As I was writing my long blog entry/column about the Manley report this morning on our nation’s Afghanistan mission, I was also struck by the magnitude of the answer that John Manley gave to a reporter in the official news conference, broadcast live earlier this morning.
Here is that answer in full, as transcribed from my recording of the news conference. Remembering that Manley is a Liberal, see how it juxtaposes against the Liberal Frenchman Stephane Dion’s knee-jerk reaction and his mendacious definition of Canada’s “traditions”. Manley has a rather different take:
Reporter Brian Lilly(?) with CFRB Toronto […]: Mr. Manley, this panel has been described by critics as a panel that rubberstamped the “Conservative” view of what should be done in Afghanistan. You’ve linked it to the Liberal government heritage not only of Martin and Chretien but going back to Pearson. Are these recommendation in this report something that Liberals can or should be able to get on board with—is this report within a Liberal tradition?
John Manley: I can’t—I think this is absolutely within a Liberal tradition. Understand, as I said at the very outset: this is a United Nations mission. Under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter. Lester Pearson’s fingerprints are all over the U.N. Charter. It preceded his innovation for which he received the Nobel Peace Prize by ten years.
It would be nice to have a peacekeeping mission in Kandahar. Unfortunately, as we’ve said in our report, there isn’t a “peace” to keep there. But the authorization for this action by the United Nations is FIRMLY in the tradition that was fathered by Lester Pearson.
As I said earlier, I believe in a strong international role for Canada. I think this world is getting more complicated, more difficult, more dangerous. I don’t think those issues should just be resolved by nuclear superpowers. I think that countries like Canada have an important, meaningful role to play: projecting our values, standing for the rights of individuals, the human security of people whose own governments can’t protect them. That’s something that we as Canadians have talked a lot about, and we believe in. So I believe this is FIRMLY in that tradition.
And what’s our alternative?! I mean one thing I’ll tell you about what we’ve said in this report is: this is not—you know, you can’t turn the Ray-o-Stat on this—you either stay, and you say you mean it, and get you get something that we can call “success”, which is giving the Afghan government the ability to maintain its own security like any sovereign country should be able to do, or you get out!
And if we get out, what’s the next mission? When are we going to say “no” to the United Nations, when they come forward and say “here’s where we need troops”? We’re a rich country! We’ve got to do some of this stuff! Would it be in Darfur? Well, you know, regrettably the government of Sudan doesn’t WANT anyone in Darfur and let me tell you: it would be just as dangerous! It would be a combat mission! Would it be in Rwanda? We didn’t have a combat mission in Rwanda, we had “blue helmets” [U.N. peacekeeping troops] and the result was genocide!
You know the world isn’t a pretty place. But I happen to believe that the people who came before me in the Liberal Party that believed in a strong role for Canada on the international stage would say there are times when we have to COUNT. There are times when it MATTERS. We’re not prepared to RETREAT under the U.S. missile shield and live in “fortress North America” . We’re prepared to go be OUT there and we’re prepared to pay the PRICE. Because that’s what you expect from a country like Canada.
That’s what I’d say.
An additional question was asked by that same reporter which enabled Manley to make another good observation or two, concerning the Liberal and more particularly the NDP leader Jack Layton’ asinine stance, wherein in order to bolster the rest of his stupidity, he cites some of the latest liberal media polls showing that Canadians want the mission to end:
Reporter: If I can ask you finally … you said the Prime Minister’s got to “sell this” but we live in a sound-bite culture, and this is a complex mission, so … what does he have to say to Canadians?
Manley: You know … it’s very easy to say, well, public opinion says, you know, “pull the troops out”. But my experience is that people don’t necessarily vote on their opinion on a given issue. People understand that this is complicated. They know that. Many of them are going to vote for the party that they think can handle an issue that’s complicated. I never felt in my riding of Ottawa South where I had a very well-informed very well-educated riding—if you asked them their opinion on ANYTHING, they had an opinion. But they basically expected me to be informed and to do the things I thought were right, and to justify that every couple of years when they had the opportunity to fire me. I think that just reading the latest poll—should the troops stay, or should the troops go—can mislead people into thinking that that’s exactly what people are going to vote for. I think they’re going to look for: how are you going to manage Canada’s role in the world; how are you going to deal with complicated international issues, and I think the leaders of our parties have to think of the fact that as Prime Minister, sometimes you’ve got to do things that in the short run are unpopular but in the long term reflect your ability to look after the interests of the country.
Manley Report Coverage at PTBC up to now:
• Manley: “…not that I would ever be critical of the media…”. Well therein lays problem #97.
• Manley Report’s Pamela Wallin also had good words
• Manley report’s Paul Tellier speaks to lack of balance in reporting the Afghanistan mission
• John Manley’s strong, good words: seemingly plays against Team Dion’s Modern Liberal Party stance
• Post-Manley report: Dion looks, sounds embarrassed, sheepish, and defeated
• Know the enemy: Stephane Dion lies—says Canada’s “tradition” is to train folks, pile bricks
PTBC was founded by Mr. Johannesen in 2000.
Contact Mr. Johannesen about this article using this form. Please refer to article's title.
FOLLOW @JoelJohannesen ON X!
- Say something. - Friday October 25, 2024 at 6:03 pm
- Keep going, or veer right - Monday August 26, 2024 at 4:30 pm
- Hey Joel, what is “progressive?” - Friday August 2, 2024 at 11:32 am
