"Measured self-defence"

I'm pretty sure--you can never be really certain--that the CBC radio wakeup this morning whispered into my ear something to the effect of Stephen Harper being in England and meeting Blair. A quick Google News check indicates that I at least didn't dream up that much.

Anyway, per the dulcet tones of Zintar Sehrs, Harper went out of his way to say he totally supports Israeli actions in Lebanon. Blair, in comparison, at least felt the need to give the Lebanese people a shout-out and trot out the usual both-sides positive-solution lasting-peace line.

The following idea germinated on the morning walk to the bus stop (roughly between Dundurn Variety and the first bridge over the CPR, for you historical reconstructionists): is this latest Israeli flareup about to become one of these Iraq-style international litmus tests which will assign Western states and their leaders into one of two camps--Bush, Harper and Howard lining up alongside Team Israel: Regional Police (Izz-rael! Zayen ken!) while the EU types, apparently including relative hawks like Blair, wag their fingers and potentially earn "told you so" rights as things continue to shittify?

As Canadians, it'll be a new experience to be part of the make-stuff-(including)-(innocent)-(people)-go-boom camp, after a fairly lengthy tour of duty in the ranks of global boyscoutism. I'm obviously not so keen, but I'm a dirty hippy. The question is whether any politicians are going to be willing to give Harper hell on this. Jack and Gilles are givens. But what about that big red party in the middle of a leadership race? The one that gave Bush the finger on Iraq and saved our asses from a debacle?

Here's the problem, as I see it. Not to sound like John Mearshimer, but Canada's Israel Lobby, while undeniably weenie compared to its southern counterpart, does have its fingers rather well inserted into the red Liberal pie. (let's all figure out where Tom's mind is this morning.) Now, let's be perfectly clear: it's not shadow puppet-mastery by any means, and a lot of dyed-in-the-wool Grits with marble Laurier busts on their mantlepieces are in Israel's corner for their own well-thought-out reasons and not because the Elders of Zion have chained them there. For instance, Kinsella, bless his heart, sports wood for Israel a little too easily for my tastes, but hey, if you've spent much of your career on the ass of anti-Semitic scum I'm hardly going to get too uppity about it. Big Liberal donors of the past (though potentially not these days) have included the Aspers and Schwartzes and Bronfmans, who, needless to be said, like their meat without milk and their UN without anti-Israel motions. They certainly haven't been getting their way in a tinfoil-hat-inducing manner, but it's fair to say it's a stalled front and one side is certainly better armed than the other.

That said, the Liberals have also been the party of choice for much of Arab Canada for the last little while. Quebec is notoriously less than keen on Israel. This arrangement of political forces basically makes for an awkward situation where uttingshay upay on the ionistzay has become a reflexive response to many in the party. It's hard to shut up in a leadership race, though.

From what I understand, both Volpe and Bennett are big Israel backers, and not coincidentally happen to represent two Jewish-heavy Toronto ridings. Rae emphatically quit the NDP back when Svend Robinson took a rubber bullet up the ass or whatever it was, citing their Israel bashing in an opinion column I can't be arsed to LexisNexis for. And Ignatieff is generally pro-ass-kicking, provided you can get freedom into the equation somewhere.

But if this is another one of those Iraq situations, we Canadians need someone to stand up and say what's going on right now is wrong, and we can't just rely on fringey voices that will be easily dismissed. Even someone like Lloyd Axworthy could come out and make clear that he is capital-D Displeased with what's going on in Lebanon, but it sadly wouldn't have an impact. What we need is someone from the Liberal leadership field to stand up and call Harper on being a patsy.

It's risky as all hell. It's certainly not in the Liberal Party's interest to have various candidates and observers yelling about Israel back and forth, likely culminating with Kinsella saying some rather colourful things about Antonio Zerbiasias on his blog, as these things always do. But it's in Canada's interest to not let Harper's position go unchallenged. And just like Howard Dean planted the seeds of Iraq opposition before it was cool, somebody needs to touch this third rail to make Harper defend a foreign policy position I can't see being shared by a great many Canadians.