Can we really wash our hands of extremist dual nationals?

Konrad Yakabuski on C-24’s proposed revocation measures for terrorism-related crimes, calling for serious debate on the implications, given recent US and UK revelations regarding US drone strikes on former UK citizens whose citizenship was revoked. See also Chris Selley’s Actually, my citizenship is a right | National Post.

Will be interesting to see if the debate within Committee focuses on the long-standing principle since Diefenbaker that a citizen is a citizen, whether born in Canada or naturalized, or more on due process and rule of law in any referrals to the Federal Court seeking revocation.

Still, C-24 is not perfect. Its proposal to strip dual nationals convicted of terror-related crimes of their Canadian citizenship warrants serious scrutiny in light of recent revelations by the British news media. If the intent is to ease CIA drone strikes, or the extradition to the United States of terrorist suspects living abroad, MPs should think long and hard about what that means for Canada.

Mr. Alexander has said he is “confident” that many of the 130 Canadians believed to be fighting with extremist groups abroad are dual nationals. Revoking their citizenship while they’re outside the country could prevent them from ever returning to Canada. This country would effectively absolve itself of their fate, even though some of them may have been born here…

Mr. Alexander has insisted that “the courts will play a very important role” in the process of revoking the Canadian citizenship of a dual national convicted of terrorism. That’s an improvement over the British system, where most of the power lies with the Home Secretary. But is it enough? The Commons citizenship committee needs to ask Mr. Alexander some tough questions.

Can we really wash our hands of extremist dual nationals? – The Globe and Mail

Or, given the “shopping for votes” culture, opposition parties focus more on fee increases and increased residency requirements.

Joseph Heath: The new nationalism

More excerpts from Joseph Heath’s book, Enlightenment 2.0, on one of the ironies of Trudeau’s policies promoting Canadian symbols. For the Conservative take on successive Liberal governments, see Chris Champion’s Tory History and Its Critics | The Dorchester Review.

So that is how, in a case of not inconsiderable historical irony, Trudeau — the avatar of pure reason — became the father of modern Canadian nationalism, in all of its most boisterous and vulgar manifestations. One wonders how he would have felt had he seen the closing ceremonies of the 2010 Vancouver Olympic Games, with its giant inflatable beavers, table-hockey players, moose hats, dancing lumberjacks and voyageurs, and Michael Bublé dressed as a Mountie singing “The Maple Leaf Forever.” The phrase “What have I done?” might have sprung to mind. And yet, almost 40 years after Trudeau made the initial moves, one could see the power of the strategy. Quebec artists essentially boycotted the Olympic ceremonies, refusing to participate in what they rightly anticipated would be an orgy of Canadian nationalism. And yet when the curtain closed, they proceeded to complain about the lack of “French content” in the program. A principled commitment to national sovereignty is all well and good, but no one likes to feel left out of a party. As far as political dilemmas go, the shoe had been moved to the other foot.

Joseph Heath: The new nationalism | National Post.

A New Muslim Renaissance is Here | TIME.com

Rabia Chaudry in Time on some of the progressive trends among Muslim Americans, reminding of the diversity within Muslim communities and on change from within:

It’s heady, scary, and exciting to watch the face and discourse of American Muslims change and expand before your eyes. The Islam I grew up with in America is not the Islam my children are experiencing. The possibilities for their lives are much more expansive than the possibilities for my life were. The largely comfortable integration and success of American Muslims that sets them apart from their counterparts in Europe also lends space for these possibilities. From tremendously increased participation in American civic and cultural life, to pressing internal demands on religious orthodoxy, another generation or two will see a vastly different American Islam that will likely have an impact on Muslims globally. From marginalized minority, American Muslims are poised to become mainstream leaders and influencers. And it’s no small irony that while historians bemoan conquest and Western colonialism as the death knell for Islam’s “Golden Age”, this new Muslim renaissance is growing out of the West itself.

A New Muslim Renaissance is Here | TIME.com.

Moderate Islam meets Auschwitz | +972 Magazine

Interesting piece on Mohammed Dajani Daoudi, a Palestinian academic who came under considerable controversy for his taking a group of Palestinian students to Auschwitz and whose partnership with Ben Gurion University includes exposing Israeli students to the nakba or catastrophe.

His thoughts on the narratives and identity are pertinent and interesting:

Among Palestinians, his advocacy of Holocaust education for Palestinians is deeply fraught. It is pointless to dismiss this as stalwart Arab anti-Semitism. Jews and Jewish Israelis, too, are almost totally incapable of considering the Palestinian Nakba, because they fear it is primarily a justification for right of return. Similarly, Palestinians encounter the Holocaust first and foremost as the justification for their modern-day oppression – and only secondarily as a matter of history and human suffering….

Indeed, between the evolving bear-hug of Israel-conservative circles and the anger he is causing among many Palestinians, his influence is unpredictable. Dajani’s language has a naivete that is out of fashion in the post-second Intifada, post nth negotiation-breakdown environment: he talks of building bridges instead of walls, and praises the Oslo accords as a psychological breakthrough. He blithely supports two states, because both societies need national and identity realization, he says, as if realities on the ground have not changed over the last 20 years.

Moderate Islam meets Auschwitz | +972 Magazine.

Des sikhs en cour contre l’Assemblée nationale | Le Devoir

The same week the federal government announced the kirpan would be allowed in Canadian embassies and consulates, a reminder that it remains an issue in Quebec, where the Assemblée nationale did not allow Sikh leaders to enter given their insistence on wearing the kirpan. Will be interesting to see if the new Liberal government will address this (non-issue in the Canadian and other provincial parliaments). In the meantime, a court case continues:

En entrevue avec Le Devoir, Balpreet Singh se fait très discret à propos de cette action en justice. « Il y a eu des tentatives pour entamer un dialogue et l’avenue légale en est certainement une que nous avons aussi conservée comme outil dans cette possible lutte »,dit-il pudiquement. M. Singh répète qu’il espère plutôt que la situation se règle par le dialogue. Il fonde en ce sens beaucoup d’espoir sur l’arrivée au pouvoir du libéral Philippe Couillard.

« Nous avons espoir que le dialogue permettra de résoudre cette situation. Nous le sommes particulièrement considérant que le PQ n’était visiblement pas favorable à ceci. Alors, nous avons espoir que nous pourrons expliquer la signification du kirpan au nouveau gouvernement au Québec et entamer le dialogue. »

Des sikhs en cour contre l’Assemblée nationale | Le Devoir.

Christian Rioux of Le Devoir never misses an opportunity to make his position on multiculturalism, this time using a play by Mani Soleymanlou, Un, the story of an Iranian immigrant who lands in Toronto but finally ends up in Quebec.

Le multiculturalisme est probablement ce qui se rapproche le plus au Canada d’une religion profane. Maintenant que notre débat sur la laïcité est ajourné, on apprenait que le Canada allait autoriser le port du kirpan dans ses ambassades. Certains y verront le triomphe d’une laïcité « ouverte ». Mais peut-être devraient-ils s’attarder au libellé de la décision.

En effet, le Canada ne se contente pas d’autoriser les sikhs orthodoxes à porter le kirpan dans ses ambassades à condition qu’il soit placé dans un fourreau fixé à une ceinture portée sous les vêtements. Afin d’éviter que n’importe quel amateur d’armes blanches frappe à la porte en se revendiquant sikh, il a bien fallu fixer des limites. Le règlement précise donc que celui qui porte le kirpan doit être animé par une « croyance religieuse sincère ». Et le Canada de définir ce qu’est un croyant « sincère ». Selon la définition canadienne, le sikh « sincère » est celui qui porte aussi un bracelet de fer, un turban, un peigne à cheveux et un caleçon spécifique. Qu’on se le dise, les amateurs de slips, de boxers et de strings ne franchiront pas le seuil des ambassades canadiennes avec leur kirpan.

Voilà donc un pays prétendument moderne, démocratique et évolué qui s’autorise, par la voix de son ministre d’État au Multiculturalisme, à définir qui est un « croyant sincère » et qui ne l’est pas. Nul doute que, demain, Tim Uppal pourrait décider de la même manière qu’un catholique « sincère » doit se confesser avant de communier et qu’un juif « sincère » doit être circoncis. On ne voit guère ce qui l’en empêcherait….

Si cette décision avait été rendue publique pendant le débat québécois sur la laïcité, elle aurait clarifié beaucoup de choses. Elle aurait notamment montré que l’État ne peut pas être à moitié ou aux trois quarts laïque. Elle aurait rappelé qu’on ne peut pas empiéter sur la laïcité et accorder un privilège à une religion sans aussitôt donner à l’État le droit de s’ingérer dans les croyances personnelles. Il n’y a pas de solution médiane. Ou bien la loi interdisant les armes dans les ambassades s’applique à tous dans l’ignorance des croyances de chacun. Ou bien il faut reconnaître à l’État le pouvoir de distinguer les bons des mauvais croyants. On reparlera ensuite de la liberté de conscience.

L’injonction multiculturelle | Le Devoir.

I don’t see how Christian interprets the practical guidance to Canadian missions on how to apply the policy means the government is deciding the sincerity of a persons beliefs beyond stating that someone who wants to enter a mission with a kirpan should also have the four other Sikh articles of faith. In other words, someone who only shows up with a kirpan but nothing else would not be able to avail themselves of the accommodation.

Sheema Khan: We can end honour killings, but not with films by anti-Muslim zealots

Sheema Khan’s reasonable approach on how best, and how not to, address gender issues, including “honour-based” violence.

Barbara Kay (Suffering caused by honour tell tales that smite the heart) and Margaret Wente (Don’t ignore women’s struggles in the Muslim world) would  do well to reflect further on Sheema’s points, as well as those of Amy Awad (Don’t Separate ‘Honour Crimes’ From Other Violence Against Women).

While much of Sheema’s piece is largely on the motives of Clarion Project (the organization behind Honor Diaries, Iranium, Obsession, and The Third Jihad), it is more her positive formulation on how best to counter “honour-based” violence that is of interest:

For those who want to help eliminate “honour”-based violence (HBV), a good place to start is through in-depth research about the issue. Next is consultation with those who have first-hand expertise in the field and credibility with affected communities. Aruna Papp, a South Asian Christian, has survived the trauma of “shame”, and is one of this country’s leading experts. In London, Ont., the Muslim Resource Centre for Social Support and Integration recently launched the “Reclaim Honour Project” that “works to promote honour and prevent violence against girls and women through the support of the community.” In March, the Ottawa Police Service held a collaborative session with local communities to address HBV, with expert Rana Husseini. Ms. Husseini, a Jordanian-based journalist, has over twenty years’ experience in the field. She advised: “never denigrate a people’s faith or culture,” but rather, protect at-risk women, create safe spaces to raise the issue, and work patiently to change laws and attitudes. The absence of Ms. Husseini’s approach in Honour Diaries speaks volumes.

We can look to the recent successes against female genital mutilation in sub-Saharan Africa as an example of how to approach centuries-rooted traditions. The key drivers include community dialogue and education, health-based initiatives, alternative income for cutters, legislative reform, and the involvement of religious clergy whose moral authority has undercut cultural legitimacy of genital mutilation.

Religion is an ally against “honour” killings. Islamic scholars (both Sunni and Shia) have condemned this practice. Their voices need to be amplified, in order to remove any doubts about the immoral nature of this crime. They carry far more legitimacy than anti-Muslim propagandists. But then again, eradicating honour killings was never the goal of Honor Diaries.

We can end honour killings, but not with films by anti-Muslim zealots – The Globe and Mail.

Homegrown terrorist: Toronto 18 bomb plotter Saad Khalid recalls his radicalization

Good interview with one of the participants in the Toronto 18 bomb plotting case, Saad Khalid, on the radicalization process, with the usual knowledgeable and thoughtful comments by Lorne Dawson:

His [Khalid’s] story in many ways offers parallels with how Lorne Dawson, a professor and chair of the sociology and legal studies department at the University of Waterloo, describes the concept of homegrown terrorism and how individuals are motivated to choose that path.

“These are young people who are mainly men. They are remarkably ordinary,” Dawson says.

“They’re pretty much like most other young people. If we’re going to explain why someone would become a terrorist, particularly a homegrown terrorist, the process of radicalization, then you’ve got to look at individual motivations.

“With each layer of explanation, you’re reducing the pool of potential candidates for who could become a terrorist. So it’s like a funnel.”

Homegrown terrorist: Toronto 18 bomb plotter Saad Khalid recalls his radicalization – Canada – CBC News.

Dan Delmar: Dissecting Drainville’s faulty identity rhetoric | National Post

Good dissection by Dan Delmar on the hapless rationalizations and excuses of former Minister Drainville, the main public face of the Charter:

Indeed, the Charter of Values didn’t go far enough in a number of areas; among them, the supposed secularization of institutions. A good start would be to cut financing and tax breaks to religious organizations and private religious schools; to stop funding the incessant and costly renovation of the plethora of churches in Quebec that no one attends; to, again, remove the Assembly’s crucifix, because no credible secular jurisdiction has Jesus Christ perched above the heads of men and women who are enacting laws.

Drainville also wanted to curb Islamism: You can’t counter ghettoization by further excluding Muslims from the government jobs they weren’t able to get in the first place. During a campaign press conference featuring former Premier Pauline Marois, I wandered off into the very next room of an east-end Montreal employment centre. A dozen people were receiving job training; nearly all were visible minorities and four were hijabi women. Marois, like Drainville, didn’t seem to comprehend how their Charter would exacerbate the problem of ethnic integration.

Dan Delmar: Dissecting Drainville’s faulty identity rhetoric | National Post.

Decision-Making: Refugee claim acceptance in Canada appears to be ‘luck of the draw’ despite reforms, analysis shows

Interesting from a decision-making perspective.

Reading this reminded me of some of Daniel Kahneman’s similar work where he showed considerable variability in decision-making, even depending on the time of day. A reminder of the difficulty of ensuring consistent decision-making, given that people are people, automatic thinking, reflecting our experiences and perceptions, is often as important as more deliberative thinking. No easy solutions but regular analysis of decisions and feedback may help:

There are legitimate reasons why decisions by some adjudicators lean in one direction, such as adjudicators specializing in claimants from a certain region. (Someone hearing cases from Syria will have a higher acceptance rate than someone hearing claims from France.) Some members hear more expedited cases, which are typically urgent claims with specific aggravating or mitigating facts.

“My view is that even when you try to control for those sorts of differences, a very large difference in acceptance rates still exists,” said Mr. Rehaag. “You get into the more idiosyncratic elements of individual identity.”

These may reflect the politics of the adjudicator or impressions about a country. If adjudicators have been on a relaxing holiday in a country they may be less likely to accept a claimant faces horrors there.

Refugee claim acceptance in Canada appears to be ‘luck of the draw’ despite reforms, analysis shows | National Post.

Diaspora Politics: Israel, Ukraine and Russia

More on diaspora politics and interests. I have not seen any coverage in Canadian media of tension between the US and Israel over Israel’s abstention on a UN resolution censuring Russia for its invasion of Crimea. Presumably the Canadian government would be equally annoyed as the Americans given its strong language against Russia and in favour of Ukraine. But then of course, this has to be “balanced” by the Canadian government’s strong support of Israel.

Always hard when there are such strong differences of opinion, both with respect to foreign relations as well as domestic diaspora politics.

Adding more fuel to the flames in Washington were public remarks by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman in which they maintained their “neutrality” and failed to back up the United States.

“We have good and trusting relations with the Americans and the Russians, and our experience has been very positive with both sides. So I don’t understand the idea that Israel has to get mired in this,” Lieberman told Israel’s Channel 9 television when asked about the Ukraine crisis.

When White House and State Department officials read these comments, they nearly went crazy. They were particularly incensed by Lieberman’s mentioning Israel’s relations with the United States and with Russia in the same breath, giving them equal weight. The United States gives Israel $3 billion a year in military aid, in addition to its constant diplomatic support in the UN and other international forums. Russia, on the other hand, supplies arms to Israel’s enemies and votes against it regularly in the UN.

U.S. officials angry: Israel doesn’t back stance on Russia – Haaretz.