There are lessons in how Stephen Harper is fighting terrorism and how he’s rolling over Justin Trudeau.

Terrorist incidents can be a godsend for demagogic leaders who exploit them to fan fears and offer themselves as people’s saviours.

The prime minister pounced on two isolated incidents of two clearly deranged people murdering two soldiers, and linked them to the imbecilic threats issued by the Islamic State and declared that Canada is at war.

There was no proof that the two lone wolves, Quebecers both, belonged to the Islamic State, let alone that they had been dispatched by that so-called caliphate to mount operations here.

Just as he has been “tough on crime,” Harper is now being “tough on terrorism.” Jihadist terrorism, at that. Next time you hear him or his ministers or his MPs — or read their statements or newsletters — count the number of times they invoke “jihad,” “jihadism,” “jihadists,” etc.

Terrorism can make people go bonkers and suspend judgment about the many contrary and counterproductive things done in their name.

George W. Bush said that jihadists hated America for its democracy and freedoms. So he diluted American democracy and curtailed people’s freedoms.

Harper’s sweeping anti-jihadist bill empowers the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the RCMP to limit free speech, invade privacy, interfere with bank accounts, etc. — without adequate oversight, which he dismisses as too much democratic red tape.

His proposed limitation on free speech is particularly ironic. He axed the anti-hate provision of the federal Human Rights Act in response to those who demanded absolute freedom to debate about Muslims and Islam. Now he’s curtailing free speech to deny the freedom to debate jihadism and terrorism.

In France, days after a million people gathered in solidarity with free speech, authorities arrested more than 100 people for not being sufficiently condemnatory of the murderers of Charlie Hebdo cartoonists. An 8-year-old boy was hauled to a police station for some foolish childish comment.

Quebec often copies France. In the borough of Hochelaga-Maisonneuve, city council has barred a wacko imam from opening a community centre because he may have preached there. In fact, all community centres are henceforth banned from holding any religious teaching.

There is strong support in Quebec for cracking down on Muslims — not just violent radicalism but most expressions of Islamic religiosity. Post-Hebdo, the Parti Québécois has even dusted off its discarded charter of Quebec values. Its leaders are linking jihadism with “fundamentalism,” which they think is symbolized by the hijab. They are quite open about tapping into anti-Muslim bigotry. Harper does it covertly.

Two-thirds of Canadians agree with him that we are at war and that censorship is just fine — let him shut down websites and social media that may promote terrorism.

Given this milieu, the Liberal party has decided not to challenge Harper’s anti-terror legislation. In fact, it is urging him to put more money into the growing deradicalization industry, a dubious enterprise, especially by fake experts on Islam.

Trudeau is scared that the Conservatives would question the Liberal party’s security credentials, just as the Republicans long did with the Democrats. Barack Obama, similarly young and callow in 2008, overcame that only by sounding tough on Afghanistan and promising to ignore international borders in order to kill terrorists. Besides projecting himself as a strong potential commander-in-chief, he issued intellectually sturdy doctrines on balancing security and civil rights.

Trudeau would rather mumble and prevaricate. This we saw during the Israeli war on Gaza last year, again when Harper committed Canada to war on the Islamic State, and yet again during the storming of Parliament by Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, whom the Liberal leader first called a criminal and then a terrorist.

Thomas Mulcair, by contrast, has been sure-footed. He opposed the war on Iraq. He criticized Harper’s “terrorist” narrative. He has withheld his support of the anti-terrorism bill, and has condemned Harper for suggesting that mosques may be seedbeds of terrorism: “It was a form of Islamophobia, and it was wrong.”

If we give in to populist identity politics or readily surrender our basic democratic rights, we let our elected leaders follow the path of demagogues and dictators.

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

There’s no shortage of authoritarian governments that also claim to be fighting terrorism — the Chinese politburo, the Egyptian military junta, Vladimir Putin, Bashar Assad and scores of Arab autocrats. Clearly not all are equally culpable but they are riding the anti-terrorist bandwagon.

To fight terrorists, we don’t need to financially and morally bankrupt ourselves. We need not tear ourselves apart along religious and ideological lines. We should not be clumsy and confused and scared. We must remain confident in the strength of our democracy to overcome the mini-challenges thrown up by deranged individuals and groups.

Haroon Siddiqui’s column appears on Thursday and Sunday. hsiddiqui@thestar.ca

Read more about: