The
Foreign Policy Challenge
Dr.
Bikram Lamba
analysis
The honeymoon of the electorate with the Conservative government is apparently over. It is time to see the real situation. The Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs indicated that Ottawa had no plans to contribute troops to the UN-authorised peacekeeping mission in Lebanon. Controversies over recent events in both Afghanistan and Lebanon have impacted the Canadian political scene and created challenges for the Conservative minority government.
Recent polls show steep decline in public support for the Canadian military mission in Kandahar and concern over the government's stance on the Lebanon crisis. Fierce clashes in southern Afghanistan, and the rising death toll experienced by Canadian forces in the Kandahar region, have prompted calls for a reconsideration of Canadian support for the NATO mission. The debate over Canada's Afghanistan policy, and the Israel-Lebanon crisis, will affect voter support for the Conservative minority government, which may face a federal election as early as the spring of 2007. A Strategic Counsel poll found that a majority of Canadians (55%) opposed the Kandahar mission. This figure represents a significant shift from similar polls in March, which indicated that only 41% opposed the role of Canadian military forces in southern Afghanistan. Since then, more Canadian troops have been killed in Afghanistan. Documents released to the media through the Access to Information Act show that Afghanistan has dominated Prime Minister Stephen Harper's mailbag since March. The Conservative government has responded to public doubts by vigorously pledging to sustain its commitment to Afghanistan until 2009. Canada currently has 2,200 soldiers stationed in Kandahar and plays the lead military role in NATO's efforts to combat a resurgent Taliban.
The Middle East crisis, added to public concern over Afghanistan, has forced the Harper government to recalibrate its political agenda away from purely domestic issues, the intended focus of its first year in office. Harper faced sustained media criticism for describing the Israeli bombing campaign in Lebanon (launched in response to an unprovoked Hizbollah raid into Israel) as a "measured response". Foreign Minister Peter MacKay called Hezbollah a "cancer" and told the House of Commons Foreign Affairs committee that it was a terrorist organisation that bore complete responsibility for the conflict. As the Israeli campaign expanded and the civilian death toll mounted, the government sought to revise its political messaging and reassure its own backbenchers about Canadian policy. The UN-brokered ceasefire on August 14 came as a welcome political reprieve. Both Lebanon and Afghanistan featured heavily during the closed-door Conservative summer caucus. The meeting was originally designed to discuss the party's autumn domestic agenda, but foreign policy concerns dominated the proceedings. Polling on the eve of the caucus indicated that 45% of voters disagreed with Harper's support for Israeli actions, against 32% who agreed. Dissent was most pronounced among Quebecois: 61% opposed the government's stance on the Israeli-Lebanon conflict.
The lack of support for Harper's foreign policy in Quebec is troubling for the Conservatives. Their hopes of securing a majority government after the next election depend on making gains in the province. However, Quebecois remain unconvinced by the party's foreign policy stance. Fully 72% of Quebec respondents in the Strategic Counsel poll thought that Harper was "aping" US President George Bush. The prime minister in an interview on Quebec television attempted to explain his initial reaction to the war in Lebanon and argue that the situation had changed. Harper was at pains to explain his government's support for a UN-sanctioned ceasefire and to show sympathy for those who had suffered in the conflict. Whether Quebecois will be mollified by the Conservatives' backtracking on Lebanon depends, in part, on the durability of the current ceasefire.
The Conservatives have sought to undercut Liberal opposition to their foreign policy through the surprise appointment of the Liberal MP and Muslim Canadian, Wajid Khan, as Harper's special envoy on the Middle East and Afghanistan. Khan, who was an officer in the Pakistani air force before emigrating to Canada, will travel to the region and prepare a report for the prime minister by October 1.
Harper's cause has been assisted by the opposition Liberals' fractious disunity over both Afghanistan and the Middle East crisis. The party is in the midst of a leadership campaign, which is scheduled to climax at its December convention. Liberal leadership hopefuls are simultaneously attempting to win party support, distance themselves from the Conservatives, and - in some cases - divorce themselves from past Liberal government initiatives. The Liberal party clearly senses an opportunity to make significant gains. This optimism was bolstered by an August 2 Decima Research poll, which showed the Liberals in a statistical tie nationally with the Conservatives, and with a significant lead on the Tories in Quebec and Ontario.
The presumed front-runner in the Liberal leadership campaign is the former Harvard academic and writer, Michael Ignatieff. Ignatieff has strongly supported the Canadian mission in Afghanistan, and reminded his party that it was originally a Liberal government commitment in 2001. That position has differentiated Ignatieff from most of his rivals, who either call for an end to the Afghan campaign, or for a reemphasis on civilian reconstruction. While Ignatieff has aligned himself with the Conservatives on Afghanistan, he has been a vocal critic of what he calls the government's "inadequate and one-sided" approach in Lebanon.
However, the Liberals found themselves in difficulty when the interim party leader, Bill Graham, argued that Canadian policy in the Middle East needed to be "fair minded and balanced". This remark distressed some party faithful, who read it as insufficiently supportive of Israel, including high-profile Liberal supporters such as entrepreneurs Heather Reisman and Gerry Schwartz (Reisman promptly defected to the Tories) and Senator Jerry Grafstein (who called for clarification of his party's stance). Another leadership hopeful, Stephane Dion, attempted to chart a middle course by arguing that the party was a 'friend' of Israel, and that its policy was based on a desire to speak frankly to a friend about the wider implications of the Lebanon crisis.
Although public opinion is increasingly hostile to the Afghan campaign, Liberal divisions should allow the government to sustain its military commitment. However, the Conservatives are more vulnerable on their policy towards Lebanon, which is undermining the party's appeal in Quebec - and with it the government's chances of securing a majority after the next general election. But the question that really faces the government is whether it is adopting an independent attitude worthy of a great nation. It is clear that Canadian policy is not aping US policy. Had Harper been aping US, then he would not taken strong recourse regarding the north border issue, where both the US and Denmark oppose Canada. Evidently, the regime is adopting a very sensible approach based on ground realities, ethical values and pragmatic geo-political situation.
Dr. Bikram Lamba is a political and business strategist and a freelance writer. He can be contacted at torconsult@rogers.com.
