Why Doesn’t Stephen Harper Want to Get Involved in Syria?

Stephen Harper and Barack Obama going on a romantic stroll. via WikiCommons.

It was about this time last year when I received comment from the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs, for a piece in our Syria Issue, about whether or not they acknowledged that Assad’s troops in Syria were committing targeted attacks on civilians:

Given the Assad regimes consistent failure to honour its commitments we all need to be fully cognizant of one indisputable fact—Assad will not voluntarily cease the brutal campaign of slaughter that he has launched against his own people. He has a clear interest in desperately clinging to power…

A year later, the Canadian government’s official position of acknowledging the conflict without committing to action has not changed much—even after what was possibly the worst chemical attack of the 21st century, an attack that followed the death of over 100,000 Syrians. In fact, top Canadian politicians like Foreign Affairs minister John Baird continue to eschew the possibility Canada will ever offer a military role in any international intervention in Syria. While tough talk denouncing Assad persists, as the oft-used saying since the Afghan mission, goes: “No boots on the ground,” for Canada.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has overseen the Canadian plummet to 57th out of 114 troop-contributing nations worldwide. It’s safe to saywhen it comes to his overall foreign policy position it’s relatively isolationist: He withdrew us from Afghanistan and oversaw two limited contributions to the Libyan war and the Malian campaign earlier this year. By all accounts, no Syrian war for Canadian Forces means the government is being consistent.

Yet the bipolarity of Canada not publicly supporting a war in Syria logistically, but strongly supporting somebody else doing the military heavy-lifting, implies internal uncertainty. Or at least the possibility Canada would partake in a strike against Syria in the future if a united western force agreed to it and shared the load. After all, the Canadian government did send their top general Tom Lawson to Amman, Jordan to meet with other top generals organizing a potential coalition against Syria. You can safely assume Conservative top brass is flirting with the possibility of war in Syria.

Yet Harper’s overall hesitance must stem from a perfect storm of mitigating factors at home and abroad, making his Tory strategists in the PMO office balk at intervention.

Of course there’s the obvious reason that comes to mind: Canada is anxious to engage in another high-cost public relations typhoon like the Afghan war, especially considering the comparisons between a potential Syrian campaign and the jihadist bee-hive that Operation Iraqi Freedom turned into. The probability of pinned down armies and street-to-street fighting in cities like Aleppo, means potentially wasted billions. And like a bad record on repeat, there’s the possibility they’d be aiding a rebel force at least partially composed of hardcore jihadist fighters, like the group Jabhat al-Nusra. It would be another mujahedeen turned Al-Qaeda during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (who were first aided by their eventual American nemesis).

Domestically, the 2015 federal election is already in plain sight. The recent prorogation will allow Harper to reset the parliamentary debate to suit his needs and to tackle Senate accountability after a disastrous scandal plagued spring term. Reigniting a war of words with the Liberals and NDP over another costly foreign war, in the vein of those debated over a supposedly cheap (and eventually expensive) Libyan war, doesn’t seem like a safe decision, especially given the Tory predilection to emphasize balancing the budget and looking out for “Jobs, Growth, and Economic prosperity.” That surely means they’re betting big on the economy as a strong suit for the 2015 re-election. The Conservatives are hoping Canadians will trust the financially savvy devil they know, over the pot-smoking liberal devil they kind of know and maybe don’t like. A Syrian invasion may mess with Stephen Harper’s delicate political advantage, and push balancing the budget behind schedule.

I’m also hearing from military sources that the government is seriously considering expanding the role of Canadian Forces in Haiti and possibly completely taking over the peacekeeping mission from Brazil, as an economic and diplomatic goodwill project to improve investment opportunities in that country. That means expanded troop levels to the tune of 1,500 to 2,000 for a mission that would likely mean less IEDs, casualties, and financial draining. Moreover, less likelihood the public could perceive it as a doomed Middle Eastern adventure and more as humanitarian mediation.

In other words, chances are, this time next year I’ll be looking over my notes in what can only be described as déjà vu journalism, just to see that the Canadian government hasn’t changed their position much on Syria—and you will be reading them. See you then.

Follow Ben on Twitter: @BMakuch

Watch:

Ground Zero - Syria

Read:

The Syria Issue