(This
column was published in the North
Shore News on
Sept. 16, 1998)
APEC uproar
is overblown
By Leo Knight
LAST
week's revelations concerning possible Prime Ministerial
involvement in providing guarantees to former Indonesian
strongman and dictator, General Suharto, are overblown at the
least and ridiculous at best.
The
documents, publicized by the CBC and waved by a host of
sanctimonious special interest groups and the ubiquitous
professional protesters, hardly bear up under scrutiny as proof
positive of any sort of conspiracy to trample on the civil
rights of Canadians.
It
is a great leap in mental gymnastics to presume the diplomatic
language contained in letters and memos to Indonesian officials
"guaranteeing" a safe and pleasant stay for Suharto
during the 1997 APEC conference in Vancouver, was somehow a
directive to the RCMP to run roughshod on the Charter of Rights
and Freedoms.
Canada
sought to play host to the conference, an international summit
of all leaders of APEC member nations. It was the intention of
this country to welcome those leaders in the spirit of
co-operation and consensus to make things better for all the
citizens of those countries.
As
the host nation, with the eyes of the world focused upon us, it
was incumbent upon the security forces to ensure the safety and
protection of all the world leaders at the conference.
We
are mandated by international agreement to do just that. We
expect the same from other nations receiving our Prime Minister.
Yes, even the current one.
Certainly,
there are some issues arising out of the police handling of the
APEC conference. Were some persons strip-searched in police
custody after their arrest at the UBC demonstrations while
others were not? This is being claimed by the protesters. If
proved to be true, then clearly the Mounties should be taken to
task for their actions.
Were
individuals along the motorcade routes ordered to remove protest
signs from their windows by police in advance of the leaders'
tour? Again, if true, then the police must be answerable.
But what, pray tell me, did the officers at the sharp end of things, at UBC, do to warrant the explosive reaction they are taking in the media?
They
were providing perimeter security for visiting heads of state.
Some protesters said they had a warrant of arrest for Suharto
issued by the "People's Court." (Didn't Judge Wapner
retire?) They were told they couldn't pass through the police
lines to effect the unlawful "arrest." Big surprise
there.
They
stormed the fences and police lines attempting to get to the
area where there were the heads of state including our PM and
U.S. President Clinton, along with a host of others, including
Suharto. They were stopped by police. Another big surprise. The
use of pepper spray by the police is the next step up in
escalated violence from talking.
This
is how they are trained. It is not an obtrusive act of
aggression, but a measured defensive reaction. It's used to gain
control without more violent means.
When
the so-called "students" rushed the barricades to try
and break through police lines, what, pray tell me, did they
expect might happen? A red carpet reception? A little bowing and
scraping with a "by your leave" admission to the stage
front?
The
police were expected to do their duty and protect the secure
area occupied by the visiting world leaders. They did this
without the use of nightsticks, riot clubs, tear gas, ARWEN guns
or any of the other tools at their disposal.
Could
the same be said if, say, the same incident occurred in London,
for example. For anyone who has seen the Metropolitan Police and
their use of a full-out "truncheon charge," on
protesting crowds, the answer is clearly "no."
What
about the suggestion that foreign security forces carrying
weapons here is an affront to our national dignity? Well, when
those critics remove their heads from the ether, they will
realize this has been going on for decades.
We
used to play a little charade. We disarmed them at the airports.
The security guys would then go into the terminals and re-arm
from the diplomatic pouches.
Nudge,
nudge, wink,wink. We do it there and they do it here.
Any
suggestion that the RCMP were being stooges for Suharto ignores
the actions of Cpl. Pat Dickson, who, by the way holds our
country's highest award for bravery.
He
was the leader of the Mounties' tactical team at UBC. He
physically intervened and stopped four of Suharto's thugs trying
to videotape protesters for later identification and possible
retribution.
The
protesters who were arrested that day have all had their
criminal charges dropped by the Crown.
Why?
All
the news footage clearly shows them attacking the police lines
while the police held fast. The police did not attack the
protesters despite what we are being spoon-fed.
Bottom
line: the protesters were not content to simply demonstrate in
the designated area. They had to make a scene. They tried and
they failed to achieve their goal of creating an international
incident.
It
is time to stop the hyperbole. The commission of inquiry into
this matter begins this week. Let's hope they can separate the
wheat from the chaff. The bleating and whining is becoming a bit
unbearable.
Somehow
this whole thing has become an issue of our country pandering to
a vile dictator. Sorry folks, but we've also played host over
the years to a variety of foreign leaders whose politics are
repulsive or distasteful: Fidel Castro; Joseph Stalin; Deng Xiao
Peng; Michael Manley; Yassar Arafat; Dan Quayle.
Amongst
many others, I might add. The so-called student protesters got
what they were seeking. A confrontation and a world-wide
audience. Now they want more and think we, the taxpayers, should
foot the bill.
And
the media are lapping it all up making folk heroes out of the
rent-a-crowd professional protesters, attention seekers,
cause-makers and anarchists who made up the bulk of the mob.
Spare
me. There is nothing noble in a mob starting a fight.
-30-