Terrorism Needs Cops Not Tanks

Canada's new Defense Minister, Jason Kenney, made his very first speech to parliament Thursday.  He chose to speak about terrorism.  My only question is this:  why?

Terrorism is a matter for the RCMP, not the Canadian Armed Forces.  Terrorists are inhuman murderers, but they are not an army.  US Secretary of State John Kerry, when he was running against George W. Bush, said that terrorism was a police matter, and was roasted for it.  We've come to accept that the terrorist threat is a military challenge, but it is not.

All the examples that Kenney used were police matters. 

"We need only to look to Copenhagen, to Paris, to Brussels and to Sydney," Kenney said."We need only consider the Toronto 18, the ongoing trials in Vancouver in the plot to bomb for the B.C. legislature and in Toronto against the alleged Via Rail bombers, to know that there is a high probability of future jihadists attacks from within." 

Which of those threats should the Defense Minister be spending time on?  Are we planning to invade the Toronto 18?  Should we be preparing mechanized infantry to face the Via Rail bombers? 

Kenney goes on to talk about Boko Haram in Nigeria.  Are Boko Haram terrorists?  They're certainly scary and unquestionably evil.  But, like ISIS, Boko Haram are taking territory (and committing mass murder).  They are fighting the armies of Nigeria and the neighboring countries.  They are not two scumbags murdering innocents in Paris.  They are not one cowardly killer in Ottawa.  They are an army.

Look;  we need to get a handle on this, and soon.  The word 'terrorism' has to mean something.  Currently, it is bent by governments to mean virtually any Islamic violence that is not aligned with the West.  When we allow them to do that, we end up with an endless open-ended war on an undefined enemy.  And we allow ourselves to turn a blind eye to the real threats and causes.  We don't have to hold up a mirror and see what we are doing and not doing to encourage violent extremism. 

The threat of terrorism in North America is virtually non-existent.  People die of things like heart attacks and car crashes, not terrorists.  A few attacks and thwarted attacks do not justify the expansion of surveillance powers and limitations on free speech that conservatives are imposing on all of us. 

I choose to be more free and less safe, and I think most people in North America would agree.  That means government should abide by the Charter and the Constitution.  They should require a warrant to perform surveillance.  CSIS and the NSA should have to play by the rules.  Would I be less safe if they weren't reading my email and bugging my phone? 

I'll take that chance.

Domestic terrorists are a police challenge, not a military one.  The RCMP and FBI have done a great job stopping them.  Peter MacKay's 'non-terrorists' (i.e. they were white) in Halifax were caught on a tip by Crime Stoppers - not by billion-dollar spy equipment.  Internationally, terrorists are made from marginalized and radicalized youth.  Groups like ISIS and Boko Haram fill the void created by failed states.  These are all complex problems. 

Which of them should the Canadian Minister of Defense be working on?  The answer is "E - None of the above."