and the tide rolls in ...

PM's policies hurt MacKay in Middle East
Toronto Star / James Travers / Ottawa (Jan 23, 2007)

If the longest journey begins with the smallest step then surely the most problematic ones start with missteps. Just ask Peter MacKay.

To make its small voice heard more loudly, Canada will have to say different things as it creates more innovative policies.

It could start by reminding Israel of its own wisdom: That peace is made between enemies, not friends. To begin countering terrorism effectively by recognizing it for what it is -- a timeless, vicious, political weapon. Most of all, Canada could be among the first to learn and proselytize the pivotal 21st-century lesson that the hoorah days of deciding differences on the battlefield, army versus army, are over.

PM's policies hurt MacKay in Middle East
Toronto Star / James Travers / Ottawa (Jan 23, 2007)

If the longest journey begins with the smallest step then surely the most problematic ones start with missteps. Just ask Peter MacKay.

Like many more seasoned Canadian politicians, the foreign minister is stumbling around the Middle East. His itinerary extends from Palestinians losing interest in what this country has to say to Israelis who have heard everything they need to know.

While he could be steadier on his feet, MacKay bears limited responsibility for the shaky impression.

After all, prime ministers now set Canada's international course and it was Stephen Harper who last year chose a more problematic, partisan, route.

Getting out in front of even George W. Bush, Harper was first to sever links and aid to the Palestinians' democratically elected Hamas administration. Then the prime minister rushed to endorse Israel's far from measured response to Hezbollah's reckless border provocations.

Those decisions came up short on historical perspective and current insight. Not surprisingly, they haven't worked out very well, except for those who benefit from chaos.

Daily life in Gaza City is more desperate than in, say, Kabul, and Palestinians are teetering on the precipice of civil war. Less than a year after yet another test between a traditional military and an innovative insurgency, Israel, its prime minister and Lebanon are weaker, Hezbollah and its state sponsors, Syria and Iran, are stronger.

It's patently unfair to blame any Canadian prime minister, let alone one new to the job and international complexities, for tectonic shifts in a chronically unstable region. As MacKay is being reminded, Ottawa is a bit Middle East actor that can, at best, play a constructive supporting role.

But the reasons for Harper's tilted policies remain as instructive as their implications are significant. In trying to seize political advantage by driving a wedge between Liberals and their Jewish supporters, Harper risked domestic ethnic tranquillity as well as Canada's limited foreign utility.

There were potential rewards. Eroding Liberal support is an understandable Conservative objective and standing shoulder-to-shoulder with allies is one of the ways Harper is projecting a different image for this country abroad and for his party at home.

Fairly enough, that leaves the ultimate judgment to voters. If the prime minister is lucky, they won't poke through the surface of prevailing myths.

Among the most popular are that we are at war with terrorism, that today's conflicts can be resolved with yesterday's methods and, most significantly, that the dominant colours in the international spectrum are black and white.

Together those myths fit a reassuring frame around a frightening world. They also distort the picture.

Terrorism is just another tactic, a time-tested vector for the desperate underdog's political aspirations. Had Canada applied its current Hamas strategy to the 1940s Middle East it would have isolated not only groups fighting to establish the state but also some of Israel's future elected leaders.

Troop and technological superiority are no longer reliable predictors of military or, ultimately, political victory. Israel, with the region's most sophisticated military, is no more successful in rooting out Hezbollah than the United States, the sole remaining superpower, is in making Iraq a model market democracy or NATO, with its collective muscle, is in defeating Afghanistan's Taliban.

It's the annoying hues of grey -- those shades of beliefs, values and experience -- that make a confusing world impossible to compartmentalize. Painting it black and white, while politically comforting, only masks the riot of colour underneath.

So, apart from demonstrating that Liberal defector Wajid Khan isn't Harper's main man on the Middle East, MacKay's journey is, depending on viewpoint, either political tourism or a fool's errand. His dubious mission is to chat with Palestinians now inclined to dismiss Canada and Israelis who know they can take this government for granted.

To make its small voice heard more loudly, Canada will have to say different things as it creates more innovative policies.

It could start by reminding Israel of its own wisdom: That peace is made between enemies, not friends. To begin countering terrorism effectively by recognizing it for what it is -- a timeless, vicious, political weapon. Most of all, Canada could be among the first to learn and proselytize the pivotal 21st-century lesson that the hoorah days of deciding differences on the battlefield, army versus army, are over.

Measure them as the first three steps on a long new journey.