Harper : International consensus needed for war
Updated Tue. Jan. 10 2006 4:04 PM ET
Canadian Press
OTTAWA — It would take a major international consensus to persuade a Conservative government to commit troops to any future war, Stephen Harper said in an interview with The Canadian Press.
He also reiterated his promise to keep the country out of the U.S.-led conflict in Iraq.
The remarks represent a further watering down of his previous position, which was highlighted in 2003 when he said Canada "should be shoulder-to-shoulder'' with the Americans in Iraq.
Earlier in the campaign for the Jan. 23 election, the Tory leader denied he ever supported the conflict and said, as prime minister, his guide for future wars would be: "The stronger the international consensus, the stronger basis for Canadian participation.''
The statement puts Harper on the same page as NDP Leader Jack Layton, who declared in a recent television interview that, "when (military) action has to be taken by Canada it's going to be taken. But, it has to be taken in the context of some kind of international consensus.''
The only qualification that Harper put on his position was that there is no cut-and-dried template for dealing with international crises.
"It's fair to say Canada would never be acting alone,'' he said.
"Beyond that you have to look at the particular circumstances that present themselves.''
The Tory leader would not tie himself to fighting exclusively under the mandate of the United Nations, which the government of former prime minister Jean Chretien set as the minimum for participation in Iraq.
The Liberals fought an air war in Kosovo under NATO and are about to commit troops in southern Afghanistan under the same banner, Harper said.
As far as he is concerned, the lack of commitment to the military spending has made Canada's international voice largely irrelevant.
"Right now, the brutal reality is it doesn't matter to these countries what position Canada takes on these issues. because our current government has left the country so weak,'' Harper said.
Over the next five years, the Conservatives have pledged to spend $5.3 billion more on defence than Liberals set aside in their last budget.
Emphasizing the economic spinoffs of military spending, the party has said it will buy new strategic lift aircraft and ships.
It would reform the disbanded airborne battalion, placing it and at least three other units close to air bases around the country for fast deployment to international hotspots.
The airborne unit would be based in Trenton, Ont., despite a plea, prior to the election, from Conservative MP Cheryl Gallant, for it to be located at Petawawa, Ont., in her riding.
Two other battalion-sized units would be located in Comox, B.C. and Bagotville, Que.
A fourth unit would be placed in Atlantic Canada, although Harper refuses to say where until his party's defence strategy for the region is released later this week. The military wants to site a rapid reaction force in Nova Scotia, near the Shearwater air base.
Harper wouldn't say whether he plans to disregard that advice and put the unit somewhere else.
A least one defence analyst is unimpressed and is concerned politics will trump sound military planning.
"Clearly there is a lot of political porridge involved in these pledges,'' said David Rudd, president of the Toronto-based Canadian Institute of Strategy Studies.
"Mr. Harper wants to appeal to the regions, which is understandable. It's even politically astute. But so many of the pledges either make little military sense, or, taken together, are unaffordable.''
or better yet like CFB Calgary?), and your freedom of the city parades. As to remote stations, I get Goose Bay (not been there) and Iqaluit (there neither), but do Trenton, Comox and Jonquiere really qualify as remote?
