One of the best and most popular things Jean Chrétien did was to refuse to participate in the 2003 American war on Iraq. He did so calmly but firmly — telling George W. Bush that Canada would not get on board without the approval of the United Nations.

Yet here we have Stephen Harper echoing Israeli and American right-wing warmongers who want Iranian nuclear facilities bombed by Israel or the United States or both, with the help of allies, if any could be roped in. Such a war would be illegal, outside the framework of international law, since it is not likely to have the approval of the Security Council.

On Friday, at a news conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Ottawa, Harper refused to give a clear answer to a very clear question:

Would a unilateral Israeli pre-emptive strike on Iran be acceptable to Canada — and “would you support it?”

Harper replied that Ottawa upholds the “right of Israel to defend itself” — meaning what? That Israel can attack Iran pre-emptively? He added, seemingly pro forma, that Canada supports a peaceful resolution to the issue.

He and his ministers have been parroting some of the most inflammatory rhetoric on Iran coming out of Israel and the extremist American Republican presidential primaries. By contrast, the U.S. government and the European Union have been counselling caution: Give economic sanctions a chance to work, which they seem to be.

Iran recently announced its willingness to come back to the negotiating table. But Netanyahu dismissed that at a ruse — “the international community should not fall into this trap” — while Harper stood by silently.

Economic sanctions on North Korea have brought a dramatic breakthrough, with the announcement that it would cease uranium enrichment and missile tests in exchange for American food aid.

Ottawa has imposed its own tough sanctions on Iran. But Harper’s preference seems to be to prepare the ground for war. He has characterized Iran as the greatest threat to the planet (Iran has not attacked anyone for centuries). In January, he added another twist when he told CBC: “In my judgment, these are people who have a particular, you know, fanatically religious world view, and their statements imply to me no hesitation of using nuclear weapons if they see them achieving their religious or political purposes.”

The “mad mullah” theory is espoused by Rick Santorum, the most right-wing Republican presidential candidate. He maintains that Tehran is ruled by a Shiite cult, bent on self-destruction and martyrdom.

This has been dismissed by the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey, who says Iran is a “rational actor” — a view also shared by John Mundy, Canada’s former ambassador to Iran, who was expelled in 2007.

Foreign Minister John Baird invokes the Holocaust to defend possible Israeli military action against Iran. He did so in his first address to the UN General Assembly last fall and also during a five-day trip to Israel last month.

Robert Malley, an American expert on the Middle East, has dismissed such “breathless” comparisons as excessive and unhelpful. The former national security advisor to Bill Clinton and now head of the International Crisis Group’s Middle East program, made the comment to the Canadian Press during a recent visit to Ottawa.

Says Jim Reilly, professor of Near and Middle Eastern studies at the University Toronto: “When people draw such parallels, it means they don’t have a good argument. They use scare tactics. They raise the spectre of Hitler as a diversion from sober assessment of the situation.”

The Iranian Canadian Congress has urged the Harper government not to support “unprovoked military action against Iran . . . (which) will inevitably unleash untold consequences.” Similar concerns have been voiced by Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East, a Montreal-based group. And the Canadian Peace Alliance was to hold a “Don’t attack Iran” rally at the U.S. consulate today at 2 p.m.

Ambassador Mundy: “This is the first time in decades that a Canadian prime minister, Liberal or Conservative, appears to be advocating approaches that reduce diplomatic opportunities for peace during an international crisis.”

Harper, who wanted Canada to join the war on Iraq, and gave unqualified support to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 2006, and the Israeli attack on Gaza in 2008-09, seems bent on dragging Canada into a war on Iran.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Yet the New Democrats and the Liberals are mostly silent. Do they, too, support an illegal war on Iran? If not, why don’t they say so clearly?

hsiddiqui@thestar.ca

Read more about: