence the advice to business
clients to get their version of the last draft to prevail. Between Hezbollah and
Israel, success will be defined for each by the last version in the cease-fire
contract.
As expected, Israeli won the first victory in the battle of the forms, when U.N
Security Council Resolution 1701 was passed on Friday, a month after the
conflict began. Hezbollah, through the Lebanese government, did manage to
whittle down the request to deploy foreign troops under a U.N. Chapter 7 clause
to the deployments of an enhanced UNIFIL (United Nations Interim Force) in the
south. But the text is resolutely in favor of Israel in practically all the
disputed points: acknowledgement that Hezbollah started the war on July 12;
prohibition of armed Hezbollah operatives in a large stretch from the Litani
River to the border; principle of exclusive power of the Lebanese security
forces and army across the country; prohibition of weapons and support from
outside forces (read Syria and Iran) to non-state parties in Lebanon (read
Palestinian factions and Hezbollah). An additional boon was given Israel when it
was asked to operate its withdrawal from Lebanon "at the earliest" rather than
"immediately."
Another Security Council Resolution is in the works. It is expected after the
U.N. Secretary General reports back to the Council on the implementation of 1701
in a month's time, and another battle of the forms has already started over it.
How the separation between Hezbollah and Israel works out is crucial. But much
will also depend on domestic developments in Lebanon, especially the eagerness
of the majority of Lebanese to impose the exclusivity of Lebanese law on the
remainder of their territory
**Chibli Mallat is a professor of law at Saint-Joseph University in Beirut and a
candidate for president of Lebanon.
Does Iran have something in store?
BY BERNARD LEWIS -AT WAR
Tuesday, August 8, 2006 4:30 p.m.
During the Cold War, both sides possessed weapons of mass destruction, but
neither side used them, deterred by what was known as MAD, mutual assured
destruction. Similar constraints have no doubt prevented their use in the
confrontation between India and Pakistan. In our own day a new such
confrontation seems to be looming between a nuclear-armed Iran and its favorite
enemies, named by the late Ayatollah Khomeini as the Great Satan and the Little
Satan, i.e., the United States and Israel. Against the U.S. the bombs might be
delivered by terrorists, a method having the advantage of bearing no return
address. Against Israel, the target is small enough to attempt obliteration by
direct bombardment.
It seems increasingly likely that the Iranians either have or very soon will
have nuclear weapons at their disposal, thanks to their own researches (which
began some 15 years ago), to some of their obliging neighbors, and to the
ever-helpful rulers of North Korea. The language used by Iranian President
Ahmadinejad would seem to indicate the reality and indeed the imminence of this
threat.
Would the same constraints, the same fear of mutual assured destruction,
restrain a nuclear-armed Iran from using such weapons against the U.S. or
against Israel?
There is a radical difference between the Islamic Republic of Iran and other
governments with nuclear weapons. This difference is expressed in what can only
be described as the apocalyptic worldview of Iran's present rulers. This
worldview and expectation, vividly expressed in speeches, articles and even
schoolbooks, clearly shape the perception and therefore the policies of
Ahmadinejad and his disciples.
Even in the past it was clear that terrorists claiming to act in the name of
Islam had no compunction in slaughtering large numbers of fellow Muslims. A
notable example was the blowing up of the American embassies in East Africa in
1998, killing a few American diplomats and a much larger number of
uninvolved local passersby, many of them Muslims. There were numerous other
Muslim victims in the various terrorist attacks of the last 15 years.
The phrase "Allah will know his own" is usually used to explain such apparently
callous unconcern; it means that while infidel, i.e., non-Muslim, victims will
go to a well-deserved punishment in hell, Muslims will be sent straight to
heaven. According to this view, the bombers are in fact doing their Muslim
victims a favor by giving them a quick pass to heaven and its delights--the
rewards without the struggles of martyrdom. School textbooks tell young
Iranians to be ready for a final global struggle against an evil enemy, named as
the U.S., and to prepare themselves for the privileges of martyrdom.
A direct attack on the U.S., though possible, is less likely in the immediate
future. Israel is a nearer and easier target, and Mr. Ahmadinejad has given
indication of thinking along these lines. The Western observer would
immediately think of two possible deterrents. The first is that an attack that
wipes out Israel would almost certainly wipe out the Palestinians too. The
second is that such an attack would evoke a devastating reprisal from Israel
against Iran, since one may surely assume that the Israelis have made the
necessary arrangements for a counterstrike even after a nuclear holocaust in
Israel.
The first of these possible deterrents might well be of concern to the
Palestinians--but not apparently to their fanatical champions in the Iranian
government. The second deterrent--the threat of direct retaliation on Iran--is,
as noted, already weakened by the suicide or martyrdom complex that plagues
parts of the Islamic world today, without parallel in other religions, or for
that matter in the Islamic past. This complex has become even more important at
the present day, because of this new apocalyptic vision.
In Islam, as in Judaism and Christianity, there are certain beliefs concerning
the cosmic struggle at the end of time--Gog and Magog, anti-Christ, Armageddon,
and for Shiite Muslims, the long awaited return of the Hidden Imam, ending in
the final victory of the forces of good over evil, however these may be
defined. Mr. Ahmadinejad and his followers clearly believe that this time is
now, and that the terminal struggle has already begun and is indeed well
advanced. It may even have a date, indicated by several references by the
Iranian president to giving his final answer to the U.S. about nuclear
development by Aug. 22. This was at first reported as "by the end of
August," but Mr. Ahmadinejad's statement was more precise.
What is the significance of Aug. 22? This year, Aug. 22 corresponds, in
the Islamic calendar, to the 27th day of the month of Rajab of the year
1427. This, by tradition, is the night when many Muslims commemorate the
night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq, first to "the
farthest mosque," usually identified with Jerusalem, and then to heaven and
back (c.f., Koran XVII.1). This might well be deemed an appropriate date for
the apocalyptic ending of Israel and if necessary of the world. It is far from
certain that Mr. Ahmadinejad plans any such cataclysmic events precisely for
Aug. 22. But it would be wise to bear the possibility in mind.
A passage from the Ayatollah Khomeini, quoted in an 11th-grade Iranian
schoolbook, is revealing. "I am decisively announcing to the whole world that
if the world-devourers [i.e., the infidel powers] wish to stand against our
religion, we will stand against their whole world and will not cease until the
annihilation of all them. Either we all become free, or we will go to the
greater freedom which is martyrdom. Either we shake one another's hands in joy
at the victory of Islam in the world, or all of us will turn to eternal life and
martyrdom. In both cases, victory and success are ours."
In this context, mutual assured destruction, the deterrent that worked so well
during the Cold War, would have no meaning. At the end of time, there will be
general destruction anyway. What will matter will be the final destination of
the dead--hell for the infidels, and heaven for the believers. For people with
this mindset, MAD is not a constraint; it is an inducement.
How then can one confront such an enemy, with such a view of life and death?
Some immediate precautions are obviously possible and necessary. In the long
term, it would seem that the best, perhaps the only hope is to appeal to those
Muslims, Iranians, Arabs and others who do not share these apocalyptic
perceptions and aspirations, and feel as much threatened, indeed even more
threatened, than we are. There must be many such, probably even a majority in
the lands of Islam. Now is the time for them to save their countries, their
societies and their religion from the madness of MAD.
Mr. Lewis, professor emeritus at Princeton, is the author, most recently, of
"From Babel to Dragomans: Interpreting the Middle East" (Oxford University
Press, 2004).
Toronto rally opposes Israeli attacks on Lebanon
Sun, August 13, 2006
By BRETT POPPLEWELL, CP
TORONTO -- A protest for peace in the Middle East took on a distinctly
anti-Israel tone yesterday as thousands of people from various backgrounds
gathered outside the Israeli consulate to protest the country's war against
Hezbollah militants in Lebanon.
Lebanese, Palestinian and even Six Nations flags flew over the heads of
protesters as they rallied to demand Israel's immediate withdrawal from Lebanon,
the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.
The protest, organized by the Canadian Arab Federation, brought together
speakers from the Arab, Jewish, Christian and aboriginal communities.
Organizers said about 8,000 people attended, but police could not immediately
confirm that .
Many expressed anger at Ottawa's support of Israel in the conflict, sporting
signs and buttons reading "Stephen Harper War Monger."
"I think there's a lot of rage across Canadian society," said protester Dan
Freeman-Maloy, 24. "Not only for the terrible atrocities that Israel is
committing right now . . . but also for the support at every level of Canadian
government."
While some refused to condone Hezbollah, others erupted with cheers when Zafar
Bangash of the Muslim Community Group announced over a megaphone the number of
Israeli soldiers killed by Hezbollah forces in the conflict.
Several members of Toronto's Jewish community also joined the protest to call
for a ceasefire.
There were no reports of violent incidents at the protest, which was followed by
a march through downtown streets.
Rae sides with Harper on MideastBlames Hezbollah, says
Israel justified
By CP-TORONTO/OTTAWA -- He may be vying to be the leader of the official
Opposition but federal Liberal leadership candidate Bob Rae found himself
agreeing with Prime Minister Stephen Harper as he outlined his foreign policy
platform yesterday. The former Ontario premier said he agreed with Harper that
Hezbollah was to blame for the current Middle East crisis. "Hezbollah started
the conflict between Israel and Lebanon," he told a Toronto audience of about
100 supporters after outlining his foreign policy platform. "There is no
question about that." Israel has a right to self-defence and is responding
"where it thinks the bombs and rockets are," Rae said. "I believe the answer is
to get to a ceasefire as quickly as we can," Rae said, adding Canada should play
a diplomatic part in resolving the dispute and addressing the "humanitarian
crisis." In a wide-ranging speech -- where Rae called for a doubling of foreign
aid to $7 billion and a re-assessment of Canada's involvement in Afghanistan --
Rae also took a shot at rival and perceived frontrunner, Michael Ignatieff.
Although he didn't mention Ignatieff by name, Rae responded to Ignatieff's
comment that he's "not losing any sleep" over the deaths of dozens of Lebanese
in the village of Qana.
'LOSING SLEEP'
"We cannot be callous or indifferent to these losses," he said. "We should be
losing sleep about them." Ignatieff admitted yesterday his comment was "a
mistake" that made him look insensitive to the tragedy. He said he had been
trying "ineptly" to explain that leaders can't develop foreign policy "on a
reactive basis." Rae's comments drew criticism, both from his opponents and from
Canadian-Arab organizations who say it's not the time to point fingers. Scott
Brison, one of Rae's 10 opponents in the leadership race, said Rae is simply
parroting what many have said in the last few weeks -- that "Israel has a right
to defend itself against a terrorist organization." Meanwhile, Conservative
Senator Anne Cools says she is not happy with Harper's position on the Middle
East and plans to speak out about her concerns when the upper house convenes in
the fall.
Rae slams Afghan vote, Harper foreign policy
KAREN HOWLETT
TORONTO -- Liberal leadership candidate Bob Rae assailed Prime Minister Stephen
Harper's foreign-policy initiatives yesterday, accusing him of an "alarming
disregard" for Canada's traditional strengths in international affairs.
Mr. Rae reserved his harshest criticism for how Mr. Harper won the support of
Parliament last May to extend Canada's mission in Afghanistan for another two
years. The fate of the more than 2,000 Canadian troops fighting on the ground in
Kandahar, the most serious decision a government can make, should not have been
reduced to a six-hour debate, he said in his first major foreign-policy speech
of the campaign.
"The parliamentary vote the government engineered in the spring to 'approve'
this mission was a cynical manipulation of the House of Commons," he said.
Canada's policy on Afghanistan needs to be evaluated because "the reconstruction
effort in Kandahar has been supplanted almost entirely by a combat mission," he
said.
"We are at the moment fighting a war in Afghanistan, and Canadian troops are
dying in that war."
Mr. Rae spoke for more than an hour to a standing-room-only crowd at the
University of Toronto's Munk Centre. It was only near the end of his speech,
when he waded into the deadly conflict in the Middle East, that he also took aim
at Michael Ignatieff, his main rival in the leadership race.
Mr. Rae did not mention his old university chum by name, but was clearly
referring to him when he said too many ordinary citizens are being killed in
Beirut, in Haifa, in Tyre, in Qana.
"We should not be calling [these losses] inevitable. We should be losing sleep
about them," he said.
Mr. Ignatieff, the front-runner in the leadership race, stirred up controversy
when he said he is not losing sleep about the Israeli bombing of a Lebanese
village that killed at least a dozen children.
While Mr. Rae and Mr. Ignatieff have disagreed on the role of Canada's military
in Afghanistan, they have both criticized the government's response to the
Middle East crisis as inadequate. Canada must be engaged in the process of
helping to secure the future of every country in the region, he said.
Mr. Rae said one of the Liberal Party's enduring legacies is a balanced,
pragmatic, multilateral approach to global affairs.
"Looking at some of the major foreign policy issues facing us today, I am
troubled by the direction and tone being taken by the Harper government," he
said. "They show an alarming disregard for our strengths and traditional
priorities in foreign affairs."