Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Stephane Dion on the Middle East

STÉPHANE DION

Special to Globe and Mail Update

Latest comment posted at 9:25 PM EDT 06/08/06

The Liberals and Israel: friendship based on frankness, Stéphane Dion says ...Read the full article

This conversation is semi-moderated What is moderation? | How do I report a comment?

  1. Mr Fijne from Calgary, Canada writes: Catering to everybody in the great Liberal tradition... The KEY word is 'apparent indifference' used to qualify the response of the government to the difficulties of Lebanon. 'Apparent' to the Gliberals of course but not to anyone else. Mr Dion is walking on eggs here and therefore his backstabbing of Graham exercise has shown him as a weak disloyal candidate and has shown that despite the media relays of the liberals, the strongest words are 'apparent indifference' and that doesn't really move crowds... The Globe is getting us all the candidates this week after 3 weeks of silence... there must be a line up at the editorial desk!
  2. 20 20 from Canada writes: This was an excellent comment by Stephane Dion. I am heartened to see some of the Liberal leadership candidates finally making a few of their views and thought processes known to Canadians. I wish they would all give us a greater idea of where they stand and what they stand for, not only on this isssue, but others that matter to Canadians such as Canadian sovereignty, foreign ownership, the healthcare issue, etc. I would encourage this of the leadership candidates in particular, but also of representatives from our political parties in general. By the way, the different members of the Liberal Party contributing to the democratic discussion in this public way demonstrates to me a greater inherent respect for democracy than Harper's authoritarian filtering and censorship of his MPs' views.
  3. H M from Perth, Australia writes: Exactly right #2, in every respect.
  4. Gaffer E from Ottawa, Canada writes: Dion is noticeably mute on what Israel and the international community SHOULD do to stop Hezbollah's daily barrage of hundreds of rockets into northern Israel and secure the return of the two abducted Israeli soldiers (remember, the instigating factor???). Even if one accepts Dion's proposition that Israel is only doing itself harm by continuing it's military offensive in Lebanon, it is unacceptable to Israel (as it would be to any country) to continue to live under Hezbollah's terror and constant attacks. Since Hezbollah is not willing to return the two kidnapped soldiers and halt their storm of rockets into Israel, what does Dion suggest Israel do -- continue to live in bomb shelters?
  5. Nick Walker from Vancouver, Canada writes: Excellent viewpoint. The Ancient Greeks wrote volumes concerning the results of hubris and excessive behavior. 'In all things, monderation'. The ancients new this and today we are just beginning to understand the wisdom they spoke of thousands of years ago - amazing. I fear that the excessive response of Israel and the United States threatens world stability and if Western Foreign Policies continue to follow the path of 'Might is Right' and continue to trample on moderate and legal foundations than I believe we are all facing a very bloody history to follow.
  6. Peter Cromerovich from Calgary, Canada writes: How nice to read a quiet, thoughtful essay amongst all the inflammatory rhetoric and hatred of late. To this essay I would add that with an enquiring mind, a small measure of cynicism, some intuition to detect specious arguments and duplicitous writings and nothing more than Google search engine I was almost but not absolutely sure there were no WMD's of consequence in Iraq and 100% sure that nothing was a threat to homeland USA. Filtering the intelligence that returned from the coalition advance into Iraq, it was obvious that no precautions against WMD's were being taken and with good reason -none were needed. I have to assume that Mr. Harper was privy to far more robust intelligence than my pitiful gathering, which leads me to wonder on what premise he wanted to drag Canada into such a dishonest war. I remember my opinions and predictions of civil war in Iraq were very unpopular in Calgary at that time and so I can sympathize with the flack the Liberal party is taking from those now blindly pro-Israel and anti-Lebanon or anti-Arab. I must also add there are hints that Israeli Intelligence warned against a premature invasion of Lebanon because data was lacking on the Hezbollah warren of underground bunkers and they feared underestimating its capabilities. Time will tell but I predict Hezbollah will wear Israel down, but if this conflict should widen (Russia backs Syria to some degree) we may, amongst events too horrible to dwell upon, be looking at a global recession. That will affect everyone, so let peace prevail. Note to Rabid Righties: I have never voted Liberal or NDP.
  7. Les Caine from brampton, Canada writes: Prime Minister Borden threatened the British with withdrawal fron WW1 due to senseless Canadian casualties. Foreign Minister Pearson challenged the right of Britain and France to make war over the Suez canal. Prime Minister Pearson in a speech at an American university challenged the American decent into the Viet Nam war. Nixon called Trudeau an 'A' hole but followed him to Red China. Chretien had reservations regarding the Iraq adventure and refused Canada's participation. The question is whether it is enough to just not participate and to say as diplomatically as possible why?
  8. jc pomerleau from Montreal, Canada writes: Dont be full the Liberal are siding with Israel all the way through. In 2004 they refuse to vote for the condemnation of a clear violation of international law the unilateral settling of the border by Israel: the building of the wall of shame. They then show there true colors and it s a backing of the zionist policy of Israel(the core of the problem). The only difference with Liberal and Harper is they are more hypocrite, therefore desearve less respect.
  9. Carlos Diaz from Unionville, Canada writes: I fully agree with #2. To Gaffer E (#4): The rain of rockets on Israel started after the attacks on Lebanon, which started after Hezbolah captured two Israeli soldiers in Israel. Of course Israel says 'kidnapped'. The Israelis will eventually win the war because they have overwhelmingly superior military strenght and nobody will stop them if the US does not. They are already winning the war of public relations. They are all over the media and they use the words terrorists, war on terrorism, right to defend themselves, defenders of democracy etc. They conveniently forget they have been subjecting the Palestinians to a long a brutal occupation which by the way is the root cause of all the problems Israel has with its Arabs neighbours today. The Israelis have 'arrested', not kidnapped thousands of Arabs and have them in their jails, they destroy their homes at will, have killed children and women in the occupied teritories covered up or justify their action as 'defending themselves'. No wonder they have problems with the so called terrorists.
  10. Rob Misek from Whitby, Canada writes: How is a measured response considered unconditional support? Harper has been anything but indifferent to the plight of the Lebanese people. The fact is that one of 'our friends' is right and one of them wrong. None of you live in Israel and are being subjected to the constant threat of terrorist attacks from a neighbor that swears to 'push you into the sea'. One of our friends is defending itself. What kind of friend are you? I suggest you consider counselling our other friend (Lebanon) to denounce terrorism and support Israels right to exist. That is all it will take to enable a stabilizing force in the region. This is the Conservative position. Why don't the blitherals focus on this simple fact for all to see instead of trying to shamelessly lever this difficult situation to their political advantage.
  11. Job Patstone from Quebec City, Canada writes: How nice of Mr. Dion to write this article, and of Mr. Graham to have written his yesterday. I am an ardent Liberal, but I find these letters a bit rhetorical. As usual it is always easy to comment on 'after the fact' events. Some people mentioned yesterday that the Liberals are fence sitters when it comes to the Middle East and it appears this is a perfect exmple, as was Mr Grahams letter. But then neither of these gentlemen would make a good leader, so what they have to say, for me, is almost irrelevant. As I had once mentioned, I admire Mr Harper for having taken a stand, and oddly enough, since Peter Mackay's speech this week, I notice that a lot of people, are now sympathizing with Israel, since it was Hezbollah who threw the first stone. So the Liberals should be careful, 'wishy washy' will always be 'wishy washy' from 'wishy washy' people. Jean Chretien took a stand for Iraq, and he was a Liberal, so there are Liberals that can take stands, obviously not Mr. Dion or Mr. Graham. So let's see which one can stand alone.
  12. J L from Toronto, Canada writes: It appears that the Liberal candidates, regardless of their opnions, put a lot more thought into their analysis and views of the current conflict. The Conservative government seems to opt for the Geroge W (simple is best) analysis of events.
  13. Cynthia Nurse from St. Thomas, Canada writes: It is my belief that 'Peace on Earth' is an unachievable expectation of human kind, regardless of where on earth you may live. Thankfully I live in this great nation where I have seen people become more receptive to different beliefs. Unfortunately the same mind set in not shared by most people of the middle east, this has not change for a very long time. So why should we as Canadians continue to put our 'peacekeepers in harms way? Especially when the more we try to assist the 'Peace Process' it is apparent to me being in the middle fuels the current situation. The more the flames fuel the more civiaian casualities. I'm thankful that many Canadains were helped to escape this conflict. I just wish that the UN troops were part of the process.
  14. S M from Saint Louis (and Montreal), United States writes: Pretty much right on the money. Encouraging Israel to puruse an attack that is against their best interests and results in hundreds of deaths and billions of dolars in damage is not the act of a friend. I find comment #4 interesting. Should destruction be the fallback position when you can't think of anything else to do? In fact, I think the real solution lay in realizing that the Lebanese only just expelled the Syrians very recently (remember the 'Cedar Revolution'?) and disarming militias takes time. Much diplomatic pressure could have been put to begin weakening Hezbollah and setting u pan international force. In fact, the threat of an Israeli invasion would have been more powerful than its execution. Indeed, without an Israeli invasion, Hezbollah would have come to be seen as an alien force, rather than the indigenous defenders they now appear to be. They would have lost popular support gradually, and a more robust interntional force could have interdicted the flow of arms. Unfortuantely, there was (and is) no quick fix; an invasion is no suubstitute for a solution.
  15. D Fernandes from Toronto, Canada writes: #4, it's not just what you do, but HOW you do it that matters. A number of commentators (including e.g. US conservatives) have suggested that instead of massive aerial bombardment (which destroys civilian infrastructure, goes astray, etc.) Israel should have committed ground troops from the outset. That is, Israel of course had a right to go in under the circumstances, but should have done it differently. The massive bombing created a huge number of refugees and destroyed civilian infrastructure. Hezbollah has not been destroyed, and unfortunately in years to come the bombing may lead to greater support for Hezbollah or its ilk amongst Lebanese. I read a quote recently, something to the effect of 'if a guerilla survives, he's won'. By that standard, Hezbollah is 'winning'. Especially since it will now probably be even more popular. It might be interesting to re-read some of the post-1982 analysis of Israel and Lebanon. If I recall correctly, when Israel first went into Lebanon it was popular among Lebanese, but Israel made the mistake of 'overstaying its welcome'. If it had acted differently, it would have succeeded in its security goals and not created the discontent which fueled the creation of Hezbollah. Similar to what Stephane Dion says, I hope that I am wrong and that current Israeli strategy and tactics work, Hezbollah and its ilk are destroyed, Lebanon returns to peace, etc.
  16. Robin Adams from Ottawa, Canada writes: Mr Dion, the Liberal party of Canada has long been a firm supporter of Israeli expansionist policies and has been anything but impartial. So in the upcoming leadership race you see an opportunity to marshall support from the Montreal jewish community by justifying the most rapid, expansionist and reactionary polices of the Ohlmert/Bush/Blair team? The only reason Canada didn't go to war with the Americans and British in Iraq is simply that we (the public) refused to accept the BS presented by the American administration as sufficient reason for undermining the UN Charter and engaging in an illegal war for an oil grab. Liberal 'leadership' did the next best thing and got us involved in Afghanistan which was only slightly more palatable to the Canadian public and now even that mimimal support is eroding. (Another country that represents ZERO threat to us!) Now Canadians are being killed by Israelis, we are offerred cheap bs as an excuse to start another war once again, the whole of Southern Lebanon is being ethnically-cleansed and people like yourself are doing your best to blame the victims. I don't see any 'good' coming from this campaign by wiping out the entire population of a region. You know a lot of English don't particularly like Quebec or Quebecers... The FLQ kidnapped Pierre Laporte but it doesn't follow that we should drop leaflets all over the Province telling you all to go back to France and then completely anihilate all your roads, brides, airports and infrastructure. Also a lot of Quebecers happen to be of lebanese origin... next time you open your mouth or publish a letter I suggest you think carefully on their feelings in this whole matter and show a little compasion and justice for their grievous losses perpetrated by the Israelis.
  17. J L from Toronto, Canada writes: Rob #10 - Saying the response is measured is essentially blind support because Israel is using such overwhelming force in civilian areas. Anyone who would say that so much civilan death and destruction is measured is obviously giving Israel the green light to do whatever it wants. Read Patrick Martin's analysis in today's G&M and you'll see that there is not much more destruction Israel can do unless they use nukes.
  18. Jim Whittier from Hamilton, Canada writes: Mr Dion criticizes 'Stephen Harper's ... apparent indifference to the plight of the Lebanese people'. This is a cheap shot and unbecoming of a candidate that could become Prime Minister. No one, not Conservative or Liberal is indifferent to the death and suffering of innocents. Mr Dion crossed the line on this wild accusation and owes the new Prime Minister an apology.
  19. morgan lamberth from augusta,ga, United States writes: Dion and J.L. are right. And Cheney- Bush are wrong !
  20. The Philosopher King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Anyone else here note that those supporting the continued destruction of Lebanon are the same people who always seem to be so angry about everything? I don't know about you, but every decision I've ever made while angry turned out to be a pretty dumb move. Stephane Dion's article today and Bill Graham's article yesterday have proven to me how much we lost when the Conservatives came to power. Hopefully this serves as a warning to the Liberal party that if they do not stay accountable, Canadians will toss them out on their ear, even if the alternative is distastful to most. These events in the middle east have proven to me at least that the Conservatives are too green and too self-righteous to run the government of a country which at its heart is inclusive, thoughtful and compassionate. Steven Harper's decisions may reflect the opinion of those who wish to force their 'righteous' opinion on others, but he does not reflect the views of those who remember that a fair and just society is the result of respect for differences, not the imposition of one's ideological views on those who disagree.
  21. Joshua Albert from Toronto, Canada writes: A unilateral cease-fire - and this is what Dion is suggesting - would only embolden Hezbollah to bring in more munitions. Noone really knows what the best course of action is. The Israeli's have the most at stake - national survival - and way more experience in these matters. They also have better intelligence. History has shown that land captured in battle can be traded for lasting peace - most notably the Sinai Peninsula. No such success can yet be attributed to the policy being suggested by Mr. Dion. Dion and others can suggest that an alternate course might be better - but it seems that they are more intent on scoring domestic political points than really helping the situation in Palestine.
  22. Jimmy Agar from Osaka, Jp, Japan writes: Thank god we have a PRINCIPLED leader like Steve who will take strong stances on issues of importance. Who cares if he ignores the history of the Middle East and makes his decision based on events of the past few weeks. Who cares if he supports a nation who is in violation of scores of UN resolutions. Who cares if for every Israeli killed by either Palestinians or Lebanese the IDF is sure to kill 10 in revenge. The 'terrorists' may target civilians but somehow the compassionate Israelis ALWAYS kill 10 times as many. (as an example see both entifada death tolls). Just like Bush, Harper is a man of principle and back bone and evenhandedness ('waffling') just won't do.
  23. NA E from Buckhorn, Canada writes: Well, we could argue on and on as to 'who threw the first stone'. To me, it's more important to think about all the innocents being killed, horribly wounded, and displaced; about the deliberate bombing of infrastructure and therefore the inability of aid workers to help; of the bombing of oil storage tanks AND the berm that was constructed to hold the oil from going into the Mediterranean Sea should there be a leak, and of the leak that kills wildlife and a tourism industry; of the destruction of the peoples' future. 'Lucid friendship' - we could all use some of that.
  24. shaun w from Canada writes: I have a few things i would like to point out. I keep hearing people complain about how the israeli soldiers were 'kidnapped' instead of 'captured'. Here's the definition of kidnapped from a website: 'take away to an undisclosed location against their will and usually in order to extract a ransom' Since they were taken in order to get a prisoner exchange, it sure seems to fit the definition to me. Also, just because Stephen Harper and President Bush agree on this, it does not mean that Harper is Bush's 'lapdog'. By that definition, Paul Martin and Jean Chretien were just Jaque Chirac's 'lapdog'. Martin even more so since he thought Canada should be in Iraq when the war started, but changed his mind when he became Prime Minister.
  25. A Gibson from Calgary, Canada writes: #9. Carlos, you seem to be forgetting the dozens and dozens of rockets that have rained down on northern Israel from Hezbollah since the Israeli withdrawl in 2000 that preceeded the current hostilities. And what long and brutal occupation are you talking about? The Palestinians rejected a state of their own in 1937, 1948, 1967, 1982, 1993 and 2000. Since 1967, when the occupation of the WB and Gaza began, Palestinans has several times had a choice between their own state and the 'long and brutal occupation'. Each time they chose to continue the occupation. And 'kidnapping' Palestinian women and children. Come on. Since when does arresting suicide bombers (who happen to be women or under the age of 18) constitute 'kidnapping'? I'm of Irish descent and I can't imagine advocating rocket attacks on the UK and demand that the UK release all Irish women and young offenders from UK jails. Its nonsensical in the extreme. However, when it comes to critisizing Israel, the nonsensical seems to rule the day.
  26. sheila whitzman from westmount, quebec, writes: It is always welcome to hear from Stephane Dion. Although I feel Israel had no choice but to respond to Hezbollah's unprovoked attack on Israeli soil, and to respond totally, nevertheless I appreciate Mr. Dion's thoughts. As usual they are sincere and thoughtful. Would that Israel's enemies were similar to the Quebec-ROC problem or the U.S. economic bullying of Canada and everyone else who dares get in their way, Unfortunately the Arabs are a different enemy, out to 'wipe Israel off the map', as Ahmajinedad so openly states, and as other Arab states (some of them) show in their actions. Mr. Dion had my vote as Liberal l;eader, and eventual Prime Minister of Canada, because of his lucid and brave Clarity Act, and he still has it. I for one am ready to trust him all the way. Sheila Whitzman, Westmount, Qc.
  27. Roger Waters from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Mr. Dion seems to be a rare politician in that he was ready and willing, when the situation in Israel and Lebanon first developed, to comment with a thoughtful contribution of his opinion. He is showing leadership by following up on his initial commentary by bringing further detail to his position. If only Mr. Harper and the other candidates for the leadership of Mr. Dion's party were able to so quickly and thoughtfully contribute to the political dialogue in this country, we as Canadians could be proud of our political representatives. Having a well thought out position on this situation is the only way that Canada will be able to help Israel and Lebanon to move forward.
  28. Caitlin Townsend from Peterborough, ON, Canada writes: Regardless of one's political preference, it is commendable that we have seen, at the very least, commentary from the Liberals. Liberal leadership candidate Michael Ignatieff wrote a wonderful article two days ago regarding the need for a ceasefire; Bill Graham, Leader of the Liberal Party, wrote yesterday condemning Harper for compromising Canada's historical 'middle-man' position and; now today we find another well-thought out article written by Liberal leadership candidate Stephane Dion. What have Canadians been offered by our current government, the Conservatives? Barely any commentary from the PM himself (I guess he hasn't gotten the scripts yet from Dubya?) and a closed door Conservative caucus meeting filled with Conservative MPs (note: Harper didn't even show up!) instructed to keep their mouths shut. How can the Conservatives continue to preach democracy around the world if they won't even encourage it in Canada?
  29. Wal Nussbaum from Outremont (QC), Canada writes: As for those commenting on 'after the fact': memories are short, and Mr. Dion has brought good historical perspective to the debate. Israeli action is ineffective, unless the goal is to make enemies.
  30. Political Junkie from Canada writes: It's interesting to see the energy expended on parsing each sentence of our politicians on this issue. One could be trapped into thinking that their opinions on this actually matter.
  31. chandra prakash from Montreal, Canada writes: Mr Dion: Thanks for your lucid opinion-piece. There are many of us who've posted opinions here strongly critical of Israeli State policies, simply because they donot promote peace for Israeli citizens amongst its ME neighbours. We're cognisant of the fact that peace and security for citizens of Israel, paramount as it is for obvious reasons, cannot be achieved so long as it refuses to address the historic Biblical wrongs done to the Palestinian people ( and now to the Lebanese as well) for the past 60 years. A true friend of Israel should encourage (like Uri Avnery, Finkelstein, Chomsky, et al ...) to engage with its neighbours in a spirit of respect and sensitivity, thus to insure mutual security and prosperity; in stead of seeing them as terrorists or life-hating mutants from another galaxy. Of all the current crop of Liberal Party leadership aspirants, I find your stated positions as being the most rational, and in the best interests of our country.
  32. gary wilson from Calgary, writes: These well-thought out essays are insightful and interesting. Dion’s position is rational and has plenty of historical support. I'd like to read a similarly detailed piece on our government's position written by Harper or MacKay as opposed to the inane buzz words and pointless partisan mudslinging we’re left with in 12 second news clips.
  33. PJ Casey Jardine from Canada, Canada writes: Why have the liberal candidates not expressed their views on the Middle East? I believe that their membership would like to know just where each of them stand and why. I have come to the comclusion that a lot of people are right in stating that the liberal party must check the direction of the polls before they will take a stance and express their opinions. People are more entitled to the candidates opinions than the candidates are entitled to the opinion of the membership as an election makes the leadership not the other way around.
  34. Allon Riczker from toronto, Canada writes: To #9, I have a couple of issues with your viewpoint: 1. Hizbollah's publicly-stated goal was to remove Israel from Lebanon. Israel withdrew in 2000. Yet, attacks, snipings and kidnappings did not subside. 2. Israel has been faced with terror since its inception in 1948, specifically with unprovoked attacks by arab governments and a multitude of cross-border incursions by the Egyptian-backed terrorist Fedayeen, in which thousands of innocents died. This went on well before the '67 war in which Israel took over the West Bank and Gaza, in other words, the start of the occupation. What then, pray tell, was the root cause of the Fedayeen, other than the expressed desire to wipe Israel off the map? probably the same one the Hizbollah now espouses. Your argument, which is the same one shared by many of Israel's detractors, is as hollow as it is inaccurate. Please study your history before making such outrageous and inaccurate claims.
  35. Alec Owen from Canada writes: Knee-jerk support for one's state, religion or group is always a mistake. Sometimes it is impossible to resist the headlong rush of one's fellows in a certain direction. Sometimes as in the case of a herd of buffalo one just can't see the edge of the precipice one is approaching. That was the case as was noted when Israel first invaded and occupied Lebanon.
  36. Alec Owen from Canada writes: Somebody who has not been paying attention or who is purposely trying to rewrite history says, 'Since Hezbollah is not willing to return the two kidnapped soldiers' Please note:Hezbollah at the beginning of this fight offered to exchange the two soldiers for Palestinians who are being kept in Israel's jails in many cases without benefit of trial. Just like those in the USA's Guantanamo prison.
  37. Colin Hebb from Bridgewater, NS, writes: An excellent piece on the current situation and one that finally touches on the real solution to this problem and the issue of terrorism worldwide: listening. It is becoming more and more clear that the more we fight and the more we ignore the reasons for terrorism, the stronger it becomes. At this rate, we will easily be in a new world war long before we ever extinguish terrorism. So, why go down this road? M. Dion clearly shows an understanding for this, which will reflect very well amongst people across the whole country.
  38. C C from Coombs BC, Canada writes: Now if this thoughtful man was running the country I'd be much happier than watching the reign of King Steven the Harpy. Hopefully the liberals can nominate this man as he is really the 'bomb' that can move this roadblock to Canadian progress. CC
  39. Jan Poot from toronto, United States writes: It appears that anyone who dares criticize the actions taken by Israel against Lebanon risks being branded as anti-semitic. This stifles debate and, in the short term at least, will inhibit an intelligent debate on the long term solutions to this middle east crisis. I believe Mr. Dionne's comments sensible and the liberal position a cautious but proper response. Surely, it must be obvious to all that in the long term it is most unlikely that the present Israeli military superiority will continue. What then? Israel is over-reaching itself, and is permitting itself to be deluded that the kind of action it is taking is a solution to the problem. It isn't.
  40. Ken Woodwords from Ottawa, Canada writes: Cynthia Nurse #13 : Peace on Earth is achievable if the will is there. Ban all weapons manufacturing by private and state, give the control of all world weapons manufacturing to an international world body for the only purpose that it has the legal authority to destroy any facility producing weapons. Invade, bomb and kill any country, person, and head of state if they do not obey the law. This will never happen because Jane in USA, Hans in Germany, Pierre in France, Yuri in Russia, Ahmad in Iran, John in England, and Ephraim in Israel will scream jobs, jobs, jobs. Along with psychopaths in the helm of major world powers, and sheep voting or expressing opinions we, the humans if survive, have a long way to go.
  41. Jeremy Kirouac from Toronto, Canada writes: Thank you Stephane Dion! Your analysis of the situation is very refreshing and helpful. If you truly love Israel, if you are a true friend of Israel, then be frank. Be honest. The situation in the Middle East is certainly not to Israel's benefit. Nor will it increase the security of ordinary Israeli people.
  42. Mike Ram from Edmonton, Canada writes: Stephane Dion the 'prophet,' he and other Liberals knew that invading Iraq would yield today's results but failed to foretell his own party's misfortunes. On Israel: at least Stephen Harper has made a stand against terrorism and that's something Liberals have never been able to do without first taking a poll. However, I disagree that Mr. Harper's support for Israel is 'unconditional' as you put it. This war is NOT yet over, it’s a developing saga that may require a different tune tomorrow. Now considering how our collective tax dollars were spend recently to airlift people of Lebanese background out of Lebanon, I don't quite see how the same guy who championed that cause would be considered 'indifferent' to the plight of the Lebanese people. Which Lebanese people are you referring to Mr. Dion? If its Hezbollah, yes I would want my PM to be as indifferent to terrorists as possible. My personal opinion is you think all Lebanese people support Hezbollah and if Mr. Harper denounced Hezbollah that would the same as denouncing all of Lebanon. If your opinion is the Liberal take on this issue, I don’t mind telling you Mr. Dion that I will NOT waste my vote on a Liberal ticket for a very long time.
  43. Arzie Chant from Canada writes: Brilliant! Mr. Dion is rapidly proving himself to be the sort of intellect that we need leading Canada. He's an intellectual like Ignatieff, but progressive and socially conscious. Quintessentially Canadian.
  44. Mr Ihateregistrations from Wabush, Canada writes: Stéphane Dion is right, the argument is logical, clear and should be obvious to anyone thinking about the situation without some ulterior motive. #8 is also right though as the Liberals for the first time in years broke with the UN and sided with Israel in terms of not condeming west bank occupation and settlements. Canada has been positionings itself for a few years now to take a more forceful role in mid-east politics. What is different now though is that nobody anticipated the events which have transpired over the last month, actually since the election of Hamas in Palestine. I am not sure that the Conservatives are really aware of what they are doing. Their obsession with domestic appearances has blinded them to international politics. They had a mid-east policy that carried on from the Liberals but these are different times and they seem not to understand what is really going on there and how this positions Canada strategically in mid-east politics now - i.e. the American stooge. It will take awhile for Canada to come out of that regardless of who wins the next federal election.
  45. Pretty Much from Toronto, Canada writes: What a nice thoughtful article by Dion. He is an excellent leader and hopefully it will either be him or Kennedy for the next liberal leader or PM even.
  46. Khaled Rifai from Dubai, United Arab Emirates writes: It is puzzling how many readers still see the merciless punishment inflicted by Israel on the Lebanese people as a justifiable act of self defense. Why does Israel have the right to occupy land, demolish homes, kidnap, arrest and murder people as it pleases, and when its victims try to give it a taste of its own medicine the whole world has to jump up and down in protest. Israel has been trying for over 50 years to impose its will on Palestinians, Lebanese and the whole world. Its policies have failed to achieve any of the stated objectives and in the process it has failed its people just as much as its Arab neighbors have failed theirs. For those who still believe Israel is acting in self defense, I invite you to read this debate (http://www.democracynow.org/finkelstein-benami.shtml). Incidentally, those are the view of a former Israeli Foreign Minister and a Jewish professor. Too bad there aren't many in Israel who share their view.
  47. Wayne Curtis from Toronto, Ontario, Canada writes: Mr. Dion's writing does have a certain, sentimental, appeal. Unfortunately I remain convinced that the world is now in a not so cold war bewtween civilizations. It is a pretty fair assumption that Western societies are not going to go backwards in time. Our governments need to accept that our liberal society cannot co-exist with any form of fundamentalism just as it could not with Radical Socialism or Communism. This is a point that the Islamic regimes understand. We are their enemy and they have stated their desire to destroy our civilization. Hitler's National Socialists desired to reshape the world order towards their particular brand in exactly the same way as the Islamists are doing. We are at war. Lets get on with it. Lets win it.
  48. Alec Owen from Canada writes: Ken Woodwords from Ottawa, Canada writes: Cynthia Nurse #13 : Peace on Earth is achievable if the will is there. Ban all weapons manufacturing by private and state, give the control of all world weapons manufacturing to an international world body Adding to Ken's reply I would like to mention the problems they are having taking guns off the street in the USA. Cynthia, wouldn't we be taking the bread out of the mouths of the children of the arms manufacturers. We could start by banning all men from public office and then electing only women. Come to think of it that wouldn't work either. Think Maggie Thatcher.
  49. Sunny Dutt from Toronto, Canada writes: Mr. Dion has written an excellent piece on how to deal with the Middle East. He is a leader that we can all trust in Canada. His reference to the 1982 crisis is right on the money as Israel did not solve anything from it's 1982 attack on Lebanon and in 2006 the situation is no different. The good thing about him is that he would acknowledge that he was wrong if Israel and Lebanon did achieve progress in security...but does that seem likely? Stephane Dion had my vote for the Liberal Leadership from the beginning and this brilliant piece by him only reinforces my support for him. He will emerge as Martin's successor in December!
  50. The Philosopher King from Ottawa, Canada writes: #24 Any leader that makes such one-sided comments based on ideological rhetoric rather than balanced reflection and consensus building, is no leader of mine. On multiple occasions while in opposition Steve felt the need to go to the US and either apoligise for our stance on certain issues or write articles criticising our government. To foreign nationals no less. Now that he's in power, his views conveniently mimic those of George Bush. Despite being a populist, he has abandoned extremely popular Canadian views on the subject in favour of views that are popular elsewhere, i.e. the US. This is why he is called a lapdog to the US. I suspect he will not admit to loving Canada because much like George Washington he will not tell a lie: He loves the United States of America.
  51. The Philosopher King from Ottawa, Canada writes: #47 Wayne, surely one cannot suggest that an all out war of civilizations is in anyone's best interests? When you lump people into categories like communist, islamist, terrorist etc, you are buying into the same logic that produced the Nazi regime when they decried the jews. One cannot use generalities to label an entire people as 'evil' no matter what word you use. Communism stopped spreading because once it was left to its own devices it proved to be less popular than democracy. The same applies to radicals in the middle east. If we stop legitimizing them they will wither and die. Continue to kill hundreds of innocent civilians and you will merely stock the Hezbollah larder full with vengeful orphans. The only answer for Israel is to support UN mandated peace keeping, and otherwise engage the Lebanese population to decrease their reliance on Hezbollah humanitarian units so that they may see who supports the peace and who does not. Until then things can only escalate as you say, which is a dire situation indeed.
  52. Evelyn Dortok from Markham, Ontario, Canada writes: Nothing was ever accomplished by using violence. Punishing the Lebanese civilians by killing them, and destroying their country in order to eradicate Hasbollah from the area is a crime to humanity! Surely there are better ways to resolve this issue. Canada should never condone, let alone accept, this situation. I don't believe there are any enemies of any religion or race on this earth. We create our enemies through our own aggressive actions and disrespectful attitudes. I fully support Mr. Dion's statements.
  53. shaun w from Canada writes: first to #40, This is a really naive proposal. I'm not the sort of person that fears having a more powerful UN(presumably this is the organization you propose should control the weapons), but to put all weapons in the control of one organization is to dangerous in my opinion. This organization would in essence have absolute power over the entire world, and as the saying goes, 'power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.' Not to mention the fact that it's completely unworkable. You still have gasoline, diesel fuel, ammonium nitrate, cars, airplanes. People that wish to cause war will still mange to do it. Always remember, Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols blew up that building in Oklahoma with fertilizer and diesel fuel. Second to #50 I believe that it's important for people to say what they think/believe. Paul Martin/Jean Chretien didn't do this. They simply told people what they wanted to hear. That's disingenuous. Also Harper didn't go to Washington to 'apologize' for our government. He went there to tell them that not everyone in Canada will try to destroy the strongest friendship between 2 nations in the world so that he can another 20 votes in the next election. Third People can sit there and blame Israel all they want for the conflicts in the middle-east, but I simply don't believe that. For 60 years Israel has extended the olive branch of peace to these nations for 60 years. For 60 years, Israel has put up with MANY attacks on it's sovereignty. For 60 years many of it's neighbors have threatened to wipe it off the map. Despite all this, when it came time for them to withdraw Gaza strip, as per their agreement, they did it. They forced their own citizens to leave. After this, they were attacked again. And again. And again. These wars may be lopsided, but how many time do you need to be bitten by a misquito before you swat it?
  54. shaun w from Canada writes: Another thing The biggest problem facing our country, in fact the world, today is the total lack of respect people have for the people that disagree with them. Just because someone does not share the same views as you does not mean that they are stupid, naive, wimps, or unpatriotic. it simply means that they are not you. I may disagree with people, and get a little hot under the collar when I read comments, but I always try to be understanding. Nobody ever does something because they think it is bad, or will destroy the country. They do it because they think it will help. The attitude that 'politicians I don't like hate Canada', is what is creating this ever growing divide among our people. People are allowing the 'I hate George Bush' people, and the 'President Bush is the greatest ever' crowds in their respective parties drive all of us apart. The important thing is to seek middle ground. Also, by middle ground, I don't mean to sit on the fence on foreign affairs. Canada has rarely sat on the fence on foreign affairs. We chose sides in both world wars, the Korean war, the Suez crisis, the first gulf war, Somalia, Yugoslavia, the cold war. Just because you pick a side, it doesn't mean you give up your reputation. I personally would argue the opposite. How often do you see Switzerland brokering peace deals?
  55. G. Veneta from Calgary, Canada writes: Thoughtful commentary by Mr. Dion and what one would expect from Canada rather than taking sides and dividing the nation along religious lines. Few can understand so much killing can be constructive for future peace and I wish Sharon was still leader with age he had wisdom and courage to move away from the extreme right. I am left to wonder that Harper and the Conservatives were truly naive as to what it takes to run a nation beyond 5 priorities and 5 second sound bites 'smaller government and lower taxes'....etc.....Where is Harper? I have never in my history know a PM to be so silent on issues of such gravity and to insult the public by assuming 'he knows best' and our opinions don't matter. Need he be reminded this is a democracy and he has a very minor minority which hardly gives him the right to unilaterally alter our foreign policy so radically without justification or debate. He insults Canadians each day with this new position and is an affront to democracy. I look forward to any of a handful of thoughtful Liberal leadership candidates to move us forward to a progressive thoughtful nation what we were before this.
  56. Louis Browne from Regina, Canada writes: Dear Evelyn Dortok at comment #52, you write, 'Nothing was ever accomplished by using violence.' I ask you, 'How is it that we defeated Adolph Hitler?'
  57. Tim Robinson from Hoylake, UK, Canada writes: Where was Dion a few years ago, when Chretien was taking a photo-op with the Hesbollah leader? He condoned that then, and yet now it's a different story. This man is more cynical than his father - you remember him - "Put a knife to the throat of Canada to give Quebec what we want."
  58. david walters from Canada writes: To Robin Adams from Ottawa. The main reason we did not go to war in Iraq (even though we were just about to do so) was because PM Chretian determined, on the eve of a provinicial election, that the majority of Quebecers were against it. That is the Quebec where most of its chattering classes are aligned to the foreign policies of France. That is the France that was against the war because of its corrupt under the table agreement with Sadaam (sp?) in the Oil for Food Scandal.
  59. K P from Montreal, Canada writes: Thank you Stephen Harper, for taking proud Canadians and forcing them to choose parties based on religious and ethnic lines. With the Schwartzes jumping ship, and presumably Muslim votes going in the other direction, Harper is aping the unstable constitutional religious divide in Lebanon itself! A central government should bring Canadians together, not divide them in such a cynical and self serving fashion. I would hate to see how he would handle a referendum...
  60. political frankness from toronto, Canada writes: Right winged fascist elements have penetrated our country. If you disagree with their opinion they'll always initiate a shouting match, call you a anti-semite, and now labell you a "terrorist". Unfortunately, their strategy is working well for majority of cdns are ill informed, headline readers, or just fanatical extremists. If anyone cares to read intelligent, factual , global perspectives on this issue read today's postings of collected articles at www.informationclearinghouse.info
  61. gail cherni from winnipeg, Canada writes: exactly right # 4 Maybe Mr Dion should try to live in a hotter than hell bomb shelter just for 24 hours in the mid east in August w. screaming babies for company - Those babies Hamas and Hizbollah has not yet manged to slaughter. Rockets raining on Israelis didn't start now. It started many years ago. This is not about 2 missing soldiers. It's about terrorists sworn to wipe off a country off the map. Started decades ago but seems some posters are not experts on the mid east only familiar w. bits of news catering to terrorists and blaming the victims as pr usual for most media. Can't help but wonder where Mr Dion would hide and same # 5 place of hiding while reading about ancient Greece if hundreds of rockets launchers were just aiming at us from St John to Saskatoon if and when radical Islam or others in power didn't want Canada to be for Canadians, took over say Michigan N Dakota Minnesotta etc and how would Mr Dion and fans suggest the Canadian forces fight them while the rockets rich enemy uses N Dakota babies, Michigan women and the U N as shields? # 5 I thought you'd be writing wisely about "excessive" terrorists orgs forever attacking civillians in restaurants on buses, trains, flying airplaines into buildings planning to Islamatise everyone while using babies for sandbags and so on, but to my great disappoinment, in your world of ancient wisdom A country fighting for survival is "excessive" how incredible.
  62. PJ Casey Jardine from Canada, Canada writes: Graham and Dion both had some reason in their messages but it told me that the liberals are not really giving Canadians any idea of the true position of the liberal party in this. Both messages were, if you read between the lines, Fence Sitting. Make sure the vote goes your way or do not open your mouth.
  63. gail cherni from winnipeg, Canada writes: I'm curious D Dortok #52 If Terror orgs inside Lebanon "using violence" against civillians inside another democratic country i.e. Hezbullah showering Israeli civillians for many years every now and again and again w. rockets and frequent attempts to kidnap and sneak in suicide bombers is a way of "using violence" that is OK by you and other posters still confused about the defenition of violence and merrily blame the victims south of the Lebanonese border namely Israelis Muslims included, all suffering and dying, all have red blood the same colour of Lebanonese blood
  64. Scot Affleck from Prince George B.C., Canada writes: Despite Mr. Dion's musings, he still is an "unnoticeable" nobody. Bummer, eh? If he was a somebody, i.e. not French, not Canadian, not in the "loop", his is just rhetoric. We need more rhetoric.
  65. david walters from Canada writes: Lot's of very well crafted comments here strongly in admiring support of Mr. Dion. Quite professional. Of the high quality one would expect from a PR agency or professional support staff. Not like the stuff that we bloggers produce. HMMM.
  66. david walters from Canada writes: To Alec Owen who wrote "Knee-jerk support for one's state, religion or group is always a mistake". Well Alec, defining "knee-jerk" is probably in the eyes of the threatened state, religion or group. I can't really see how Israel's response after six years of Hesbollah terroritst attacks was "knee jerk". I think it would be better described as "the straw that broke the camel's back". Pity the six million Jews who were marched off to the gas chambers by Germany, with the willing assistance of too many other European countries, did not have the opportunity to have a "knee jerk" reacation.

Join the Conversation, Leave a Comment

This conversation is semi-moderated What is moderation? | How do I report a comment?

You must be logged-in to submit a comment — login now!

Not registered with globeandmail.com? Register now. It is quick and free.

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.