~snip~
In the email, the departmental adviser outlines a number of significant changes made to policy language by political staffers recently. Among them are changes to the "standard docket response" of Canada's position on the violence in Democratic Republic of Congo.
"Suggested changes to this letter include removing the term "impunity" in every instance," he writes. "E.g. "Canada urges the Government of the DRC to take concerted measures to do whatever in necessary to put and end to impunity for sexual violence..." is changed to "Canada urges the government of the DRC to take concerted measures to prevent sexual violence.""
These type of linguistic alterations have become commonplace, the message says.
"Furthermore, the word 'humanitarian' is excised from every reference to 'international humanitarian law.' References to gender-based violence are removed. And in every phrase 'child soldiers' is replaced by 'children in armed conflict.'"
"These changes, the adviser implies in the email, have major policy ramifications. [1]"
Links:
[1] http://embassymag.ca/page/view/dfait-7-29-2009
[2] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/struggle-between-conservative-political-staff-and-foreign-service#comment-1043573
[3] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/struggle-between-conservative-political-staff-and-foreign-service#comment-1043590
[4] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/struggle-between-conservative-political-staff-and-foreign-service#comment-1043851
[5] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/struggle-between-conservative-political-staff-and-foreign-service#comment-1043871
[6] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/struggle-between-conservative-political-staff-and-foreign-service#comment-1043877
[7] http://rabble.ca/user
[8] http://rabble.ca/user/register
The foreign service has been a loyal servant of imperialism since the days of war criminal Lester Pearson. Perhaps the Conservatives are simply making the service a more direct transmission belt of corporate and neo-liberal interests.
One would think so....
So, what exactly would be the motivation for Tory political staff to want Canada's standard docket responses to go easy on the DRC?
And why would they decide that Canada's diplomats should refuse to admit that there's such a thing as child soldiers?
So, what exactly would be the motivation for Tory political staff to want Canada's standard docket responses to go easy on the DRC?
To prolong the war so Canadian, American and European mining (and other) companies can get cheap "blood" stones.
Canadian, American, European (and Russian) and Chinese arms industries can sell their weapons to the Africans with the money they received from selling the "blood" stones. It's a nice little set up, really.
And why would they decide that Canada's diplomats should refuse to admit that there's such a thing as child soldiers?
It makes the Omar Khadr case "messy". Even though it's true, the Conservative government doesn't like being called war criminals.
For the record, only the first and last graphs of what you show as a quote from me were words I actually posted(not that I disagree with it, it just wasn't my own words).