Clark offers precedent for Harper

It's often argued that Canada isn't a significant player in world events. That can't be said of the current crisis in the Middle East, where the Harper government has played a notable — and disastrous — role.

Jumping out in front of the rest of the world last year, newly elected Prime Minister Stephen Harper abruptly cut off aid to the Palestinian government of Hamas, which, ironically, had just been elected with a bigger share of the popular vote than Harper's Conservatives had won in the Canadian election.

Harper's brash rejection of the democratically elected Palestinian government was, of course, just the opening salvo in the attempt by Western nations, spearheaded by Israel and the United States, to strangle Hamas and replace it with a more malleable government.

The West's rejection of Hamas is always justified on the grounds that Hamas refuses to recognize Israel. But it could be noted that Israel also refuses to recognize Palestine. Israel has shown its disrespect for Palestinian sovereignty by allowing some 400,000 Israelis to settle on Palestinian land and by building a wall that incorporates into Israel significant chunks of Palestinian territory.

So you could say there's a mutual refusal on the part of these bitter enemies to “recognize” each other.

But Hamas is willing to enter into talks anyway. Israel is not.

Ahmed Yousef, political adviser to Hamas leader Ismail Haniya, wrote in the New York Times last week that Hamas “has consistently offered a 10-year ceasefire with the Israelis to try to create an atmosphere of calm in which we resolve our differences.” Haniya himself recently told the French daily Le Figaro: “Our program is clear. We seek the creation of a Palestinian state within the frontiers of 1967.”

This would be the end point of negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians — implicit “recognition” of each other within the boundaries that existed before Israel seized Palestinian land in the 1967 war.

But Israel refuses to enter into talks unless Hamas concedes the end point of “recognition” at the beginning — even while Israel continues constructing its wall and its settlements on Palestinian land.

Given Canada's provocative role in the crisis, we should take the lead now in acknowledging that any meaningful solution must involve the government chosen by the Palestinian people. That's just democracy, which we should have no trouble supporting.

This would involve Harper retreating from the provocative misstep he took last year.

There's a precedent for this in Canadian history. Back in 1979, another new Conservative prime minister, Joe Clark, made a similarly ill-informed foray into Middle East politics. Just two days after being sworn in, Clark announced a provocative plan to move Canada's embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, suggesting Canada's acceptance of Israel's annexation of the city.

But Clark had the good sense to admit he had waded in beyond his depth, and appointed the respected former Canadian Conservative party leader and elder statesman Robert Stanfield to advise what Canada should do.

In a thoughtful report, Stanfield concluded Canada should not move its embassy, because that would compromise our attempt to be a fair-minded intermediary in the Middle East conflict. Clark followed Stanfield's advice.

In a speech at McGill University earlier this year, Clark compared his mistake over the embassy to Harper's mistake over cutting aid to Hamas. If only Harper had the good sense to follow in Clark's steps and turn to a more seasoned and thoughtful observer for advice — someone like, say, former Conservative party leader and elder statesman Joe Clark.

Comments