Carney’s ‘Defeatist’ Dismissal of International Law | The Tyee (thetyee.ca)

submitted 1 day ago by HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works to c/canada@lemmy.ca

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s much criticized ambiguity about the role of international law regarding U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran is more than an excusable stumble by an inexperienced politician operating in a challenging environment.

Carney is building a foreign policy “doctrine” that increasingly warrants a closer look.

Last October, Carney lavished praise on U.S. President Donald Trump for supposedly “disabling Iran as a force of terror” with U.S. strikes months earlier. While the prime minister has softened — but not withdrawn — his support for the current military campaign that began in spite of progress on peace talks, he has not explained why he has long disagreed with intelligence assessments that Iran was not pursuing a nuclear weapon.

Nor has Carney or his ministers refused to rule out some form of participation in the conflict that is rapidly extending to other Persian Gulf states.

An opportunity to provide clarity on such issues was rebuffed when Carney skipped an emergency debate in Parliament on the growing crisis. Meanwhile, the war continues to unleash enormous human suffering and chaos.

top 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] AGM@lemmy.ca -2 points 23 hours ago

Sad to say, but the Carney Doctrine is bs. The speech he gave in Davos and what we see in practice are two very different things.

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 5 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

No, this is literally exactly what he said in Davos.

Remember the part about how we can only afford to be generous from strength? His point was that beggars don't get to influence the systems that govern our world in a meaningful way, i.e. sometimes you have to focus on building yourself up in order to be a force for good.

His record will always bear continuous scrutiny, but you also have to give him some time and space to cook, and recognize that the fastest way to the top of the mountain isn't always by naiively going straight up.

[-] patatas@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 hours ago

I agree that it's what he said in Davos, but this 'doctrine' is effectively just caving to the outlook of Trump, Putin, et al, which deems that economic and military might make right, and that we should measure human worth in GDP rather than the inherent value of one's humanity.

The Carney Doctrine is Value over Values, in other words. It's really cynical and shitty tbh

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 hour ago

I agree that it's what he said in Davos, but this 'doctrine' is effectively just caving to the outlook of Trump, Putin, et al, which deems that economic and military might make right, and that we should measure human worth in GDP rather than the inherent value of one's humanity.

You did not understand his speech at all then.

The literal entire thesis of it was that we take the world as it is, not as we want it to be. The game isn't always set up to let you play nice and still achieve a good outcome.

[-] AGM@lemmy.ca 0 points 9 hours ago

The parts he is sticking to are the pivot to realism, but most of the rest has already been binned.

Values-based realism has been revealed as just realism wearing a "values" hat to make it palatable to liberals who need some hand holding into a Hobbesian state of chaos and a return to the Standard of Civilization.

The principles in "principled pragmatism" are just more branding. The principles he spoke to, including naming reality, being consistent, building what we claim to believe in have all been more absent by the week. What we've seen recently is actually a refusal to name reality, a refusal to be consistent, and a throwing of institutions we claimed to believe in under the bus.