Daniel Turp

[Kosovo, April 12th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, as you can see, the Bloc Québécois is interested in these matters even at this late hour.

I would like to ask my colleague, who has a legal background and who, I believe, is well versed in criminal law, whether he believes a genocide is currently taking place in Kosovo or whether he believes that, for the moment, it is more a matter of ethnic cleansing.

Either way, under international law—because he referred to international law—does the international community not have an obligation to act to prevent genocide or ethnic cleansing?

[Kosovo, April 12th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask my Reform Party colleague, just as I asked the Prime Minister this afternoon, to give, not one, not two, but three reasons why there should be a vote in this House if a decision is made to use ground forces in the conflict in Kosovo.

[Kosovo, April 12th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I congratulate the member for Parkdale—High Park who, at this late hour, is brimming with energy and is keeping members awake. I congratulate her on this.

I would also like to quote for her benefit the preamble to the United Nations charter, which begins with the following words:

We the peoples of the United Nations determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind.

However, it would appear that one country is no longer a true member of the UN. Moreover, Yugoslavia's status within the UN is rather unique, given the breakup of the former Yugoslavia. One country has failed to uphold the principles of this charter, but because of a veto right, the UN cannot intervene as it really should in the conflict in Kosovo.

There is one thing the UN could do. The hon. member from the Liberal Party maintains that we are witnessing a genocide. She used the word “genocide”. This afternoon, the Prime Minister hesitated to use the word again when reminded that this was the word he had used previously.

Would the hon. member who is talking about a genocide support the idea of the Government of Canada bringing Yugoslavia up on charges before the International Court of Justice and calling on this court to rule that Yugoslavia has indeed violated the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide?

[International Cultural Forums, March 18th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, last year, Ms. Beaudoin did not wish to take part because she was invited to listen but not to speak.

What explanation can the Prime Minister and the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs therefore give for both being even more opposed to letting Quebec speak than ministers of a foreign government such as France?

[International Cultural Forums, March 18th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, Quebec's Minister of International Relations, Louise Beaudoin, said she was waiting for the go-ahead from Ottawa before speaking on behalf of Quebec at the Mexico meeting on cultural diversity, which is a follow-up to the Ottawa meeting last June.

Since the Prime Minister said yesterday that he was the one who gave the floor to Quebec, does he intend to give that floor to Quebec in Mexico, as opposed to what he did last year in Ottawa?

[Petitions, March 17th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition on behalf of residents of Quebec and the Peace Network of Greater Montreal.

The petitioners call upon parliament to adopt the SCFAIT report as an official policy of the Government of Canada, to fully and promptly implement the recommendations of the report and to harmonize existing government positions and programs within the spirit and intent of the report.

[East Timor, February 19th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the Indonesian government recently declared that it was prepared to grant independence to East Timor, a former Portuguese colony invaded and annexed over 20 years ago.

As the Indonesian president, BJ Habibie, recently said “Give them freedom. It is just and fair”.

The Bloc Quebecois is delighted that the government of Indonesia intends to act on the desire of the people of East Timor for sovereignty. Reports indicate, however, that the pro Indonesian militia are receiving arms. This is the very militia that are trying to further integrate the Timorese into Indonesian society.

The Bloc Quebecois hopes the government of Indonesia will demonstrate its good faith by working on a peaceful and negotiated solution to the East Timor problem and the right of the Timorese to decide their future freely may not only be recognized but honoured as well.

[Foreign Affairs, February 18th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, since Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan was arrested by the Turks on Tuesday, many have expressed concern that he will not get a fair trial, but what they are mainly concerned about is the future of the Kurdish people.

Given that the minister has already shown he is sensitive to the plight of the Kurdish people, does he not feel that Canada should take advantage of its chairmanship of the security council to raise this issue in that forum?

[Peacekeeping, February 17th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, this evening, as in October, the member for Vancouver Quadra wants once again to discuss international law in the House.

That is fine, but let us never forget that international law must, first and foremost, serve peace. We are reminded of that in the preamble of the UN charter, which includes its most important provisions.

Indeed, we can always claim and argue that international common law now authorizes humanitarian types of interventions, interventions that are different from 19th century humanitarian interventions, which were made for eminently political reasons and far less humanitarian ones.

But I do believe that a practice has developed that would now allow states to take an action such as the one being contemplated for Kosovo, or that was contemplated under other circumstances. That action could be based on international law, so as to avoid the issue of the legality of such an intervention without the security council's formal and express authorization.

But still, I am urging the parliamentary secretary to act as a messenger to the Minister of Foreign Affairs. I told him this afternoon, when the standing committee met, that, in spite of the possibility of invoking humanitarian international law, if the UN is to maintain its credibility and its legitimacy in this intervention in Kosovo, the security council must, if not the UN general assembly, be involved. The UN must have an opportunity to approve the intervention by soldiers from various national contingents on behalf of NATO.

[Peacekeeping, February 17th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak on behalf of the Bloc Quebecois and to tell you that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Joliette.

First, I want to stress the importance of such a debate. The Bloc Quebecois has always supported such debates, because it is important for Parliament to discuss peacekeeping or peace-building missions before we send troops to implement decisions made by a regional or universal international organization such as the United Nations.

I basically agree with the Reform Party, which proposed ways to make parliamentary debates more meaningful and influential because, as you can see, there are just a few of us here in the House. The ministers have left and a meaningful debate should take place under circumstances and according to procedures that would promote greater participation from parliamentarians. In that sense, it is unfortunate that the motion recently moved by the hon. member for Red Deer was defeated after a vote in the House.

It is true that lack of preparation is certainly one the main problems with this kind of parliamentary debate, as exemplified by the preparatory briefings held last week on the issue of Kosovo; briefings on the Central African Republic were scheduled for tomorrow, but they will be pointless because the debate will have taken place the evening before in the House of Commons.

That having been said, we have a decision to make on whether or not to dispatch Canadian troops to Kosovo if a peace agreement were to be signed in the next few days in Rambouillet as well as on renewing the MINURCA mandate in the Central African Republic. Unlike the Reform Party, the Bloc Quebecois will be clear: we are in favour of sending a Canadian contingent, should a peacekeeping mission in Kosovo be decided on, and in favour of renewing the mandate of the mission set up by the United Nations in the Central African Republic.

That is not to say that we have no concerns. With respect to Kosovo, I would like to share two concerns of ours, which deserve consideration by this House.

First, regarding the nature of the mission to be deployed in Kosovo, what we are expected to be debating this evening is obviously the dispatch of a peacekeeping mission. But it is far from certain that this is the kind of mission that will be contemplated in the next few days, since, as we know full well today, negotiations in Rambouillet are stalled.

President Milosevic has issued a statement indicating that he did not want any multinational force in Kosovo. In this case, unless the President of Yugoslavia changes his position—the Minister of External Affairs suggested a few moments ago that it could be a bargaining position—the mission in which Canada must take part may very well not be a mission to maintain a negotiated peace, but rather a mission to force the Yugoslav government to accept a negotiated peace, which would most likely involve the use of armed force.

Such debate is not taking place but it should because, should Canada be called upon to take part not in a peacekeeping mission but in a mission involving air strikes, Parliament should have an opportunity to debate the issue. This debate should not be restricted in such a way as to prevent us from authorizing the government to take part in a mission of a totally different nature.

This is one concern that had to be voiced by the Bloc Quebecois. Another concern is the way in which this peacekeeping mission, if such is the case, will be set up and whether or not it will be authorized by the United Nations.

On several occasions, I have expressed in this House our party's concern that such a mission should be authorized by the United Nations. Obviously, the Security Council does not seem in a position to authorize such a mission since any country that has the right of veto can exercise that right.

Consequently, Canada, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, who himself could chair the Security Council, must still make sure that this question is put to the Council and eventually the General Assembly of the United Nations, since it can deal with it should the Security Council be stymied by a veto. The famous Acheson resolution, which my colleague from Vancouver Quadra knows so well, would enable the General Assembly to consider this mission in Kosovo.

So, there are two unanswered questions that should be the subject of concern to the Government of Canada before a peacekeeping mission is sent to Kosovo.

Regarding the mission to the Central African Republic, I was in New York on a parliamentary mission when Canada was asked to be part of this mission. The Bloc Quebecois immediately indicated its support for such a mission there. That is still true today. We know this mission ends February 28 and Canada's participation is to be renewed.

It is important to maintain a certain stability in this African country, which is starting the process of democracy that will lead to presidential elections, and it may help if foreign troops are present as part of MINURCA.

The Bloc Quebecois has always supported the idea of sending peacekeeping and peacebuilding troops abroad. We believe it is an investment for and in peace.

When I hear the objections of my Reform Party colleagues, with more of the rhetoric we saw earlier this evening, I do not think they show any sign of being able to form an alternative, even a united one, in Canada, to the government, or of being concerned with the matters that should concern a party with ambitions of forming a government.

The concerns of the present government, as presented by the ministers, have enough merit in our view that our party will be supporting them. As it did before, our party reiterates this support and also notes, as did the Reform Party, that it would like to see debates such as this one have a greater impact, be better prepared and be discussed beforehand, probably in the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade, as was done before. This way, the public would have a better understanding of, and be more open to, the investment in material and human resources required of a country engaged in peacekeeping missions.

I will close with the statement that, if war is necessary—because it is likely or at least possible, and the Bloc Quebecois no more wants to see a war than any other reasonable person, just to make Yugoslavia listen to reason in its dispute with the Kosovars—then let us hope, as André Malraux wrote in the wonderful novel

Les Noyers de l'Altenburg

that victory goes to those who go to war but take no pleasure in it.

But I would rather quote Aristide Briand to the House. I address my words to the Yugoslavians listening this evening, and particularly to their representative who is in the gallery. Aristide Briand said “It takes two to stop fighting: you and the other fellow”.