According to Those Who Know, who are never mistaken, our Prime Minister has emerged from last week's summits as a major player on the world's stage, perhaps indeed the key one. Think LeBron Harper. As one immediate consequence, the PM's long-standing obsession with Canada winning a seat on the United Nations Security Council should now be a slam dunk.
There are 15 council seats, five permanent members (P5) each wielding a mighty veto and ten chosen for two years by the General Assembly. With the election for the rotating seats to be held in the fall, and consistent with my patriotic duty to stand behind my government, this column will lay out over the coming weeks some of the positions Canada can be expected to take once it secures that precious seat.
The Security Council matters. It's the most important body in the world when it comes to international issues of conflict, peace and security. In international law, only the Security Council is legally allowed to take military action against a perceived threat to peace and security. That's why the 2003 invasion of Iraq by George Bush and Tony Blair was illegal, a violation of international law, even trumping God's instructions to each of the men.
Only the Security Council can establish or approve peacekeeping operations or impose sanctions against rogue states. Its writ covers the world, and there are Security Council resolutions related to conflicts in every corner of the globe.
Naturally there are limits. The council hasn’t the enormous, often destructive, economic clout of the World Bank and IMF, nor can it challenge the might of the American armed forces (see Iraq, above). The veto power of the P5 – China, the United States, Britain, France and Russia – is clearly anachronistic and intolerable, although the chance that any of them would surrender or share that power is less than negligible. That the five also happen to be the world's leading arms peddlers is one of life's enduring little ironies. They may be morally illegitimate, as they demonstrated in Rwanda and Darfur, but they are the rule of law for our turbulent planet.
So love it or not, the Security Council is where a great deal of the world's action is, and where Stephen Harper naturally belongs. The Prime Minister has spared no amount of taxpayer dollars dispatching senior government officials around the world systematically lobbying for Canada against Portugal to win the next available seat. And given Mr. Harper's record on the world stage – you know, leadership on climate change and Middle East peace initiatives, for example – it should be no contest.
The Harper government urged the World Bank to defer the debt reduction deal, but luckily the bank refused. Let us note this historic moment when the World Bank is more flexible than the government of Canada.
Here's another example of what the Security Council can expect from Stephen Harper's Canada. The council is deeply engaged with the troubled Democratic Republic of Congo. Of course the United States, followed by France, bears substantial responsibility for Congo's woes. But never mind that for now. The council runs a huge peacekeeping operation in the DRC. Canada was asked to head this mission; Mr. Harper said no. It was suggested that Canada provide troops; Mr. Harper flatly said no. Not a moment of public discussion was held. Canada no longer does peacekeeping. I'm sure the Prime Minister will know how to explain this constructive response to his new Security Council chums.
