Butt out on Arctic, Harper tells U.S.

[Jarrek]

Butt out on Arctic, Harper tells U.S.
Prime minister-designate indicates Canada won’t recognize Palestinian Hamas government
Jan. 26, 2006. 02:37 PM
CANADIAN PRESS


OTTAWA — Prime minister-designate Stephen Harper says he won’t take advice from the U.S. ambassador on how to protect Canadian sovereignty in the North.
At a wide-ranging press conference this afternoon, during which he said the new Conservative government will be sworn in on Monday, Feb. 6, Harper said he will stick to his campaign promise to station icebreakers and military personnel in Canada’s Arctic.

U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins had criticized Harper’s plan, claiming the Arctic passage to be "neutral waters.â€

But Harper, at his first news conference as the incoming prime minister, said Canadians gave him a mandate to protect Canada’s sovereign interests in the North.

And Harper said he’ll listen to Canadians on such issues, not the American ambassador.

Harper pledged during the election campaign to build three armed icebreakers to protect against possible American submarine incursions into Arctic waters.

At the same news conference, Harper suggested Canada will not recognize the new Palestinian Hamas government.

Harper said his Conservative government won’t accept Hamas as long as it continues to support terrorism and calls for the destruction of Israel.

Asked about the issue, Harper said he supports Israel.

And he added: “For a nation to be truly democratic, that nation must renounce terrorism.â€

Hamas is already banned from operating in Canada because of its support for terrorism.

The group won a surprise majority in this week’s Palestinian election.

U.S. President George W. Bush re-iterated today that the United States will not deal with Palestinian leaders who dispute Israel’s right to exist.

Earlier, Harper met with Gov Gen Michaelle Jean to officially confirm that will form the next government.


Harper met for 15 minutes with Jean at Rideau Hall, across the street from 24 Sussex Dr.

They discussed the future of the government during a brief exchange that Harper described as "interesting," before departing in a limousine.

Harper, smiling and wearing a bright blue scarf against the bitter cold, had little else to say.

Jean formally asked Harper if he thought he could form a government and then asked him to do so.

Harper has been meeting with his transition team to discuss dates for a handover of power from outgoing Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin and when he might call Parliament back into session.

 

[boiler2000]

Call me cynical and paranoid, but that exchange with the U.S. ambassador sounds too convenient. Perhaps a nice welcome present for Harper, to boost his credibility? Either way, the Americans will understand this is for domestic consumption.

 

[rbtaylor]

And he added: “For a nation to be truly democratic, that nation must renounce terrorism.â€

Hamas is already banned from operating in Canada because of its support for terrorism.

How about if Hamas announces that they renounce terrorism and that they intend to put full resources behind liberating the people of Israel from the tyranny of the Jewish invaders?

 

[EnviroTO]

Harsh talk with respect to Hamas is untimely right now. Palestinians have chosen Hamas to be their government through free elections which by all reports seems to have been run fairly and without any tampering or coersion. The countries of the world need to accept that and move forward with dialogues between them and this new government and deal with them as they would any other nation. When Palestine threatens Israel or other countries the world now have a better mandate to deal with Palestine as a country and Hamas as a government entity. An elected Palenstinian leadership represents the population of Palestine and therefore any sanctions or other measures that come about due to the behaviour of their government are more fitting than if the people of Palestine were simply oppressed by some unelected leadership or were simply overrun by terrorists. Before today the actions of Hamas couldn't be dealt with by the international community because they were not the government and were simply a terrorist group. Now that Hamas is the government Hamas actions in Israel in the future are not those of a terrorist group but those of a government army. I think it changes the picture a bit. Hopefully Hamas having power in Palestine and now being given the responsibility of looking after their citizens will cool down the rehtoric a bit.

 

[Danny225]

^ very well-said..
I totally agree.. we've got to wait and see.. lets hope things turn to the better

 

[ganjavih]

It's foolish to simply say, "we don't negotiate with terrorists". We negotiate with terrorists all the time whether it be in hostage situations, with the IRA or whatever. Sometimes it's the best option.

 

[billy corgan19982]

Call me cynical and paranoid, but that exchange with the U.S. ambassador sounds too convenient.

The dispute between Canada and the US over artic sovereignty has being going on for decades. This ambassador and other American officials have been making similar claims throughout the Liberal reign; unfortunately for Canadians the Liberals never really paid attention to this serious issue.

 

[cacruden]

Harsh talk with respect to Hamas is untimely right now. Palestinians have chosen Hamas to be their government through free elections which by all reports seems to have been run fairly and without any tampering or coersion.

Just because they were chosen in fair elections -- does not mean that we have to deal with them. In fact I believe we would have to redesignate them from a terrorist organization before dealing with them under Canadian law.

I say -- wait and see. It is up to Hamas to make the first move by recognizing Isreal's right to exist and to cease all current terrorist activities. If Hamas fails to do that -- shut down all foreign development within the territories and walk away.

There is lots of areas of need in this world -- why waste that development dollar in an area that will (if things don't change) be moving towards a war footing.

According to one unscientific poll, I look like the moderate on this issue (CTV online poll):

Recognize it as a legitimate party - 1676 votes (10 %)
Continue to refuse to recognize the militant group - 8750 votes (53 %)
Wait and watch how it governs - 6059 votes (37 %)

 

[rbtaylor]

I say -- wait and see. It is up to Hamas to make the first move by recognizing Isreal's right to exist and to cease all current terrorist activities. If Hamas fails to do that -- shut down all foreign development within the territories and walk away.

Dumb question, but why is it up to Hamas to recognize Israel has a right to exist?

Why isn't it up to Israel to recognize that they invaded onto Pakistan territory and should vacate the area?

How did you decide that Israel should win this long-standing argument over land ownership?

 

[EnviroTO]

^ you mean Palestinian territory right?

 

[bizorky]

Isreal invaded Pakistan? When did that happen? I shouldn't be spending so much time answering Enviro's interesting postings on other threads and should be reading the news!

 

[cacruden]

rbtaylor, in addition to being geographically challenged :lol

You should really do some reading up on Isreal:

Isreal

The "palestinian land" was captured -- after Isreal was attacked (assuming you are talking about the current disputed lands).

If you are talking about the evils of immigration that lead to a jewish majority on the current lands of Isreal.... Of course that has also happened in North America too..... Maybe the Natives should form a "militant wing" and start bombing civilians in restaurants in major North American cities

 

[bizorky]

I say -- wait and see. It is up to Hamas to make the first move by recognizing Isreal's right to exist and to cease all current terrorist activities. If Hamas fails to do that -- shut down all foreign development within the territories and walk away.

From what I understand, Hamas was expecting to be the opposition. Now that they are in power they will discover that their party platforms actually have consequences. It will be interesting to see what they do.

 

[rbtaylor]

You should really do some reading up on Isreal

Indeed. I don't know anything about it but that doesn't change my point.

As an impartial observer and mediator (which Canada should be in things like this) why is it that we immediately want to label one side as being a terrorist and wrong?

Fighting for your beliefs is something we have annual events and holidays to recognize and remember. Who gets to decide which group is an oppressed freedom fighter and which group is a terrorist organization up to no good.

 

[cacruden]

As an impartial observer and mediator (which Canada should be in things like this) why is it that we immediately want to label one side as being a terrorist and wrong?

Yes, if the organization is responsible for acts of terrorism inside and outside the territories. If they were attacking military targets instead of strapping bombs to individuals, having them walk into restaurants and blow up civilians not involved. I am not a believer of relativism, one side being wrong does not make the other side right -- and vice versa.

As far as taking sides -- I said wait and see -- If they continue to be involved in terrorism -- then -- Canada should have nothing to do with them. They are already listed on our list of terrorist organizations -- now it is up to them to prove why they should not be.