Trump’s deranged imperialist ambitions are a threat to world peace

The ramifications of Trump's sociopathic inclinations . . . hint at a greater mental imbalance that could result in armed conflict.  His authoritarian style, dictatorial leanings, and empathy deficit reveal a man consumed by self-interest rather than concern for the collective well being of either the American people or the global community.  

 

By Fareed Khan

 

The relationship the United States has with the world has always been complex, but no recent American leader has muddled this relationship more than Donald Trump.  Amidst his myriad of controversial statements and actions since being re-elected, Trump's repeated musings about annexing Canada, taking ownership of Greenland, and the US retaking control of the Panama Canal reveal a fundamental disconnect with reality and a disturbing inclination toward autocracy.  As the world watches, it becomes increasingly clear that Trump's behaviour is not just a product of bombastic rhetoric.  Furthermore, it aligns with the insights of clinicians and first-hand accounts from those who worked closely with him that paint a portrait of a deranged sociopath posing a serious threat to peace and stability in the western hemisphere and around the world.

 

At the heart of Trump's approach to geopolitics lies an alarming disregard for the sovereignty of nations and a seeming reckless ambition for territorial expansion regardless of the consequences. His statements about annexing Canada sound bizarre, almost comical, and yet they reveal a mindset that views neighbouring countries not as independent sovereign entities, allies or friends, but as territories ripe for acquisition and exploitation.  

Trump’s remarks, peppered throughout his first presidency and since he was re-elected, evoke images of an imperialistic era reminiscent of tyrants rather than democratically elected leaders.  Claims that the US should own Greenland or that it would retake control of the Panama Canal serve to further illustrate this disturbing trend.  Such sentiments, particularly from the president of a global superpower, have a ripple effect, undermining international relationships and the principles of international law and diplomacy.  Such statements by the world’s most powerful nation also give ideas to adversarial nations like China and Russia that might makes right, and that more powerful nations can use force to take over less powerful nations.

In the 2017 book “The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump,” 27 psychiatrists, psychologists, and other mental health professionals described the “clear and present danger” that Trump's mental health posed to the “nation and individual well being”.  These contributors articulated concerns that his apparent narcissism and sociopathic traits could lead to dangerously unpredictable behaviour.  Their analysis suggested that when someone in power exhibits a blend of grandiosity, lack of empathy, and disregard for the consequences of their actions the potential for catastrophic decisions rises exponentially.  Trump’s cavalier discussions about territorial acquisition exemplify this mindset — where diplomacy is replaced by fantasies of control and conquest.

Moreover, the assessments of former senior officials from the first Trump administration provide a chilling look into his character.  In interviews with The New York Times and The Atlantic in October, John Kelly, Trump’s longest serving chief of staff, warned that the man met the definition of a fascist, and that during his first presidency, he suggested that Nazi leader Adolf Hitler “did some good things.”  Such assertions — from insiders who once aligned with him — indicate a disturbing mindset.  Rather than being a mere aberration of presidential behavior, these claims reflect a coherent psychological profile stretching beyond just personal traits to encompass ideological beliefs that could have long-term ramifications for global peace.  His admiration for Hitler and other authoritarian leaders — projected through flippant comments and praise — highlights an affinity for power structures reminiscent of fascism.

The testimony received during both impeachment hearings and those related to the January 6 insurrection further solidifies this understanding of Trump's psyche.  Witnesses described a man willing to stoke violence and division for personal gain, a behavior that could have devastating consequences not just domestically but also on the international stage.  Such an approach to governing results in the trampling of democratic principles in favor of self-serving narratives which in turn leads to a breakdown of trust — both within the US and with nations that are friends and allies.

 

 

 https://www.axios.com/2019/10/28/donald-trump-world-peace-threat-kim-putin-xi-maduro

Former White House officials consistently pointed to Trump's unpredictable nature as a catalyst for destabilization in international relations.  His tendency to make unilateral decisions or uninformed and unhinged proclamations, usually without evidence or expert consultation fostered chaos, not just for domestic policy but also in America's global standing.  Consequently, statements suggesting that US should have authority over territories outside its jurisdiction not only unsettles nations it also compromise the very foundation of the international legal order which has prevented another world war for 80 years.

Consider the implications of a world where the leader of the US (or any powerful nation) has the right to dictate the fate of other nations based on personal whims.  In an era where global cooperation is more crucial than ever in confronting issues like climate change or pandemics, Trump's insistence on making irrational claims on the territory of other nations showcases a profound disconnect with the realities of international relations and governance, suggesting an imminent threat to peaceful relations with neighbours and allies.

The ramifications of Trump's sociopathic inclinations extend beyond mere bluster.  They hint at a greater mental imbalance that could result in armed conflict.  His authoritarian style, dictatorial leanings, and empathy deficit reveal a man consumed by self-interest rather than concern for the collective wellbeing of either the American people or the global community.  As the world continues to try to grapple with issues like human rights, trade, and security, leaders unable to acknowledge the fundamentals of cooperation and respect — such as Trump — pose a direct threat to world peace.

As we watch Trump begin to undo American laws and institutions that protect the underprivileged, the marginalized and the persecuted, and as he issues ultimatums and threats to the world, it is time for world leaders, particularly those from the democratic West, to see the danger he poses to peace and stability.  His repeated statements about territorial expansion are not just idle threats, they are indicative of a psychological profile that endorses aggression in place of genuine diplomacy.  

When insults become ambitions and fantasies threaten state sovereignty global peace hangs in a delicate balance.  In such circumstances it is imperative that the lessons learned from 20th Century history and the Trump political era guide world leaders to take the actions necessary to defend peace and stability and keep the world free from the inane political vision of a deranged sociopath. 

© 2025 The View From Here.  © 2025 Fareed Khan.  All Rights Reserved.

Canada and its political leaders will be held accountable for complicity in the genocide of Palestinians by Israel

It is time to hold all Canadian leaders accountable – political, corporate, academic or otherwise – who have tried to silence and erase Palestinian voices, before another year passes and thousands more innocents are murdered in a genocide that is the most transparent in history.

By Fareed Khan

As the year 2025 begins, the phrase “Happy New Year” rings hollow for millions around the world, especially for the Palestinian people enduring the horrors of genocide in Gaza.  The scale of the atrocities committed by Israel against Palestinians — recognized as genocide by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the University Network for Human Rights (a global consortium of university human rights centres) and the UN Special Committee to investigate Israel’s war in Gaza (among others) — is horrific.

Over 54,000 Palestinians have been reported killed since the genocide began in October 2023 according to Geneva-based Euromed Human Rights Monitor.  Among the dead are 17,627 children and 10,892 women.  In addition, 113,220 have been injured, well over 90% of the population has been displaced, more than 90% of the hospitals and health care facilities have been destroyed, over 77% all the buildings in Gaza have been destroyed or damaged, and the enclave has been transformed into a post-apocalyptic hellscape.  However, a report released by the British medical journal Lancet in June 2024 estimates the actual Palestinian death toll could be as high as 186,000 or even higher — that’s roughly 8% of Gaza’s population.

Yet, despite the overwhelming evidence that has been revealed to the world of Israel’s crimes Canada continues to stand with the US and other Western nations in support of the terrorist state, and has turned a blind eye to the immense suffering that has been inflicted on an innocent people without an army, navy or air force to defend themselves against one of the most powerful military forces in the world.

The complicity of Canada in the ongoing genocide is not merely a matter of indifference, it is an active endorsement through Canada’s continued military support and trade relations with Israel.  When Russia invaded Ukraine Canada took quick and decisive action against the Russian government and key officials by suspending trade and imposing sanctions.  No such action has been taken against Israel despite the fact that the evidence of Israeli crimes is far greater than the evidence that had been presented against Russia during the early stages of the invasion of Ukraine.

Canadian-made weapons have contributed directly to the violence inflicted upon Palestinian civilians — violence that has been institutionalized and perpetuated at an astonishing rate.  What more must transpire for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Opposition leader Pierre Poilievre and other Canadian politicians to recognize that Canada is not a neutral observer of Israeli crimes but rather an enabler of the genocide of Palestinians?

The Nuremberg Trials after World War 2 defined the crimes that the Nazis had committed as the ultimate crime against humanity.  So, for Canada and its leaders to support a nation that commits such acts, whether through words or actions, makes them just as culpable in the crimes committed.  

Leaders like Trudeau and Poilievre exemplify a political establishment at every level in Canada steeped in this complicity.  Despite the outcry from hundreds of thousands of Canadian via emails and weekly pro-Palestinian demonstrations in different locations across the country, and public sentiment that increasingly opposes Canada’s support for Israel, both leaders and their parties continue to voice support for the racist Apartheid state and its so-called right to defend itself, perpetuating a narrative that denies recognition of the lived experiences and suffering of Palestinians.

The polls also tell a disturbing story with a majority of Canadians opposing the government’s tacit and explicit support for Israel, expressing a collective awareness of the genocide being perpetrated.  There is a growing recognition among Canadians that we are faced with a moral crisis at the highest levels of politics in this country which requires us as ordinary citizens to respond and stand up for the humanity and dignity of a brutally oppressed people when our leaders choose to sideline humanity for political expediency.  While the voices of justice for the Palestinian cause find amplification on social media platforms, a question persists – if we do not demand that our government cease its complicity in genocide now, what will we say when history asks us what we did while a modern genocide unfolded every day before our eyes?

It is crucial to understand that the political complicity of Trudeau, Poilievre, their parties, and others transcends mere rhetoric. These leaders have made conscious choices to sustain policies and relationships that embolden the oppressive, racist regime in Israel, benefiting from a geopolitical stance that echoes colonial values while providing Israel with the means to continue its catastrophic assault on Palestinians.  The failure to act against such policies is a fundamental betrayal of the humanitarian principles that Canada professes to uphold.

Any reasonable person must question the moral fabric that underpins a government’s decision to foster international relationships with states that engage in actions that fit the legal definition of “genocide.”  The course that the Canadian government has taken reflects an insensitive and heatless approach that can only stem from deeply entrenched and systemic anti-Palestinian racism and a disregard for the value of Palestinian lives.  The pervasive anti-Palestinian sentiment that permeates Canada’s political ecosystem indicates a willingness to be silent and do nothing when deadly violence is committed against defenceless people, when it aligns with domestic political concerns, which in this case means maintaining support among certain segments of Jewish Canadian voters who support Israel’s racist, Zionist ideology and its goals of erasing Palestinians from the lands controlled by Israel.

Moreover, the absence of accountability for these actions is deeply disturbing.  Trudeau’s and Poilievre’s insistence on narratives that disproportionately favor Israel stands as a testament to Canada’s political double standards when you compare this country’s response to crimes committed by Russia against Ukraine and Israeli crimes against Palestinians.  How can we reconcile this difference in response to Israel in the face of irrefutable evidence of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, compared to Canada’s actions against Russia?  How can we overlook the responsibility that leaders hold when their words and actions enable the perpetuation of brutal and sustained violence?  The case for charging politicians like Trudeau and Poilievre with complicity in these crimes is not without precedent.  It is a demand for accountability rooted in the law and a commitment to justice. 

As evidence mounts and global condemnation rises, Canadians must no longer accept the perpetuation of complicity in genocide through their political leadership. It is a moral imperative to demand immediate policy changes, renouncing military support for Israel and advocating for Palestinian rights unequivocally.  Silence, in this case, only furthers complicity, becoming an extension of the violence that is inflicted upon countless individuals in Gaza, as well as against Palestinian voices in Canada fighting for justice and freedom for their people.

To quote Ha’aretz columnist B. Michael from a column he wrote in May of this year, “What did we learn from the Holocaust?  Nothing.”  By supporting Israel as it commits genocide, selling it weapons used to commit genocidal crimes, and refusing to condemn its criminal acts, Canada’s leaders are not only flouting the international laws, conventions and treaties this nation claims to uphold, they are also demonstrating that all the lessons of the Holocaust have been forgotten or (more likely) are being wilfully ignored for the sake of domestic political considerations, thereby enabling horrific crimes.

Everyday that passes where innocent lives continue to be extinguished is a painful reminder of our governments’ failures.  The discourse must shift from complicity to accountability.  Canadians must mobilize more than they already have — raising voices, lobbying for change, and striving to elect and support leaders who value humanity over politics.  The human suffering and misery that has unfolded in Gaza since October 2023 requires nothing less than a resolute demand for justice and political reprisals against those did nothing to help stop the carnage, or worse yet supported the criminal regime committing the crimes.

As 2025 begins, we cannot let it simply be the start of another year of indifference.  Instead, let it be the beginning of a year when Canadians compel their leaders to find their humanity, when we stand in solidarity with the oppressed and brutalized, and when we demand that our leaders be charged and tried for their criminal complicity in the genocide Israel is committing against the Palestinian people.  The call for justice is loud and long overdue.  Let it echo through the halls of power and pierce the complacency, indifference and prejudice that enables Israel’s atrocities in Gaza.  It is time to hold all Canadian leaders accountable – political, corporate, academic or otherwise – who have tried to silence and erase Palestinian voices, before another year passes and thousands more innocents are murdered in a genocide that is the most transparent in history.

 

© 2024 The View From Here.  © 2024 Fareed Khan.  All Rights Reserved.

Donald Trump’s second presidency is a looming threat to Canada and the western hemisphere

If Trump believes that it is America’s right to exert control over Greenland for strategic reasons then there’s also little standing in the way of his administration taking a similar approach to Canada, Mexico or other nations in the hemisphere where the national security, economic or strategic interests of the US are prioritized above all else.  

By Fareed Khan

 

As the world stands on the precipice of a new administration in the United States, the election of Donald Trump to his second term as president raises urgent questions regarding peace and stability in the Western Hemisphere, in the context of increasing American nationalism.  Since his election in November his unpredictable musings have not been limited to very damaging economic policy proposals, but have also extended into the realm of possible violations of the territory and sovereignty of other nations, and could involve potential military aggression against friends and allies.  Under such a scenario it is imperative for Canada and its neighbouring nations to prepare for the potential fallout of Trump’s erratic behaviour, and ambitions which echo a distinctly fascistic ideology that could threaten North American unity and the sovereignty of nations surrounding the US.

Rhetoric of aggression

The threatening comments emanating from Trump and his camp are alarming.  At a dinner with Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau and some of his senior officials at his Mar-a-Lago estate in November Trump floated the ludicrous idea of making Canada the 51st state when responding to Trudeau’s comment about the devastating impact of Trump’s suggested 25% tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico, nations with which the US renegotiated a free trade agreement in 2020.  While some within the United States may laugh off these comments as a bad joke or mere politics, they breed a toxic environment of hostility that undermine long-standing cordial and stable relationship that Canada has had with the US.

A recent Leger poll released in early December in Canada, 13% of Canadians expressed support for Canada joining the US, demonstrating a disturbing inclination within a segment of the Canadian population towards Trump’s imperialistic vision.  It suggests that some Canadians are willing to sacrifice Canada’s autonomy and the freedom of their fellow Canadians for perceived benefits like lower taxes and the right to own firearms that come with American citizenship.  This mindset reflects a vulnerability within Canada’s population that can be exploited by those within the Trump movement ho wish to see Canada absorbed into the US, stripping it of its identity, culture, and independence.

Threats to sovereignty

Canada and the US have been friends and allies for well over a century, and have enjoyed a relatively peaceful and cordial relationship characterized by mutual respect.  But Trump’s blatant disregard for this history and the norms of diplomacy and international relations threatens to destabilize what has been a long-standing and mutually beneficial alliance and economic partnership.  Furthermore, the repercussions of his approach to relations between the US and other friends and allies in the hemisphere could lead to a realignment of treaties and agreements that have safeguarded the boundaries and relationships of sovereign states in North America.

Consider Trump’s ominous musings regarding the potential for American military intervention in Mexico to combat drug cartels.  Reports suggest that there are plans being contemplated within his inner circle that would disregard Mexican sovereignty and undermine international law to go after narcotics kingpins.  Such discussions raise profound concerns about American military imperialism, evoking historical memories of US interventions in Latin America that often sought to establish control rather than collaborate with neighbouring countries for mutual benefit.

The Greenland Calculus

In addition, Trump’s past fixation with controlling Greenland as an “absolute necessity for purposes of national security,” is not an isolated incident.  And given his history as a businessman it but shows a pattern of behaviour that indicates a willingness to disregard laws and legal niceties, and even the territorial integrity of other nations, if it helps him achieve his objectives.  In response to Trump’s most recent social media post about buying the territory Greenland’s prime minister made it unequivocally clear that the territory is “not for sale.”  Additionally, Denmark’s reaction, to Trump’s comments was to announce that it would significantly boost defence spending for the territory, and indicates the seriousness with which the Danish government take Trump’s rhetoric.  When Trump made a similar comment about buying Greenland in 2019 the foreign affairs spokesman for the Danish People’s Party said, “If he is truly contemplating this, then this is final proof, that he has gone mad.”

Given the proximity of Canada’s eastern Arctic territory to Greenland such posturing by Trump brings this country squarely into the frame as a player in a geopolitical game where the end result would be very bad news for all the parties involved if he decided on a military option to make his vision a reality.  And given his comments during his first term about his admiration for Hitler and other authoritarian figures, and his proclivity to do anything to get what he wants, it would be within the realm of possibility that he would violate the territorial integrity of other nations to achieve his foreign policy goals.

If Trump believes that it is America’s right to exert control over Greenland for strategic reasons then there’s also little standing in the way of his administration taking a similar approach to Canada, Mexico or other nations in the hemisphere where the national security, economic or strategic interests of the US are prioritized above all else.  Such actions could potentially lead to military mobilization that could have dire repercussions not just for North America but also for the NATO trans-Atlantic relationship, which has been the foundation that has underpinned peace and stability in Europe since after World War 2.

The threat to take back the Panama Canal

Trump’s latest target for his imperialist ambitions is Panama.  In a speech in Phoenix on December 22nd he threatened to take back the Panama Canal if that nation’s government didn’t reduce shipping fees.  This is another example of Trump’s restorationist rhetoric — an attempt to re-establish US dominance based on its imperialist past regardless of contemporary realities.  This call has reverberated poorly across Central America where it is seen as inflammatory, and risks reigniting tensions between the US and many Latin American countries, after those nations have worked hard to move past fears about the US violating their sovereignty

The Panamanian president’s emphatic response asserting that “every square meter” of the canal belongs to Panama highlights the potential for tensions to escalate into diplomatic crises across the hemisphere.  Such rhetoric destabilizes regional relationships, undermines diplomacy and political stability honed over decades, and erodes trust between the US and its neighbours.

As Canada tries to develop a strategy in response to Trump’s approach to global territorial disputes, leaders in this country must recognize that his public comments are indicative of a mindset where US foreign policy could be formulated based on his ignorance about and disregard for the norms of international relations and international law.  This is a man who seemingly cares little about diplomacy and cordial relations, and is willing to bully and threaten friends and allies to achieve his foreign policy goals regardless of the long term damage it might do.

Need for Preparedness and Solidarity

As members of the international community scan the horizon for the implications of a new Trump presidency, vigilance must become paramount for Canada and its neighbours.  The rhetoric of military intervention, annexation, and hegemonic ambition should be a warning sign to prepare for the real possibility of aggressive policies that threaten the sovereignty of Canada and other nations in the hemisphere.

The Canadian government must engage in proactive diplomacy to fortify alliances in the Latin American region and in Europe.  By fostering relationships built on mutual respect, collaboration and historic ties Canada can position itself as a regional leader committed to preserving sovereignty and peace.  There must be a concerted effort to deter the idea that America’s policy goals can be achieved through bullying, intimidation, territorial expansion or military aggression, aiming to unify voices against the fascistic impulses emanating from the US that threaten peace and stability in the Americas.

Addressing the threat of fascism

The threat that Trump’s presidency poses to the US and its neighbouring nations is symptomatic of a broader internal threat to democratic principles and the rule of law in that nation.  The suggestion that territories can be commandeered or absorbed based solely on American priorities stems from rising fascist sentiments over the last decade that have garnered traction within US politics within a the segment of society that are hard core supporters of Trump.

In “The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump”, a compilation of psychiatric insights put together during his first term, professionals delineate how Trump’s character poses a risk to national and individual well-being.  The inadequacies he displays in addressing complex geopolitical issues reveal a troubling trend toward authoritarianism, where personal whims bypass logic, justice and international norms.

As such the incoming Trump administration poses a “clear and present danger” not only to the principles of democracy but also to the very sovereignty that defines Canada and its neighbours.  His upcoming presidency challenges how nations collaborate, engage, and exist alongside one another, and poses a danger to the nations which stand in the way of his imperialist policies.
 
Shaping a Path Forward

As Canada and the other nations of the Western Hemisphere stand on a precipice of uncertainty, America’s neighboring nations must come together to defend the principles of sovereignty and the shared ideals of democracy.  Canadian leaders cannot afford to be naive and hope that traditional diplomatic tactics will save Canada from an incoming US president who has been described as a “sociopath”.  Its leaders must act decisively in forming coalitions and alliances that prioritize collective security over subjugation to a superpower led by a man with the impulse control of a child and the mental acuity of someone who shuns facts and valuable intelligence.
 
The rising tide of fascism in the US, which began in his first administration, calls for strategic responses that not only prioritize peace, cooperation, and respect for national boundaries, but also demonstrate national resolve to a bully who feels he can do what he wants without consequence.  If Canada and its allies fail to sufficiently prepare for the incoming Trump presidency the consequences could extend far beyond policy disagreements, and could threaten peace and stability throughout the hemisphere.

Only through united action, strong diplomatic ties, defence alliances, and a clear stand against imperialist ambitions can Canada and its allies hope to fend off the looming perils of a second Trump administration. In the dance for power, Canadian leaders need to make sure that our borders aren’t just lines on a map but expressions of sovereignty, identity, and mutual respect for the independence of all nations.

Fareed Khan is the founder of Canadians United Against Hate, a human rights activist, and has spoken and written extensively on public policy issues affecting the lives and the rights of Canadians.

© 2024 The View From Here.  © 2024 Fareed Khan.  All Rights Reserved.

Trump's hostility towards Canada telegraphs possibility of future aggression and attacks on Canadian sovereignty

The dismissiveness with which Trump treats relations with nations that are friends and allies, glossing over tactless comments as jokes or misunderstandings, is reminiscent of other world leaders who have used bullying, threats and aggression to assert dominance and control.

 

By Fareed Khan

 

In the realm of international relations, political rhetoric matters.  Words, especially those coming from the leaders of nations, carry weight and can serve as precursors to actions.  Donald Trump's return to the American presidency four years after a tumultuous first term, characterized by divisive comments about allies and threats against those who wronged him, raises alarming questions about the future of US-Canada relations. 

 

In light of his recent belittling remarks regarding Canada's sovereignty, and the potential for aggressive action against Canada — a neighbour, long time ally, and largest trading partner — should be taken seriously. American aggression against Canada is not merely a hypothetical scenario but a plausible outcome given Trump's erratic behavior, his lack of respect for political and diplomatic conventions, and his history of treating international relations as transactions rather than friendships.

A hostile comment passed off as a joke

At a recent event to honour Trump's political triumphs, he doubled down on comments that can only be interpreted as mockery towards Canada and Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau.  During the Fox Nation's "Patriot of the Year" ceremony, Trump repeated a remark that Canada should consider becoming the "51st state" and encouraged a chant from the audience that derided Canada's status as an independent nation.  While this comment has been framed as a joke by Trump insiders, they reflect a dismissive attitude towards one of America's closest allies and sends a troubling message that undermines Canadian sovereignty.

These comments followed his threats to impose a staggering 25% tariff on Canadian imports to the US in response to an unfounded claim that Canada was failing to stem the flow of drugs and illegal immigrants into the US.  This rhetoric echoes Trump's longstanding pattern of using fear and hostility to control narratives and assert dominance, not just over individuals but entire nations.  He appears to perceive Canada not as a partner, but as an entity that must bend to American whims, a notion that is fundamentally colonial and imperialist in its orientation.

The realities of tariffs and economic consequences

Should Trump follow through with his tariff threat, the repercussions for the Canadian economy would be dire given Canada’s dependence on the US as it’s largest trading partner.  Retaliation by the Canadian government would be inevitable, and the likelihood of an escalating trade war would result in ominous consequences for both nations, with retaliatory measures by Canada inviting a further response from a Trump administration, fuelling a cycle of hostility that would severely damage Canada-US relations.

 

Trump's propensity for rash reactions to perceived provocations cannot be underestimated.  If history has shown us anything, it is that he views conflicts as power struggles that need to be won at all costs.  Thus, if a trade war ensues, the escalation could veer into territory with ominous implications for Canadian sovereignty.

The possible threat of military action

Trumps aggressive attitude towards Canada and other allied nations during his first administration signals how he would behave during his second administration, and is not the sort of thing one expects from the leader of a nation that is a friend.  It is something one sees mainly in politicians with a far right, and some would say fascist, world view.  And given that fears surrounding Trump's fascist tendencies have been highlighted in public statements by former Trump administration officials, as well as by his ex-wife Ivana Trump, all of whom alleged that he was a fascist and admired authoritarian figures such as Adolf Hitler, should raise dozens of red flags in Ottawa and across the country about what will happen when Trump is in full control of the US government.

 

The dismissiveness with which Trump treats relations with nations that are friends and allies, glossing over tactless comments as jokes or misunderstandings, is reminiscent of other world leaders who have used bullying, threats and aggression to assert dominance and control.  The last hundred years is replete with examples of national leaders who, when diplomacy failed, resorted to sabre rattling and even military interventions to achieve their objectives.  As disturbing and unlikely as it may sound, the undercurrent of Trump's rhetoric could easily be a precursor to military action against Canada — especially in the context of controlling resources such as fresh water and critical mineral resources of value to the US and its military.

The role of military command and loyalty

Trump's proposed cabinet and the allegiance he seeks from those he is nominating to senior positions raises further concerns. His inclination to fill key positions with loyalists — individuals more interested in serving Trump's agenda than in upholding democratic tenets or maintaining positive relations with allies — means that checks and balances within the US political system are eroding.  When in office this could also extend to his choice of military leaders, who historically are supposed to serve the national interest and defend the US Constitution.  However, if Trump's regime consists of zealots with a belief in American exceptionalism and superiority, we may find them willing to support aggressive actions against non-existent threats.

Imagining a scenario where US military forces are directed against Canada is not as far-fetched as it appears under a fascist minded Trump administration.  Once feeling threatened economically or politically Trump may resort to using all US resources including the military to assert dominance over Canada either through threats or direct action. 

 

A Call to Canadian Vigilance

The growing body of evidence — both from public statements and actions taken by Trump since he first entered politics — demands that Canadian officials reassess their approach to dealing with him over the next four years.  Trump's penchant for belittling Canada, paired with the very real threat of economic warfare, must be viewed as a potential precursor to more aggressive actions.  Taking into account his apparent affinity for authoritarian and militaristic leaders it is imperative for Canada to enhance its defence strategies and alliances with allies, particularly those in NATO, that prioritize sovereignty and democratic values.

Canada's leaders must prepare for all scenarios while addressing domestic political concerns affected by a potential trade war or even more aggressive US actions.  Engaging with international bodies, strengthening partnerships with other allied nations, and fostering resilience at home will be vital to safeguard Canada and its interests.

Canadian leaders have been complacent about the Canada-US relationship for far too long.  In the coming years diplomatic niceties may not suffice with a US leader like Trump, a man who sees relationships as transactional, subject to capricious whims.  

Trump’s 51st state comment is a bad joke — until such a time it isn’t.  Therefore, it is incumbent upon Canadian leaders to take Trump’s tariff threats seriously in ways they haven't considered before, and to prepare to deal with the US in ways that haven't been contemplated since the 19th century.

The time to act to defend Canadian sovereignty from US aggression is now, and the potential for American aggression arising out of an economic dispute should not be dismissed as hyperbole. In a scenario where Canada-US relations could be upended it is better to prepare for the worst while hoping for the best.

 

 © 2024 The View From Here.  © 2024 Fareed Khan.  All Rights Reserved.

OP-ED -- Pierre Poilievre’s claim to understand the struggles of average Canadians is a political ploy rooted in deceit

What does Pierre Poilievre really know about the lives of average Canadians?

 

By Fareed Khan

https://rabble.ca/politics/canadian-politics/pierre-poilievres-claim-to-understand-the-struggles-of-average-canadians-is-a-political-ploy-rooted-in-deceit/

 

 

Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre has recently released a series of political ads in an effort to continue to position himself as the politician who will save Canadians from the Liberals.

 

Since becoming leader he has frequently invoked the struggles of ordinary Canadians in heated speeches and many of his policy proposals, and his new ad campaign reinforces those narratives while he tries to portray himself as an average Canadian sharing their everyday problems.  But Canadian voters need to cautious about buying into his “ordinary Canadian” charade because he is anything but that.

 

 

 Pierre Poilievre at a rally Credit: Stephan Alberola / Flickr Credit: Stephan Alberola / Flickr

 

The glaring contrast between Poilievre’s lifestyle and that of the average citizen raises significant questions about his understanding of the struggles of the middle or working class.  It has become increasingly evident, since before he became Conservative leader, that he is ensconced within the elite ranks of society, with little appreciation or true understanding of the daily realities faced by the vast majority of Canadians.

To understand Poilievre’s disconnect from average Canadians all we have to do is look at the last 20 years of his life.  His first job out of university was working for Canadian Alliance party leader Stockwell Day until he was elected as a Member of Parliament at the age of 25.  Since his entry into Parliament he has enjoyed a level of financial security that today places him in the top one per cent of income earners in Canada.  His current salary as Opposition Leader is $299,900 per year – a substantial figure that exceeds the average annual income of most Canadians multiple times over.  Additionally, in comparison to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, who both had careers outside of politics before being elected, Poilievre has never held a job where taxpayers didn’t pay his salary and benefits, thus making him a professional politician.

Moreover, Poilievre’s current living arrangements amplifies the economic disparity between him and the vast majority of Canadians.  Residing in Stornoway, the publicly owned mansion for the leader of the Official Opposition, he enjoys the perks of a lavish lifestyle without having to pay any of the associated household costs – rent, hydro, phone, internet, gas, maintenance, etc.  In addition, he has an annual entertainment and hospitality budget of $166,000, a figure that would raise the eyebrows of many financially challenged voters at whom his political appeals are directed.  This lack of a personal financial burden common to most Canadians, combined with his publicly funded household staff – including a chef, housekeeper, and groundskeeper – places him in a realm of privilege and comfort inaccessible to the vast majority in Canada.

It is not only Poilievre’s financial situation that disqualifies him from truly understanding the struggles of the average Canadian, but also the systemic privilege inherent to his role.  With a government-owned SUV at his beck and call, a chauffeur, and a 24-hour security detail, his life encapsulates an elite lifestyle alien to all but the richest in Canada.  It shows an undeniable disconnect between those struggling under the burden of rising costs in housing, groceries, and other necessities, and a man rooted in a world of extreme privilege and financial security.  

While it’s understandable why such expenditures would be necessary for the prime minister Canadians should ask why such taxpayer funded privileges are provided to the Poilievre when no other parliamentary democracy like Canada’s provides similar benefits and financial support to their Opposition leaders.

Poilievre’s rhetoric also often critiques what he describes as "elites" and "gatekeepers" yet he embodies the characteristics of the very segments of society he condemns.  Historically Conservatives have advocated a handful of policies during election campaigns that would address the concerns of the majority, but once elected to government most of their policy initiatives often promote corporate interests along with fiscal conservatism, as well as undoing progressive policies of the previous government, which are actions traditionally aligned with the interests of wealthy and privileged segments of society.  This proclivity of Conservatives to favour the interests of elites suggests a compulsive inability to understand the challenges faced by average Canadians.

As Canadian voters express their frustration with the leadership of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his government, and with polls putting him as much as 20 percentage points behind Poilievre, many may be tempted to look towards the Opposition leader as a viable alternative.  However, doing so would perpetuate a cyclical elitism that fails to significantly improve the lives of the vast majority.  Poilievre’s status as a professional politician, his privileged lifestyle, and his political ideology going back to his time in the Stephen Harper government, reveals an affinity for the concerns of the privileged and powerful rather than a genuine connection to the issues and interests of Canadians far removed from his reality.

Poilievre’s ascent to political elite status and his very privileged lifestyle over the last two decades contrast starkly with the realities faced by most voters.  Since he never accumulated the middle-class experiences that would help him relate to the issues important to the bottom 95 per cent of Canadians one has to wonder how can he relate to that segment of the Canadian electorate?  As voters consider their options in anticipation of an election expected within the coming year it is crucial to recognize that supporting Poilievre could be detrimental to their own interests.  Those seeking to lead Canada should be able to understand the struggles of average Canadians, uplift them and address their pressing needs – qualities not embodied in Poilievre’s political narrative, his policies or the elitist life he has led his entire adult life.

FAREED KHAN

Fareed Khan is the founder of Canadians United Against Hate and has written and commented extensively about issues around racism and human rights. More by Fareed Khan

 

© 2024 Rabble.ca.  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 The View From Here.  © 2024 Fareed Khan.  All Rights Reserved.

 

 

 

Bigotry and human rights violations by Quebec are constitutional according to province’s highest court ruling on “secularism” law

The decision about Quebec’s secularism law should scare all Canadians about human rights protections in this country.  It is very likely to be referred to the Supreme Court of Canada for a final ruling, and if they agree with the Quebec Appeals Court that the Quebec law is constitutional it would mean that the concept of human rights in this country will become meaningless. 

 

By Fareed Khan

 

In a unanimous decision by Quebec’s highest court on the province’s controversial Bill 21 “secularism” law released on February 29th the judges sided with the provincial government and decided that it is within its constitutional rights to implement policies and laws that violate human rights, and (by extension) promote racism and bigotry against religious minorities.

 

 

The court was ruling on a challenge to the law launched by a number of civil liberties and Muslim organizations under Section 2(a) of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  The law was implemented by Quebec’s CAQ government in 2019, which invoked the Constitution’s “notwistanding” clause (Section 33) to override Charter rights and the case has been working its way through the court since the Charter challenge was launched later the same year.

 

In issuing the decision the judges on Quebec’s Court of Appeal seem to be saying that the fundamental human rights of the communities primarily affected by the law, who are mainly racialized religious communities, do not matter, and that the bigotry and racism that the law enables is acceptable.  With this decision members of Quebec’s Muslim, Sikh and Jewish communities who wear clothing that is intrinsic to the practice of their faith have been told that they are second class citizens and lesser human beings because of their religious beliefs.  While the law affects people of all faiths a 2019 poll revealed that the law was founded on the basis of anti-Muslim prejudice in Quebec.

The court’s decision is a very dangerous and fascistic approach to human rights in Quebec because it now gives free reign to the government to violate the fundamental rights of any individual or community if it is to their political advantage.  Such court rulings are more in line with authoritarian, far right regimes in other countries than those of an advanced democracy like Canada.

 

While Premier Francois Legault’s government is the primary villain in this situation they have also been enabled by the federal government which declined to intervene immediately after the law was instituted in 2019 by referring the law directly to the Supreme Court.  Had the government of Justin Trudeau taken that action it would have expedited a ruling on the law at Canada’s highest court, and Quebec’s racialized religious minorities would not have had to live under the tyranny of a government which finds it acceptable to violate religious freedoms.

 

The federal government’s failure to take action has allowed Quebec to destroy the lives of observant Muslims, Sikhs and Jews in Quebec who have been unable to fulfill career ambitions in their home province by working in those fields restricted to them under Bill 21.  For more than four and a half years Quebec has violated the rights of these religious communities, and the Trudeau government has been complicit in these rights violations by refusing to take action to defend the rights of Canadians.

 

Quebecers who wanted to work in certain public sector jobs – teachers, police officers, crown attorneys, and others – have had to leave the province to pursue a living because Justin Trudeau was more concerned about votes in Quebec than he was about the fundamental rights of Canadians.  He was not alone in this laissez-faire approach to criticizing the Quebec law as the leaders of other federalist parties said the issue was within Quebec’s purview, while the nationalist Bloc Quebecois and the far right People’s Party of Canada said that the federal government should stay out of Quebec’s business.

 

 

Since being elected in 2015 Trudeau and his ministers have talked repeatedly about their support of the Charter and the rights of Canadians and their opposition to racism.  But it appears these statements were all political theater because the federal government has shown repeatedly that it cares more about the public relations benefits of making such statements rather than about defending the human rights of racialized minorities, whether at home or abroad.  A government that truly cared about defending the human rights of Canadians would have referred the Quebec law to the Supreme Court in 2019 when it came into force regardless of the political consequences, or it could have used its powers under the “disallowance” clause of the Constitution (Section 90).

 

 

The Quebec court’s decision also raises concerns about the integrity of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  Since it came into force the “notwithstanding” clause has been used 26 times by provincial governments (primarily Quebec) to override Charter rights.  When it was implemented more than 40 years ago the Charter was seen as a shield to protect the rights of Canadians from the whims of politicians.  But as we have seen in Quebec, Saskatchewan, Ontario and other provinces over more than 40 years provincial governments are now more than willing to use this provision to violate Charter rights for the sake of political expediency regardless of who suffers as a result.  It begs the question, what is the point of having guaranteed rights under Canada’s Constitution when they can be ignored by governments and politicians whenever it suits them.

 

The decision about Quebec’s secularism law should scare all Canadians about human rights protections in this country.  It is very likely to be referred to the Supreme Court of Canada for a final ruling, and if they agree with the Quebec Appeals Court that the Quebec law is constitutional it would mean that the concept of human rights in this country will become meaningless.  This would make Canada no different than authoritarian states where political leaders violate their citizens’ rights at will.  People across Canada should be deeply concerned about what is down the road, and remain vigilant about protecting fundamental rights, which are slowly being chipped away by the actions of some provincial governments.  Otherwise we will lose them and human rights and civil liberties in Canada will return to the era before the Charter when the decision about whether Canadians had rights were in the hands of very flawed politicians and the interests they serve.

 

Fareed Khan is a human rights activist and founder of Canadians United Against Hate.

 

© 2024 The View From Here.  © 2024 Fareed Khan.  All Rights Reserved.