The Media Co-op

Unreported in the mainstream press, Angus Reid's poll on the slaughter in Gaza[1] is interesting for a number of reasons, some unintended. The slightest scrutiny reveals much deceit.

Previous polls conducted for Canada's 'pro'-Israel lobby inform us that a huge majority of Canadians oppose taking Israel's (or the Palestinians') side in the conflict; 83% prefer neutrality.[2]

It would obviously be awkward to revisit Canadians' desire for neutrality after the their government’s strident display of support for the most recent slaughter in Gaza.

Sensitive to the political winds, Angus Reid gets around this by asking if Canadians support the Harper government's position indirectly:

"Earlier this month, Canadian Junior Foreign Minister Peter Kent declared: 'Hamas bears a terrible responsibility for [Israel's attack] and for the wider deepening humanitarian tragedy. The burden of responsibility is on Hamas to stop its terrorist rocketing of Israel.' Do you agree or disagree with the junior minister's statement?"

Fifty-seven per cent agreed. This gives rise to the poll’s sub-headline, which claims “a majority agrees with Ottawa’s official position that Hamas is greatly responsible for the conflict.”

But the square brackets in Angus Reid’s question are curious.

Speaking to Reuters, Kent was not speaking generally about the conflict or Israel’s ‘Operation Cast Lead’, he was specifically blaming Hamas for Israel's killing of 43 Palestinians outside a UN school in Jabaliya on January 6th.

Admitting he didn't yet know much about the incident, but having internalized Israeli claims (credible or otherwise), Kent declared:

"Hamas's record is to use civilians – the population and civilian infrastructure – as shields and it would seem quite possible that this is yet another tragic instance."[3]

As Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937) recognized, Great Powers (like the United States) have relative freedom in determining their foreign policies; smaller powers (like Canada), however, have somewhat less autonomy.[1]

Separating independent Canadian foreign policy from US pressure to conform to American interests is not always a straightforward exercise. National conceit leads us to assume our independence and good intentions, the record often suggests otherwise.

Describing pressure to join an American initiative in 2004, former Liberal minister of foreign affairs Bill Graham explained:

Foreign Affairs’ view was there is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver.[2]

Aiding in the coup that overthrew Haitian democracy in 2004 and helping the murderous suppression of Haiti’s majority political movement was ‘another arrow in our quiver’.

Canadian foreign policy towards Israel and Palestine has become another such ‘arrow in our quiver’, bolstering our relationship with ‘the political masters in Washington.’

Canadian policy towards Israel has always left a great deal to be desired. However, beginning under the Liberal government of Paul Martin and continuing under the current minority Conservative governments of Stephen Harper, Canada has been removing itself from the international consensus it reluctantly joined over the course of the 1990s.

The United States has long had a policy of demanding obedience from less powerful states at the United Nations. Under Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, UN Ambassador Daniel Patrick Moynihan said in a January 1976 cable that breaking up the large bloc of “mostly new nations, which for so long have been arrayed against us” was to become a “basic foreign policy goal” of the US.