News

Nobel laureate Jody Williams is in Canada this week to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the treaty to ban land mines, but she told The Globe's Gloria Galloway she is far from impressed with this country's recent efforts to promote world peace.

"My personal message would be 'Where's Canada's leadership in global issues right now?' " Ms. Williams said.

"Challenging the world over 10 years ago to negotiate a mine-ban treaty within the year was serious leadership on the part of the Canadian government. And it was very risky. And they carried it off."

But that kind of leadership does not seem to exist today, she said. "For example, there is a new initiative that should bring about a convention on cluster munitions by the end of May, 2008, and Canada is noticeably not leading in this initiative."

Canada did sign on last February to an international process to protect civilians from the impact of the massive packs of bomblets that have been used to deadly effect in Iraq, Kosovo and Lebanon but it was not among the first group of 30 countries to join the fight.

How do you feel about where Canada stands on the world stage? Do you think the Harper government is ventured too close to U.S. policies? What would you like to know about the continuing fight to ban land mines?

We're pleased that Ms. Williams will join us online at noon Friday EST to discuss these issues. Send your questions now, then return to read her replies.

Jody Williams is an activist, writer and teacher who won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1997 for her role in founding the International Campaign to Ban Landmines. The ICBL achieved its goal of an international treaty banning antipersonnel landmines during the diplomatic conference held in Oslo in September 1997. The treaty was signed that year in Ottawa.

Prior to starting the ICBL, Ms. Williams worked for 11 years to build public awareness about U.S. policy toward Central America. From 1986 to 1992, she developed and directed humanitarian relief projects as the deputy director of the Los Angeles-based Medical Aid for El Salvador. From 1984 to 1986, she was co-coordinator of the Nicaragua-Honduras Education Project, leading fact-finding delegations to the region. Previously, she taught English as a Second Language (ESL) in Mexico, the United Kingdom, and Washington, D.C.

Ms. Williams has a Master's Degree in International Relations from the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (Washington, D.C., 1984), a Master's Degree in Teaching Spanish and ESL from the School for International Training, (Brattleboro, Vermont, 1976), and a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Vermont (Burlington, Vermont, 1972).

Editor's Note: globeandmail.com editors will read and allow or reject each question/comment. Comments/questions may be edited for length or clarity. HTML is not allowed. We will not publish questions/comments that include personal attacks on participants in these discussions, that make false or unsubstantiated allegations, that purport to quote people or reports where the purported quote or fact cannot be easily verified, or questions/comments that include vulgar language or libellous statements. Preference will be given to readers who submit questions/comments using their full name and home town, rather than a pseudonym.

Christine Diemert, globeandmail.com writes: Ms. Williams, thanks for joining us online today. You are gathering with others in Ottawa this weekend to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the signing of the treaty banning the use, production, stockpiling and transfer of antipersonnel mines.

This evening your address is on Canada's place in the world. You told The Globe earlier this week you are disappointed about how you see the Conservative government having shifted the country's position on the world stage.

Would you like to elaborate on that point?

Jody Williams: Happy to elaborate. Canada has an international reputation as a peacekeeper and peace builder. It also led the way in banning land mines, for which all Canadian citizens should be proud. But on the new movement to ban cluster munitions, Canada is not a leader in the "Oslo Process" to result in a convention banning certain cluster munitions in 2008. Canadian citizens should be scratching their heads on this position.

Christine Diemert, globeandmail.com writes: How difficult is it to keep a government focused on an issue when popular opinion shifts so dramatically? For example, these days the environment seems to be everyone's focus, when 10 years ago some government leaders were questioning the science behind global warning.

Jody Williams: To keep governments focused requires public awareness on an issue. The environment is a critically important issue. But I would say in the environmental context, how a military leaves a battlefield at the end of a conflict is also an environmental issue. Leaving one million cluster munitions, for example, in Lebanon after the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict in 2006 is a humanitarian and environmental disaster. Canada needs to lead on banning cluster munitions, like it did on land mines. It has already begun destroying all its stockpiled cluster bombs, so why stay in the rear and not step up to leadership on this issue as all Canadian citizens should expect?

Richard Soley from Cochrane writes: Ms. Williams is committed to the protection of civilians but I would like to ask her how is the world to protect itself from the acts of terrorism that are committed by foreign nationals crossing borders to engage in sabotage, placing of IED's by any other name a mine, holding of civilian hostages etc. Mines could be used to shut down border crossings and help protect those engaged in humanitarian efforts such as the ISAF in Afghanistan. Unless the enemy is willing to sign and respect the treaty by not using these kinds of munitions then we effectively endanger our troops and help to prevent the humanitarian efforts of Nato forces. Why therefore should Canada continue to respect treaties that endanger our men and women?

Jody Williams: If land mines stopped cross-border infiltration, drug trafficking, etc, the world might be a different place. No serious military analyst would argue that antipersonnel land mines along borders stop terrorism.

Antipersonnel land mines would not have stopped the 19 men who flew planes into the Twin Towers in NYC or the Pentagon. Suicide bombers in Iraq and Afghanistan would not be deterred by antipersonnel land mines.

IEDs are a separate issue and are not antipersonnel land mines. 80% of the countries of the world are part of the Mine Ban Treaty. Essentially all global traffic in the weapons ceased in the mid-1990s. Even countries like Russia and China that have not yet signed have stopped producing land mines for export.

All change takes time. We have been remarkably successful on the land mine issue in a very short time because governments and civil society continue to work together to make sure the treaty is obeyed. Such partnerships, in my view, might more effectively tackle many global threats — and not just "terrorism" -- than the chaotic mess we are living today.

Elsie Dean from Burnaby BC Canada writes: Ms. Williams Do you believe that the governments of the NATO countries bear a great deal of responsibility for Malalai Joya's security and to call on the Afghan parliament to reinstate her to her seat in the Afghan parliament. They created and prop up the government that has allowed her to be expelled from parliament. She has been the victim of four assassination attempts, and must travel clandestinely and under tight security.

Jody Williams: I think if she requests security from NATO they should provide it. Yes, pressure should be brought to bear on the Karzi government regarding her seat in parliament. But any and all efforts on her behalf should reflect what she herself wants, not what we or NATO think she wants. I met her recently at a women's conference on peace in the US and she very clearly discussed the threats against herself and the risks she endures by working to change the Afghan system. She expressed a belief that she would be assassinated, but was returning to her country. She is a very brave and committed woman and her needs and desires must be respected.

Art Jaszczyk from Thornhill Canada writes: This week in Annapolis, US President George W Bush announced a fresh Middle East peace process. Israel and the Palestinian Authority will 'make all efforts' to reach a final agreement by the end of 2008. More meetings are planned in Paris, Moscow and the region. But are these talks a major advance toward peace, or a dangerous smokescreen?

Jody Williams: I wish I had a crystal ball and could answer that question. Only the actions — not words — but words followed by actions will be the ultimate factor to determine if real movement toward peace emerges from the Annapolis meeting or if another failed attempt at peace only fuels desperation, hopelessness and more violence in the region.

Karine LeBlanc from Ottawa Canada writes: Dear Ms. Williams. As an active volunteer working for the cause to ban land mines and cluster munitions, I find that one of the biggest obstacles when rallying support is not to convince people that these weapons should not be used, but rather that it is a problem that not only the government should take a strong stance on but also Canadian citizens. What are some of the things a person can do to make this issue more relatable to Canadians who have had the luxury of not worrying about such threats to their personal security? Thank you for your time. Karine LeBlanc

Jody Williams: Hi, Karine. Just as Canadians worked through Mines Action Canada — which is part of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines and a founder of the Cluster Munition Coalition — to build public awareness on land mines so citizens would become involved and pressure the government on the issue, awareness needs to be raised about cluster munitions. Using this 10th anniversary of the Mine Ban Treaty to both celebrate the "Success in Progress" of the mine ban movement to raise awareness about cluster munitions and why they too need to be banned is an excellent opportunity. Canadians in Canada may not have to worry about them as a threat, but Canadian peacekeepers might very well face these insidious weapons if they continue to engage in more combat missions such as in Afghanistan or if the cluster proliferation becomes a global crisis like land mine proliferation did. By banning clusters now, we have a unique opportunity to stop deadly contamination before it proliferates If you aren't part of MAC, join now. If you are part, keep up the good work

Larry Kazdan from Vancouver Canada writes: The Campaign for a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (www. unpacampaign.org) envisages the creation of a citizens' watchdog at the UN as a first transitional step towards a world parliament (modelling the development of the European Parliament in the European Union). Do you think Canada should play a key role in this initiative as a means of promoting democracy and international law, even if the concept is not supported by large countries such as the United States or China?

Jody Williams: I don't believe that any country that supports any issue should "wait" for the "important" countries like the US or China to be on board before taking action. Canada didn't wait when it launched the Ottawa Process that brought the world the Ottawa Mine Ban Treaty 10 years ago and the world is a better place for that leadership. Canada neeeds to exert the same leadership on cluster munitions. If Canadian citizens want the government to play a leading role in establishing a UN Parliamentary Assembly, then they should press their government to do so. Because it is what they believe to be the right thing, not just so they can join the "large countries" on issues.

Small town Canada guy from Canada writes: What do you think of Richard Fitoussi's efforts to keep the land mine museum going in Cambodia? He is a friend of mine and has been back and forth many times a year. Michael Russo, Clinton

Jody Williams: I have met Richard briefly, but haven't had the opportunity to see his museum. I'd say if the people of Cambodia believe such a museum to be important, then efforts should be made to keep it going. There is an opportunity to ask Cambodian land mine survivors over the next few days what they think — they are the most important opinions on this, in my view.

Darry Toews from Morden Canada writes: Hello Jody, The United States Campaign to Ban Landmines has been active in the US to increase public awareness about the landmine issue and the US position on the issue. Do you think that given the awareness that now exists in the US amongst the public and elected officials, that the US is closer to joining the treaty once a new administration takes office after the 2008 elections?

Jody Williams: Anything is possible. The US Campaign has worked diligently on the issue, as well as on cluster bombs, but I've not heard the position on the Mine Ban Treaty of any of the presidential candidates. IF the US Campaign hasn't asked them to publicly state their positions, they need to so do ASAP so they can be held accountable.

west slope from Greater Vancouver Canada writes: You would think that the military advantages of deploying dirty (non-selective) anti-personnel vectors like cluster bombs would be outweighed by the political and diplomatic disadvantages. Particularly in the case of the USA. Two questions: 1.) What are the battlefield tactical advantages of dirty anti-personnel weapons? Is it terror? 2.) Do western military forces still deploy anti-civilian strategies and tactics because ordinary citizens do not understand the mathematics behind aerial bombing, for example? Or do you believe that everybody instinctively understands the probability calculations?

Jody Williams: If you mean by "dirty AP weapons" cluster bombs, I do not believe in the battles of today's conflicts there is a tactical advantage to the use of cluster munitions. The US deployed 2 million clusters in its invasion of Bagdad — firing indiscriminately into civilian populated areas — a direct violation of international law. Some US military refused to use clusters in Bagdad, recognizing the illegality of firing into civilian sites as well as the threat to their own troops of moving through those cluster munition fields.

Ordinary citizens who pay attention to conflict clearly understand the anti-civilian tactics of the use of cluster munitions. That is why there is the campaign to ban them and the Oslo Process to give us a cluster munition treaty by 2008.

Christine Diemert, globeandmail.com: Thanks to Ms. Williams for taking time out of her full agenda this weekend to join us today.