When Bob Rae was in Winnipeg yesterday he mused that Harper’s suspension of Parliament, while undemocratic, gave the Coalition a chance to talk with Canadians, listen to Canadians and to “get it right.”
I agree. Nowhere is this more important than on the question of Afghanistan. The Liberals got us into Afghanistan. The Liberals voted with the Tories (against the NDP and BQ) to keep us in Afghanistan. And the agreement signed by the Liberals and the NDP leaves this situation unaddressed.
If the Coalition for Change is truly interested in the views of Canadians, it needs to remember that a majority of Canadians opposes Canada’s military involvement in that war. We need to remind them of that.
Should the war in Afghanistan be a deal breaker for NDP participation in the Coalition? Evidently not, as far as the NDP leadership is concerned. For Paul Kellogg, writing in rabble.ca, it should be. According to Kellogg:
An anti-war party cannot stay anti-war and enter a cabinet with a pro-war party. Layton and the NDP leadership have to face up to the fact, that were the coalition to take office, the war in Afghanistan would become their war, and the deaths and injuries suffered in that conflict would be their responsibility.
I’m sympathetic to Kellogg’s point of view, but I’m not totally convinced. This coalition business might provide an opportunity to talk to Liberals about the evils of imperialism and the Liberal’s sad record of supporting it.
I suggest that Coalition supporters who oppose the war insist that their respective parties address it. Surely there are at least a few Liberals who oppose this war.
So, Antiwar Liberals, wherever you are, as long as you are in bed with the NDP, why not raise some hell about this war? How many more Canadian soldiers have to die helping the Americans rule the world? How many more Afghans do we have to kill before you awaken to complicity of your party?