FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Aug 28

Issue of Use of Vaccine Passports Within Provinces and States

by bcurry

As of late, everyone has turned from the evident use of vaccine passports for Canadians and Americans who travel out of country to their use internally.  Due to the requirements in many countries with respect to COVID vaccinated and unvaccinated travellers, it is readily accepted that some form of vaccine passport is required to permit people to skip measures such as quarantine requirements if they are fully vaccinated.  For this reason, some form of proof of vaccination is needed.  Almost all countries have accepted this approach when dealing with travel into and out of their jurisdictions.

However, when it comes to the use of vaccine passports within Canadian provinces and U.S. states, this is a whole different and more controversial matter.  In general, their use is seen as a means to encouraging more people to become fully inoculated against COVID-19 in order to engage in certain larger public activities, sports events, enterprises such as restaurants and bars, and even some workplaces.  In Canada, British Columbia and Quebec have recently implemented the use of vaccine passports, and Ontario is now apparently planning to implement one.  Both provinces indicate that they are seeing a surge in vaccination appointments after announcing residents will have to show proof of being fully vaccinated to enter certain non-essential establishments.  Prince Edward Island (PEI) and Manitoba were the first Canadian provinces to implement a provincial passport.  Manitoba’s immunization card also allows holders to visit long-term care facilities and sit with members of different households in restaurants.  The PEI pass allows travellers from out of province to skip the area’s mandatory quarantine.  However, none of those provinces require the passport for access to essential services such as education or health care.  However, this could change in the near future.

In the U.S., the debate among states is a lot more heated.  As of this month, only New York state and Hawaii have implemented some form of vaccine passport.  Among the other states, 15 states have banned vaccine passports and 33 states have no current requirement for vaccine passports.  Most states with a ban are governed by Republican administrations.  What is most interesting, those states such as Florida, Texas and Georgia, are among those with the lowest vaccination rates and the highest counts of new cases of COVID-19.  The reasons given for banning or not requiring vaccine passports vary from state to state, but tend to correspond to each state’s position on masking in public places and other health restrictions.

In Canada, recent surveying has indicated that almost 80 percent of Canadians would support a vaccine passport within their province.  This is not the case in the U.S. where there appears to be an even split between those in favour of and those opposed to vaccine passports within their respective states.  Much of the issue in the U.S. has to do with a continuing high degree of vaccine hesitancy, especially among younger Americans, and a concern over whether this will lead to some form of discrimination between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.  However, from a public health aspect, anything that can be done to encourage more people to get vaccinated is considered a good and positive move from a community point of view. 

Meanwhile, in both countries the battle to deal with the fourth COVID wave rages on, especially since the more contagious Delta variant represents the majority of our cases.  Perhaps, the use of vaccine passports for admittance to non-essential activities is not such a bad idea under the circumstances?  Otherwise, governments may be heading to the imposition of more economic lockdowns and further restrictions.

Canada Coronavirus COVID-19 US

Leave a comment »
Aug 26

The Issue of the Right to Choose vs. the Ability to Choose

by bcurry

I recently read an interesting editorial in a Canadian media outlet that addressed some of the issues facing Canadians and Canadian political parties in the current federal election.  All the main parties have attempted to address such issues as child care, affordable housing, health care, long-term care, employment opportunities, and economic assistance to the middle class and working poor.  In this particular article, the writer wondered whatever happened to people’s right to choose what’s best for themselves and their families?  What the proposition fails to address is the fundamental issue that not everyone in our society has a choice when it comes to their livelihood and daily lifestyles.  The right to choose would be great if we had an egalitarian society where people had the means to choose the alternatives available for many necessities.

Let’s start with how one educates one’s children.  Education is supposed to be the foundation for allowing people to reach their full potential in society, and notably to escape from the cycle of poverty that exists in many circumstances.  However, when it comes to public education which the majority of Canadians rely on, there is not always the same quality of primary and secondary public sources depending on where a family lives.  Sure, one can choose to send their children to private schools, but how many of us can afford to do so? 

Then, there is the question of affordable housing which everyone agrees is increasingly disappearing in most major urban communities.  If one cannot afford to expend 60 or 70 percent of their monthly income on rental housing, the options are clearly limited.  One ends up having to take whatever is available, and that’s not much.  Just look at the waiting lists for subsidized housing in most communities.

Next, we have the question concerning our current system of universal health care.  Fortunately, unlike in the U.S., Canada supports a basic health care insurance system which covers every Canadian.  However, even then, we have inequalities because of the need to have private health insurance to cover such things as certain prescription drugs, dental care and physiotherapy.  There are those who have to forgo certain treatments or medication in order to put food on the table and pay the rent.  Is this what one implies by referring to choice?

Then there is the question of one’s employment and supplementary needs.  For many single parent families or working couples, there is little choice but to work.  With a requirement for affordable child care during early childhood, they need to find affordable means to ensure that their kids are adequately cared for while they are at work.  Given the evident lack of affordable child care across Canada, the means to providing for care is not always a matter of parental choice.  You may be required to work more than one job, often at minimum wages, and the needed hours most likely will vary depending on where one works.  In addition, you most likely will take public transit to and from work because it’s the cheapest means to commute, especially given the high costs of vehicle insurance.

This brings us to the ultimate question.  Do we have a real right to choose or is this a privilege depending on one’s status in an inequitable society?  What many need are affordable and quality options, whether it is for child care, housing, transportation or health care.  Without greater availability to affordable and quality options, simple measures through income-based tax credits for Canadians does nothing to resolve the existing inequalities.  Hopefully, there are signs that some political parties have recognized the need for proactive policies and expenditures to tackle such inequalities.  After all, we are talking about the basic necessities of everyday living for many Canadians who are not among the privileged few.  Unfortunately, as it now stands, many are not in a position of choice.

Canada Federal Government

Leave a comment »
Aug 22

How the Delta Variant has become the Biggest Concern of the Biden Administration

by bcurry

Back in June 2020 when over half of U.S. states reported record-breaking breakouts of coronavirus cases during the ‘first wave’ of COVID-19, I created the blog Could COVID-19 be the Harbinger to the Decline of the American Empire | FROLITICKS (wordpress.com) in jest to make a point about President Trump’s irrational handling of the pandemic at the time.  Now, the arrival of the Delta variant and American reactions to it represents probably the most immediate political test for the Biden administration.  Despite the President’s efforts and his administration’s praiseworthy commitment to vaccinate the vast majority of Americans, there continues to be around an estimated 100 million people who have yet to receive a single dose.  Meanwhile, there has to date been a total of over 625,000 COVID-related deaths and over 150,000 new daily cases as of August 18, 2021 in the U.S. according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).  The U.S. daily COVID cases are now reaching rates seen last in November 2020.

Among the problems is the fact that certain Republican governors and legislatures are refusing to re-introduce some of the prevention measures taken during the first waves, including mandating masking, physical distancing and restrictions on certain activities involving potential crowds and non-essential activities.  One of those is Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis who has resisted mandatory mask mandates (including in schools) and vaccine requirements.  Along with the state legislature, Florida has limited local officials’ ability to impose restrictions meant to stop the spread of COVID-19.   At the end of July, Florida reported over 17,000 new daily cases.  The previous peak in Florida had been 19,334 cases reported on January 7, 2021, before the availability of vaccinations became widespread.  The case counts along with the death rates continue to climb.  In Kentucky, the governor’s efforts to aggressively combat COVID-19 suffered a recent legal defeat as the state’s high court cleared the way for new laws to rein in his emergency powers.  One of the contested laws passed by the Kentucky legislature limits the governor’s executive orders in times of emergency to 30 days unless extended by lawmakers.

Republican lawmakers across more than a dozen states, including Montana, North Dakota, Missouri, Kansas and of course Florida, are working to limit the powers of local health departments in ways experts say is likely to lead to “preventable tragedies” during disease outbreaks, including the Covid-19 pandemic.  There is nothing that President Biden can do about what is going on in these states.  These states are now experiencing the most significant outbreak of Covid-19 since spring 2021, when a fast-moving vaccination campaign and social distancing led to the lowest rates of new infections since the pandemic began.  They are also among the least vaccinated states in the nation.

One of the ironies is that former president, Donald Trump, is now recommending that his supporters get the vaccine.  However, at a recent “Save America” rally in Alabama, Trump was severely booed after encouraging his supporters to get vaccinated against COVID-19.  Oh the irony!  Remember that the former president and his wife privately got vaccinated at the White House in January 2021, although the American public didn’t learn about it until the following March according to the New York Times.  As president, Trump frequently dismissed following public health guidelines during the pandemic and mocked mask-wearing on several occasions.  You may recall that the former president contracted the coronavirus in October 2020 and was hospitalized for three nights at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.  Needless-to-say, he received medical treatment at the time that most Americans would never see in a lifetime.

In the current situation, there will be a lot of questions about the American handling of the highly-contagious Delta variant, and whether the lessening of previous restrictions came too soon and too quickly.  It’s fine to say that we have to come to live with COVID-19 like we do with colds and seasonal influenza, but at what cost in the short-term.  It may take years to determine whether the actions taken by governments were effective in dealing with this global pandemic.  Right now, I have more immediate serious concerns about what is happening south of our border.

Coronavirus US

Leave a comment »
Aug 21

Canadian Federal Election is Here, But What About the Issue of Fairness in Taxation?

by bcurry

A recent release of secret files of the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) revealed that some of the wealthiest billionaires in the world — including Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Michael Bloomberg and George Soros — hadn’t paid a cent in income tax in some years, and paid very low rates of tax in general.  The files indicated that the wealthiest 25 American billionaires paid an average income tax rate that worked out to just 3.4% of their increase in wealth in the five years from 2014 to 2018.  That’s far less than the average American or Canadian paid in income tax as a share of their income or their increase in wealth.  The tax system in both countries is obviously broken, and it could never really pretend to be progressive in its current form.

According to most tax experts, there’s little doubt that Canada’s ultra-wealthy and billionaires also pay very low rates of tax on their income and wealth.  Our tax system has many similarities with the U.S., similar ways to dodge taxes, and Canada is the only major country without some form of wealth tax.  And we’re talking big bucks!  As the non-profit Canadians for Tax Fairness (C4TF) notes: “Canada’s 1% now control over a quarter of the country’s wealth — over C$3 trillion.”  The existing massive inequality in wealth grew even bigger during the pandemic, as corporations and wealthy individuals prospered while many Canadians struggled to simply maintain their standard of living.  Canadian corporations received taxpayer-funded government subsidies while paying out billions to their shareholders.

A recent book by Jonathan Gauvin and Angella MacEwen, entitled “Share the Wealth”, highlights the injustices found in the current tax system.  The book is highly recommended.  It  points out that more and more countries are applying new successful taxes on the uber-rich.  Even the Biden administration is promoting higher corporate taxes.  The concept of a wealth tax on the richest of the rich is increasingly becoming accepted by Americans and Canadians.  In addition, most of us would like to see the current tax loopholes for individuals and corporations closed.  This alone would bring in billions dollars into the federal treasury, and could be used to help fund such things as much needed infrastructure improvements, national child care initiatives and pharmacare programs. 

All three major federal parties have expressed their willingness to introduce tax fairness measures if elected.  Since its establishment in 2011, the C4TF has brought forward issues like taxing the wealthiest 1%, closing tax loopholes, tackling tax havens, having corporations pay their fair share, and taxing digital giants in Canada.  All the necessary rationale for change exists.  Isn’t it about time that whichever party forms the next government, it will put the issue of tax fairness front and centre in parliament.  Let’s hopefully see the next government ‘walk the talk’ in support of the needed changes when it comes to this important issue!

Canada Fairness in Taxation US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Aug 18

Once Again, as in the Case of Vietnam, the U.S Military Misled the President

by bcurry

As many of us predicted some time ago, the Afghan ruling government was overthrown by the Taliban this past week.  This despite the fact that President Biden had just reassured Americans that the Afghan military and security forces would be able to defend Kabul against any Taliban attacks.  One counted on the over 300,000 security forces, armed and trained by the Allies, to defend the capital and reigning government against a poorer armed estimated force of 85,000 Taliban insurgents.  Well, as in the case of South Vietnam and the fall of Saigon in April 1975, the disintegration of the military and ruling government ended with the rapid fall of Kabul.  Thus came the familiar sight of Allied embassy staffs, their families and some Afghan officials fleeing the country in frightening moments of utter chaos.  Like in Saigon, helicopters circled the U.S. embassy in Kabul as its diplomatic personnel were under evacuation orders.  Frankly, it appears that no one expected to see this, and most especially U.S. military commanders.

Let’s take a step back.  Once the President announced the complete American troop withdrawal by this fall, there was an obvious surge in Taliban attacks in several provinces, ending in the successful capture of key cities and border areas —  in some cases with little opposition from government forces.  Next, Afghanistan’s president Ashraf Ghani and members of his administration suddenly fled the country to God knows where, without really any advance notice to the Americans.  No interim governing administration was left in his place.  What’s interesting is that, according to current and former U.S. officials familiar with the matter, there had been an already stark intelligence assessment predicting Kabul could be overrun within six to 12 months.  Even as the President Biden was telling the public that Kabul was unlikely to fall, intelligence assessments apparently painted a grimmer picture, suggesting that the Afghan military collapse could be more rapid than expected.  In addition, it became clear that the so-called peace agreement hammered out under former President Donald Trump, that promised the withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Afghanistan, wasn’t worth the paper on which it was written.   

Taliban co-founder and de facto leader Abdul Ghani Baradar triumphantly arrived in Afghanistan this week for the first time in more than a decade, and immediately declared ‘amnesty’ for former Afghan government officials.  If anyone believes in the Taliban’s generosity and promised clemency, I’ve got Florida swamp land to sell them if interested.  Right now, there continues to be western media coverage while the Americans and allies continue the evacuation efforts at the Kabul airbase.  Once completed, you can bet that the Taliban administration will impose tight controls on all media and telecommunication networks, most likely including internet services which didn’t exist twenty years ago.  Future news about the Taliban regime’s actions will be tightly controlled, especially anything dealing with the anticipated reprisals among Afghan security personnel and Allied collaborators.

Now with the Americans hastily exiting Afghanistan and no U.S.-backed government in power, one can bet that bordering countries such as Pakistan, Russia and China are considering how to promote their interests in a Taliban-led Afghanistan.  On the other hand, the U.S., Canada and their NATO allies have no plans to recognize the Taliban as the official government of Afghanistan, as was the case 20 years ago.  Indeed, the U.S. and Canada still view the Taliban as a ‘terrorist’ group. 

Unfortunately, while many Afghan national army troops may have fought bravely, the inevitable government’s collapse happened much faster than expected.  U.S. military sources, as early as a week ago, wrongly expressed glowing and misleading reviews of the Afghan army’s readiness.  However, even the American intelligence community was taken by surprise at how fast the total collapse occurred.  Sounds familiar, think back to the rapid collapse of the American-backed government and military in South Vietnam!

Afghanistan Canada US

Leave a comment »
Aug 13

How Can Colleges and Universities Not Mandate Their Students and Staff Be Fully Vaccinated?

by bcurry

Both here in Canada and in the U.S., there are growing numbers of colleges and universities who are now mandating that their students and staff be fully vaccinated to attend classes and extracurricular activities.  However, there continues to be a Hodge poach of policies across both the U.S. and Canada when it comes to mandatory vaccinations.  In some cases, governments are refusing to require mandatory vaccinations in postsecondary institutions.  This is the case in Ontario, Canada, where the Premier has refused to support such policies.  This position has created an array of confusing approaches among schools, which go from mandatory vaccination on campuses to simply encouraging students and staff to be vaccinated against COVID-19.  Where students cannot be vaccinated for health reasons or are hesitant to be vaccinated, some policies include the option of being tested two or three times a week for COVID in order to attend classes and extracurricular activities.

O.K.  Let’s look at the facts.  Recent data from Health Canada show that 51 percent of Canadian adults aged 18 to 29 were fully vaccinated by July 31st.  As of that date, Canada had over 80 percent of eligible people vaccinated with their first dose and approximately 64 percent fully vaccinated.  Meanwhile, the national seven-day moving average rose to 1000 daily cases on Aug. 8th, an increase of 326 from the week prior, largely owing to the spread of the Delta variant.  The facts indicate that those infected by the highly contagious Delta variant who are subsequently hospitalized are primarily among the unvaccinated and the majority (well over 90 percent) are younger than was the case during the first and second waves.  Public health officials are on record that being fully vaccinated represents the primary defence against the Delta variant, preventing more serious illness and hospitalizations.  Unfortunately, left to their own discretion, some colleges and universities are acting as if there is not a pandemic happening, and vaccines are not the way out of it.  On the other hand, surveys have shown that students and faculty members for the most part say they are concerned that not mandating vaccination could lead to outbreaks, and they will not feel safe on campuses should the schools let students return to classes without vaccination.  As a result, in Ontario, the Council of Ontario Universities and Colleges Ontario called for a province-wide policy that requires the vaccination of post-secondary students, staff and faculty.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported last year, before vaccination was possible, colleges that diminished their student impact by remote instruction brought about an 18 percent decline in COVID-19 disease in their surrounding community, while those that did not brought about a 56 percent increase. The difference would be greater now, with Delta circulating.  The fact is that not fully vaccinating campuses is guaranteed to spread a fourth wave to the communities which host them.

As far as the legal ramifications of implementing mandatory vaccinations on campuses, there is already litigation challenging such policies.  However, the general belief is that such challenges will fail given the nature of the pandemic and its related public health issues, not only on campuses but in the community at large.  For example, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett recently denied an emergency relief request challenging Indiana University’s requirement that all students and employees get the COVID shot.  It’s the first time the U.S. Supreme Court has weighed in on a vaccine mandate during the pandemic.  The liability excuse in Canada is also a weak bogeyman for inaction, because there has never been a successful lawsuit for vaccine injuries in Canada.

Let’s forget any arguments about stigmatizing the unvaccinated or shaming them on campus.  The issue of vaccination is one of public health for the community at large, and more specifically the health of students and staff at colleges and universities across both countries.  Indeed, as Delta variant cases rise in this fourth wave, one is seeing a change of heart by many postsecondary schools, a number of which have now introduced mandatory vaccination requirements.  Hopefully, more will continue to do so before on-campus classes commence.

Canada Coronavirus COVID-19 US

Leave a comment »
Aug 12

How Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s Actions Are Just the Tip of the Iceberg

by bcurry

Facing the scandalous report alleging that he displayed inappropriate behaviour, often sexual in nature, toward several women while in office, New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo has now resigned.  Here one has a governor who claimed to champion women’s rights, but one who also had an office was considered “toxic” by the affected women.  While it appeared that Cuomo advanced a feminist agenda, there are those that now argue that it was just smoke and mirror politics.  Once again, it takes a high profile case to demonstrate that sexual harassment in the workplace continues to be an issue of major concern to both employers and employees.

Interestingly enough, Statistics Canada just released a report that concluded that one in four women and one in six men reported having experienced inappropriate sexualized behaviours at work in 2020.  Inappropriate sexualized behaviours are defined to include inappropriate verbal or non-verbal communication, sexually explicit materials, and unwanted physical contact or suggested sexual relations.  The survey also found that people with formal authority in the workplace ― such as supervisors and bosses ― were often the perpetrators of inappropriate sexualized behaviours.  Women most often identified a man as the perpetrator of all three types of the above defined inappropriate sexualized behaviour.  In addition, because the harassment that they experience at work is most often by a superior, people are reluctant to come forward fearing negative consequences for their careers if they did so.

Today, many jurisdictions require that employers have some form of written harassment policy in place and that it is clearly communicated to all employees, including management.  As well, most businesses must have an independent harassment complaint process in place to allow employees to come forward in a confidential and timely manner.  However, as the Statistics Canada survey indicated, approximately one-third of women and one-quarter of men surveyed said that they had not received any information from their employer on how to report sexual harassment and sexual assault.  Furthermore, such impartial complaint mechanisms should also deal with matters regarding discrimination on the basis of actual or perceived gender, gender identity or sexual orientation.

What is truly sad about the Cuomo case is the fact that it took so long to finally surface.  It took no fewer than five district attorneys who made preliminary inquiries into Cuomo’s alleged sexual harassment, now detailed in the scathing 165-page report released last week.  The report from state Attorney General Letitia James’ office found Cuomo sexually harassed at least 11 women — including nine current or former state employees — in violation of state and federal law.  Apparently, his resignation won’t end a bevy of pending investigations into him and his administration.  According to those in the know, the investigations and litigation could enmesh Cuomo for months or years after his scheduled departure from public office in two weeks.

What is interesting is that Cuomo was in his third term as governor, having been first elected in 2010.  One has to ask in this “#me too” movement era, why it took so long — some ten years — for these alleged complaints to come forward, and why it took an investigation by the Attorney General’s office to finally reveal the harassment complaints?  I would hope that there will be some form of formal inquiry into the whole process itself, examining why these women had to allegedly and silently endure what they endured over those years under question.  Moreover, as the above noted survey illustrates, the issue of harassment in the workplace is much broader than we think.  This is despite all the legal protections against such harassment for both men and women that now exist in most jurisdictions.  Hopefully, the Cuomo case will encourage governments, organizations and businesses to once again examine their harassment policies and complaint processes.

Political Scandals US Women's Issues

Leave a comment »
Aug 9

The Tragedy of Gun Violence in Canada is One of Our Own Doing

by bcurry

Back in 2018, a random mass shooting that killed a 10-year-old girl and an 18-year-old woman in Toronto, Ontario, brought about another call by gun control advocates and some politicians for increased controls on guns, and in particular handguns.  According to Statistics Canada reports, “firearm-related violent crime” has gone up 42 per cent since 2013.  However, like in the U.S., these statistics include the fact that the most common way Canadians die from firearms is by suicide, be it by handguns or standard rifles and shotguns.  Unlike in the U.S., ownership of handguns in Canada comes with several restrictions and requirements because most handguns that are not prohibited are restricted and must be registered.  Being restricted, the permitted purposes for handgun ownership are for target practice or target shooting competitions and as part of a collection.  Unlike in many U.S. states, the federal Criminal Code prohibits carrying a concealed weapon in Canada unless authorized for a lawful occupational purpose under the Firearms Act.

When it comes to handguns in particular, most violent crimes are being committed by gangs, often against other gang members.  Obviously, given Canada’s gun laws and prohibitions, the guns being used were obtained illegally.  So where do these gang members get their guns? The federal union representing the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and some police chiefs have themselves opposed a complete gun ban, saying it does little to address gang violence and gun smuggling at the Canada-U.S. border, which accounts for the majority of firearm-related violence.  In one example, they refer to the case of a Michigan man who in 2017 admitted to reselling 67 guns on Toronto’s black market.  However, while most of illegal handguns are smuggled in, many are also purchased legally in Canada and then resold illegally, what’s known as “straw purchasing”.  In addition, they rightfully believe that most guns used in violent crimes are obtained illegally, so it doesn’t make sense to ban something that’s already prohibited.

In truth, of illegal handguns that can be successfully traced by the RCMP (which can be as little as one third), about half have been found to start out as legal guns purchased at a Canadian gun store — with the other definitively coming by way of American gun smugglers.  In 2016 the RCMP was estimating that up to 61 per cent of illegal guns started life as a legal Canadian firearm.  Recognizing this fact, recently the federal government modestly expanded a number of existing laws, like lengthened prison sentences for people who smuggle firearms or who manipulate gun magazines beyond their legal limit.  Changes to “red flag” laws grant expanded powers to courts to search and seize the possessions of gun owners.

The Canadian government recognizes that lawful gun owners are not a threat, and have thus taken a cautious approach to enacting more forceful gun laws.  As it is now, gun laws already provide sufficient regulation of handgun ownership and use.  The real problem is how to reduce the availability of illegal handguns which are increasingly being used for the purposes of crime.  To do so will require the provision of adequate resources to national and local law enforcement to effectively go after the smugglers and illegal gun sellers.  This enforcement has to take place at the borders and by local guns and gangs units that now exist in every major city.  For society at large, the real fundamental issues are social and economic in nature.  The actual question is why people are using guns to commit crimes in the first place?  This is a Canadian problem, and we have only ourselves to resolve it.

Canada Gun Control

Leave a comment »
Aug 7

The U.S. Falls Short in Anticipated Olympic Medals, and Why This is a Good Thing

by bcurry

For years now, the Olympics have represented the top of athleticism in multiple sports around the world.  Many athletes who become Olympians work and sweat for years to become one among the world’s best in their sport.  While this is meritorious, the fact of the matter is that many countries are simply striving to dominate the medals podium.  The U.S. is no different.  However, while the Americans’ efforts in Tokyo have produced results that might be the envy of the world, they have fallen short of their recent lofty standards.  The U.S. Olympic Team will not equal its haul of 121 medals in 2016, and trails China in total gold medals to date.  In team sports, there have been a number of upsets, including Canada’s winning the gold in women’s soccer and Japan’s winning the gold in baseball over the Team U.S.A.  Host nations generally do better than normal because they invest heavily in sports in the years leading up to the Games.  In this case, Japan, with its third place medals tally, nearly doubled its previous gold medal tally for the summer Olympics.

There are those that will argue that the Olympics should be more about athletes doing their personal bests, representing competitive excellence and true sportsmanship.  There should be no return to the earlier Olympics of the sixties through eighties when the former Soviet Union and Eastern European block used the events to demonstrate so-called superiority in athleticism within Communist systems.  Of course, the end results became more important than the means, resulting in the use of performance enhancement tactics by athletes from these countries.  Thank goodness, the International Olympic Committee, as the guardian of the Olympic Games and the leader of the Olympic Movement, put an end to this by severely penalizing the culprits and introducing tougher drug-screening for the athletes.

However, for the United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee (USOC) today, the total medal counts apparently both matter and don’t.  Nevertheless, its executives maintain that they want to win as many medals as possible, sometimes at the cost of placing an inordinate amount of pressure on their top athletes to perform well.  The consequences can be devastating for some athletes, as demonstrated by Simone Biles who withdrew from the women’s team gymnastics final, citing mental heath concerns as she attempts to protect “her body and mind.”  Due often to unreasonable expectations by the media and the USOC, the added pressure and publicity can prevent athletes from performing at their best, as has very likely been the case in these latest Olympics.

Needless-to-say, this issue is not just one that the U.S. Olympic Team must face, but is one which athletes from other countries must constantly deal with.  Obviously, Chinese athletes in particular are expected to perform well and win medals at the summer Olympics.  Other countries such as Australia and Canada with smaller populations, some 25 million and 37 million people respectively, generally can only hope to improve their standings over previous summer Olympics.  Whatever the expectations, one can only hope that the Olympics remain a global outlet for the best of amateur sports — despite the fact that many professionals participate in the games.  It’s nice to see that in some sports, such as in track and field, diving, rowing, gymnastics and swimming, the U.S. no longer can be expected to dominate.  For the sake of a more representative Olympics, let’s hope that this is the case in future games.

Canada Olympics US

Leave a comment »
Aug 3

Afghanistan: With Afghans Fleeing, Appears To Resemble Another Vietnam Debacle

by bcurry

As American troops withdraw from Afghanistan, one cannot but remark some similarities with the debacle that accompanied the sudden U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam in April 1975.  As Saigon fell to communist forces, the last few Americans still in South Vietnam were quickly airlifted out of the country.  In the resulting chaotic evacuation, more than 130,000 people fled Vietnam after the North Vietnamese captured Saigon.  Many of the refugees, especially those who had supported the American military, eventually were flown to Guam and later settled in the U.S. and Canada.

Now, we have the hundreds of thousands fleeing Afghanistan as the Taliban continue to capture more and more of the districts and cities.  So far this year, according to the United Nations, around 330,000 Afghans have been displaced, more than half of them fleeing their homes since the U.S. began its withdrawal in May.  Since the country had historically been in a state of war and chaos, notably involving the Soviet Union in the early eighties and Taliban regimes in the mid-nineties, Afghans in the millions had already accounted for one of the world’s largest populations of refugees and asylum-seekers.

Before U.S. and NATO troops withdraw from the country in September, both the U.S. and Canada are now organizing the large-scale evacuation of endangered Afghan interpreters and others who worked for the U.S. and Canadian governments.  The Taliban have ratcheted up attacks on civil society activists and women in particular, frequently assassinating judges, journalists, local officials and anyone else considered as ‘traitors’.  Like the so-called Vietnamese “boat people”, in recent weeks the number of Afghans illegally crossing the borders with Pakistan and Iran shot up around 30%-40% compared with the period before international troops began withdrawing.  As noted by various support groups in the U.S. and Canada, the growing backlog of Afghans who face threats because of their work with their governments has left more than 20,000 eligible Afghans and their families trapped in bureaucratic limbo in Afghanistan.  The sooner they can be airlifted out, the better their chances for survival once the Taliban retake the country.  Let there be no doubt, the Taliban will once again rule most if not all of Afghanistan!

All of this is to say that the consequences of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan should be of no surprise given the history of this twenty year war going back to 2001.  Despite the U.S. spending at least $4 billion a year on the Afghan military, its security forces have shown that they are not up to the task of defeating the Taliban.  The current Afghan administration in Kabul has failed to negotiate a truce with the Taliban, although given numerous opportunities and having the support of the Americans and NATO countries.  Until lately, the American and Canadian media had tended to ignore what was obviously happening in the country.  Canada’s past involvement included efforts to provide security to Afghanistan’s new government, and aid reconstruction in a country driven by a generation of war.  Canadians contributed to the war against a growing Taliban insurgency and suffered numerous casualties.  Canada concluded combat operations in 2011 and left Afghanistan in 2014.  However, many Canadians believe that the Canadian government should still help those Afghans who served with Canadian troops and officials during that period.

For past observations concerning Afghanistan, I refer you to the following two blogs:

https://froliticks.wordpress.com/2021/02/28/once-again-we-have-forgotten-about-afghanistan/
https://froliticks.wordpress.com/2013/08/01/afghanistan-good-investment-or-sink-hole-and-lost-cause/

Canada US

Leave a comment »
Blog at WordPress.com.