Harper’s agenda: Fear & loathing in the Great White North

Scan page 10

The move by Canada’s Conservative government to ex­ tend for a year the bombing mission in Iraq, and expand it into Syria, won’t make much difference in the U.S.-led war on the Islamic State. But it will appease the arms industry, mobilize the party’s right-wing electoral base, and poison the political climate.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s foreign policy is largely about re-shaping the domestic agenda—for years to come. War in the East helps to fuel the flames of hatred and bigot­ ry at home, and strike fear in the hearts of working people, especially social justice seekers.

By spending $122 million and bombing 53 targets, Ot­ tawa is no closer to eliminating ISIS. Instead, it is treading the path that turned Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya over to ruthless, sectarian, reactionary forces. It also ensures more costly contracts for makers of military hardware and sur­ veillance technology.

The ideological offensive, however, is priceless. For Canada’s ruling elite, that is. By distracting huge swaths of the population with security paranoia and islamophobia, the Conservatives sidelined discussions about job insecu­ rity, tax giveaways to the rich, rising economic inequality, eroded pensions, long ignored child-care needs, and the scourge of climate change. The diversion worked, for a while, and now shows signs of waning.

Harper continues to inflate the “jihadist monster”—even as the Canadian Security Intelligence Service says that Muslim terrorists are less of a threat than white suprema­ cists. Lone wolf attackers are more likely to be radical right wingers than radical Islamists, according to CSIS. But Ar­ abs and Muslims fit the profile Harper prefers to employ to rationalize more police powers and longer jail sentences. His so-called Anti-Terrorism Act (C-51), condemned by the 36,000-member Canadian Bar Association for curtail­ ing liberties without increasing public safety, casts a widen­ ing net. Its vague wording is a gaping snare, potentially for anyone who engages in protest that “undermines national security.” Workers on strike, indigenous land defenders, Access to Information Act that made information inac­ cessible? The Privacy Act that invaded your privacy? The noncombat mission in Iraq that put Canadian troops in combat, leading to the death of one soldier, and the maim­ ing of three others from “friendly fire” on an Iraqi battle front line in March?

To his credit, New Democratic Party leader Tom Mulcair condemned the extension of the war. He said in Parliament that an NDP government would end Canadian intervention in Iraq and Syria, and bring the troops home. If only he would similarly denounce the Zionist occupation of Pales­ tinian territory and reverse his stridently pro-Israel stance. Liberal leader Justin Trudeau opposed Harper’s expand­ ing belligerence, mostly on the dodgy basis that the mis­ sion lacks clear objectives. However, Trudeau and his Liberals are voting for repressive law C-51, they say, for fear of handing Harper an election issue. Such a principled opposition.

Fortunately, the parliamentary critics increasingly echo the changing mood of the population, which is questioning permanent war abroad, and challenging repressive legisla­ tion at home.

On March 14 over 90,000 people rallied and marched across English Canada and Quebec against Bill C-51. More protests are in the works. That is the best bet for changing the channel on Harper’s ‘fear and loathing’ agenda. n