Canada’s Mid-Life Crisis Government

I swear, whenever I hear the words “Canada’s New Government”, I want to slap someone silly. It’s an old complaint, I know, but does this not underscore the ridiculousness of the whole thing? If people are tired of even hearing complaints about the stupid slogan, then the Conservative Party really needs to come up with a new one, and fast. They’ve been in power for about a year and a half. Surely one of the grunts in their public affairs army has a better idea.

I believe the problem is that they just didn’t think this far ahead. They expected an election to come hard on the heels of the last one, and for a variety of reasons, it didn’t happen. They planned for the short term and have somehow managed to stick around for the long haul. “Now what?” they ask themselves, like a middle-aged man contemplating his possessions. I personally expect to see a shiny new convertible when Parliament reconvenes in the fall.

An article from this week’s Economist that, I admit, partly inspired this post. 

It’s Best to Ignore the Middle East

It’s best to ignore the Middle East, said Edward N. Luttwak in yesterday’s National Post. Read the article. If nothing else, it will make you think. Quite possibly, it will make you angry. In this article, Luttwak challenges many of the major assumptions surrounding conflict in the Middle East, criticizing in particular the constant focus on the Arab-Israeli conflict and the importance that so many people place on it.

Need some encouragement to click that link? Consider the following points the author makes:

“…humanitarians should note that the dead from Jewish-Palestinian fighting since 1921 amount to fewer than 100,000 – about as many as are killed in a season of conflict in Darfur.”

“…geopolitical engagement in the region does nothing to safeguard the supply of oil.”

“Arab-Israeli catastrophism is wrong twice over, first because the conflict is contained within rather narrow boundaries, and second because the Levant is just not that important any more.”

Strange bedfellows indeed…

An article in today’s Globe and Mail describes a new direction in Afghan politics. The newest opposition party counts among its members several men accused or suspected of war crimes, former rebel commanders, Islamists, Communists, and a general assortment of former enemies and political beliefs from Afghanistan’s turbulent past.

The question I have to ask is: Is this necessarily a bad thing? Afghanistan has not seen peace in at least 30 years and any step at reconciliation between the various groups could be seen as a positive development. However, the problem lies in the fact that members of this party have a vested interest in decentralization and delegation of more political authority to the provinces. They may be willing to cooperate until they are elected and able to pass laws that weaken the central government and delegate more power to their respective regions.

One of the major issues that plagues newly emerging democracies is a tendency to reinforce ethnic and tribal enclaves, often at the expense of cooperation. Sometimes this is for the best, but competition for resources and longstanding feuds often leads only to further conflict. What is interesting about this particular case is that the different actors seem willing to buy in to the political system in order to achieve their goals. I take this as a positive sign. It might not last, but then again, it may. Establishing a precedence of cooperation and political dispute resolution is an important step toward a more peaceful Afghanistan.

Apartment Hunting

By the way, I’m looking for an apartment right now, and this sums up my feelings pretty well, expressed so  well by the guys at Penny Arcade.

Hello world!

I thought that title was cute, so I’m keeping it. It is my first post after all, and I somehow doubt that it will be read anytime soon. By way of a quick introduction, this is my very first public blog. I haven’t yet decided on an overall topic or theme for this blog, but I think it will generally stay on the current events and politics side of things. After all, they tell you to write what you know.

What I do know is that while visiting the CBC.ca page this week, I was most surprised by the new layout. I’ve read positive reviews, (on a CBC blog). I have to say that I am not a fan.

To me, the site design seems to emphasize advertisements: some paid advertising by outside companies, and some advertising CBC shows. The news, which I have always considered to be the “meat” of the website, is difficult to access. I realize that it has its own page, at CBC.ca/News, but I find that my eye is just as drawn to the ads on that page.

Mostly I’m disappointed at the lack of access to the Analysis & Viewpoints page. I love a good editorial, whether or not I agree with it, and I wish I could get to the editorial selection page without going through one of the authors’ pages. What would the world be without the brilliantly written, if arrogant and sometimes dogmatic, commentary of Heather Mallick?