SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Khadr and Harper; Bush and the Ayatollahs
In thinking about the Omar Khadr case -- which evinces strong emotions, from both those who want him brought home to be tried in a Canadian court and those who would rather let him be in Guantanamo Bay -- it is useful to consider the following:
AC/a,!AC/ The issue is not how evil Khadr or his family is but rather the Canadian values at stake.
Should Canadians care that he's the last Westerner left at Gitmo?
Why is it that other nations, notably Britain and Australia, lobbied Washington and got their citizens repatriated, but we won't?
Jul 20, 2008
In thinking about the Omar Khadr case -- which evinces strong emotions, from both those who want him brought home to be tried in a Canadian court and those who would rather let him be in Guantanamo Bay -- it is useful to consider the following:
AC/a,!AC/ The issue is not how evil Khadr or his family is but rather the Canadian values at stake.
Should Canadians care that he's the last Westerner left at Gitmo?
Why is it that other nations, notably Britain and Australia, lobbied Washington and got their citizens repatriated, but we won't?
Is that because we think Gitmo is not as bad as portrayed? Or even if it is, do we have more confidence in the discredited American military trials than others do, including a growing number of Americans?
The answers will have far more to do with us than with Khadr or his dysfunctional family.
AC/a,!AC/ Canada was the first to sign the treaty on child soldiers. The Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child calls for captured fighters under 18 to be kept separate from adult combatants and then rehabilitated into society. Refusing to practise what we preach will erode our credibility in speaking out against some notorious army or militia using, and abusing, child soldiers.
Stephen Harper's "Do what I say, not what I do" creed can also be seen in his position on Zimbabwe.
Robert Mugabe's sabotaging of democracy should draw not just condemnation but also sanctions.
However, Harper's proclamations, like those of George W. Bush and others, ring hollow given that Canada took the lead, and the U.S. and others followed, in actively undermining the democratic will of the Palestinian people as expressed in the 2006 elections, especially in the Gaza Strip.
Mugabe clubs his opponents; Harper, Bush et al. starve theirs.
This is not to equate Harper and Bush with the criminal Mugabe, but it's hard to ignore the parallels.
Hypocrisy also surrounds the American approach to Tehran's nuclear program, a policy heartily endorsed by Harper.
Israel, India and Pakistan have been rewarded for making bombs on the sly by staying out of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
North Korea, which threw out international inspectors, pulled out of the treaty and made a bomb, was rewarded with multi-party talks and food aid, and had its name removed from the U.S. list of states sponsoring terrorism.
On the other hand, Iran has remained in the treaty, allowed international inspections and been certified by the International Atomic Energy Agency as not having diverted any declared nuclear material toward a bomb. Though the agency has no information to the contrary, its only doubt is over whether or not Iran has some undeclared nuclear material.
Yet Iran has been demonized, subjected to Security Council sanctions, threatened with war and told that the U.S. wouldn't talk until it stopped enriching uranium.
Iran refused to blink.
So the U.S. has. The Bush administration (besieged on every other front - the economy, Iraq and Afghanistan) sent a senior official to Geneva yesterday to join Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China for talks with Iran.
Washington maintained the fiction that William Burns was there not to negotiate but only to listen. Iranians pretended that they were not talking to the Great Satan either.
But few were fooled. Engagement with Iran, which Europe and Barack Obama have advocated, has begun. Unless the neo-cons in the Bush administration derail the talks to facilitate the bombing of Iran, negotiations are indeed underway. This is welcome.
However, there's an irony. When such talks were first proposed but rejected by Bush, Iran had 20 centrifuges spinning uranium. Now it has 3,500. And whereas North Korea has agreed to give up its nuclear program, Iran is not likely to.
Such is the price of Bush's ideological rigidity -- and incompetence.
Haroon Siddiqui writes on Thursday and Sunday.
(c) CopyrightToronto Star 1996-2008
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2023 TheStar.com
In thinking about the Omar Khadr case -- which evinces strong emotions, from both those who want him brought home to be tried in a Canadian court and those who would rather let him be in Guantanamo Bay -- it is useful to consider the following:
AC/a,!AC/ The issue is not how evil Khadr or his family is but rather the Canadian values at stake.
Should Canadians care that he's the last Westerner left at Gitmo?
Why is it that other nations, notably Britain and Australia, lobbied Washington and got their citizens repatriated, but we won't?
Is that because we think Gitmo is not as bad as portrayed? Or even if it is, do we have more confidence in the discredited American military trials than others do, including a growing number of Americans?
The answers will have far more to do with us than with Khadr or his dysfunctional family.
AC/a,!AC/ Canada was the first to sign the treaty on child soldiers. The Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child calls for captured fighters under 18 to be kept separate from adult combatants and then rehabilitated into society. Refusing to practise what we preach will erode our credibility in speaking out against some notorious army or militia using, and abusing, child soldiers.
Stephen Harper's "Do what I say, not what I do" creed can also be seen in his position on Zimbabwe.
Robert Mugabe's sabotaging of democracy should draw not just condemnation but also sanctions.
However, Harper's proclamations, like those of George W. Bush and others, ring hollow given that Canada took the lead, and the U.S. and others followed, in actively undermining the democratic will of the Palestinian people as expressed in the 2006 elections, especially in the Gaza Strip.
Mugabe clubs his opponents; Harper, Bush et al. starve theirs.
This is not to equate Harper and Bush with the criminal Mugabe, but it's hard to ignore the parallels.
Hypocrisy also surrounds the American approach to Tehran's nuclear program, a policy heartily endorsed by Harper.
Israel, India and Pakistan have been rewarded for making bombs on the sly by staying out of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
North Korea, which threw out international inspectors, pulled out of the treaty and made a bomb, was rewarded with multi-party talks and food aid, and had its name removed from the U.S. list of states sponsoring terrorism.
On the other hand, Iran has remained in the treaty, allowed international inspections and been certified by the International Atomic Energy Agency as not having diverted any declared nuclear material toward a bomb. Though the agency has no information to the contrary, its only doubt is over whether or not Iran has some undeclared nuclear material.
Yet Iran has been demonized, subjected to Security Council sanctions, threatened with war and told that the U.S. wouldn't talk until it stopped enriching uranium.
Iran refused to blink.
So the U.S. has. The Bush administration (besieged on every other front - the economy, Iraq and Afghanistan) sent a senior official to Geneva yesterday to join Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China for talks with Iran.
Washington maintained the fiction that William Burns was there not to negotiate but only to listen. Iranians pretended that they were not talking to the Great Satan either.
But few were fooled. Engagement with Iran, which Europe and Barack Obama have advocated, has begun. Unless the neo-cons in the Bush administration derail the talks to facilitate the bombing of Iran, negotiations are indeed underway. This is welcome.
However, there's an irony. When such talks were first proposed but rejected by Bush, Iran had 20 centrifuges spinning uranium. Now it has 3,500. And whereas North Korea has agreed to give up its nuclear program, Iran is not likely to.
Such is the price of Bush's ideological rigidity -- and incompetence.
Haroon Siddiqui writes on Thursday and Sunday.
(c) CopyrightToronto Star 1996-2008
In thinking about the Omar Khadr case -- which evinces strong emotions, from both those who want him brought home to be tried in a Canadian court and those who would rather let him be in Guantanamo Bay -- it is useful to consider the following:
AC/a,!AC/ The issue is not how evil Khadr or his family is but rather the Canadian values at stake.
Should Canadians care that he's the last Westerner left at Gitmo?
Why is it that other nations, notably Britain and Australia, lobbied Washington and got their citizens repatriated, but we won't?
Is that because we think Gitmo is not as bad as portrayed? Or even if it is, do we have more confidence in the discredited American military trials than others do, including a growing number of Americans?
The answers will have far more to do with us than with Khadr or his dysfunctional family.
AC/a,!AC/ Canada was the first to sign the treaty on child soldiers. The Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child calls for captured fighters under 18 to be kept separate from adult combatants and then rehabilitated into society. Refusing to practise what we preach will erode our credibility in speaking out against some notorious army or militia using, and abusing, child soldiers.
Stephen Harper's "Do what I say, not what I do" creed can also be seen in his position on Zimbabwe.
Robert Mugabe's sabotaging of democracy should draw not just condemnation but also sanctions.
However, Harper's proclamations, like those of George W. Bush and others, ring hollow given that Canada took the lead, and the U.S. and others followed, in actively undermining the democratic will of the Palestinian people as expressed in the 2006 elections, especially in the Gaza Strip.
Mugabe clubs his opponents; Harper, Bush et al. starve theirs.
This is not to equate Harper and Bush with the criminal Mugabe, but it's hard to ignore the parallels.
Hypocrisy also surrounds the American approach to Tehran's nuclear program, a policy heartily endorsed by Harper.
Israel, India and Pakistan have been rewarded for making bombs on the sly by staying out of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
North Korea, which threw out international inspectors, pulled out of the treaty and made a bomb, was rewarded with multi-party talks and food aid, and had its name removed from the U.S. list of states sponsoring terrorism.
On the other hand, Iran has remained in the treaty, allowed international inspections and been certified by the International Atomic Energy Agency as not having diverted any declared nuclear material toward a bomb. Though the agency has no information to the contrary, its only doubt is over whether or not Iran has some undeclared nuclear material.
Yet Iran has been demonized, subjected to Security Council sanctions, threatened with war and told that the U.S. wouldn't talk until it stopped enriching uranium.
Iran refused to blink.
So the U.S. has. The Bush administration (besieged on every other front - the economy, Iraq and Afghanistan) sent a senior official to Geneva yesterday to join Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China for talks with Iran.
Washington maintained the fiction that William Burns was there not to negotiate but only to listen. Iranians pretended that they were not talking to the Great Satan either.
But few were fooled. Engagement with Iran, which Europe and Barack Obama have advocated, has begun. Unless the neo-cons in the Bush administration derail the talks to facilitate the bombing of Iran, negotiations are indeed underway. This is welcome.
However, there's an irony. When such talks were first proposed but rejected by Bush, Iran had 20 centrifuges spinning uranium. Now it has 3,500. And whereas North Korea has agreed to give up its nuclear program, Iran is not likely to.
Such is the price of Bush's ideological rigidity -- and incompetence.
Haroon Siddiqui writes on Thursday and Sunday.
(c) CopyrightToronto Star 1996-2008
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.