What Next for NATO ?

I am a pacifist: militantly so.  Nevertheless, there are moments when my patience runs thin. So….

     For several months NATO has been bombing Libya in an attempt to eradicate the regime of Muammar Khadafy and install a new government, just as it has tried to do also in Afghanistan.  If I understand rightly, the revolt began in Libya among 30% of the population that was cruelly treated by Khadafy. The other 70% had found a way to accommodate itself with the regime. That Khadafy was a dictator, I have no doubt; that he treated the rebellion cruelly is clear.  However, since when does NATO—I speak here of those nations engaged in that military alliance—have the right to go in to “protect the population” against 70% who supported the regime? Whatever…. The effort was successful and now the victors can enjoy the spoils of a country rather rich in oil.   

     NATO may then be wondering where to go next. I have a suggestion: Canada.  Here we have more than 60% of the population strongly opposed to the current regime. If NATO should decide to send in its forces to bomb Parliament Hill and oust the current regime, it would be doing the majority of the population a great favour. It would also be nice if the Canadian forces could contribute to this humanitarian effort by deploying they excellent bombing capability they showed in Libya (and Afghanistan).
     If you need a pretext of abuse of human rights, then there are always those immigrants we keep in prison for years on end without any accusation other than they are a danger to national security, or, even better, those we send to the Afghan or Syrian government or to Guantanamo for torture.
    You are, no doubt aware that Canada has excellent oil, gas and water reserves that could well serve members of NATO—just a little cherry on the sundae for their effort. Well, for the most part, I guess, we just give them all that already.
     In any case, I invite the commander of NATO to consider this option, which fits in well with the general pattern of NATO adventures—oops, I mean missions.  Also, while you are up there flying around, perhaps you could make a little detour and drop a couple of bombs on the Assemblée nationale in Quebec. That way we could all start over fresh: Just a suggestion. 

     But, to be serious, if we were to take seriously--which I don't--the arguments given for NATO's incursion in Libya and all scales taken into account, I think Canada could be presented as a case requiring an intervention.  Of course, that would never fly, for reasons we all know well. Even if we were to consider the real reasons for NATO's incursion--oil, strategic military importance, etc.--Canada could still be a plausible target.  It won't happen because we are all to ready to give the Empire all it wants without a murmur. The day we don't, we could well become a red zone and we all know that too. We are a major world democracy totally dependent on a huge military empire. Go figure! 

If you read French, I strongly recomment Arabesque américaine: Le rôle des États-Unis dans les révoltes de la rue arabe written by Ahmed Bensaada and published by Michel Brulé Press, Montréal, 2011. Without minimizing the courage and importance of the Middle-East Springtime, it is a very different view  that helps put a number of things in perspective. I will, no doubt ,have more to say about this later. In English, a similar thesis is put forward by K.R. Bolton at http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23282  With all deference to the courage and success of popular movements in the Middle East, what seems to be significant is that an important amount of money and investment in formation was set aside by US interests to prepare leaders for these movements. While the movements may have retained their autonomy, and certainly could not have gone forward without the massive support of the population, the serious question to be raised is to what extent there has been an infiltration of the non-violence movement by official (and "officious") sectors in the United States in a geopolitical move to harness these movements to further US geo-political interests that, ultimately, are not the interest of the populations in the Middle East -- somewhat has happened earlier in Eastern Europe.

SENEGAL: A First View of Africa

With this reflection I begin a short series of reflections on my participation in the World social Forum and the World Forum on Theology and Liberation held in Dakar, Senegal February 4-11, 2011. (See the previous post.)  The series will reflect briefly on Africa and  the World Social Forum before turning to a longer reflection on Liberation Theology.

    Anyone who visits a country, let alone a continent, for the first time, needs to be very careful about saying too much. One week is hardly time to have even first impressions. Nevertheless it would be unfair not to say at least something.

     Africa has long been on my horizon. To step on its soil was a deeply moving experience that brought back the centuries of struggle that have marked the life of its people through colonization, slavery, supposed decolonization through independent States and then the whole sad history of “development.”

     There are many paths of reflections that could be developed. It was particularly moving to visit Goré Island and the Slave House from which men, women and children were shipped out to the “New World.” We were told that many threw themselves overboard and that the water in the bay turned red from the thrashing of the sharks. It is a history that puts into sharp reflief the courage of those who continue today to struggle that every person might live with dignity and respect.

    It was a particularly significant time to be in Africa: the Tunisian government had just fallen, Egypt was in the process of ousting its president and several other countries were entering into a period of major popular mobilization. It was important to discover what the engaged people of Africa were saying and the week at the two Forums, with presence of delegates from every continent, provided an opportunity for them to tell the world about their efforts.  After my few days there, I came away with a tremendous respect for their wisdom, commitment and capacity for organization. Slowly they are working their way out of the rule of dictators maintained in place by the complicity of our North American and European governments. As one Tunisian told us, “We have done our work; now it is up to you to get rid of the real dictators, the heads of your governments” who try to dictate to the world what is possible.  

     Many people asked where I was from and I always said, “Quebec.”  I was surprised to find that the Africans, Senegalese in particular, recognized the name right away.  “Oh yes,” one young street vendor said, “You are part of the francophonie,” that is to say part of our French-speaking family.  Being in Africa led me to see Quebec in a clearer light. As a minority people in North America who struggle to assert their place, there is a resonance with the struggles of Africa and Quebec was seen by those I met as a partner in this struggle. I was able to look at the world through different eyes and find other horizons.