Skip to content

O'NEILL: Canada's path is better than the UN's

FACE TO FACE: Is Canada on the right track with its approach to foreign policy? Let's turn back the clock a few weeks and examine an important bit of Canadian political history that, in the excitement of the May 2 general election, was overlooked.

FACE TO FACE: Is Canada on the right track with its approach to foreign policy?

Let's turn back the clock a few weeks and examine an important bit of Canadian political history that, in the excitement of the May 2 general election, was overlooked.

Just hours before the polls closed, then-Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff said the U.S. military's killing of Osama bin Laden the day before was "very, very good news." "This was a mass murderer," he continued. "This man was a threat to every freedom-loving person alive, frankly."

Nothing controversial, there, right? Wrong.

In fact, his statement represented the height of hypocrisy because the Al Qaeda leader's death was, in fact, the direct result of exactly the sort of unilateral international military action that Ignatieff had, just weeks before, pledged to prevent Canada from embarking upon.

How's that? Well, during the French-language leaders' debate, Ignatieff specifically said that, if elected prime minister, he would limit the international use of the Canada military to only those missions that had the direct authorization of the UN.

Clearly, under such a policy, the secretive deployment of an elite team of soldiers to a foreign land, without any other country being informed of the operation, is exactly the sort of mission that Ignatieff would not allow the Canadian military to undertake. Yet, he apparently saw nothing wrong with the American military undertaking it. That's hypocritical.

Thankfully, Ignatieff has now taken up a post-politics professorial position. But the issue of when it's proper to deploy troops is still a matter of considerable importance.

The country's left wing, including my colleague on the other side of the page, loves the idea of letting the UN have the final word on the use of our troops, even though this means giving China and Russia a veto over their deployment.

But I, for one, don't want some despot in Moscow or autocrat in Beijing to have that power. We're a sovereign nation and our own government should have the final word.

I also reject my colleague's assertion that neutrality gives our country some sort of special moral authority with which we can better influence the world.

Experience tells us that a stout military, durable international alliances and the moral courage to stand up to evil will yield far more good than singing "Kumbaya" around a campfire.

An award-winning journalist, a writer with Edmonton's Report Magazine and Toronto's Catholic Insight magazine, and co-host of RoadkillRadio.com, Face to Face columnist Terry O'Neill is a long-time Coquitlam resident who sits on the board of the Coquitlam Foundation and chairs the finance commitee of St. Joseph's Catholic parish.