Madam Chairman, in the context of whether or not there should be pre-emptive strikes, the answer is no, I am not in favour of pre-emptive strikes. In the context of is this the only multilateral organization that Canada is engaged with, obviously it is not. However in the context of whether a Security Council resolution that is currently standing and affects the particular situation we are in right now, the only place that we should be going that has the capacity to give effective multilateral action at this time is the Security Council. I firmly believe in that.
There have been situations in history where genocides have been ongoing. Has the UN ever made a mistake in the past? I think the member cited something regarding Rwanda with which I would agree.
Having made a mistake in the past, does that mean people should take it into their own hands unilaterally at a time when every action has a reaction not only with the immediate neighbours, but around the world?
We can quibble with the words. I think we all know what we are talking about when we talk about due process and established international law. There is a difference. I do not need proof when I see somebody slaughtered in the same manner that I need proof when I have to find some weapons in this situation.
The situation is that we have the time. We can take the time. I do not understand the colleagues in the House who seem eager for what reasons I do not understand to rush to the conclusion that the only resolution is military action as opposed to dialogue.
We have to be prepared to take more forceful action if it is necessary. That is not in dispute. However that is not the action that I hope and expect my government to take in this case.