In the Liberal leadership debate in Vancouver on the weekend, Bob Rae posed a very clear challenge to Michael Ignatieff. And once again, Ignatieff used weasel words to duck it.
Rae to Ignatieff: “George Bush made the wrong decision on Iraq. Jean Chretien made the right decision. I have not yet heard you say that Mr. Bush made the wrong decision. The issue is: do you stand with George Bush on the issue of Iraq, or do you not?”
Ignatieff to Rae: “George Bush has made every mistake in Iraq, and then some. I visited the Kurds in 1992 and saw what was going on there. Fifteen years ago, I decided to stand with the Kurdish people and I’ve stood with them ever since. I don’t stand with George Bush. I stand with the independence and freedom of the Kurdish and Shia people.”
What Michael Ignatieff will not do, has repeatedly refused to do, is to say that the American led invasion of Iraq was wrong, and that the world is a more dangerous place today because it took place. This is no small matter, no issue of semantics. It cuts to the very core of Ignatieff’s world view.
Ignatieff is the man who wrote that “it is at least ironic that liberal believers… someone like me, for example---can end up supporting the creation of a new humanitarian empire, a new form of colonial tutelage for the peoples of Kosovo, Bosnia and Afghanistan.” And: “It is an empire lite, hegemony without colonies, a global sphere of influence without the burden of direct administration and the risks of daily policing…but that does not make it any less of an empire, that is, an attempt to permanently order the world of states and markets according to its national interests.” And: “We are no longer in the era of the United Fruit Company, when American corporations needed the Marines to secure their investments overseas. The 21st century imperium is a new invention in the annals of political science….a global hegemony whose grace notes are free markets, human rights and democracy, enforced by the most awesome military power the world has ever known.” And finally: “The case for empire is that it has become, in a place like Iraq, the last hope for democracy and stability alike.”
Canadians have lived in the shadow of empire for four centuries---first a French Empire, then British and now American. We don’t want a prime minister who doesn’t get it---Canadians do not want to live under the sway of an empire. That’s why so many Canadians are offended by the way Stephen Harper revels in supporting the American global mission.
The quotes above make it clear that Michael Ignatieff has also espoused the idea that the American Empire is a force for good in the world. He won’t directly and honestly respond to the challenge posed by Bob Rae. He insists on leaving the door open by saying that Bush has made every mistake in the book. What he never says is that the mission is wrong, that the American Empire will never liberate the people of the world, no matter what tactics it employs.
If Ignatieff wants to declare that his erstwhile enthusiasm for empire has been misplaced his opponents should give him room to do so. It takes a large person to change his mind and move on. Ignatieff would win respect and a second look from many people if he took this step. Or, if he still believes in the basic purpose of the American mission in Iraq, if not its execution, let him say that in forthright terms.
No more ambiguity. No more weasel words.
Rae to Ignatieff: “George Bush made the wrong decision on Iraq. Jean Chretien made the right decision. I have not yet heard you say that Mr. Bush made the wrong decision. The issue is: do you stand with George Bush on the issue of Iraq, or do you not?”
Ignatieff to Rae: “George Bush has made every mistake in Iraq, and then some. I visited the Kurds in 1992 and saw what was going on there. Fifteen years ago, I decided to stand with the Kurdish people and I’ve stood with them ever since. I don’t stand with George Bush. I stand with the independence and freedom of the Kurdish and Shia people.”
What Michael Ignatieff will not do, has repeatedly refused to do, is to say that the American led invasion of Iraq was wrong, and that the world is a more dangerous place today because it took place. This is no small matter, no issue of semantics. It cuts to the very core of Ignatieff’s world view.
Ignatieff is the man who wrote that “it is at least ironic that liberal believers… someone like me, for example---can end up supporting the creation of a new humanitarian empire, a new form of colonial tutelage for the peoples of Kosovo, Bosnia and Afghanistan.” And: “It is an empire lite, hegemony without colonies, a global sphere of influence without the burden of direct administration and the risks of daily policing…but that does not make it any less of an empire, that is, an attempt to permanently order the world of states and markets according to its national interests.” And: “We are no longer in the era of the United Fruit Company, when American corporations needed the Marines to secure their investments overseas. The 21st century imperium is a new invention in the annals of political science….a global hegemony whose grace notes are free markets, human rights and democracy, enforced by the most awesome military power the world has ever known.” And finally: “The case for empire is that it has become, in a place like Iraq, the last hope for democracy and stability alike.”
Canadians have lived in the shadow of empire for four centuries---first a French Empire, then British and now American. We don’t want a prime minister who doesn’t get it---Canadians do not want to live under the sway of an empire. That’s why so many Canadians are offended by the way Stephen Harper revels in supporting the American global mission.
The quotes above make it clear that Michael Ignatieff has also espoused the idea that the American Empire is a force for good in the world. He won’t directly and honestly respond to the challenge posed by Bob Rae. He insists on leaving the door open by saying that Bush has made every mistake in the book. What he never says is that the mission is wrong, that the American Empire will never liberate the people of the world, no matter what tactics it employs.
If Ignatieff wants to declare that his erstwhile enthusiasm for empire has been misplaced his opponents should give him room to do so. It takes a large person to change his mind and move on. Ignatieff would win respect and a second look from many people if he took this step. Or, if he still believes in the basic purpose of the American mission in Iraq, if not its execution, let him say that in forthright terms.
No more ambiguity. No more weasel words.
2 comments:
It takes a large person to change his mind and move on.
Former U.S. Senator John Edwards did just that when he said voting for the Iraq resolution was a mistake.
Ignatieff to Rae: “George Bush has made every mistake in Iraq, and then some. I visited the Kurds in 1992 and saw what was going on there. Fifteen years ago, I decided to stand with the Kurdish people and I’ve stood with them ever since. I don’t stand with George Bush. I stand with the independence and freedom of the Kurdish and Shia people.”
The Halabja gassings took place in March of 1988. Was Ignatieff not aware of their persecution back then? Or was it because Saddam was an ally to the West then?
By coincidence, Ignatieff became acutely aware of the Kurdish plight in 1992, shortly after Saddam fell out of favour with the US and there was a US-led war to market.
In 2003, just prior to second invasion, with two thirds of Iraqi skies patrolled by US jets cutting off Saddam's reach to the North, the Kurds were the most autonomous they had ever been.
If Ignatieff should feel such kin to an oppressed people in the future, he might want to stand with them when they were actually being persecuted and not wait until it's politically convenient.
BTW Mr Ignatieff, that dispicable lot of Reaganites who rallied against sanctions proposed by the Senate on behalf of the Kurds and instead sided with Saddam back then,... well, they now make up the majority of Bush's war cabinet. But, I'm sure you are well aware of that.
You might want to show your solidarity with the Kurds with a few choice words for Cheney, Rumsfeld, Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith, Libby, Bolton, Abrams...
I won't be holding my breath, that's for sure.
Post a Comment