Taking Sides

As the war in the region known as The Middle East continues, it looks like some countries are beginning to take sides. If that's the case,  perhaps we need some new thinking at our collective leadership. [In fact, that's what this column/blog is consistently about: new leadership offering an alternative POV.]
 
It's a dangerous time in the region. We've got Iran and Syria sympathizing with Hezbollah and we have the United States and Canada sympathizing with Israel. But who's going to side with peace? The body count of innocent victims rises daily and nobody speaks for them. The United States once again offers its Secretary of State as a broker in some mock peace-talks, but they are decidedly biased in favour of Israel. You don't have to look to far to see who's supplying weapons to that country and it isn't Russia or China. People in the region have known this for years.

If, as reported in the San Francisco Chronicle that Israel has been planning this war for years, then that means the US Pentagon was in there helping out in the interests of McDonnell Douglas and Aerospace Technologies. But still we never question the ineffectiveness of the United States whose shaky track record in peace negotiations has generally been a failure.  

If Canada chooses one side over the other, then we're part of the problem, not the solution. Why can't Canadians use our expertise in the middle ground and choose peace? This is the real question for the Prime Minister and one that he must heed. Remember Pearson in the Suez? He brokered a deal that won him a Nobel Peace Prize and opened up the region to a huge economic gain.
 
I was rather disappointed to learn that 8,000 people attended a pro-Israel rally in Toronto this past week that raised $6 million to support the war. Pull out your calculator and it adds up to $750 per person. I’m afraid their money and loyalty is misplaced.
 
Clearly, by taking sides the opportunity for peace is lost. [Why do you think Rice & Co. failed on Wednesday?] The middle ground, what's left of it, is a much more progressive step and cheering Stephen Harper for taking sides is completely inappropriate. I would hope that geographic distance would provide us with a better view of the world; the big picture, as it were. By taking sides in this conflict, that point-of-view is considerably diminished.

That’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.