Carney’s patterns discouraging on human rights front

In his outstanding book, One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This, author Omar El Akkad criticizes Western governments for their limp and immoral response to the deaths of thousands of innocent children in Gaza.

He essentially argues that they invariably look away from the human carnage, calculate their national interests and say that they truly care — though their words never translate into meaningful deeds.

Near the end of the book, he asks the reader to finish the following sentence: “It is unfortunate that tens of thousands of children are dead, but…”

There are many other pertinent queries such as, “What are you willing to give up to alleviate someone else’s suffering?”

Power? Wealth? Position? Self-interest?

Then there’s this critically important line in the work: “I don’t know how to make a person care for someone other than their own.”

As I scope out my September course at University of Prince Edward Island on international human rights, I’m certain that my students will struggle mightily with that one, too.

But I wonder whether Prime Minister Mark Carney — notwithstanding his recent move to advance Palestinian rights — has ever given any thought to whether he cares about the well-being of others outside his own immediate family. Does the advancement of human rights register as a top priority for his government? Or, is it more about words and less about actions for him?

I know, I know. Canadian governments never fail to tell us how important values, basic freedoms and human rights considerations are. We are told over and over again that they raise this thorny issue all the time with non-democratic governments around the world. But, alas, then they often quickly move on to more important matters like signing trade deals, investment protection agreements and a slew of lucrative business contracts.

In a major foreign policy speech in June to the Munk School of Global Affairs in Toronto, Carney made one or two passing references to human rights, our values and Canada’s principles. He made it very clear that “Canada will lead with the values the world respects, the resources the world wants and an economy that leads the G7.” Again, it looks like economics trumps human rights to me.

I understand that Carney has only been in power for a few months now — so we shouldn’t judge him harshly on his short record to date. Perhaps he will surprise us yet. But we can already see patterns of behaviour and direct actions thus far that are not very encouraging on the human rights front.

Take a look at the recent G7 gathering of Western industrialized countries in Kananaskis, Alta., where there was one joint statement on “transnational repression” (to appear tough on China). Almost all of the other ones had a commercial or trade component that was said to boost economic prosperity.

To add insult to injury, Carney thought it was wise to compose a G7 guest list of what can only be described as international bad boys: Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. If Amnesty International is to be believed, none of these characters has a human rights record that would necessitate a personal invite to such an exclusive G7 gathering.

More to the point, humanitarian and human rights crises in Africa alone were not given the time of day. Not a word was uttered about the conflict, sexual violence and displacement in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the violent conflict, food insecurity and climate shocks in the Sahel region or even the ongoing civil war in Sudan.

Lastly, there was a great deal of brouhaha over having Carney use the G7 — especially after word broke that the House of Commons was ready to confer honorary citizenship on Hong Kong media tycoon Jimmy Lai (who is now wasting away in solitary confinement) — to focus the world’s attention on Lai and China’s massive human rights violations in Hong Kong.

Instead, nothing was said at the G7 and the anticipated House of Commons unanimous motion initiative was actually pulled at the last moment. A spokesperson for the Government House Leader’s office actually had the temerity to say that a unanimous consent motion was not the best method of conducting Canadian foreign policy.

But Russian pro-democracy campaigner Vladimir Kara-Murza was granted honorary Canadian citizenship in June 2023 by unanimous consent in Parliament. Let’s be clear: this was all about not offending Beijing.

Accordingly, I just don’t see Mark Carney incorporating a human rights agenda into his foreign policy posture. This is a Liberal government that will be consumed by commercial and trade matters, investment and economic growth and business deal-making.

Perhaps that’s a sign of the times. But as El Akkad explains in his thought-provoking book: If that’s the case, then world leaders should at least be honest about that and stop pretending and saying publicly just how central human rights are to their governments.

Peter McKenna is professor of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island in Charlottetown.