Cons, Libs and NDP do not call for Egyptian President to step down

132 posts / 0 new
Last post
trippie
Cons, Libs and NDP do not call for Egyptian President to step down

Well it seems from the CBC National tonight that the only part leaders calling for the presedent of Egypt to step down are the Bloc and the Greens.

 

Of course I expect the Conservative and Liberals not to , but what about the NDP?

 

I thought the NDP was working class party?

radiorahim radiorahim's picture

This is the statement that the NDP released on Friday:

http://www.ndp.ca/press/statement-by-ndp-on-situation-in-egypt

Things have certainly changed since then and by now they should be calling for Mubarak to go.

JKR

The NDP's statement was bang-on. The most important thing for Egypt is to have political reform. Mubarak's departure is secondary after the need to have basic democracy established in Egypt. Focussing on Mubarak's status could ironically limit Egypt's chances of implementing long term political reforms.

Unionist

radiorahim wrote:

Things have certainly changed since then and by now they should be calling for Mubarak to go.

Well, I kind of disagree with that. What business is it of the NDP's (or of Canada's for that matter) who the president of Egypt is?

When you come down to it, why is the NDP lecturing Egypt, in agonizing detail, how it should conduct its affairs:

Paul Dewar wrote:
“It is time for political reforms in Egypt. The deeply flawed November 2010 Parliamentary election should be re-run after a review of election laws and regulations with the input of civil society organizations and political parties. International and domestic observers should be fully accredited and given access to all stages of the election process to ensure legitimacy and accountability.

"Unreasonable restrictions on ballot access for presidential candidates should be lifted immediately and replaced by candidacy requirements that adhere to legitimate electoral practices. The change of law should take effect as soon as possible to allow prospective candidates time to organize campaigns for the November 2011 presidential election.

Really?

If I were the NDP, I would concentrate on: 1) mobilizing Canadians for democratic reform in Canada; 2) warning against any foreign interference in internal Egyptian affairs (including statement's like Paul Dewar's).

I'm not trying to be contrary. I am filled with enthusiasm and anticipation (as are we all) at the uprising of the Egyptian people and the people of other countries currently under way. I do, however, believe that the advice from foreigners is useless at best (e.g. Dewar's), or menacing at worst (Obama, Netanyahu, etc.).

The Egyptian people will either get this done alone, or not at all. There is no third way.

 

JKR

Maybe at the end of the day Egypt will be more democratic then Canada.

Sean in Ottawa

I don't have a problem with anyone in Canada or elsewhere providing advice to anyone including Egypt or the US or whomever but when you make that "advice" public it is not advice anymore it is pressure and interference.

Interference is difficult to justify and there is no justification at this point.

 

Stockholm

Something like a million people are expected to demonstrate in cairo today calling for Mubarak to resign. I'm sure that makes no difference at all to Mubarak, but if the fourth largest party in the Canadian parliament issues press release demanding that he step down - well then by jove it will be a done deal - sayonara Mr. Mubarak!!!

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

I never voted for Jack for leader. I realize that this is a generalization, and I may be speaking more from the heart then the head, but I wish he would do the right thing on this by calling for Mubarak's resigination, UN intervention in some appropriate way, and an offer of Canadian direct aid to the Egyptians in any way they might want. I feel disappointed. Rightly or wrongly, that is how I feel.

Arthur Cramer, Winnipeg

Slumberjack

acramer wrote:
I may be speaking more from the heart then the head, but I wish he would do the right thing on this by calling for Mubarak's resiginationI feel disappointed. Rightly or wrongly, that is how I feel.

You are only wrong in expecting anything in the first place.  It's really the best way to avoid disappointment.

remind remind's picture

No Canadian political party should be issuing any commentary about how the Egyptian President should step down. I completely agree with unionist on this issue.

Moreover, by the NDP doing so, if they had of, which I thank rational thinking and non-political game playing that they did not, it would have lended credibility to a false notion that the Canadians working class are better off than the Egyptians, thereby giving us a reason to tell them what to do.

The NDP did not I believe for different reasons of course than why the Liberals and CONs did not, so lumping them together smacks of political game playing.

That trippie slams unions in the other thread speaks a great deal as to the political mechanisms at work in trippie starting this duplicate thread.

Slumberjack

remind wrote:
That trippie slams unions in the other thread speaks a great deal as to the political mechanisms at work in trippie starting this duplicate thread.

Criticizing an establishment oligarchy of another sort isn't the same as coming down against worker's rights. It seems a tad disingenuous of you to suggest that this is what transpired from that statement. 

humanity4all

Most comments are correct in saying that countries should not interfere in other nations affairs. So why would a canadian prime minister say in public, "Canada will support israel at any cost?".  Why do canadians support israel at any cost?

Stockholm

If we should never interfere in othert countries internal affairs - does that mean that we we should all apologize for interfering in the internal affairs of South Africa in the 1980s when many of us were demanding an end to apartheid and for majority rule?

humanity4all

Keep paying your taxes....

Buddy Kat

Well I'm not to optimistic...Anwar Sadat came from the military and so did the wack job they have now..his vice president.....looking at all the respect the military has from the people ...there new leader will once again be a military leader.

 

Kind of like Canada where we so called democratically oust one leader (always con or lib) and replace them with a new one (always con or lib)...so Egypt is in the same crummy situation...they will replace the old militant leader with a new militant one.....and I don't think elections will help ..just look at Palestine and how a democratically elected party can be shunned and attacked by the soaking in democratic bath oil west.

Like usual tho the only sensible statements about anything foriegn are always NDP ones..too bad 80% of Canada can't see it or even care...much less give them time of day.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Stockholm wrote:

If we should never interfere in othert countries internal affairs - does that mean that we we should all apologize for interfering in the internal affairs of South Africa in the 1980s when many of us were demanding an end to apartheid and for majority rule?

I supported the anti-apartheid movement not just because the regime was racist but because the people of South Africa asked me too.  So far I have not heard what the people of Egypt would like us to do.  I am at this point merely cheering in the background and hoping that the military keeps it pledge to not instigate a blood bath to restore "peace, order and good government."

Unionist

Stockholm wrote:

If we should never interfere in othert countries internal affairs - does that mean that we we should all apologize for interfering in the internal affairs of South Africa in the 1980s when many of us were demanding an end to apartheid and for majority rule?

No, Stockholm, we should celebrate the assistance we gave to the people of South Africa, at their request, to rid their country of the evil of apartheid and minority rule.

And no one said we should "never interfere". We should boycott Israel, for example, until the demands of the Palestinian civil society are met. We should get our troops out of Afghanistan, now. We should actively support the struggles of people everywhere against imperialism and colonialism.

We should, however, also learn to make distinctions. We should focus on not oppressing others before "helping" them. We should favour consensus between nations over unilateralism. We should be very careful not to decide for others who represents their best interests.

 

Stockholm

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I supported the anti-apartheid movement not just because the regime was racist but because the people of South Africa asked me too.

Perhaps you can tell us how exactly the entire population of South Africa "asked you" to support the anti-apartheid movement? Did they have a conference call for you and 25 million South Africans where they all told you what they wanted?? By what process might the people of Egypt let it be known that they would welcome people in other countries expressing support for the anti-Mubarak movement and they they would welcome having people in western countries like Canada and the US telling their leaders to let it be know that if Mubarak doesn't quit, all of the billions of dollars of foreign aid to Egypt (most of which gets stolen by the Mubarak family anyways) will be suspended.

Stockholm

Stockholm wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I supported the anti-apartheid movement not just because the regime was racist but because the people of South Africa asked me too.

Perhaps you can tell us how exactly the entire population of South Africa "asked you" to support the anti-apartheid movement? Did they have a conference call for you and 25 million South Africans where they all told you what they wanted?? By what process might the people of Egypt let it be known that they would welcome people in other countries expressing support for the anti-Mubarak movement and they they would welcome having people in western countries like Canada and the US telling their leaders to let it be know that if Mubarak doesn't quit, all of the billions of dollars of foreign aid to Egypt (most of which gets stolen by the Mubarak family anyways) will be suspended.

I have no opinion as to who exactly should govern Egypt. All I knoew if that i support democracy and oppose fascist dictatorship. I think that there should be free elections in Egypt. Hosni Mubarak should also be free to compete in those elections and if a majority of Egyptians want him to remain President then so be it - the public is always right

Slumberjack

Unionist wrote:
We should, however, also learn to make distinctions. We should focus on not oppressing others before "helping" them. We should favour consensus between nations over unilateralism. We should be very careful not to decide for others who represents their best interests. 

Canada and its political parties decided for thirty years to keep their collective mouths shut while the US supported henchman in Egypt decided for others. With the unprecedented historical shift underway, expecting slightly more from our respective representatives than the hedging of political bets between desperate calls for democracy and ruthless oppression doesn't seem like all that much to ask for.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I don't think Duceppe was overstepping the bounds when he said yesterday "there can be no democracy with Mubarak" - I think he was just pointing out the obvious.

Stockholm

I suspect that the people demonstrating in Cairo want Mubarak gone and the quicker and the more peacefully it happens, the better. If it takes Obama making a call to Mubarak telling him the job is up to make it happen, I doubt if they will get upset at the US "interfering" since the US has been interfering in support of Mubarak for the last 30 years in the first place.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Good point, Stock. The USA may start to reap what it has sown, though.

Pogo Pogo's picture

The news reports talk of individuals looking to the rest of the world for support.  In many ways it is analogous to South Africa.  The problem is that there is not a representative body. While I cannot prove that the Egyptians want outside support, I believe it is the case and I defy anyone to prove they don't.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Stockholm wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I supported the anti-apartheid movement not just because the regime was racist but because the people of South Africa asked me too.

Perhaps you can tell us how exactly the entire population of South Africa "asked you" to support the anti-apartheid movement? Did they have a conference call for you and 25 million South Africans where they all told you what they wanted?? By what process might the people of Egypt let it be known that they would welcome people in other countries expressing support for the anti-Mubarak movement and they they would welcome having people in western countries like Canada and the US telling their leaders to let it be know that if Mubarak doesn't quit, all of the billions of dollars of foreign aid to Egypt (most of which gets stolen by the Mubarak family anyways) will be suspended.

Perhaps you could tell me why you are so abrasive. I relied on the ANC's and others calls as indicative of what the oppressed people wanted.  I am personally hoping that the transition coalition that has been talked about between ALL the opposition parties takes power and then I will be happy to offer it any assistance requested. In the meantime us telling them that we want them to have democracy is a joke given the state of our democracy.  Hopefully they can move towards a democratic system of government and if so it definitely will not be a FPTP facade.

Sean in Ottawa

I was going to add a comment similar to Stockholm on the interference question-- it is a little rch for us to say no we should not interfere now when the regime in place is only there thanks to previous interference-- granted mostly that of the US but as a member of NATO, I am not so sure that sayign that the people should have their will is interference-- it is more like a renunciation of previous interference. I think due to previous interference there is no absolutely clear position on this so I can't agree wholeheartedly with Remind and Unionist even though I totally respect their viewpoint and the spirit and principle behind it.

 

Unionist

Slumberjack wrote:

Canada and its political parties decided for thirty years to keep their collective mouths shut while the US supported henchman in Egypt decided for others.

And that was and is wrong.

Quote:
With the unprecedented historical shift underway, expecting slightly more from our respective representatives than the hedging of political bets between desperate calls for democracy and ruthless oppression doesn't seem like all that much to ask for.

Maybe I didn't make my point clearly. I expect much more from our political parties. They should (but won't) publicly demand that the U.S. and Israel keep their hands, arms, and money out of Egypt and let the Egyptian people decide their future.

That, you'll never see or hear, unfortunately. They'll lecture the Egyptian people on the niceties of phoney Western electoral multi-party "dumbocracy" - just as they lectured Iraq, and as they lecture Afghanistan on how to treat women. But they will never respect the sovereignty of the Egyptian people.

Sean in Ottawa

Now this, Unionist, I can wholeheartedly agree with as it does repudiate previous interference.

Stockholm

Would it be "interference" if Obama decided to withdraw all US aid to Egypt unless Mubarak announces he is quitting and allowing free elections?

Unionist

Yes, Stockholm, it would. It's called blackmail. It's the very definition of neo-colonial interference. Obama should keep his dirty hands off of Egypt and everywhere else. As for "free" elections, I don't know which food bank is handing those out.

 

Slumberjack

Stockholm wrote:
Would it be "interference" if Obama decided to withdraw all US aid to Egypt unless Mubarak announces he is quitting and allowing free elections?

It certainly would. They've developed such a culture of dependency between puppet master and puppet dictator for so long, that any arbitrary cutting of the strings now would in itself amount to interference. They'd have to first wean the pervasive security and military apparatus from the bulk of the aid, so that any sudden withdrawal of prop money wouldn't have unintended consequences upon the budgetary allocations for domestic social spending.

Unionist

The U.S. will never stop financing Egypt, any more than Saudi Arabia - any more than Israel. Without their puppets, their power will be extinguished by the masses. If one puppet no longer serves their purpose, they will replace him - murder him if they need to - and get another one.

The Egyptian people may or may not be focusing their demands on the departure of Mubarak - hard to tell at this distance. For progressives in Canada to do so, however, is not a good idea. That "victory" in itself will be hollow, and will leave the imperial chains intact.

Let the Egyptian people decide - without lectures, interference, or disingenuous "support".

 

Stockholm

But then to let US aid to continue to flow into Egypt is also "interference" since a continuation of aid implies support for the Mubarak dictatorship - so if you want non-interference, i guess the only option is for the US to cut off all ties to Egypt regardless of whether Mubarak stays or goes?

Sean in Ottawa

still complicated Stockholm-- abrupt withdrawal of supprot is also interference--

This is indeed difficult and is in fact the very reason why interference is so problematic to start with even the disengagement is a problem.

Pogo Pogo's picture

Talk about not interfering is simply non-sense.  You cannot not interfere.  The structure of nation states is that much of their legitimacy is based on the respect they have of other states.  If there is an internal dispute over the reigns of power avoiding support for any non-state based group is  by default offering support for the state. 

There is a difference between acknowledging the forces at play within a state and direct interference.  I have no problem with Canada or any political entity stating obvious facts and questioning whether the leadership continues to have the support of the population.  What Canada shouldn't do is then offer advice on choices that lay ahead, except about very basic human rights.

Unionist

Stockholm wrote:

But then to let US aid to continue to flow into Egypt is also "interference"

LOL, you're persistent, aren't you? Who said "let US aid continue to flow into Egypt"?? You asked about the U.S. withdrawing aid unless Egypt obeyed some ultimatum. That's called blackmail. Interference.

Let me be even clearer. The U.S. should be condemned by the entire world for every penny it gives to the Egyptian government, AND for any threat to cut off aid whatsoever. How's that for dialectics?

To reiterate. If Obama decides that Mubarak has become an obstacle, he will never cut off "aid" as you quaintly call it. He will either evacuate Mubarak, or have him murdered. And then install his next puppet.

Unless the people get there first. Then, all bets are off.

Unionist

Pogo wrote:

Talk about not interfering is simply non-sense.  You cannot not interfere.

You mean, NATO not invading Egypt to "help" the demonstrators would be sort of like interfering in support of the regime?

Or as per Stockholm: If the U.S. has been interfering for a long time, and then they stop interfering, that's kind of like interfering on the other side?

I think that's a little too cute by half. You can't solve real-life problems by re-defining words.

 

humanity4all

Wow, reading this conversation, it seems that canadians have a strong tradition in interferring(invading) and destoying other societies. I make this comment in accordance to their curriculum vitae(their history).

Fidel

I just don't see how the NDP is swimming in the same pig troff occupied by the two very similar pro-USA parties in federal government in Ottawa throughout the cold war era and still today. The NDP was busy pointing out the pro-Uncle Sam stoogery in Ottawa for years and years. In my opinion, that covers everything and anything our colonizers in Washington have ever done in the way of foreign policy including the theft of Canada with full compliance by our stoogeaucracy.

 South Africans were protesting in the1970s. They were dying in police detention and clashing with cops a good 15 or 20 years before the ANC was even recognized as a legal political party. By comparison, Egyptian protesters have only really just begun. Egypt on the other hand, has the Muslim Brotherhood as well as secular leftist opposition. We know which of the dissidents have been supported by Washington at the same time our imperial masters have supported the dictator in Cairo. We know which of secular left wing and religious extremists Washington and their stooges in Ottawa will choose to support.

Our stooges supported Uncle Sam's meddling in Afghanistan for over 30 years. Afghanistan is probably the most backwards country ruled by right wing fundamentalists in both government and opposition Taliban for many years. Afghanistan was a failed nation state years ago and owning some of the worst infant mortality rates. Gross abuse of women and children's rights are now a 30 year norm for Afghan domestic policy and made worse by war instigated by our largest trade partners next door to Bananada. There was no anti-Afghan apartheid movement in Canada then.  But our NDP critics take the opposite view of Afghanistan, a failed nation state. In the case of Afghanistan, the NDP is meddling when it says intervention is needed to bring negotiated peace followed by democracy Afghan style. The NDP can't do anything right on foreign policy if you listen to those critics for very long.

radiorahim radiorahim's picture

Unionist wrote:

Well, I kind of disagree with that. What business is it of the NDP's (or of Canada's for that matter) who the president of Egypt is?

 

Well, I would normally kind of agree with you ;)  

But in this particular case the key demand of the mass movement in Egypt is for Mubarak the puppet to go.

As for what comes next, that's up to the Egyptian people.

Unionist

radiorahim wrote:

But in this particular case the key demand of the mass movement in Egypt is for Mubarak the puppet to go.

That may well be - but I don't believe it can be Canada's key demand. It's not our affair. Indeed, it appears it's Obama's key demand too. He has already declared victory for the mass movement, from a little speech I saw him give today.

Quote:
As for what comes next, that's up to the Egyptian people.

That I have to agree with. Not only what comes next, but what comes first.

 

 

trippie

Here is my line of thinking.

 

What is happening in Egypt is a working class revolution. The NPD is a Social Democrat party. Meaning, if anything, they hold some kind of Socialist understanding.

 

So I would think that the NDP would support this workers revolution and the first task is to form solidarity with the working class in Egypt.

 

But instead they do not, they have an allegence to the the bourgeoisie and hope that they prevail in this matter. Because that seems to be the stance of the two main bourgeois parties in Canada, the Libs and Cons.

 

Now I didn't start this thead to denounce the NDP. I started it to hi-light our fight here in Canada. I am 100% in solidarity with the working class in Egypt. They are showing us how it is done. So we must be very carefull about whom we, members of the working class in Canada, choose to align ourselves with.

 

Their fight is our fight. I have International Socialist tendencies. I see no borders to our collective struggle against Capitalist class structure.

JKR

If someone like Nelson Mandela was waiting in the wings, there would be many more calls for Mubarak's immediate resignation, the NDP included.

Fidel

Slumberjack wrote:
Canada and its political parties decided for thirty years to keep their collective mouths shut while the US supported henchman in Egypt decided for others. With the unprecedented historical shift underway, expecting slightly more from our respective representatives than the hedging of political bets between desperate calls for democracy and ruthless oppression doesn't seem like all that much to ask for.

The NDP is a fourth party with not a lot resources. Uncle Sam does business with more corrupt stooges around the world than just our own in Ottawa. The NDP has criticized Harper's stooging it up with other stooges owned by Uncle Sam in this hemisphere, like Uribe's right wing death squad government in Bogota. Our weak and ineffective leaders in Ottawa have signed trade deals with oppressive right wing regimes in central and South America, and aided and abetted the CIA's overthrow of a democratically elected leader in Haiti. The NDP doesn't have the resources to embroil themselves in every country where Uncle Sam has meddled over the years. And so this is why I agree with Noam Chomsky when he says there should be activism and political efforts aimed at blowing the whistle on crimes of the state(USA). The NDP is doing a great job of pointing out how our elected leaders have and continue to sell this country down the Mississippi River time and time again. We have our own stooges in Ottawa that need pressuring and feet held to the fire on issues of basic democracy right here at home.

Slumberjack

Fidel wrote:
The NDP is a fourth party with not a lot resources gain.

I've seen MSM microphones dangling in front of NDP mouths this week, responding to the same question asked of the BQ. There were plenty of resource neutral opportunities for the NDP to be emphatic in support of people seeking to rid themselves of US supported puppet dictators.  How on earth are we supposed to warm to the NDP statements on Human Rights, and their stated desire to establish an independent, principled foreign policy, when they can't even manage a word or two in solidarity with people who are literally dying to bring an end to 30 years of brutal American sponsored neo-colonialism.

Fidel

Oh the BQ can say whatever they want to. Their's is not a party seeking federal power. Past governments in Ottawa were all bluff and bluster when it came to South Africa's apartheid government, too. Our stooges in Ottawa would puff up their chests and speak harsh words against Botha and DeKlerk. Canadians thought the sun shone out of their asses for those grand speeches. They never actually did anything about it though.

I can remember when the roles were switched when it came to the issue of the American CIA abduction of Aristide from Haiti. The Bloc were all pissed off that NDP MPs were referring to Aristide as having been "removed" from Haiti. BQ MP's demanded the NDP refer to Aristide in the more politically neutered term, "departed."

First things first - clean the two stoogeaucratic parties from the halls of power in Ottawa, then see what happens. Our two Bay Street parties are really one and the same and been in power in Ottawa a helluva lot longer than Mubarak and twice as long as the Sovs ruled the former USSR. Actions speak louder than mere words. The NDP isn't about to score meaningless political points over a country we have no FTA's with. Our stooges have signed FTA with another of Uncle Sam's friendly dicatators right here in this hemisphere. And the NDP have spoken out fairly strongly against that bit of stoogery on the part of the Harpers and that other party in official opposition propping them up at the time.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Fidel wrote:

First things first - clean the two stoogeaucratic parties from the halls of power in Ottawa, then see what happens. 

Great any chance in an election in the next twenty years that the NDP will make a break through in Ontario?  In Burnaby we have been sending a progressive MP to Ottawa for decades and people like you keep saying lefties have to play nice or they don't get elected..

Here we elected first Svend and then Bill so stop the depressing lectures and elect someone Fidel or STFU.

Unionist

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Great any chance in an election in the next twenty years that the NDP will make a break through in Ontario? 

The Ontario NDP campaigned from the left, and when they won, were so traumatized that they decided to govern from the right, so as to stay in power forever. Whoops, didn't work. It'll take a couple of generations to recover from that lesson. Give them time.

Back to Egypt - now that Obama has declared that the uprising is over (having won its demands, don't you know), and now that Mubarak's hired thugs (according to some reports) are implementing Obama's call for peaceful transition - what should our politicians say? Daily lectures to the Egyptian people? Detailed tactical instructions? Taking sides?

I don't think so. My suggestion remains:

1. Long live the struggle of the Egyptian people for democratic rights!

2. Foreign powers: Hands off Egypt! The Egyptian people are sovereign!

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Make our best efforts to elect true progressive people to the HofC - what else can we do?

Slumberjack

Boom Boom wrote:
Make our best efforts to elect true progressive people to the HofC - what else can we do?

Ummm...

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Boom Boom wrote:

Make our best efforts to elect true progressive people to the HofC - what else can we do?

 

100% agreement.

It is why I hate the digs from people like Fidel.  We have elected progressives in places I have lived and I helped on those campaigns so yes I get to complain that the NDP is not progressive enough.  I know from experience that people vote for integrity and hard work before ideology.  If the NDP honestly believes in democracy it will support the will of the Egyptian people.  This would be a great time for the NDP to point out the futility of Afghanistan where the current stated mission is to make the country stable enough for democracy.  Clearly Egypt proves that propping up a stable corrupt dictatorship will never lead to the people having democracy unless they wrest it from the Western backed tyrants and their cronies.  This is  a great time for some coherent messaging around Canada's role in Afghanistan and NATO and the relationship of Israel to the most despotic regimes in the region.  Come on NDP grow some gonads and at least talk the talk.

Pages

Topic locked