MICHAEL ENRIGHT, ARE YOU FOR REAL?

Sunday morning I tuned into Michael Enright’s Sunday Edition radio show (Feb. 19) and was sorry. I don’t know what to think about Michael these days. Or CBC Radio. I understand that Stephen Harper considers CBC Radio the enemy but I am increasingly perplexed as to why. As far as international news reporting goes, it seems to me that the Canadian media, including the CBC, is doing Harper’s job for him by keeping the Canada public so tense with threats of immanent war that we will be willing to accept more restrictions on our basic freedoms. These threats center on the so-called possibility of a US-Israeli invasion of Iran.

On the program Michael utters the threatening words in a deeply authoritarian voice: “How close is Iran to building a nuclear weapon? What should be done? Should the US and Israel make a preemptive strike?” Michael’s first two guests demure about a strike, but at least his third guest, Hirsh Goodman from National Security Studies from Tel Aviv University in Israel gives Michael the answer he seems to be hoping for. The answer is yes. Mr. Goodman would think a preemptive strike would be proper action if Iran continues with nuclear development.

The other two guests, Barbara Slavin (Atlantic Council Think Tank) and Paul Rogers (University of Bradford, England) weren’t so sure about what to do. But what I find so troubling is this… there was a lengthy discussion with these three scholars concerning Iran and a possible invasion and not a single one of them, including Michael himself, mentioned the magic word…China. I couldn’t believe it. It was as if China didn’t exist. As if China hadn’t announced to the world that she would protect Iran. As if China hadn’t announced to the world just recently that she was preparing for war if need be (Commodity On Line 1/7/12) and that she was troubled by remarks coming from the White House. Voila! An immediate change in Obama’s attitude.

“Okay,” Obama and the bankers seem to say to China, “if you won’t let us invade Iran without getting your kickers in a knot, will you please loan us some more money? “Well,” China seems to say in response, “we would like to see a negotiated settlement on the restrictive measures against Iran”. “Okay, we’ll get to work on that,” Obama seems to have responded and the bankers appear to have nodded in agreement. And China seems to have accepted this kind of a compromise because suddenly China and the US are big buddies. Really big buddies. And the talk coming from the While House appears to be leaning toward a negotiated settlement with Iran rather than an invasion. Just as Stephen Harper also appears to have been “born again” on the Chinese front.


“We’re not really looking for trouble over Iran,” Stephen Harper seems to have explained to China. “We just have to get rid of some of this bitumen we’re digging out of our tar sands, and as we are disfiguring and poisoning the entire landscape, we need more investment in the tar sands and we also have these other big plans for fracking shale gas that we need investment for, and in return and with a little luck maybe we can get the liquid gas over to your shores without explosions, how about it?”

“Fracking right on”, the Chinese seem to have replied.

There will be no invasion of Iran. China buys most of Iran’s oil. And while China is not expansionist she will protect her own interests. Harper and Obama and the banks all know this. However, the saber rattling by the Western media keeps their citizens on edge. Nervous citizens will allow erosions of civil rights that they wouldn’t entertain without the stabbings of continuous war anxiety. The CBC is certainly doing its share of exaggerating or outright falsifying the dangers of an imminent invasion of Iran. And while I’m at it, I have another bone to pick with Mr. Michael Enright’s reporting, this time about legalizing the sale of body parts. For another time.