|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Réponses
Question 2: L'examen de la politique étrangère de 1995 et après À la lumière de l’évolution de la situation mondiale, le Canada doit-il continuer à orienter sa politique étrangère en fonction d’une stratégie reposant sur les « trois piliers », ou doit-il plutôt rechercher un nouvel équilibre? |
|
| Participant: | efuchs |
| Date: |
2003-05-01 13:05:27 |
| Réponses: |
I do not agree with the three pillars approach. Security is viewed too narrowly. I would be more interested in seeing security include food security (ensuring there is enough food for all Canadians and for all inhabitants of the world, and that that food be safe to eat--that is to say not genetically modified, as there is not enough proof that it is safe, and also ensuring that people have the option and capability to produce their own food to ensure their own survival, should they desire to do so), and other aspects of security. I feel that the current view and definition of security is one that in fact makes us feel less secure. I would think that by emphasizing a world that is fighting against terrorism and any form of resistance, that we are in fact encouraging a less safe world.
We should take a different strategy in order to focus on meeting the basic necessities of people and through this means we would not need to focus on the false security that anyone could gain from increasing weapons production and distribution, as well as surveillance and intelligence services. In the end, it will only backfire and will be creating the kind of society that no one wants to live in.
Prosperity is also a word that does not reflect what I want to see in foreign or internal policy. I would use equity instead, as prosperity of the kind that is practiced now only benefits a select number of people within any one country, and certain countries more than others. We need to work towards ensuring that all have their basic needs met, and we will not do this by spending more money to secure ourselves so that we can be prosperous.
As for values, I think there are some values that I hold dear as a Canadian, but I see even those fading, so I think that it is time to define more clearly what those values are. Certainly for me it is not a question of economics, but more on social justice, which I do not see reflected in most foreign policy except in a very superficial way. |
|
|
|
|
