Why do we treat dictatorships with respect?

[Argus]

So Martin, rather than atending to the needs of this country, is out in Libya, hanging around, waiting for Libya's bloody dictator to find time to see him. How charming. Does anyone have any idea why he's even there? Does anyone have any idea why we even have diplomatic relations with a shithole like Libya? Or any of the rest of the sordid, squalid little jumped up thieves and killers who make up much of the United Nations? Why do we go to all the trouble of setting up embassies and treating these dirty little thugs with such respect? We don't need diplomatic relations with the likes of Libya or Iran. If we truly wanted to show a sense of morality we would not only withdraw diplomatic recognition of such regimes but refuse to even recognise the existence of these nations as states. Make them international pariahs, refuse to recognize their passports, or even allow any of the people from those nations to pass our borders - except perhaps as refugees.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Argus,

Many of these

sordid, squalid little jumped up thieves and killers

are fully supported by the USA in exchange for favourable trade and access to raw resources. Don't forget, it was you who said "Don't underestimate the importance of cheap energy". The US, especially, funds, arms and supports dictators if it is profitable to do so.

If we truly wanted to show a sense of morality

The problem is sticking to the 'moral high road', not recognizing it. 'Asinine ethics' can often get in the way of winning.

As to Libya, Qadaffi claims to have turned over a new leaf. We should at least check it out.

Or, it could be a ruse. Perhaps the PM PM is going to try to bankrupt Libya by introducing a gun registry and patronage advertising contracts.

[August1991]

Perhaps the PM PM is going to try to bankrupt Libya by introducing a gun registry and patronage advertising contracts.

Giggle, giggle.

-----

I figure Libya is the evident proof that the US didn't invade Iraq for the oil.

What's the difference between Saddam and Qaddafi? Saddam wouldn't cooperate on WMD and Qaddafi apparently did. End of story.

As to Libya, Qadaffi claims to have turned over a new leaf. We should at least check it out.

Or, it could be a ruse.

I think Blair had the line, which PM PM repeated, that the West wants to send out a signal to these idiot dictators. If they behave themselves sort of, they'll benefit sort of.

[caesar]

Libya is NOT proof that the USA invaded Iraq over oil. Iraq is a big oil producer compared to Libya plus it puts America there in the middle east where it can exert pressure on all the oil producing countries.

You don't ignore a country or bomb the h out of it because it has a dictator. Bush may be elected in the USA but he is acting as a dictator to the rest of the world. So, I suppose you would agree that we cut trade and relations with the USA. Negotiations and a little good faith bargaining can bring better and more lasting results than wars or illegal invasions.

[Argus]

Many of these

sordid, squalid little jumped up thieves and killers

are fully supported by the USA in exchange for favourable trade and access to raw resources. Don't forget, it was you who said "Don't underestimate the importance of cheap energy". The US, especially, funds, arms and supports dictators if it is profitable to do so.

Oh I suppose that's true to an extent. I recognize the absolute basic need for oil to keep our economies running. But do we really have to treat these nations with deference and respect? Surely we would buy oil on the open market. We don't have to deal with Iran's government, for example. We don't need their embassy and we certainly don't need one there.

If we truly wanted to show a sense of morality

The problem is sticking to the 'moral high road', not recognizing it. 'Asinine ethics' can often get in the way of winning.

There is what you CAN do and what you CAN'T. We should at least do what we CAN, even if it costs us a little. I don't care if we never get another contract of any kind with the wretched Iranian mullahs. I'd like to see us send them packing. And the Chinese, for that matter. I bet we'd get a lot more contracts, more profitable ones, with the Taiwanese if we recognized them and told the Chinese to go stuff it.

Or, it could be a ruse. Perhaps the PM PM is going to try to bankrupt Libya by introducing a gun registry and patronage advertising contracts.

Send him to Iran, then, and have him register stones. That'll keep him busy and out of our hair.

[August1991]

Dear Argus,

You raise an interesting point: should we ignore dictators or should we engage them?

This was an issue during the Cold War and Nixon referred to his response as detente. Reagan refused to meet any Soviet leader until finally he was talked into meeting Gorbachev in Geneva in 1985. (Reagan was reticent and I think Thatcher talked him into it.)

I am of the opinion that dictators are never popular in their own countries. (In democracies such as Canada or the US, landslides are rare and occur with 50% (Canada) or 60% (US) of the popular vote. There is a honeymoon for at most several years, or more likely months.)

We should make it clear to the people opposed to the dictator that they are not alone. In addition, we should make it clear to the dictator, his family and his minions that they are a pariah. The fewer places where these people can travel, study, get health treatment the better. The more ways oppositionists can feel supported, the better.

I don't know if closing our Embassy in Tehran, for example, would advance these goals.

[caesar]

And the Chinese, for that matter. I bet we'd get a lot more contracts, more profitable ones, with the Taiwanese if we recognized them and told the Chinese to go stuff it.

Well you would lose your bet. A tiny island vs a very large populated country with a quick growing economy.

As for those who suggest that we should not have embassies in countries that do not meet our ideals; how do you expect the world to change for the better if we do not interact and talk to each other. When diplomacy works it will usually have more lasting effect than does invading and bombing a country and it inhabitants because WE don't like their leader.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear August1991,

The more ways oppositionists can feel supported, the better.

Yes, we should show the 49.5% of the USA that Bush must go. lol

I don't know if closing our Embassy in Tehran, for example, would advance these goals.

It is rarely embassy officials, or indeed any gov't representatives that influence foreign dictators. It is almost always business investors that they heed. Most overseas business investors maintain very close ties with those in (both) gov'ts.

[caesar]

I am of the opinion that dictators are never popular in their own countries

Well, you would be wrong many times. Some dictators are not all that bad; in fact many I prefer to Bush. I believe that Castro for one is quite well liked in Cuba.

[Stoker]

You raise an interesting point: should we ignore dictators or should we engage them?

Thats an intresting idea. Perhaps we should lead an initiative that would see an end to all financial aid to dictorships. (I remember a news story a month or so ago that stated the fourth largest receiver of Canadian financial aid was Red China)

I would much rather see us give food and humanitarian aid to these countries either directly from Canadian aid agencies to the people, and if that was not possable, through international agencies such as the Red Cross or Red Crescent.

Well, you would be wrong many times. Some dictators are not all that bad; in fact many I prefer to Bush. I believe that Castro for one is quite well liked in Cuba.

A better example would have been Saddam, he won the previous election with 99.9% of the vote............

[August1991]

I believe that Castro for one is quite well liked in Cuba.

We'll never know what Cubans think of Castro because they'll never get a chance to express their honest opinion.

But I'll bet that within five years of his death, Cuba will not have a "socialist" regime. IOW, Castro will leave no legacy at all to Cuba. His regime will have been a big waste of time.

----

I remember a news story a month or so ago that stated the fourth largest receiver of Canadian financial aid was Red China)

According to CIDA, we gave 43 million to China placing it fourth (after Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Ethiopia) in country to country aid.

CIDA Check Table J

We gave about 12 million to Brazil (about 25 million if we add our multilateral contribution). Now, consider that the Brazilian government subsidizes Embraer which competes with Bombardier.

We gave about 10 million to Cuba. I'll bet the Cuban government had an influence over how all that money was spent.

[Argus]

And the Chinese, for that matter. I bet we'd get a lot more contracts, more profitable ones, with the Taiwanese if we recognized them and told the Chinese to go stuff it.

Well you would lose your bet. A tiny island vs a very large populated country with a quick growing economy.

A tiny island with a GDP of over half a trillion dollars, a tiny capitalist country with a thriving industrial base, which will buy foreign produced goods and also allow foreign investors to withdraw their money in profits. Furthermore we would be highly favoured by the government if we recognized them. In China, we are a little fish trying to swim among many, many others in a corrupt country where if, after bribing the locals you can get a contract you have to use local resources and you can't take your profits out. What actual good is that to Canada?

As for those who suggest that we should not have embassies in countries that do not meet our ideals;  how do you expect the world to change for the better if we do not interact and talk to each other. 

How do you expect them to change if we fawn over them and show our approval, granting them state visits with pomp and ceremony, smile and shake hands with their bloody, brutal thuggish leaders? Do you see our engagement with China making any changes? I have yet to see any sign of a slackening in their brutal supression of human rights, nor in Iran, nor in North Korea.

Perhaps making them international pariahs will have more affect.

[Argus]

I am of the opinion that dictators are never popular in their own countries

Well, you would be wrong many times. Some dictators are not all that bad; in fact many I prefer to Bush. I believe that Castro for one is quite well liked in Cuba.

The only people who speak well of Castro are ignorant foreigners who have never had to live under his reign.

Say what you like about George Bush - and many do, inside his country and out. Go to America, call Bush an idiot, a moron, a murderer. Shout it from the rooftops. No one will try to harm you. Go to Cuba, try insulting Castro. Visit their lovely jam-packed underground prison cells with no cots, with men and boys jammed shoulder to shoulder in the darkness, and one hole in the corner for a toilet. No trial in sight for months, even years. The screams of those being tortured, their bodies broken and mangled, echoing through the dark stone corridors.

Absolute, sheer bloody ignorance to speak of Castro as being preferred to Bush.

[caesar]

Visit their lovely jam-packed underground prison cells with no cots, with men and boys jammed shoulder to shoulder in the darkness, and one hole in the corner for a toilet. No trial in sight for months, even years. The screams of those being tortured, their bodies broken and mangled, echoing through the dark stone corridors.

Sounds like the American controlled prisons in Iraq and Cuba.

Have you been to Cuba; or you just believe everything the USA government tells you. Indira Ghandi was at one point considered a "dictator" and she was supported by Mother Teresa.

[paranoid joe]

Sounds like the American controlled prisons in Iraq and Cuba.

In Cuba?

Indira Ghandi was at one point considered a "dictator"

you could still say that, I have nothing against her, but in 1975 when she was found guilty of cheating in her last campaign she declared a state of national emergence and called for the arrest of her political foes. in 1977 in an election that she called, she lost. when she came back into power, in responce to Sikh terrorists she assualted the Golden Temple. At her death her SON went into power (to my knowlege there was no election)

[caesar]

Sounds like the American controlled prisons in Iraq and Cuba.

In Cuba?

Yes, Joe;; In Cuba (much to Cuba's regret) Where do you think Quatanana Bay is located. The Americans leased that tip of the country years ago and will not leave despite Cuba's wishes otherwise and refusal to accept "rent"

[Argus]

Visit their lovely jam-packed underground prison cells with no cots, with men and boys jammed shoulder to shoulder in the darkness, and one hole in the corner for a toilet. No trial in sight for months, even years. The screams of those being tortured, their bodies broken and mangled, echoing through the dark stone corridors.

Sounds like the American controlled prisons in Iraq and Cuba.

No, it sounds nothing like them. Or have you read the Red Cross reports? No? I didn't think so. You're far too intellectually lazy to actually look into things before spewing out drivel on the itnernet.

Have you been to Cuba; or you just believe everything the USA government tells you.

Why yes, Caesar, I launched a personal fact-finding tour last year, touring all the Cuban prisons and interviewing prisoners.

[IrishAndProud]

We cannot support dictatorships. Though in Cuba's case it is necessary. Thats a different debate. Anyhow. Dictatorships cannot be praised whatever ideology they hold. I think what annoys me the most is when Americans call for democracy in other countries when their is nothing democratic about their system. You have to be rich, your friends have to be rich. You have to use that wealth to pour your view into American minds. Ralph Nader was more intelligent than any of the two other President candiadates during but he didn't play ball with big business so they shut him out. Democracy. Democracy, some say it is. Your blind if you think thats democracy.