The reaction of the Canadian PM is nothing new. Whenever such incidents occur in a western country, the head of the government vows to hit back. They condemn the ideology of the extremists in harsh terms and find a suitable opportunity to arm their security agencies in the name of beefing up internal security and order the military to make inroads in foreign lands.
But what about the efforts to use these instances for a political mileage?
Every time there is an instance of violence, the West mobilises support for itself
The Canadian establishment already had an opportunity to project its fear-mongering side on terrorism after the 25-year-old convert Martin Couture-Rouleau or Ahmad Rouleau hit two Canadian soldiers by a car, killing one in the process. There was a clear effort to win sympathy by preaching how bad the ideology of terrorism is and how mercilessly it targets peace-loving communities.
But didn't the Canadian authorities tell just one side of the
story just because it suited their convenience?
Canada's 13-year war was bound to have some self-defeating impact
The western powers, including Canada, tend to forget that clapping takes two hands. Canada, which has an image of a peaceful country otherwise, is in state of war for the last 13 years. It was a participant in the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan in October 2001 and also took part in the War on Terror led by the US as a retaliation against the 9/11 attacks on its soil. Recently, the right-wing prime minister of Canada said his country was ready to take on the Islamic State fighters militarily.
Why interfere in other countries and invite disaster at home?
On October 7, Canada's conservative MPs including the prime minister voted successfully passed a controversial motion by 157-134 votes approving airstrikes in West Asia. A couple of days, the country's defence minister was also present at an airbase in Canada from where fighter jets left to strike in Iraq. He also spoke about the noble intent of his country's battle against the evil.
But how does participating in military adventures in several other countries make Canada a peaceful country and how does it justify its shock and surprise when a little bit of the violence perpetrated elsewhere are brought back to its own soil? The Canadian prime minister's shaken reaction speaks volume about the hypocrisy of the power-fed North Atlantic ideology which has influenced world politics over the ages.
The West hasn't helped anybody by uprooting local regimes and placing its stooges in the name of democracy
In the name of fighting terrorism, these powers have fuelled the menace by making unilateral military ventures and destabilise regimes by uprooting them in the name of preaching democracy. When these same western powers term the instances of attack on their soil as senseless act of violence committed despite no provocation, they clearly deceive their people to shield their own policies of disaster.
West's war on terror has fuelled terror more
The hypocrisy also speaks about the western world's hollow stand on terrorism. By categorising every act of violence as terror and by trying to mobilising public opinion in their favour, the western countries uses terrorism as a means to legitimise their action against non-complying forces abroad and delegitimising the violence which is perpetrated against them by those at the receiving end. There is, to say it clearly, no universal definition for terrorism for the 'noble' West and hence no policy to tackle it effectively.
We don't justify IS's acts but who created the situation conducive for their rise?
This article doesn't justify the merciless acts of the IS in
West Asia. Beheading of journalists or killing innocent people can
never be accepted in a civilised world but who has allowed the
situation to deteriorate to the extent it is today? By uprooting
local political structures and exporting democracy, how has the
West actually helped countries like Iraq and Afghanistan where a
massive vacuum has been created today? How has its vague stand on
Syria helped the cause of war on terror?
Is military strike the only way to call for peace?
Why can't the powerful western countries engage in their mission to defeat the extremists through peaceful means? It is unfortunate but nevertheless true that a Frankenstein called ISIS has gained grounds in Iraq and Syria because the West's policy to tackle the situation there failed completely.
Dear Westerners, let's stop the hollow war you have been waging against 'terrorism' with a cynic mindset. The war on terror has begun to boomerang and a mutual destruction might not be far away.