Despite the very negative reaction Bush got from all around the world when he said Iran was part of “an axis of evil,” Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper used the word “evil” three times to describe Iran in an address he delivered in New York.
But there was little negative reaction, suggesting that 11 years after Bush coined the term “axis of evil,” many people around the world no longer find it objectionable when applied to the Islamic Republic. (Ironically, the speechwriter who coined the term “axis of evil” for Bush is Canadian-born.)
Harper said he wasn’t advocating war and he was mindful of the suffering of the Iranian people. But he said that didn’t mean anyone could ignore the “truly malevolent ideology being propounded by Tehran.
Harper said there are some countries in this world that “constitute unambiguously a clear and present danger…. First among these is the Government of Iran.”
Not mincing any words, he said: “I speak not merely, friends, of its appalling record of human rights abuse or its active assistance to the brutal regime in Syria, or its undeniable support for terrorist entities, or its continued denial of diplomatic rights, or its pursuit of nuclear weapons, rather it is the combination of all these things with a truly malevolent ideology that should concern us.
“I believe that the appeal of our conscience requires us to speak out against what the Iranian regime stands for.
“Likewise, it requires us to speak in support of the country that its hatred most immediately threatens, the State of Israel.
“Now friends, in supporting Israel, we don’t sanction every policy its government pursues. When, however, it is the one country of the global community whose very existence is threatened, our Government does refuse to use international fora to single out Israel for criticism. And it is important to state, that whatever Israel’s shortcomings, neither its existence nor its policies are responsible for the pathologies present in that part of the world.”
Harper then gave his litany of “evil”: “I say these things not to counsel any particular action, not to wish any additional hardship on the long-suffering Iranian people and certainly not to advocate war, but rather so that we not shrink from recognizing evil in the world for what it is.
“Our Government simply contends that the international community must do more, must do all it can, to further pressure and isolate this regimeÖ..
“We should never consider others evil merely because they disagree with us or because they compete with us.
“But where evil dominates, you will invariably find irreconcilable disagreement with the ideals that animate Canada, America and like-minded nations, the ideals which assert that all people possess human dignity and should be accorded equal rights.
“It is not for Canada to lecture others, but it is the responsibility of our Government to make the choices that circumstances force upon us, and these are the choices we shall make,” Harper concluded in an unusually stern speech.
A few days later at the UN General Assembly, Foreign Minister John Baird also spoke of Iran. He echoed the prime minister’s words—though he did not use the term “evil.”
Baird explained his decision to sever relations with Iran last month.
“Not only has the Government of Canada formally listed the Iranian regime as a state sponsor of terrorism, under Canadian law, we have also suspended diplomatic relations.
“Some may ask why a country committed to openness and engagement would suspend relations. We don’t take these decisions lightly.
“On a practical level, the regime’s blatant disregard for the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations created legitimate concern for the safety and security of our civilian diplomats.
“But there is also a great principle at stake. While Canada prizes engagement and open relations, there can be no open engagement with a regime that dishonors its word, repudiates its commitments, and threatens to perpetuate crimes against humanity,” Baird said, consciously choosing very harsh rhetoric just like the prime minister.
Also like the prime minister and US officials, Baird was careful to distinguish between the government of Iran and the people of Iran: “Let me be absolutely clear, our quarrel is not with the people of Iran, but instead with the regime that aims to silence their voices.”
Baird also made clear that Canada doesn’t want a war—but he took a unique tack in charging that Iran seemed to be pursuing a warpath: “Rather than accept as inevitable the conflict Iran seems intent on provoking, Canada seeks a peaceful alternative.
“Iran must act immediately to stop all enrichment and abandon technology that could be used for weapons. Iran is thoroughly testing the will of the international community. This, too, must end.”
In Tehran, Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehman-Parast called the Canadian language “unprofessional remarks.”
Mehman-Parast said, “Such an extremist approach, which is characterized by Islamophobia, racism and double-standard approaches to terrorism and human rights, has turned the Canadian government into a source of threat to international security through the creation of tension in international relations.”
Mehman-Parast advised the government of Canada to tackle its own domestic problems first and stop violating the rights of aboriginal people and spreading Islamophobia.
Mehman-Parast’s response continued the standard tactic of the regime, which is not to respond to criticism but rather to go on the attack against the one who criticizes.