Monday, May 31, 2010

Louise Arbour Slams Israeli Flotilla Attack - Iggy, Can You Hear Her?

The President of the International Crisis Group, Canada's own Louise Arbour, isn't pulling any punches in responding to Israel's assault on a flotilla bringing humanitarian aid to Gaza.

For years, many in the international community have been complicit in a policy that aimed at isolating Gaza in the hope of weakening Hamas. This policy is morally appalling and politically self-defeating. It has harmed the people of Gaza without loosening Hamas's control. Yet it has persisted regardless of evident failure.

The flotilla assault is but a symptom of an approach that has been implicitly endorsed by many”, says Robert Malley, Director of Crisis Group’s Middle East Program. “It is yet another stark illustration of the belated need for a comprehensive change in policy toward Gaza.”

International condemnation and calls for an inquiry will come easily, but many who will issue them must acknowledge their own role in the deplorable treatment of Gaza that formed the backdrop to today’s events. [Iggy, I think that includes you] The policy of isolating Gaza, seeking to turn its population against Hamas, and endorsing a "West Bank first" approach was not an exclusively Israeli one. To focus on this recent tragedy alone is to miss the much wider and more important political lessons.

...“Today, we have witnessed the sad outgrowth of a failed and dangerous policy”, says Louise Arbour, Crisis Group President. “One hopes it can provide an opportunity for a long-overdue course correction.”

Meanwhile, the silence from Ignatieff is deafening. He did issue a cold fish statement regretting the loss of life and asking for Israeli clarification but that's it. Then again he might realize that, when it comes to Gaza, he stands right up there with the "morally appalling" who've been complicit in "the deplorable treatment of Gaza that formed the backdrop to today's events." In any event, progressive and centrist Liberals shouldn't need the International Crisis Group or Louise Arbour to recognize that their party leader's unbalanced and absolutionist, pro-Israel policy on Gaza is morally appalling.

8 comments:

pogge said...

Ignatieff hasn't been silent. Exactly. But what he did say didn't amount to much.

The Mound of Sound said...

Yeah, I corrected the item when I stumbled across his lame response. Liberal-In-Name-Only and that's just the way the IgLibs like it.

Cherniak_WTF said...

Can Iggy be any more pathetic,

Iggy, why don't you just say that Israel can do anything it wants and you will support the hasbara as being the truth.
The neutrality that the Liberal party once seemed to have has been removed with the like of WK and the Cherniaks.

Until the Liberals return to a progressive root, they will be nothing more than Connies lite.

Even the most fervent Liberal cool aid drinkers seem to have lost a little sheen on their hero...

Makes you miss Dion...

Okie said...

It appears that Kinsella is putting some distance between his current view and his past unwavering support for Israel. Some interesting responses on his blog, especially a lengthy one from a person married to an ex IDF officer.

Can another flip flop for Iggnatieff far behind?

The Mound of Sound said...

Kinsella? Like others of his kind his take on Israel's actions is it's a matter of "profound stupidity." Labelling it a blunder, a goof, is a far cry from seeing it as morally appalling, an international crime, even an act of terrorism. WK remains firmly within the ambit of those castigated by Arbour.

I think CWTF has it sussed out. The IgLibs have undermined the credibility, reputation and traditional role of the LPC. They've caused far more damage than most realize. That's what happens when you sell your integrity for expediency and pandering. The party of Ignatieff is not the party of Laurier, Pearson and Trudeau - anything but.

Okie said...

I thought kinsella's shift notable given his normal penchant for following with popular trends, except perhaps in cases such as Gaza where dollars may have spoken louder.

Quite possible that Igg's stance was based on the same, but languishing around 25%, one does have to begin to wonder what one needs to change.

I have referred to the old strategy as bumming for bucks. As John Prince points out in his latest posting, their have been few responses originating from sources such as liblogs. Waitiing for the nod perhaps?

LeDaro said...

It is not Liberal Party anymore. It is like Dracula wearing a Mandela mask or something.

The Mound of Sound said...

Kinsella sees himself as a spinmeister and, predictably, he views the incident as a question of optics. It doesn't look good = blunder. So not impressed.