Walking Out On Crazy Leaders

While normally I would be proud to see Canadian diplomats boycotting an Iranian speech at the United Nations, I do have a procedural request. The visual effect is far greater when you get up and walk out of the room 10 seconds after he starts talking than if you don't show up at all. The Canadian seats at the UN assembly were empty before Ahmadeninejad even began talking. Over 30 countries walked out during his speech, and that visual was broadcast on news stations all around the world. It was great to see. Next time, let's send our people to the speech and have them walk out as soon as he begins talking so cameras can catch the visual image.

North Korea To Chair UN Conference On Military Disarmament? What?

The United Nations never ceases to amaze me in the absolute ridiculousness of some of their decisions. North Korea has now been chosen to chair a UN Conference on military disarmament, and Canada will be proudly boycotting the work of this body as we should. North Korea is one of the worst perpetrators in the development and proliferation of nuclear weapons who frequently fires missiles, torpedoes, rockets, and bullets at their sovereign neighbours. This conference should not be taken seriously and any policies produced by it should be soundly rejected. N.Korea is the worst possible country that could have been chosen to chair this conference, short of maybe Myanmar. Previous ludicrous appointments include Muamar Gaddafi to the UN Council on human rights. You will be pleased to know that Gaddafi's membership on that council has been suspended since he began massacring his own people. We'll see, maybe NK's chair of  this conference will be suspended the next time they sink a South Korean navy ship.

The United Nations has become a joke. Getting denied a spot on the security council was actually a great compliment when you examine the selection criteria for other appointments.

What Happened To UN Security Council Seat-gate?

To all those people who said that Stephen Harper deserved a black eye because Canada did not win a seat on the United Nations Security Council, just remember that the UN selected Muamar Gaddafi for their Human Rights Council. This certainly speaks to the credibility of the UN to make intelligent and pragmatic decisions on its council membership. The most substantial yet under-reported part of this Libyan crisis is Gaddafi's role at the UN. What does that say about the UN?

United Nations "Suspends" Gaddafi From Human Rights Council

Way to go United Nations, they have finally suspended Libyan leader Moomar Gaddafi from their Human Rights Council. That of course begs the question; what the hell was this lunatic doing on the HRC??? Who were his references? Paul Martin? Who recommended Gaddafi for a seat on the HRC, and which UN member nations voted in favour of the appointment? The bigger story is not that he was suspended from the HRC, but rather that he was ever appointed to it. I did watch the Daily Show last night, and Jon Stewart asked if Moomar was suspended from the HRC, what would it take for him to get expelled from the HRC?

Excellent question...

The United Arab Emirates

I would like to publicly state that the United Arab Emirates can kiss my ass! They wanted more landing rights on Canadian runways, which they were not getting. First they thought that kicking us out of camp Mirage would secure them a better deal, but thankfully the government did not bend. Then they thought that campaigning against us for the UN Security Council might get more flights at Pearson, but it didn't work. Now they are jacking up Canadian visa fees, and I ask my government not to give in to that extortion. Somehow I think that we will get along just fine without a strategic partnership with this tiny little Arab country.

If they want to play hardball, then screw them.

More Crisis In Haiti; Best Call Portugal

As a cholera epidemic is taking hold in Haiti and geologists are predicting another possible earthquake that could devastate the country, who ya gonna call? Punch Portugal into the speed dial, as this Security Council member is in a far better position to help the helpless. Isn't that why they beat us for the SC seat; their ability to respond quickly to international crisis? I'm sure the European Union trying to stack the Security Council with EU members had nothing to do with it, Portugal must just be better than us in global security matters.

I just hope that they are able to help the Haitian people. As members of the Security Council, I expect that they are able to do so.

Lewis MacKenzie: Thank You Portugal

If you want to read a fantastic analysis about Canada and the UN Security Council, you have to read former General Lewis MacKenzie's latest piece Thank You Portugal. He discusses the failures of the United Nations, and is very qualified to talk about it having served in on UN peacekeeping missions. Of course "peacekeeping" is an oxymoron given that the UN does precious little to actually enforce peace.

Thank you to Adler Online for tipping me to this piece. I also strongly recommend listening to Adler's interview with MacKenzie about this issue. To listen, just visit http://www.charlesadler.com/ and scroll down his archive on the right hand column.

"Devastating" For Harper?

I happened to catch the pundit's panel on CTV's Question Period Sunday, which could hardly be called "balanced" with Taber, Oliver, Travers, and Galloway. When discussing Canada's failed bid for a seat on the UN's Security Council, the panelists kept repeating the word "devastating" when discussing the effect on the government. Travers even went on to say that people had been confusing the inept General Assembly with the prestigious Security Council, but did not mention that the General Assembly elects the temporary members of the Security Council. As per usual, Taber had a big smile on her face while talking about this "devastating" turn of events.

In other news, the latest polling numbers show the Tories with a significant lead over the Liberals. Jane, if this is "devastating", shouldn't it harm the government? To "devastate" after all is "to cause great destruction". We will see over the coming weeks if the polling numbers shift, but in the meantime, no great destruction has been done. As there is no evidence of “great destruction”, to call it devastating is a left leaning opinion that is a wee premature.

Losing Security Council Vote No Tragedy

Rex Murphy wrote an excellent piece for today's National Post about our loss in the vote for a seat on the UN Security Council. Whereas Jane Taber and John Ibbitson have been trying to spin this as a "devastating loss" for the Harper government, Rex points out several great reasons why we should not be devastated or treat this as a terrible insult. I suppose that type of first clas logical analysis is why the Globe let Rex go last year.

Also, voting is now open for the "what would Iggy have done to win us a seat" webpoll. I voted for praise China on human rights.

United Nations Reformation

There are some serious institutional problems at the United Nations, and I would like to know what you would do to reform the world body. Despite these problems, I still believe that the UN should exist and that it can still serve a useful purpose, even if it does not anymore. I don't believe that there should be a one world government, but the UN at least provides a mechanism for the global political machinery. Our two biggest barriers to Security Council entry on this most recent ballot were the EU nations trying to stack the SC with EU members and the United Arab Emirates turning on us visa vis our air space and support of Israel. Canada contributes more to the United Nations, to world aid, to global security, and to global sanity than does Portugal; and we were ultimately the most deserving of a seat but regional politics kept us out.

One reform that I would really like to see is that if you are not a democracy then you should not get a vote in the General Assembly. If you don't believe in democracy, then why should you have the right to participate in democracy? I also think the armed wing of the UN is even more flawed than the General Assembly and is arguably in the greatest need of reformation. Just watch Hotel Rwanda; that will tell you everything you need to know about the effectiveness of the UN's "peacekeeping" force.

What Would Iggy Have Done?

If the accusations from the leader of the Liberal Party are that we were denied a seat on the United Nations Security Council because of what we have NOT done internationally, I would really like to know what he would have done differently. Iggy tells us that he could have been Prime Minister in January of 2009 but turned it down. Well, let's say that he was more ambitious than he claims to be and had been Prime Minister for the past 2 years; what do you think Iggy would most likely have done to improve our chances? I am accepting nominations for a poll to be released later today. Thus far my options are.

1) Join the European Union
2) Open up more Canadian air space to Arab airlines
3) Comply with Kyoto
4) Condemn Israel
5) Praise China's human rights record

What am I forgetting?

Should Canada Join The European Union?

If our objective is to win a "western" seat on the United Nations Security Council, our chances would increase if we were members of the European Union. So if the Ignatieff Liberals would have done what was necessary to win a seat on the SC and stay at Camp Mirage; would that include joining the European Union? Would we have increased our chances if we had supported a Green Shift? Some coalition MPs certainly think so. If climate change was a factor, what is Iggy's Climate Change policy? He doesn't want to touch his predecessor green terd with a ten foot pole; I’d just like to know what the man who wants to lead us would have done instead.

I would like to know, would the Liberals like to open up Canadian air space to Air Dubai? Would the Liberals commit to climate change legislation? Would the Liberals join the European Union, which supports its members in popularity contests? If this has been a catastrophic failure of our government, what exactly would a Liberal government have done differently?

Did Obama Interfere In Canada's Security Council Bid?

In the lead up to Canada's failed bid for a seat on the Security Council, the American delegates did not campaign for Canada or do anything to help rally support for another North American seat. According to a former American United Nations spokesperson this was not an accident, but rather an executive order. The charge is that the American delegation was ordered to do nothing to help Canada win a seat. It is unclear whether this order came from the Oval Office, but what is clear is that the United States did nothing to help us win the seat.

"U.S. State Department insiders say that U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice not only didn’t campaign for Canada’s election but instructed American diplomats to not get involved in the weeks leading up to the heated contest. With no public American support, Canada lost its bid to serve. That gives the EU more than 25% control of the body and a strong voting block to ensure EU priorities become global priorities."

Charles Adler: "I love my country, I don't love the United Nations"

Charles Adler delivered a fantastic monologue yesterday about Canada being denied a seat on the United Nations Security Council. He discusses how we have fallen out of favour with a group of countries for taking a stand in support of human rights in places like Iran. According to Charles, "they feel that Canada is too pro American or too pro Israeli and so they don't vote for Canada, and I think that's great! We should wear their scorn proudly". I strongly recommend listening.

To listen, visit charlesadler.com and click on Oct 12th pt 1 in his audio vault (located in the cellphone graphic on the right hand side). There is also a great rant on today's show. Click on Oct 13th Hour 1 and fast forward to the 10 minute mark.

"Security Council rejection a deep embarrassment for Harper"

Sometimes I feel like Peter Donolo is writing the headlines at the Globe and Mail, as in the case of our entirely predictable third place finish in Security Council seat votes in the United Nations General Assembly. Most of the discussion on this matter in the media has been whether or not Canada should apply for a seat, and nobody at all predicted the predictable, that our stands in support of Israel, human rights, and climate change skepticism actually put the seat in jeopardy. The last time we won, there were two nominees for two Western seats. I have always supported our bid for a seat, but I never predicted we'd win in a popularity contest because the media was noticeably silent on whether or not there was a contest going on.

Between the anti-Israel lobby, the pro-climate-wealth-redistribution lobby, et all, we never really had a chance. Why wasn't that ever a story? And while I don't support what Iggy said on the matter, I don't think he has near the influence to sway the United Nations. All this being said, there were a number of Conservatives who opposed even applying for a seat in an organization as corrupted as the UN. I wanted to see Canada add a voice of sanity to the Security Council, but would we be able to affect change at an institution with a long history of corruption?

G20 Protesters Going To The United Nations

Canadian protesters who are angry at police for being aggressive with arrests the day after protesters torched 3 police cars are now preparing to take a complaint to the UN Human Rights Tribunal. It is unclear as of yet whether Muamar Gaddafi will be put in charge of the case, but we are allowed to speculate. The complaint is that police were too aggressive AFTER the burning of police cars. Meanwhile, the night before many on the left said that they were not aggressive enough. This is another instance where the protesters are out of touch with the common Canadian, where I am assuming that the large majority of Canadians wanted more arrests after they saw police cars burning in the streets of our biggest city.

Should Canada Seek a Seat On The UN Security Council?

This week our Prime Minister has been in Europe on a diplomatic tour, which has included conversation on Canada seeking a seat on the United Nations Security Council. Today's poll question, do you think we should be lobbying for this spot in the rotation? I know that many of us are frustrated with the United Nations for some of their more controversial inefficiencies, but this is a prestigious international role where we would be included in international negotiations. It unquestionably gives us a louder voice on the world stage, even if some of us don't like the microphone.

I have many disagreements with the United Nations, but I don't want to see it disbanded. They can serve a useful purpose, but the current hierarchy is flawed. I would like to see the UN reformed, though I lack the specific expertise to suggest specific reformations. I am a big fan of John Bolton, and I trust his opinion on any matter to do with the United Nations. As Dennis Miller recently said to Johnny B, "I want you on that wall, I need you on that wall!" I also feel the same way about Stephen Harper.

UN Congo Mission: Just Say No

The United Nations asked Canada to lead the UN mission in the Congo after we are finished in Afghanistan next year, and we have declined. I am assuming that the UN officials responsible for choosing to ask Canada do not watch our parliament's Question Period and did not consult Ujjal Dosangh on the conduct of our troops in the field. If they did, they would have had grounds to suspect that our military are marauding war criminals who will deliberately send innocent Congolese farmers to be tortured.

Personally I wish the people of the Congo all the best, but I lost respect for the UN mission in that country when they botched that election. I am not interested in Canada taking command of that mission, especially when we are going to need military resources for our aid work in Haiti. Some day when I'm rich and famous, I would love to be able to visit the Congo and go into the jungle searching for man eating apes and the lost mines of King Soloman. I would even invite Laura Linney and Tim Curry. I support an international military presence in the Congo, but now is not a good time for Canada to take that responsibility. We have other responsibilities.

I started a poll on this yesterday, and thus far the response is overwhelming. There is no appetite to jump into the Congo when we complete combat operations in Afghanistan.

Do you think that Canada should send a large peacekeeping force to the Congo?

No (96%)
Yes (2%)
Undecided (1%)

The Security Council

While I have had a number of complaints about the United Nations in my adult life, I have never argued that it should be disbanded. I do think that there should be a mechanism and infrastructure for international government, but that how it exists in its current form is flawed. Having said that, I think it would be fantastic for Canada to have a seat on the Security Council to inject a little sanity into an insane chamber. More Canadian content in the United Nations can only be a good thing, and by "Canadian content" obviously I'm not talking about Mike Ignatieff. America and Britain are already represented on the Security Council.

To take it a step further, I think Preston Manning should be the President of the United Nations. That would be a far more effective choice than Ban Ki Moon. If we are sitting on the Security Council, would we then have the power to nominate Presto to preside over the general assembly? I doubt it, but a man can dream...

Best Political Decision of the Decade?

I ask the question, what has the best/smartest political move of the 2000s? I will be launching my poll for the worst political disaster of the 2000s shortly and would like to take some nominations for the smartest political decision. I am having a more difficult time selecting the smart political moves of the decade, as there does seem to be a preponderance of bad news, disasters, war, terrorism, etc. This will be slightly different from my worst political disaster question, this is about a person or country making a very positive political decision. I look forward to your ideas.

1) MacKay - Harper unite the right
2) Harper elected leader of united right
3) Michaelle Jean prorogues Parliament
4) Swift boat veterans expose John Kerry
5) Supreme Court overturns Gore Presidency
6) Troop surge in Iraq
7) France and Germany elect Sarkosy and Merkel
8) Israel elects Netanhyahu
9) Chretien resigns

PS My worst political disaster question is going to be more focused on individual people than acts of terrorism or natural disasters.  Both of these polls are being asked from the perspective of if you are a Conservative.  I decided to take George Bush out of the equation, because he is like cat nip for the left wing loons.