National Post (National Edition)
Canada fails easy test of friendship
The number of times the phrase “Canadian values” has been uttered by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, his ministers, his government spokespeople and ministry press releases in the more than two years since the Liberals were elected is a number so high that, even if it could be counted, most of us probably couldn’t wrap our heads around the result. It’s too vast for the human mind to comprehend, like the number of miles between Earth and Neptune or one of those obscure really high mathematical terms, like undecillion. That’s a reliable sign that the term has become a cover-up — a form of rhetorical white noise meant to dull the senses. What it’s hiding is that the Liberals still can’t figure out what “Canadian values” actually are. That, on important questions — like whether Canada should, say, publicly condemn or not its most vital ally in the world over something like, oh, where that ally puts its own damn embassy in the territory of yet another vital and longstanding ally — the Liberal government abstains.
The Liberal government cranked the volume on its white-noise machine Thursday as it tried calling back to those unspecified Canadian values to justify its lastminute decision to sit out the vote at the United Nations meant to censure the United States. This, over Washington’s decision to finally make good on its promise, made by Congress 22 years ago, to move its embassy to Jerusalem. “Canada’s longstanding position is that the status of Jerusalem can be resolved only as part of a general settlement of the IsraeliPalestinian dispute,” said Adam Austin, a spokesman for Global Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland.
But the vote wasn’t about Canada’s position on the status of Jerusalem; it was about Canada’s position on whether the U.S. had a right to have its own position, which happens to align with Israel’s position, on the status of Jerusalem. The Liberal government couldn’t find any meaningful values to express on that.
The text of the resolution, brought before the UN General Assembly on Thursday in an emergency session, explicitly expresses “deep regret at recent decisions concerning the status of Jerusalem,” referring to the Trump administration’s decision, declares that any such decisions “are null and void and must be rescinded,” and “Demands that all States comply” with the resolution. Freeland’s spokesman was at least willing to say the resolution was completely out of line: “We are disappointed that this resolution is onesided and does not advance prospects for peace to which we aspire” — we just weren’t willing to say so in front of the UN — “which is why we have abstained on today’s vote.” So the Liberals properly recognized an unjust resolution that works against peace … and they took no stand.
Well, then, Canada’s back, as the slogan goes, but it’s to the era of undefined beliefs on the important questions in the world and passivity masked as honest-brokerism. Those can’t rightly be called Canadian values, by any stretch — there are millions of Canadians who are unabashedly pro-American and pro-Israel and a solid number who are just as antiAmerican and anti-Israel — but refusing to be much of anything is the default position of Liberal governments. The problem today is, that without a firm framework of certain principles, Canada looks increasingly out of its depth and lost, muttering about its progressive values in a world where terribly regressive things are rapidly unfolding on the ground.
Earlier this week, the Trump administration released its new security policy. It was given much credit from geopolitics authorities for offering a pretty clear-eyed understanding that there are moves underway right now to realign the power structure of the world at a level we haven’t seen since the demise of the Soviet Union. It identified China and Russia as rising “revisionist powers” actively trying to displace U.S. dominance in whatever regions they can. Meanwhile, Iran is acquiring strength, weaponry and power to dominate the Middle East, all while Islamist transnational groups infect new places each day with their terror, fear and political instability. The “soft power” theories of yesteryear’s Liberals like Lloyd Axworthy were dubious even during the peace dividend years between the Cold War and 9/11, when stakes were lower. In their latest incarnation, with the Liberals shamelessly courting a dangerously unscrupulous China but uncomfortable expressing too much support for democratic Israel, the approach looks rather batty.
Say what you will about the Trump administration, but it has now taken a firm stand on more than one uncomfortable foreign policy issue. And with its decision on Jerusalem, and the pileon of UN members that followed, managed at the same time to refresh all our memories as to what a lopsided, ludicrous parody the UN has become. Overwhelming support for the resolution was billed as a rebuke to the U.S. But it’s one even Americans who don’t much like Trump will probably take with some pride, particularly given the vote was accompanied by denunciations of U.S. and Israeli policies delivered by such noxious governments as Syria, Iran and Venezuela. The whole spectacle was orchestrated by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who declared in Istanbul two weeks ago that he would turn the UN into his weapon against the U.S. and Israel as a response to the Jerusalem decision. In that same speech, before an emergency summit of the Organization of Islamic Co-operation, Abbas also reportedly claimed Jews were “faking and counterfeiting history and religion” to establish a claim to Jerusalem, which he said properly belongs to Palestinians, not Jews.
Nikki Haley, Trump’s UN ambassador, vowed Thursday that the U.S. would remember who voted against it. Given how badly Ottawa right now needs to keep relations running smoothly with Washington, let’s hope Trump doesn’t take issue with the Liberals’ abstention. But Canadians certainly should. Six months ago, in a House of Commons speech widely applauded for finding clarity in the confusing time of Trump, Freeland promised that her government was ready to stand up for cherished western values if others would not. But defending our closest partner’s sovereign right to place an embassy in the capital of an ally we both value — and in the face of bad-faith behaviour by Israel’s antagonists — is one of the easy tests given everything else that’s out there right now. And we skipped it.