Canada's "Moral" Behaviour: Only When It Suits Harper & Washington

From the Sunday, November 18, 2007, Toronto Star, Canada section, page A8, is an article about Prime Minister's Harpers selectively moral foreign policies.

HARPER'S 'SELECTIVE' MORALS BAD NEWS FOR DESERTERS

Thomas Walkom

The Supreme Court's refusal to hear the refugee appeals of two U.S. Army deserters should come as no surprise.

Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey do not qualify as refugees under the United Nations definition used here. They are not fleeing political persecution; they do not face torture. They are merely trying to escape what they - and most Canadians - see as an unjust Iraq war.

This does not mean that the pair should be sent home to face court martial. Quite the reverse. If Canada's federal government had the inclination to face down Washington just a bit, both men - who almost certainly qualify for permanent resident status - would be welcomed, not as refugees but as landed immigrants. That's how Canada treated U.S. draft dodgers and deserters from the Vietnam War. And it worked out fine.

However, it is most unlikely that Prime Minister Stephen Harper will take this path.

True, he has promised to deal with foreign affairs "on moral grounds." But his is a selective form of morality. Harper is willing to go to bat against countries that the U.S. criticizes - like China. But he is not willing to take on those that President George W. Bush deems friends. And he is certainly not willing to take on Washington itself.

Nowhere is this double standard more apparent than in the government's approach to Canadian citizens detained abroad.

Harper has been outspoken in his defence of Huseyin Celil, a Canadian tried and convicted in China earlier this year on charges of terrorism.

Harper has raised Celil's case personally with the Chinese leadership. In July, then foreign affairs minister Peter MacKay rebuked China again, saying that "due process for this Canadian citizen was not followed and his rights were not respected."

Compare this to Ottawa's tepid response in the case of another Canadian, Bashir Makhtal, who has been languishing for months in an Ethiopian jail. Makhtal was seized at the Kenyan border last December as he tried to escape Somalia's latest bout of mayhem and handed over illegally - to the Ethiopian army. While he hasn't been formally charged with anything, it seems that Ethiopia suspects him of connections to a separatist group it regards as terrorist.

Yet from Harper, there has been radio silence. The reason? Ethiopia is America's proxy in the Horn of Africa. Its invasion of Somalia to depose an Islamic government (the invasion that caused Makhtal to flee) was sanctioned and militarily supported by Washington.

In this context, it seems, the Canadian government finds a mere Canadian citizen expendable.

But nowhere is the double standard more apparent than in the case of Omar Khadr, another Canadian imprisoned abroad on charges of terrorism. Khadr faces trial in a setting so unfair that it makes the Chinese justice system look reasonable.

He can be convicted on the basis of secret evidence and statements obtained under torture. In the unlikely event that he is acquitted, his captors have reserved the right to keep him in jail anyway.

Yet Ottawa insists that the process if fair. That's because Khadr's human rights are being abused not by Beijing but Washington. And this government does not wish to irritate Washington.

For the two U.S. deserters, none of this is good news. Their ability to remain in Canada depends on the federal government's willingness to accommodate U.S. war resisters.

Alas, there is little likelihood of this. This government won't protect even its own citizens without U.S. clearance. It is unlikely to help Americans trying to escape Bush's wars.

Thomas Walkom's, column appears Thursday and Sunday.