Religious freedom envoy joins think tank ahead of Liberals’ decision on office – iPolitics

2016/03/18 Leave a comment

Suggests that the decision to fold the religious freedom office back into the human rights division has been taken:

Religious freedoms ambassador Andrew Bennett has joined conservative think tank Cardus amid uncertainty over the future of his office under the Liberal government.

The Canadian Press has learned that Bennett has become a senior fellow at Cardus and chair of the group’s Faith in Canada 150 program, effective immediately, while he serves out the balance of his term as ambassador.

“I look forward very much to working with Cardus, the think tank best placed in my view to reaffirm the essential and foundational role of faith in our common life as Canadians,” Bennett said in a statement to The Canadian Press.

The Tories set up the Office of Religious Freedom in 2013, and appointed Bennett, a former public servant and Christian theologian, as its first ambassador.

Source: Religious freedom envoy joins think tank ahead of Liberals’ decision on office – iPolitics

Filed under Religion Tagged with , ,

Abolish office of religious freedom: Anthony Furey

2016/03/07 Leave a comment

Interesting that the call to disband the office is coming from the Toronto Sun which generally supported the previous government:

It really does look like the office is just multicultural pandering, letting various religious groups – and they’re well-represented on the office’s 23 member advisory committee – feel the government is going to bat for them around the world.

It’s not exactly a “Canada first” endeavour, is it? I’m rather uncomfortable with us encouraging religious leaders into thinking their priorities are automatically Canadian policy priorities.

It’s even in the mandate: “The office will promote freedom of religion or belief as a Canadian foreign policy priority.”

A good and true sentiment, but a priority? No thanks. Canada’s foreign priorities should be about geopolitical stability with a view to our economy and security interests. If religious freedom becomes a secondary goal in these ventures then fine, but it shouldn’t be a standalone one.

However Garnett Genuis, Conservative MP for Sherwood Park-Fort Saskatchewan, believes the office is doing good work and hopes the Liberals keep it.

“Religious persecution is increasing and there are religious undertones to a lot of conflicts that exist in the world today,” he told me in a phone interview.

“If you believe the government should be involved in development assistance to some point, this is a very effective way for the government to be contributing to global harmony,” Genuis adds. “It helps to elevate our reputation as a country that takes human rights seriously and is willing to put its money where its mouth is.”

If these activities are priorities for the government, they shouldn’t be undertaken by a secondary office, but directly championed by the foreign affairs minister. And if they’re not that important, then leave them to the NGOs. There’s really no compelling reason for the Liberals to maintain this office.

Source: Abolish office of religious freedom | Furey | Columnists | Opinion | Toronto Sun

Filed under Multiculturalism, Religion Tagged with ,

Religious freedom office faces uncertain future as Liberals consider wider human-rights proposals

2016/01/19 1 Comment

Good in-depth piece, with considerable commentary offering advice on what the Government should consider:

The Liberal government is considering whether to scrap Canada’s controversial Office of Religious Freedom — considered a signature achievement by the previous Conservative government — and instead focus on ways to champion a broader array of human rights abroad.

Unless the new government intervenes, current Ambassador for Religious Freedom Andrew Bennett’s three-year term will expire Feb. 18. The office’s mandate and funding, about $5 million a year, will run out on March 31.

Supporters of the office are urging the Liberals to save it. Others are calling for big changes, if not its outright abolition. The government is weighing its options.

“Beyond March, the government has not made a decision with respect to the mandate and associated budget of the office,” said Adam Barratt, a spokesman for Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion. “The minister is examining options and how best to build on the work that has been accomplished in the area of religious freedom while promoting human rights as a whole.”

The Office of Religious Freedom was the subject of controversy even before it was formally established on Feb. 19, 2013. It was promised by the Conservatives during the 2011 election, but some worried it would be used to selectively champion Christianity, woo certain ethnic voter groups and pursue pet projects of the government.

Those who supported its creation argued there was is a growing link between religious freedom and democratic rights. They also said religion was becoming an increasingly important factor in international affairs, and having an office dedicated to the issue would benefit Canada abroad.

Bennett subscribes to that belief. Sitting in his office at the Department of Global Affairs, surrounded by religious symbols from different faiths, Bennett warned recently that Canadian diplomats risk a “blind spot” if they don’t have a strong grasp of how religion influences countries’ actions.

“We need to ensure that if we want to be really nuanced and winsome in how we engage countries that are deeply religious, that we can actually employ language that enables us to have a deeper engagement,” he told the Citizen. “If we can’t do that, then we risk developing or having a serious diplomatic blind spot.”

Even those who question the need for an Office for Religious Freedom have been impressed by Bennett, the well-spoken policy analyst at the Privy Council Office who also moonlights as a professor and dean at a small Christian college in Ottawa.

“Anytime I reached out for him, he was open, available and worked within the mandate,” said former NDP MP Paul Dewar, who was his party’s foreign affairs critic for years. “I think he did as good a job as he could to connect with groups from different religions and really try to engage to the extent he could.”

That doesn’t mean his term has escaped controversy. When the Conservative government appealed a court ruling that struck down a ban on face coverings during citizenship ceremonies, Dewar asked for Bennett’s position on the issue. The ambassador replied it was outside his mandate.

Bennett, however, admits that what happens in Canada has an impact on his ability to champion religious rights abroad. For instance, he says Turkish officials were quick to raise Quebec’s controversial Charter of Values two years ago when he was pressing them on the treatment of religious minorities in Turkey.

But even now, Bennett refuses to talk about the niqab debate, or the use of identity politics during the election debate. Mandate restrictions aside, he says Canada is different from Turkey and other places because it has a healthy democracy in which such issues can be debated.

“We need to be conscious as Canada that we have our own challenges that we have to engage,” he said. “But at least we’re able to engage them. In many countries, they can’t even talk about them.”

…Father Raymond de Souza wants the government to keep the office. A Roman Catholic priest and National Post columnist, de Souza is also chair of the Office of Religious Freedom’s external advisory committee. He says the federal government spends more on water treatment plants abroad than on the office each year.

“And if you ask why are there Syrian refugees in the first place, at least part of the answer is religious liberty,” he said. “People are fleeing religious persecution … The foreign policy issues that the government of Canada has at the top of its agenda are sort of shot through with religious liberty questions.”

…Alex Neve, the head of Amnesty International Canada, said the human rights group appreciated Bennett’s frequent public interventions on both individual and broader issues of religious persecution abroad. And he suggested the government might consider appointing ambassadors focused on other human rights.

“There is considerable value in devoting dedicated resources to a particular human rights concern, and appointing high level ambassadors or envoys to represent Canada globally with respect to that issue, as has been done with the Office of Religious Freedom,” he said.

Conservative foreign affairs critic Tony Clement hopes the Liberal government will keep the office and Bennett. He says both have contributed to religious freedom abroad, and transformed Canada into “a voice for research and advocacy and collaboration in order to protect people and their religious freedoms.”

But even some supporters question its impact. One is Imam Abdul Hai Patel, founder of the Canadian Council of Imams, Muslim chaplain for the University of Toronto and York Regional Police, and another member of the office’s external advisory board.

“I welcome the office. But then it has limited or no powers really to do anything,” said Patel. “I think it hasn’t really fulfilled the purpose for which it was intended, because it has no teeth and there was a limited budget.” He would like to see the office have more independence and influence, like its counterpart in the U.S.

Some Canadian diplomats have also quietly grumbled that the creation of the office politicized the issue of religious freedom, and hurt Canada’s ability to advance it abroad by putting it into a silo.

History might be against Bennett and the office surviving under the current Liberal government. Unlike the U.S. and some other countries, Canada has not traditionally appointed ambassadors for specific themes. And, fairly or not, the ambassador and office are inextricably linked to the previous Conservative government.

Bennett argues the office is needed more now than ever. In particular, he would like to offer more training to Canadian diplomats, to protect against that potential “blind spot” as religion and belief become more and more important in international politics.

And he says there’s an appetite for what the office has to offer. He says he has always acted as a non-partisan public servant. “My goal for the office is to just do the work. I just want to help people. I want to take that Canadian experience and try to assist as best we can people who are being persecution.”

Source: Religious freedom office faces uncertain future as Liberals consider wider human-rights proposals

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , , ,

On the Saudis and human rights, Canada needs to stop contradicting itself: Mendes

2016/01/15 Leave a comment

Errol Mendes’ suggestion to broaden the mandate of the Ambassador for Religious Freedom to Ambassador of Human Rights:

The Harper government earned itself a lot of criticism for creating its Office of Religious Freedom, a quasi-diplomatic operation which is supposed to promote the cause of faith rights around the world. This office, run by Christian scholar and public servant Andrew Bennett with a budget of $5 million, has a narrow mandate — and while Mr. Bennett has met with many diplomats, officials and groups from many religions in Canada and around the world, he hasn’t really achieved much.

Many want his office abolished. I have a better idea: replace it. Establish one with a wider mandate — an Office of the Ambassador for Human Rights. This office could go beyond merely shining a light on the persecution of religious minorities abroad by taking on a mandate to keep the Government of Canada itself honest. It could engage with the relevant government departments, conduct proactive analysis of Canadian interests abroad and seek ways to reconcile our vital diplomatic and economic interests with our principles.

While there are officials in Global Affairs whose job it is to focus on human rights matters as they affect our economic and diplomatic interests, an ambassador’s office could go outside the hierarchy and directly challenge individual ministerial decisions that could undermine Canada’s reputation. It could help establish a whole-of-government policy framework on human rights, and engage in outreach with civil society groups advocating a principled approach to trade and human rights. That could be useful to public servants too overburdened by management and accountability duties to see the bigger picture.

A human rights ambassador could be Canada’s eyes and ears abroad, monitoring — for example — how these Canadian-made armoured vehicles are being used in Saudi Arabia, and whether they’re being used against civilians. It could help the government frame its response to any evidence the Saudis were using these weapons against civilians.

Had such an office been in place when the previous government was negotiating the Saudi deal, it might have lobbied against it — or not; we’ll never know. But setting it up now would go a long way to ensuring the federal government is more transparent and accountable with future arms export deals.

Our economic and diplomatic interests are vitally important to us as a nation. So is our international reputation. We shouldn’t have to sully one to support the other.

And Errol Mendes says it’s time for Ottawa

Filed under Multiculturalism, Religion Tagged with ,

Sensitivity key for Canadian foreign service, says religious freedom envoy

2016/01/07 4 Comments

Encouraging that the promised spirit of openness by the Liberal government allowed this interview. Agree with Bennett’s fundamental thesis that diplomats would benefit from greater understanding of the role that religious faith plays.

Arguably, the same could be said for public servants more generally, given that many if not most reasonable accommodation issues involve religions:

Canada’s ambassador for religious freedom says the explosive rift between Saudi Arabia and Iran highlights religion’s growing influence on global affairs — and a potential “blind spot” for Canadian diplomats.

In an exclusive interview, Andrew Bennett said Canadian foreign service officers and other government officials need more training on the role that religious faith often plays in an individual country’s domestic policies and international relations.

“We need to ensure that if we want to be really nuanced and winsome in how we engage countries that are deeply religious, that we can actually employ language that enables us to have a deeper engagement,” he said. “If we can’t do that, then we risk developing or having a serious diplomatic blind spot.”

….On the broader question of religious reconciliation, Bennett said Canada and its western allies “are not going to solve the Sunni-Shia divide. But we need to understand it.” Key to that, he says, is making sure Canadian diplomats and government officials can understand, appreciate and speak the “language” of religion.

“When we engage, we can at least be somewhat conversant in the language that is used in Iran,” Bennett said. “I don’t mean Farsi. I mean what are the cultural, religious reference points that we need to be aware of and need to sort of integrate into that dialogue.”

The Pew Centre, a U.S.-based think tank, has estimated that 84 per cent of the world population has some type of religious affiliation, Bennett said. Religion has also played a role in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, he said, as well as in Nigeria and other places.

“Religion is becoming more of a geopolitical fact. It’s informing geopolitics,” said the ambassador.

“In Canada, because we live in a fairly secularized society where religious faith is not a strong component in shaping political, economic (or) social discourse, we’re not formed through our education and other things in a way that allows us to engage necessarily in that discussion around faith,” he added.

“So I think we need to increase our knowledge and increase our ability to engage in questions of religion.”

Bennett said his office, which was established under the previous Conservative government three years ago, has been working to expand such understanding in Canada’s foreign service. Several courses were offered and quickly filled up. His hope is that such work will be increased under the new government.

“At a more foundational level, in Canada and in the United States and in many Western countries, really since the Enlightenment, religion and religious faith has increasingly become absent from public discourse and from the public space, and it’s been viewed as something purely of the private sphere,” he said.

“When it comes to foreign affairs and international relations, when we leave a very secularized country such as Canada and go to a country that is not at all secular such as Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Iran, Nigeria, there’s a bit of a disconnect. And we need to address that.”

Source: Sensitivity key for Canadian foreign service, says religious freedom envoy | Ottawa Citizen

Filed under Multiculturalism, Religion Tagged with ,

Unmuzzle the ambassador of religious freedom, Conservatives tell Dion

2015/12/12 Leave a comment

My sense is that Andrew Bennett’s time is up.

Open question whether they fold back the function into the Human Rights Division or keep it as a stand-alone division (6 FTEs). Arguments can be made for both approaches:

With Donald Trump calling earlier this week for a ban on all Muslims entering the United States until the country’s representatives can “figure out what’s going on”, it seemed like a great opportunity for Canada’s ambassador of religious freedom to say…something.

It is his mandate, after all, to “promote Canadian values of pluralism and tolerance abroad.”

But since the Liberals were elected in October, Andrew Bennett has been suspiciously quiet, leading many to speculate Canada’s first ambassador of religious freedom could also be its last.

Though Bennett, who was appointed to the Harper government-created position in February 2013, released a statement on the International Day for Tolerance in mid November, Global Affairs Canada has turned down requests from multiple media outlets for interviews.

“I will have to politely decline your interview request with Ambassador Bennett at this time,” Global Affairs spokesperson John Babcock told iPolitics in an emailed statement right around that time.

“I will say that the promotion and protection of human rights is an integral part of Canada’s constructive leadership in the world. Freedom of religion or belief, including the ability to worship in peace and security, is a universal human right in accordance with the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”

The Toronto Star was told during the campaign that he’d be available after the election, and CTV‘s Don Martin lashed out on Twitter this week after being declined yet another interview request with Bennett.

In Question Period on Wednesday, Conservative MP Garnett Genuis sought clarification from the government, echoing the familiar Liberal jab at the Conservatives’ muzzling of federal government scientists.

“Mr. Speaker, members of the media are telling us that they have been unable to get hold of the ambassador for religious freedom since the new government was sworn in. The ambassador has previously been a highly effective advocate internationally, earning widespread acclaim and achieving substantial results. At a time when religious minorities are more vulnerable than ever before, why is the ambassador being muzzled?”

Global Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion responded, “Mr. Speaker, that is quite rich coming from this party. We do not muzzle officials at all. They did. They did it all over the place. We will fight to protect the right of freedom of religion, and all freedoms will be protected as much as possible by this government.”

Unmuzzle the ambassador of religious freedom, Conservatives tell Dion

Filed under Religion Tagged with ,

Niqab debate important for Canadians, religious freedoms ambassador says

2015/03/13 Leave a comment

More on the incoherent messaging from the Government; showing openness and inclusion on the one side, playing wedge and identity politics on the other:

Bennett, who was appointed Canada’s ambassador for religious freedoms in 2013, said balancing equality rights against religious freedoms is always a challenge.

“Freedom of religion necessarily intersects with equality between men and women and freedom of expression, freedom of association,” he said.

“So we have to ensure that one right does not trump another right, and I think we always have to be aware — as the prime minister has articulated — about the rights of women in society and we have to be careful to defend those rights.”

….The scramble to clarify came amid a social media backlash to Harper’s comments and escalating opposition charges that the Conservatives are deliberately stoking prejudice against Muslim Canadians in their bid to ramp up fear about radical Islamist terrorism.

Clement argued that Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau, who gave a major speech Monday denouncing what he dubbed Harper’s “politics of fear,” is the one expanding the issue beyond just niqabs at citizenship ceremonies.

But Conservative party talking points issued Wednesday suggest the issue is tied to the party’s broader goal of making terrorism an key issue in the coming election. After offering several lines about Trudeau being out of step with public support for banning the niqab during citizenship ceremonies, the final point says: “Unlike Justin Trudeau, we are not afraid to call the growing threat of jihadi terrorism exactly that — jihadi terrorism.”

For a Government that is normally so disciplined in its messaging, interesting to observe.

Niqab debate important for Canadians, religious freedoms ambassador says – The Globe and Mail.

Filed under Citizenship, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Islamic State attacks on religious minorities ‘genocide,’ Canadian ambassador says | Toronto Star

2014/09/10 Leave a comment

Trying to straddle the fine line between strong condemnation of ISIS and not leading to further mission creep and a seeming endorsement of R2P (Responsibility to Protect):

And, he says, it’s time that Canadians, who live in a secular society, brought religion into public debate — something many Western governments have shied away from.

“We can’t be afraid of religion in public discourse and how we advance foreign policy goals. We cannot say that religion is just bad, because it isn’t. It motivates people to great good and justice. But when we talk about the advancement of religious freedom we don’t mean theological disputes. We’re looking at the inherent dignity of every human being.”

Canada is well placed to set an example of tolerance, he said. But it is also correct to take military and humanitarian action on “religiously based persecutions,” that amount to “genocides in the case of the Yazidis and Christians.” The Islamic State has threatened both groups with conversion to their brand of radical Islam or death, and has massacred hundreds of men, women and children.

“The worst thing we can do is to throw up our hands and say it’s too complicated and we need to back away,” Bennett said. “It depends on countries of goodwill like Canada and its allies — that believe in democracy, freedom, rule of law and human rights — to take a stand.”

Islamic State attacks on religious minorities ‘genocide,’ Canadian ambassador says | Toronto Star.

And an interesting take on ISIS, and valid caution regarding further intervention beyond air strikes and the related current approach.

But the political pressures to do more, not least for the “brilliant” minds cheerleading the 2003 Iraq war, are hard to resist:

Unless politicians in the United States and allies in the West fall back on their traditional “Fire first, think later” approach to military planning. Consider for a moment: ISIS has suddenly begun decapitating Western journalists and placing the videos online for everyone to see. The target audience, of course, is the United States. ISIS says it is engaging in this barbarism to warn the Americans away, but even they aren’t that stupid. The 9/11 attacks, as every terrorist knows, were intended to and succeeded in luring us into war—just as bin Laden hoped it would. He believed his Al-Qaeda fighters would defeat the American military and drive it from Saudi Arabia. Why would ISIS think that killing a few journalists would cause the United States to cower when slaughtering thousands did not?

Simple: They don’t. As one terrorism expert told me, ISIS is hoping America will go too far in response, launch attacks that kill lots of innocent Muslims in an attempt to wipe out the jihadists. That would not destroy ISIS, but would derail the Islamic threat to the group. For no matter how hated ISIS is among the other jihadists and Middle Eastern Muslims, the United States is despised more. A new American strategic blunder on par with the Iraq War would distract ISIS’s Islamic enemies and turn the battle, once again, toward the U.S. If ISIS is to survive, it needs America to strike out rashly and harshly against it.

All this sounds like three-dimensional chess and it is. Unfortunately, in a world of Twitter foreign policy analysis and cable news blathering, America is rarely able to handle more than checkers when trying to address global threats. Yes, ISIS is hoping to strike us with something, anything, and it has enough supporters in the United States that it may succeed in executing an attack on a soft target. But the purpose of such an assault will be to provoke a response, one that will, inadvertently, save ISIS from the threat of the billions of other Muslims who want nothing to do with the group.

So, remember this: Every time you hear some commentator say America should “do something,” they are reading from the ISIS script. The U.S. can soften up ISIS with strategic bombing to aid the Islamic fighters taking them on. But it cannot beat them by rolling the Humvees back into Iraq or Syria. ISIS will be defeated by its own brutality against the people who might otherwise be their allies. In this case, the enemies of our enemies are truly our friends, at least for now.

ISIS will fall. It is inevitable. That is, unless the United States becomes the stupid one and gives them what they want.

ISISs Enemy List: 10 Reasons the Islamic State Is Doomed.

Filed under Religion Tagged with , , , ,

International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Ends: Andrew Bennett New Canadian Head of Delegation

2014/03/13 1 Comment

Interesting choice of new head of Canadian delegation to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance: Andrew Bennett, Canada’s Ambassador for Religious Freedom.

Responsibility for multiculturalism-related files now spans three Ministers:  Baird of DFATD, Alexander of CIC, and Kenney, who has overall political responsibility. Holocaust awareness and remembrance is about more than religious freedom. Countries like the US and UK separate religious freedom and Holocaust/antisemitism responsibilities. Represents a further dilution of the multiculturalism policy role of CIC, whether driven by the political or bureaucratic levels, and whether or not it represents distrust of officials.

News Release — Canadian Chair Year of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Ends: Holocaust Awareness and the Fight Against Anti-Semitism Continue.

Filed under Antisemitism, Holocaust, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Religious freedom chief says he aids diplomats in supporting human rights abroad – The Globe and Mail

2014/01/10 Leave a comment

A few articles on the Office of Religious Freedom, under the direction of Ambassador, Andrew Bennett. The focus on religious freedom is understandable given the rise of religious intolerance and fundamentalism. Not surprisingly, given evidence of increased persecution as well as the Government’s political interests, is the emphasis on persecution of Christians.

Religious freedom ambassador not worried about ‘push back’ from abroad.

Religious freedom chief says he aids diplomats in supporting human rights abroad – The Globe and Mail.

Filed under Multiculturalism, Religion Tagged with ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →