News   Nov 25, 2024
 158     0 
News   Nov 25, 2024
 272     0 
News   Nov 22, 2024
 859     1 

Harper's Management Style and Lebanon

E

Ed007Toronto

Guest
He's gonna learn the hard way that trying to run everything doesn't work. Meanwhile we pay.

PMO wanted crisis kept under wraps, sources say
By DOUG SAUNDERS and MARK MACKINNON AND GLORIA GALLOWAY
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
Doug Saunders:

E-mail

| Read Bio

| Latest Columns
Micromanagement by the Prime Minister's Office and a lack of resources in Lebanon contributed to the confusion and anguish at Beirut's port Wednesday as Canadians trying to flee Israeli bombardments watched boats chartered by other nations sail away, leaving them behind.

It is expected, ultimately, to be the largest removal of Canadian citizens from a crisis zone ever arranged by the federal government. But, as early as Sunday, there were complaints about delays in arranging ships to carry people to safety, as well as lineups and inaction at the Canadian embassy.

The perception of inaction was exacerbated by the lack of information flowing last week about Canadian efforts to organize a response.

In fact, Foreign Affairs staff realized last week that there was an emergency situation involving tens of thousands of Canadians brewing in Lebanon.

But federal sources say there was an edict handed down by Sandra Buckler, the Prime Minister's communications director, dictating that the situation was to be kept under wraps.

By Saturday, with Canadians desperate to reach safe ground, a task force was put together at Foreign Affairs to find ways to get people out.

Foreign Minister Peter MacKay also decided it was time to talk publicly about the scope of the situation confronting his department.

Two obstacles were blatantly obvious to everyone involved.

First, there were not enough people at the Beirut embassy to cope with the influx of frantic Canadians in need of help — the number of Canadians registered with the embassy would swell from 10,000 to more than 30,000 in 72 hours.

And second, the only way out was by boat because the Beirut airport had been taken out of commission last Thursday by Israeli strikes.

Canada is accustomed to arranging evacuations by air. Water was another matter. Unlike countries such as Britain and the United States, Canada had no military vessels in the region. And that meant private ships would have to be leased from places such as Cyprus at a time when many other countries were trying to do the same thing.

Canadian officials arrived in Nicosia on Sunday afternoon to set up a command centre in the Cypriot capital and prepare for the evacuation. Canada no longer operates an embassy or even a full consulate in Cyprus, only a small office staffed by a part-time honorary consul, so officials had to be brought in from Ottawa and from Canada's other embassies.

“Well, it's fair to say that some Canadians arrived on Sunday, but only just,†said one diplomat involved in the operation.

It was hard to find staff, since huge numbers of Foreign Affairs and embassy staff were on vacation, and many of the embassies were unable to spare workers. Of the approximately 36 people now working in Cyprus, the majority arrived Tuesday or yesterday.

They set up shop in two cramped rooms at the International Hilton hotel, and the staff found themselves cut off from most decisions, unable even to communicate with the local government.

“I haven't heard anything from the Canadians — they haven't even told us they're here,†Homer Mavrommatis, head of the Consular Affairs division for the Cypriot government, said Wednesday.

Aside from shortage of staff, the Canadians involved in the operation say they were hampered by another difficulty: the Prime Minister's centralized command and communications policies — frustrations that were expressed both in the Middle East and in Ottawa.

All decisions had to be made and approved by Ottawa. And, with six time zones between the locations, decisions were often painfully slow.

While other countries were already marshalling large cruise ships on Sunday, Canada spent two days in long-distance discussions before any calls were made.

“It was only 24 to 36 hours ago that we first got in contact with the owners of the ships,†one senior official in Cyprus said Wednesday.

Most of the ships, very small compared with those used by other countries, were leased from a charter company based in Turkey. Ottawa, citing “security issues,†then took a full day to finalize the deal. The number of ships and the terms of the deal kept changing, officials said, as they dealt with increasingly angry families.

On Tuesday night, they realized that the promise they'd made earlier — that there would be seven boats each transporting two loads of Canadians per day starting Wednesday — could never be met. There wouldn't be seven boats, and it appeared unlikely that even one of them would be able to make it across the Mediterranean by the end of last night.

And the boat owners were extremely nervous about whether Israel, which is blockading the Beirut harbour, would honour any commitment to give them safe passage.

But even as late as Wednesday morning, Canadian officials in Beirut were confidently telling reporters that all seven ships were on their way, and that they expected to get 2,000 people out of the country by sundown. Thursday, they had hoped to be moving something close to double that number.

Far more than 2,000 people showed up at the Beirut port at 7 a.m. Wednesday, nearly all of them claiming that they'd been contacted by the embassy and told they had a space on the first ships. The tiny embassy staff was swamped from the start, unable to keep up with the unexpected flood of people claiming they had been guaranteed a spot.

The embassy in Beirut swore it had a contingency plan in place before Wednesday. It's standard practice for all embassies to prepare for an evacuation, although operations this large are not something that can be practised.

In Cyprus, Canadian officials said they felt betrayed by Ottawa. Canadian diplomats say the reason Wednesday's evacuation was so catastrophically slow is because decisions had to be routed through Ottawa — and nobody was even at work in Ottawa until midafternoon in Lebanon. “If you want to know where that boat is going, don't ask us — it's Ottawa driving the boat,†one official said, using a line repeated by others throughout the day.

But there were other, serious logistical problems to be dealt with. As many as 40,000 Canadians may need to be removed, and the initial plan of moving them into Cyprus ran into a serious obstacle: It is vacation season on this popular Mediterranean resort island and most hotels and airplane seats have long been booked. Short of dumping them into refugee camps, nothing could be done with the Canadians.

That was why, on Tuesday, Ottawa abruptly switched the target of the evacuation from Cyprus to Turkey, where there are both hotel spaces and the facilities to quickly airlift evacuees to Canada using military or commercial planes.

Still, that switch took Canadian officials in Cyprus by surprise. Wednesday morning they prepared to move the Nicosia operation to Turkey.

Suddenly, last night, they were told the Prime Minister would be visiting and that Canadians — any Canadians — would have to be brought to the port of Larnaca, Cyprus. They made an urgent request to the British government, which had been taking Britons on large naval vessels with military escorts to the western city of Limassol, to allow 120 Canadians to board one of the ships so that there would be some available to greet the Prime Minister and ride home on his Airbus jet.

One government official in Ottawa, who asked to remain unidentified, expressed concern that Mr. Harper's decision to fly to Cyprus to offer up the services of the government jet might be perceived by Canadians as a publicity stunt. The government could have sent one of its Challenger jets to Paris to pick up the Prime Minister and his staff, the source said, freeing up more room on the Airbus.

But, even if they had qualms, the Canadian officials quickly booked suites of rooms and offices at the Palm Beach resort hotel in Larnaca, and made the half-hour journey to the port. Joined by newly arrived officials from the PMO, they set up a war room in the hotel's conference centre and were quickly struck by waves of bad news.

First, it turned out that 120 Canadians had not boarded the British vessel — at most, perhaps 20 were on board. The officials then scrambled to see whether the single Canadian-rented vessel that had reached Beirut, the Lebanese-licensed Blue Dawn, could sail more quickly to Larnaca to meet the Prime Minister.

It quickly became apparent this wasn't going to happen. While Israel had guaranteed Canadians passage, the captain wasn't ready to move without military escort — and Canada couldn't deliver that. Hours passed. The sun set. And it wasn't until 11 p.m. in Beirut that the ship finally left the dock with 261 Canadians aboard.

But the end was not in sight for the passengers. The trip to Cyprus takes from six to 10 hours depending on weather and the speed of the vessel. And the Israelis were demanding that private ships leaving the harbour, especially those with unfriendly flags, follow an ever-changing and lengthy route from one checkpoint vessel to another, a zigzag that can add hours to the journey. The Canadian vessel, as a Lebanese-flagged ship without military escort, was given the full treatment.

And when the Blue Dawn finally reaches Larnaca to meet the Prime Minister, another set of obstacles was anticipated.

Last night, three very big U.S. ships and a Swedish/Norwegian ship containing 1,500 people arrived, which proved too much for the harbour. One of the U.S. ships was diverted to Limassol, 85 kilometres away. So it may prove impossible, in the wee hours of this morning, for the Canadian ship even to find a slot. It was given a narrow berth, booked at exactly 6 a.m., but harbour officials said Wednesday that they had no idea whether the Canadians could be fit in.

Meanwhile, the other six vessels, which had left their home ports Wednesday to pick up Canadians, were still floating empty in the Mediterranean. There was hope Wednesday that they would make it into the harbour, starting at 6 a.m. Beirut time Thursday. But Israel has said entry will be permitted only one ship at a time.

Foreign Affairs acknowledged yesterday that the one-at-a-time process will greatly complicate the logistics of getting people out of the holding area and onto the ships, increasing the likelihood of chaos at the dock again Thursday.

With a report from Brian Laghi in Ottawa
 
Harper's micro management definitely needs to addressed. Of course no management is not an alternative. If Martin and Chretien had been a little more micro we may not have seen millions dissappeer into the HRDC scandal, gun registry and Adscam. There must be a middle ground somewhere, where the PM knows what's going on, without causing delays on critical matters.
 
PM's pro-Israeli tilt could cost him at polls
Jul. 20, 2006. 01:00 AM
HAROON SIDDIQUI


Stephen Harper reminds me of the late King Fahd, of the American puppet state of Saudi Arabia, who was said to be more American than the American president.

By falling in lockstep with George W. Bush, the Prime Minister is either displaying his ideological commitment to the president or trying to please him, at any cost — from Afghanistan to Israel. Either way, he is compromising Canadian sovereignty and our reputation for even-handedness, as well as exposing our soldiers to grave risk in the questionable Afghan mission.

To be fair, Ottawa's pro-American tilt began under Paul Martin. But Harper is "out-bushing Bush," as Opposition Leader Bill Graham says.

Whereas several G8 leaders thought of the Israeli bombardment of Lebanon as outrageously disproportionate, Harper found it "measured."

A Canadian prime minister thus did not utter a word of protest against the killing of eight Canadians, let alone of nearly 300 other people and the displacement of about 500,000 civilians and the destruction of civilian infrastructure.

It's a line of thinking in which the only lives that matter, and the only territories worthy of immunity from violence, are American and Israeli.

This is the immoral calculus that's at the heart of so much havoc in the world today. And it is this that Harper has committed Canada to, with little or no debate in Parliament or anywhere else.

Harper also parrots the line that the crisis emanates solely from "the actions of Hamas and the actions of Hezbollah." It does, but not completely.

The crisis in the Gaza Strip has been in the making for a year. Israel evacuated the territory, only to keep a stranglehold by controlling the movement of people and goods. This helped Hamas win the parliamentary elections, which triggered even more collective punishments.

Harper led Bush in initiating Western revenge on the Palestinians for electing the wrong people. Canada helped foment a humanitarian crisis, with mass starvation and the near-breakdown of the social order.

An agreement by moderate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas with Hamas to nudge it toward recognizing Israel got lost in the Hamas shelling of Israel and its June 25 abduction of one Israeli soldier in the hope of freeing some of the 1,500 Palestinian prisoners held by Israel.

Israel retaliated with bombs, sonic booms, the arrest of cabinet ministers and MPs, and the killing of about 100 Palestinians.

Gideon Levy, columnist for the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, wrote:

"It is not legitimate to cut off 750,000 people from electricity. It is not legitimate to call on 20,000 people to run from their homes and turn their towns into ghost towns. It is not legitimate to kidnap half a government and a quarter of a parliament. A state that takes such steps is no longer distinguishable from a terror organization."

It was into this mess that the terrorist Hezbollah moved, landing missiles on Israeli civilians and killing eight Israeli soldiers and abducting two. The Israeli offensive on Lebanon followed.

United Nations human rights chief, Canadian Louise Arbour, said yesterday the scale of killing in Lebanon, Israel and the Palestinian territories could involve war crimes.

Israel has an inalienable right to defend itself against terror, with proportionate force and an obligation to protect civilians during hostilities. It has a right to exist, indeed thrive. So do the Palestinians. One is not possible without the other.

Despite all the militant Arab bluster of driving Israel into the sea, nobody can. Yet, for all its power, Israel won't have peace unless the Palestinians have it as well.

Harper is either ignorant of this reality or chooses to ignore it. Now that he has made his choice, Canadian voters will, too, in due time.

If the Tories fail to procure a majority in the next election, their failure to crack through urban Canada and Quebec may be attributable to this moment when their leader's Stockwell Day-like zealotry got exposed.

Harper's mistake is of far greater magnitude, both internationally and domestically, than that of Joe Clark in 1979 when he pledged to move the Canadian embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Harper may also be too ideological or too stubborn, or both, to recover, as Clark did by dispatching Robert Stanfield on a mission to the Middle East.

Quebecers tend to be more pro-Palestinian than English Canadians. That the Canadian family killed in Lebanon was from Montreal, and that most of the stranded Canadians there are from Quebec, can only add to that sentiment.

It is a mistake to see Harper's stance only through the window of our domestic ethnic politics, between the 350,000 Jewish Canadians and the 650,000 Muslim Canadians.

Half the Canadian Arabs are Christian, and not all Jewish Canadians agree with a military solution.

The issue also has wider resonance, as seen in the boycott call against Israel by CUPE Ontario and the Toronto branch of the United Church.

Finally, the struggle to keep Canada's voice distinct and separate from that of the United States is bred in our bones.

It is more urgent, not less, under a president whose deeply flawed vision has left even a majority of Americans distraught over what he has wrought, both at home and abroad.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Haroon Siddiqui, the Star's editorial page editor emeritus, appears Thursday and Sunday. hsiddiq@thestar.ca

www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1153345815626&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795
 
Harper's taken his stance, and now let him be judged on it at the next election. I'd rather have a PM that takes a stand than one that wavers and dithers back and forth based on poll data.

The world cut off the Palestinians when they voted in Hamas, including the entire EU and IIRC the UN. Canada's contribution was a pitance compared to these guys.
 
Ganja, I'm replying to this:
Harper led Bush in initiating Western revenge on the Palestinians for electing the wrong people. Canada helped foment a humanitarian crisis,
To imply that Harper led Bush in creating a crisis in Gaza is not correct. There were many countries that cut off aid to the PA, and Bush wouldn't be led by Harper anywhere. The Palestinians should have realized that by voting in Hamas, while this same group has the declared goal of Israel's destruction AND is a declared terrorist group in many western nations, that their meal ticket western subsidies would end. You can't hate the west and Israel and still expect support. There are fewer nations with more wealth nor more support for the terrorist cause than the Arabs, yet we see little money from Saudi Arabia et al for the PA.
 
Harper's taken his stance, and now let him be judged on it at the next election. I'd rather have a PM that takes a stand than one that wavers and dithers back and forth based on poll data.
To borrow from Stephen Colbert, you'd rather have a Prime Minister who believes the same thing on Wednesday as he did on Monday, no matter waht happens on Tuesday.

Um....great.
 
I think what happens should matter, but what the polls say really shouldn't if a politician is sticking to their principals.
 
I don't really get this distaste for following (within reason) popular opinion. It seems to be a conservative position that allows them to justify implementing unpopular policies as somehow more noble than doing what the people who elected them prefer.
 
To borrow from Stephen Colbert, you'd rather have a Prime Minister who believes the same thing on Wednesday as he did on Monday, no matter waht happens on Tuesday.
I'm not talking about operating in ignorance or in a vaccum, but we had Dithers all over the map on policy. It's a refreshing change to have PM that sticks to his core ideas. Let the people judge him on that.
 
So we're forgetting the sudden reversal in deciding to finally evacuate the Canadians in Lebanon?

I never liked Martin. The best thing about Paul Martin losing the last election was that Paul Martin lost the election. Though he made a suprising, but very graceful, exit, which restored some of my respect for the hard fiscal conservative turned Mr. Dithers. I'll take Paul Martin again over the Tony "I'm with stupid" Blair wannabe.
 
So we're forgetting the sudden reversal in deciding to finally evacuate the Canadians in Lebanon?
No, that won't be forgotten, the voters should keep that in mind, along with other factors that concern them, when they consider who to support during the next election.
 
^Well, the election is over, so we could give the whole "Mr. Dithers" thing a rest, couldn't we? While you might agree with Harper's assessment of Isreali action as being "measured," I am not impressed at all. I see nothing measured in this action, unless one is looking to measure the level of possible excessive violence.

I don't see what it gets Harper, or the Conservatives, for that matter. Is it supposed to show that they are tough on terrorism? Should we then expect a policy based on the idea there is no such thing as too many civilian dead in the name of the war on terrorism? Some sense of "measured" that is.
 
Israel is one of the few functioning democracies in the Middle East. Israel did not ask for this, in 2000 they withdrew entirely from Lebanon, and I imagine wanted to leave the whole episode behind them. However, on IIRC July 12th, Hizbolah troops harboured by Lebanon (or at least certainly not expelled and/or arrested by Lebanon) attacked Israeli territory, killing and capturing Israeli soldiers. Then, they began firing rockets into Israel, killing civilians. Only at this point, did Israel begin shelling Lebanon.

I can't blame Israel for what it's now doing. I would have done the same. I imagine this is what the Hizbolah fellows wanted, as their purpose was gone, and when you're a thug, but have no cause, you must either go back to your original employment or lack thereof, or restart a new battle. We saw this with the Real IRA in Ireland, when the thugs and bullies lost their reason of being, and thus wanted to start the fight anew.

As for Israel, if there's one thing I think I know about the Jewish people and their country, is that they will never again be pushed around. They haven't spend the last 50 years building one of the world's top military and intelligence arms for nothing. If you hit them, they'll hit you back seven times over.

Lebanon should have thrown out these terrorists of Hizbolah. They were able to throw out Israel and Syria.
 
If you hit them, they'll hit you back seven times over.

And that's what Steve calls "measured." Fine, go after the terrorists, but don't go after the civilians and kill seven (or more) civilians for every one the terrorists maim or kill. Many of Beirut's neighbourhoods now are nothing more than rubble, all over again, and of course with the roads and airports destroyed, how can civilians easily flee? It's the way that Israel is responding that has many people upset, but the Republicans and the Republican ass-kissers call it "measured".

And what better way to end support and neutralize Hezbollah and other terrorist groups by shelling civilian residences and infrastructure? Right now, support for Hezbollah is increasing.
 

Back
Top