Canada should not extend Mali mission

National pride about Canada’s peacekeeping “days of glory” is probably due to UN peacekeeping being the brainchild of former Canadian PM Lester Pearson. But the hype is largely undeserved: Canada’s participation is either about Canada’s national self-interest or propping up U.S. and NATO interests around the globe. Mali is a case in point. Canadian mining companies have a huge stake ($1.5 billion in 2016) in extracting Malian minerals, mostly gold. In addition, oil deposits have been discovered in Mali’s Sahel region. Finally, France has uranium mines in Mali, essential to its nuclear industry. That’s why there’s a Canadian peacekeeping mission there.

Another factor spurring the mission is Trudeau’s goal of winning a UN Security Council seat, a goal he can’t attain without sending Canadian troops on at least one UN mission. But he’s not extending the Mali mission to avoid the possibility of Canadian soldiers coming home in body bags during a federal election.

Interestingly, Mali is in turmoil over Tuareg separatism. Armed Tuaregs claim the Sahel region. They obtained their arms from the vast caches remaining after NATO bombed Gaddafi’s Libya in 2011. Canadian General Bouchard led that NATO mission, which turned Libya into a failed state, contested by numerous armed factions.

Canada should not extend the Mali mission. We have dirty hands from our government’s role in destroying Libya. Our foreign policy should be based on the Hippocratic Oath and the Golden Rule: “Do no harm” and “treat others as we would like to be treated.” Owen Ford, Hamilton