World of opinion
On suspected war criminals:
We’re pleased the federal government responded quickly to our campaign to publish the names and photographs of suspected war criminals hiding in Canada.
Public Safety Minister Vic Toews, following the posting of the identities of 30 men suspected of international war crimes on the web site of the Canada Border Services Agency, credited QMI Agency and Sun News Network for the initiative. …
Toews and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney said there has already been a huge public response to the initiative.
As a result, three of 30 suspects on the list were arrested within days of the program being set up. …
Public support for the initiative isn’t surprising, since everyone from the Canadian Police Association, to opposition MPs, to the leaders of many immigrant communities were in favor of the idea.
We are concerned the CBSA initially argued against the disclosure of the photos and identities of suspected war criminals by wrongly claiming it would violate Canada’s privacy laws.
Upon learning of the CBSA’s position, Chantal Bernier, Canada’s assistant privacy commissioner, told us privacy laws had nothing to do with this issue.
“We have repeatedly stated that privacy is not an excuse to promote secrecy,” Bernier said. “The Privacy Act permits the heads of government departments to disclose personal information when they believe that the public interest clearly outweighs any invasion of privacy.”
Since it’s hard to imagine anything more in the public interest than deporting suspected war criminals the government has already determined don’t belong in Canada, this raises the question of whether other information important for public safety is being wrongly kept from us.
If it is, the government needs to remedy the situation right now.
The Toronto Sun
On Israel-Turkey-U.S. relations:
The U.S. is keenly pursuing reconciliation between Turkey and Israel. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton convinced U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to postpone until the end of August the release of the U.N.’s Palmer Commission report on the Mavi Marmara. The delay would facilitate negotiations between Jerusalem and Ankara aimed at returning to semi-normalcy in relations and allow for the burying of the Palmer Commission report, which reportedly upholds the legality of Israel’s naval blockade of the Gaza Strip, but takes the IDF to task for using disproportionate force.
The Obama administration is convinced that resolution of the Mavi Marmara fiasco is the key to maintaining the Israel-Turkey-U.S. strategic triangle, so essential in American eyes to a stable Middle East.
The U.S., therefore, wants Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to back a formula that includes an apology for “operational mishaps” that resulted in the loss of nine Turkish lives in the Israel Navy commando raid last year, and payment of compensation through a fund to be set up by the Turkish government.
The Turks, meanwhile, will be asked to agree to refrain from bringing legal claims against the commandos who boarded the ship, or against the officers and political leaders who sent them, and resolve their dispute with Israel. …
After being tasked with a life-threatening mission to protect legitimate Israeli interests, the country’s political leadership should now stand behind them. If anything, the Turkish government should be asked to apologize for helping to violate Israel’s legal blockade of Gaza. …
Under the circumstances, the White House’s pressure on Netanyahu to apologize to the Turks raises serious questions. Does the Obama administration truly believe that an apology from Israel will fundamentally change relations with Turkey?
Shouldn’t the U.S. be exerting more efforts to convince Turkey to recognize the legality and legitimacy of Israel’s blockade of Gaza? Saying sorry might sound innocent. But in the case of Turkey, it is liable to do more harm than good.
The Jerusalem Post
On U.S. military actions:
There have been reports that two Chinese fighter jets recently intercepted a U.S. U-2 spy plane over the Taiwan Straits. When asked to comment on the incident, U.S. Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said: “We both have to be very careful about how we fly them. We have to be careful about the intercepts.”
His remarks certainly sound prudent, but they carefully avoided the crucial point — It is the U.S. military’s dangerous war games around China’s air and maritime territory that have repeatedly triggered China’s legitimate response.
The cause and effect should be clear to everyone.
And the U.S. shows no sign of giving up such games. Mullen reiterated on the same occasion that the U.S. military “won’t be deterred from flying in international airspace” on China’s doorstep, despite opposition from Beijing.
Mullen did say that his country does not want a repeat of the incident in 2001, when a Chinese fighter jet and a U.S. military reconnaissance plane collided near China’s coast, killing the Chinese pilot.
However, the onus is on the U.S. to avoid such provocative flights, which can and will cause grave damage to relations between the two countries. …
Given the increasingly interdependent relations between China and the U.S., and the commitment by both governments to build a cooperative partnership in the 21st century, it is in both sides’ interests to build and maintain good-neighborliness based on mutual respect for each other’s sovereignty and national dignity. Washington should show its political will and stop playing with guns on China’s doorsteps.
“Good fences make good neighbors.” The words of the American poet Robert Frost also hold true for this relationship.
China Daily
On Norwegian massacre:
It is customary, after every violent tragedy, to observe that lessons must be learned from it. But the reality of the Norwegian massacre is that there are rather few to be learned.
Anders Breivik was patently an obsessive extremist but his background was both prosperous and liberal; he would not have been first on anyone’s checklist of a potential mass homicide. He did not announce his intentions in advance on the Internet. His views on what he saw as the Islamisation of Norway were extreme but there may be hundreds of people with identical views who would not dream of turning to mass murder.
The only obvious moral is that Norway’s relatively strict gun laws should be better enforced. Norwegians need a license to own a gun and must keep them in a safe; individuals may not buy automatic weapons. Police may inspect a gun-owner’s home. Yet plainly, those laws were poorly enforced. The normal reflex, to call for still stricter laws, is less valid here than to take existing law seriously. ..
What would be a mistake would be to close down a debate on immigration in Norway where the immigrant population amounts to some 12 percent of the total. To put an end to serious debate on this issue would be itself a kind of totalitarianism. A free society will always be vulnerable to the actions of extremists; unfortunately, there will always be those who abuse that freedom.
London Evening Standard