On mature policy

A few days ago, word came out that the Libs had negotiated a deal in Afghanistan which provides Canada with no assurances of access to prisoners transferred to the Afghani government, only a "trust me" from Afghanistan that prisoners would be accessible to the Red Cross and that the Geneva Conventions would be applied. (And there's nothing which apparently prevents a Bushco-style creative application of the Geneva standards.) Meanwhile, the Netherlands' comparable deal featured full access for Dutch authorities, as well as notification upon any charges or transfers. More than a few words and phrases could apply to the result for Canada, with "poorly negotiated", "negligent" and "hosed" coming readily to mind.

Surely this Lib failure would have been a chance for the new government to point out the Libs' unwillingness to stand up for Canadian interests. The Cons, however, apparently have another word entirely to describe Canada's abdication of its obligation to avoid complicity in torture:

Hon. Gordon O'Connor (Minister of National Defence, CPC): Mr. Speaker, to my knowledge the previous government knew about the arrangement because it was done under its watch.

With respect to the second question, this is a more mature arrangement than the Netherlands has.

O'Connor's answer would have been scary enough if "mature" wasn't Harper's chosen description for his planned means of dealing with Bush. But based on the consistent terminology, the Con foreign policy has come entirely into focus.

Lest there be any doubt, the Cons' idea of "mature" policy is for Canada to avoid taking responsibility for either its own actions, or the actions of those with whom it does business. And when those deals go wrong - as U.S. files such as softwood lumber already have, and as Afghani prisoner treatment could easily do in the future - our response will be only to cut another deal based on the word of the same party who has already let us down.

There's certainly a time and a place to deal based on trust in the word of a partner. But a foreign policy based on a refusal to look behind others' promises is the height of naivete, not maturity. And the main question now is which file will result in the Cons' oddly (if selectively) trusting nature blowing up in Canada's face first.