by Salahuddin Rafiquddin
Copy Editor, The Policy Exchange & Director of Infrastructure, University of Toronto Model Parliament
Citizens all across Canada have undoubtedly heard of extremism in many forms over the past decade. The attacks of 11 September 2001 have pushed extremism, terrorism, and religious fundamentalism to the forefront of mainstream news media. This subject had invaded the minds of many in North America; Canadians are no exception. For policy makers in the federal government, however, the issue of extremism has largely been on the back burner.[1]
It has become common place to read the names of Omar Khadr – a Canadian currently held in Guantanamo Bay on charges of killing an american soldier and the only westerner currently held at the facility[2] - and Maher Arar – a Canadian who was arrested and deported to Syria, where he was allegedly tortured.[3] These men, and many more, are in constant rotation on the news, but policy to protect Canadians accused of terrorism has not been forthcoming. The integrity of organizations like CSIS, which exists solely to ensure the safety of Canadians, has even been called into question in recent months.[4] The Security Intelligence Review committee – a watchdog in charge of supervising CSIS – said “advice and guidance” is needed from the federal government if past errors, such as relationships with countries that have a history of disregarding human rights, are to be avoided.[5] If extremism is to be dealt with swiftly and effectively, the the integrity of the institutions concerned must be maintained, even if sweeping changes are needed. An immediate action that can ensure the fluidity of ensuring equal rights and safety for all Canadians, is addressing the issues that have plagued CSIS in the past. CSIS’s has deported citizens, on the basis of terrorism suspicion, to foreign countries to be questioned. The organization’s historic ignorance of human rights in these foreign countries – Syria for example in the case of Maher Arar, has been cannon fodder for opponents of the organization and, to this day, remains a point of controversy.[6] Canadian policy makers should work proactively in ensuring that CSIS works in a positive and productive manner in which Canadian citizens are questioned by lawful Canadian standards in a Canadian setting. With this perspective on interrogation, past blunders like the Maher Arar saga can be avoided and current issues, like Omar Khadr, can be addressed properly with little to no negative repercussions.
Though the issues of ill fated Canadians have been prominent in the media, the issue of extremism has not followed suit in chambers of government. The protection of citizens is the core mission of state and, unfortunately, Canada has not done its best in ensuring it’s accomplishment of that goal. In recent memory the issue of the “Toronto 18” can be seen as a failure on the part of policy makers. Though only four of the men initially charged with terrorism have pled guilty[7], the larger issue remains; how did so many young men, in seemingly normal lives, come to the conclusion that violent acts of terrorism were the course of action in addressing their grievances? Why they came to the conclusion they did is only one factor in a greater picture; how can the Canadian government ensure it never happens again? Canadian public policy, if aimed at ensuring that extremists cannot foster among Canadians, should proactively seek to include minorities, or groups of people who find themselves stigmatized by the larger Canadian community. The disenfranchised and socially alienated ones of society, be it people of minority religious, ethnic, or cultural backgrounds, are some of the most susceptible to radicalization.[8] The Canadian government should co-ordinate efforts through multiple levels of initiatives, at the personal, communal, and national level, to foster a sense of Canadian identity and collective unity amongst the susceptible so a large group of individuals will not be seduced by extremist ideals. The goals of policy should ensure that all Canadians, despite their connection with ethnic, regional, religious, or cultural groups, have a collective voice in condemning acts of terror and ultimately, extremist ideals.
The largest issue at hand that policy makers have disregarded is an open dialogue on extremism in Canada.[9] Richard Fadden, director of CSIS, called for a nuanced debate during a conference in Ottawa.[10] He said that Canada, in particular Canadian policy makers, need to have a dialogue on the issue due to the fact Canada is not immune from terrorism.[11] In recent months, the policies that government have addressed have been on the whole regarding domestic issues such as fiscal expenditure and political rivalries that have had the prospect of leading to untimely elections. Extremism is a concern all policy makers in Canada have an obligation in addressing. Unfortunately, it has fallen on the back burner of politicians in Ottawa and sadly, Canadians are suffering as a result; Omar Khadr is just one case in point. The dialogue government should pursue should include all political parties with the hope of creating a solid policy that can be supported in spite of which political party is in power. The issue of national security should not become a new partisan debate. Further, if any dialogue on the issue is created, community groups should have some avenue to voice their opinions, concerns, or grievances, so that when a policy can come into effect, the alienation many groups face in today’s society can be limited.
Ultimately, extremism has been an issue that has trail blazed the new millennium as a global concern. Canada should not fall behind in addressing an issue that has serious ramifications for domestic security. To date, the job done by policy makers and institutional organizations has kept the populace safe but, the room for improvement is great and should be taken advantage of. With Canada’s active role in Afghanistan and high profile involvement with individuals such as Omar Khadr, the imperative for action is present, but improvement can only occur if the issue is brought back into consideration.
[1] The Canadian Press. (2009, October 29). CBC News – Canada – Canada not immune from extremism: CSIS head. CBC.ca. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/10/29/canada-terror-csis029.html
[2] CBC News. (2009, June 23). CBC News – World – Omar Khadr: Coming of age in a Guantanamo Bay jail cell. CBC.ca. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/01/13/f-omar-khadr.html
[3] CBC News. (2007, January 26). CBC News In Depth: Maher Arar. CBC.ca. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/arar/
[4] The Canadian Press. (2009, October 29). CBC News – Canada – Canada not immune from extremism: CSIS head. CBC.ca. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/10/29/canada-terror-csis029.html
[5] The Canadian Press. (2009, October 29). CBC News – Canada – Canada not immune from extremism: CSIS head. CBC.ca. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/10/29/canada-terror-csis029.html
[6] The Canadian Press. (2009, October 29). CBC News – Canada – Canada not immune from extremism: CSIS head. CBC.ca. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/10/29/canada-terror-csis029.html
[7] CBC News. (2009, October 9). CBC News – Canada – ‘Toronto 18′ timeline: Key events in the case. CBC.ca. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/06/02/f-toronto-timeline.html
[8] POWELL, B. (2005, October 23). TIME Europe Magazine | The Enemy Within – 1. Time Europe. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from http://www.time.com/time/europe/html/051031/story.html
[9] The Canadian Press. (2009, October 29). CBC News – Canada – Canada not immune from extremism: CSIS head. CBC.ca. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/10/29/canada-terror-csis029.html
[10] The Canadian Press. (2009, October 29). CBC News – Canada – Canada not immune from extremism: CSIS head. CBC.ca. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/10/29/canada-terror-csis029.html
[11] The Canadian Press. (2009, October 29). CBC News – Canada – Canada not immune from extremism: CSIS head. CBC.ca. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/10/29/canada-terror-csis029.html
The author of this article has raised several interesting issues. Many Canadians have been feeling a lack of leadership on the part of government following the state of the economy and this whole “inflated” swine flu fiasco. But as you touched on, this issue extends way beyond current affairs or even the current government. There have been severe leadership shortcomings in previous Conservative and even Liberal governments which I feel have primed Canadian agencies such as CISIS and even the RCMP for the serious overhaul that we now recognize they need. True government leadership, regardless of political party, is about the welfare of the Canadian people, and having some leadership these days would go far in preventing situations like Maher Arar and even in resolving the current abandonment on behalf of the Canadian government of Omar Khadr.
In terms of extremism, many people who prefer looking at both sides of the coin would argue that you will always have a segment of the population that is alienated or susceptible to radical ideals. Recognizing the importance of “integration” by all level of government is important, but some argue what else is society to do? At the end of the day, even though some may understand where you’re coming from and despite how educated some of your readers may be, a significant proportion of public opinion is likely to question whether extremism is likely to foster out of the grievances of the stigmatized or out of a perversion of ideals and values; such is the case with the Toronto 18 as I understand it. Although grievance is an imperative factor in the perversion of these ideals, I would argue that it is out of a “twisted” sense of right and wrong that extremism is truly born.
However, you very adeptly provided a resolution to both your and my interpretation as to the root of extremism; the fact that all Canadians should speak with one voice condemning such actions. This country’s diversity is one of its greatest assets but also one of its greatest weaknesses. When you have such diversity across such a large nation, you will naturally encounter divides in the thoughts and beliefs of society, which leads to social stigmatization and as you so eloquently put it, seduction by radical ideals. In the end, it’s up to us to take a page from our southern neighbours in forging a national identity, a “collective unity” by means of which we can hope to speak about certain issues with a single voice reflecting Canadian values and the beliefs of all Canadian citizens, such as condemning terrorist acts and extremism, without intruding on the regional, cultural, religious or even political values that our society values.
GREAT JOB!