Sovereign nations have always been associated with their current leaders. There is no more iconic image of World War II than the pictures of Winston Churchill, Franklin Roosevelt and Joseph Stalin meeting at Yalta discussing postwar Europe.
The Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962 was a confrontation between the two superpowers, but was also about secret direct communications between US President John F. Kennedy and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev. There were even indirect messages between Kennedy and Cuba’s Fidel Castro.
In this Age of Social Media, national leaders—whether president, prime minister or dictator—appear closer to the people and seemingly become the absolute face of a nation. The line between the person and country is blurred like never before. Instant “selfies” of Barrack Obama and instant tweets of Donald J. Trump are scattered to every corner of the planet.
If that line between the leadership and the country is unclear, then perhaps the policies of the government are also hazy as to which purposes they serve—the person or the public.
Upon assuming the presidency, Rodrigo Duterte said that he wanted US troops in Mindanao to leave and that he would no longer allow military exercises with American forces. While the annual Balikatan exercises continued, the 2017 exercises focused on disaster response and medical missions. Was that a “compromise” based on what was best for the nation or best for the Duterte policy?
In early-February Prime Minister Justin Trudeau supported pushing through with the sale of 16 Canadian made helicopters worth some $200 million to the Philippine Air Force. By the end of the month, Canada said they were reviewing the deal and that it would be delayed due to questions about if the helicopters would be used for “combat operations.” Because of the delay, Duterte canceled the purchase.
The Bell Helicopter 412EPI is not designed for use in military combat operations except as a support platform and has been sold to the military of nearly 40 other countries, including Thailand, China, Pakistan and Indonesia. It can be outfitted with armaments. Bell Helicopter Canada is a subsidiary of Bell Helicopter Textron USA and most of the sales did come from the US.
Canada has always grappled with the morality of its military sales having helped arm the Dutch in its colonial war against Indonesia in 1946 and then arming Indonesia when it invaded East Timor in 1975.
However, the controversy over the sale of the utility helicopters to the Philippines is coincidentally interesting.
Trudeau has strongly supported an $11.6-billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia struck in 2014, including 119 “heavy assault vehicles” armed with 105-millimeter cannons. Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland confirmed that her department did not find “conclusive evidence” that the previously delivered Canadian-made light-armored vehicles had been used in human-rights abuses. Saudi invaded Yemen in 2015, involving itself in a civil war that has killed some 10,000 civilians.
On March 21 Trudeau said “the [Saudi] deal is in line with Canada’s foreign and defense policies.” But as the controversy over the Saudi sale heated up in February, he was also asked whether he was concerned the Bell helicopters might be used against Filipino citizens and replied, “Absolutely.”
Like all good politicians, Prime Minister “Say people-kind not mankind” Trudeau can keep both his $11-billion deal with the Saudis and maintain his global human-rights defender image. President Duterte can keep his tough guy image with “My God, you Canadians, how stupid can you get?” and add another incident to the list that “the West does not care about the Philippines.” Politicians, you have to love them.