Paul S. Graham

Michael Byers, one of Canada’s outspoken critics of the war in Afghanistan, will be speaking in Winnipeg next Thursday.

Date: Thursday, October 4, 2007
Place: Club Room, Hotel Fort Garry
Time: 7 PM
Admission: A suggested donation of $5 to defray expenses has been requested by the sponsors.
Sponsor: Peace Alliance Winnipeg

Dr. Byers’ work focuses on the interaction of international law and international politics, especially with regard to international organizations, the use of military force, the law of the sea, human rights and Canada-United States relations.

He is a regular contributor to the London Review of Books, Toronto Star and Globe and Mail, and is the author, most recently, of Intent for a Nation: What is Canada for? (Vancouver/Toronto: Douglas & McIntyre, June 2007).

He holds a Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law at the University of British Columbia, where he also serves as a faculty member at the Liu Institute for Global Issues. Prior to July 2004, he was a tenured Professor of Law and Director of Canadian Studies at Duke University. From 1996-1999, he was a Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford University.

Here is an excerpt from a recent article Byers wrote for the Globe and Mail:

“… Travelling through Europe this month, I’ve been struck by how national debates in different NATO countries take place in isolation from each other. Many Germans, for instance, assume Canadians support the counterinsurgency mission in southern Afghanistan. Similarly, many Canadians assume the 3,000 German soldiers in relatively safe northern Afghanistan aren’t going anywhere soon.

“In fact, 54 per cent of Germans think their soldiers should be withdrawn. In the Netherlands, 58 per cent want the 2,000 Dutch troops brought home by next year. Even in Poland, where the government strongly backs the mission and none of its 1,100 soldiers have been killed, a staggering 78 per cent oppose the Polish presence in Afghanistan.

“Governments have fallen because of their support for the mission. In Italy, Prime Minister Romano Prodi resigned in February after losing a Senate vote over a foreign policy that included keeping 1,800 troops in Afghanistan. Although he was asked to form a new government, Italy’s commitment to the mission remains tenuous at best.

“Other governments are teetering on the edge . . .”

Including ours. Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe has repeatedly threatened to topple the government unless there is a clear mandate to withdraw troops from Afghanistan by February 2009.

In my view, 2009 is not soon enough. But toppling this government is an appealing prospect. Maybe it will help speed up the process of getting Canada out of one of America’s dirty wars.

Peter Holle, of the Frontier Institute for Public Policy (FIPC), writes in the September 23 issue of the Winnipeg Free Press (Parable of the drug dealer):

“The idea that our carbon emissions are destroying the planet, however, is beneficial to anyone involved in this particular science. As long as we think we face a choice between our industrialized way of life and saving the planet, global warming is a big research topic, a big lobbying issue, a big political opportunity and a big media story.”

He goes on to suggest that various groups expressing concerns about global warming are motivated by financial interests (Greenpeace, the news media, etc.) and anti-capitalist political interests (coyly described as “the older class-struggle and state ownership types“).

He even attaches a dollar value to this conflict of interest:

“If conservative estimates of the dollar amounts of U.S. government research grants are correct, climate change is a $2 billion a year industry.”

Even if Holle’s unsourced “conservative estimate” of $2 billion is accurate, it is chump change compared to the reported profits of the major oil companies in 2006:

1. Exxon Mobil ($39.5 billion),
2. Royal Dutch Shell ($25.4 billion)
3. BP ($22.0 billion)
4. Chevron ($17.1 billion)
5. ConocoPhillips ($15.55 billion)

Holle continues

“If, as many contend, we are experiencing natural warming with minimal impact, more research is unnecessary.”

Who are these “many” who are contending that we are experiencing “natural warming”????

Perhaps one of Holle’s “many” is FIPC research advisor Tim Ball. Ball, who taught at the University of Winnipeg until 1996, has made a name for himself as a climate change denier. According to DeSmog Blog:

“Ball is listed as a “consultant” of a Calgary-based global warming skeptic organization called the “Friends of Science” (FOS). In a January 28, 2007 article in the Toronto Star, the President of the FOS admitted that about one-third of the funding for the FOS is provided by the oil industry. In an August, ’06 Globe and Mail feature, the FOS was exposed as being funded in part by the oil and gas sector and hiding the fact that they were. According to the Globe and Mail, the oil industry money was funnelled through the Calgary Foundation charity, to the University of Calgary and then put into an education trust for the FOS.”

According to Holle:

“There is no global warming conspiracy. But there is a group of people, let us call them translators, who inform us about scientific issues we cannot understand first-hand. These translators have their own incentives, which mostly tend toward keeping the man-made global warming hypothesis alive. When the warming lobby warns of perverse incentives distorting the debate, they just might be right.”

The same might be said for Holle and his organization. FIPC is a neo-liberal think tank whose raison d’etre seems to be promotion of untrammeled economic growth, deregulation, smaller governments, and so on. FIPC preaches the mantra of freedom through wealth creation and property rights.

Holle’s personal history includes a stint as senior policy advisor in the Saskatchewan government of Grant Devine during the 1980s, according to SourceWatch. Devine’s rule was marked by large scale privatization, reductions in public services and corruption. Devine left the people of Saskatchewan with a $15 billion debt. One might wonder what role Holle played in the sell-off of Crown corporations and natural resources that destroyed Saskatchewan’s public institutions and history of balanced budgets.

I agree with Holle on one thing. There is no “global warming conspiracy.” But the “climate change deniers conspiracy” — that is another question.

For a lighter look at climate change denial . . .

Canadians should feel shame and outrage at the decision of the Harper government to vote against the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Reading the document, it is not difficult to understand why the Tories are unwilling to join the rest of the world in recognizing the rights of aboriginal peoples. Virtually every aspect of the declaration speaks eloquently and forcefully against abuses of the kind perpetrated by Canadian governments for generations.

Don’t take my word for it. Read the declaration and judge for yourself.