Centre For Local Research into Public Space (CELOS)
Show search options
You are on the [Ukraine Anti War Thread] page of folder [CELOS (Main)]
For the cover page of this folder go to the Ukraine anti-war email thread (Dufferin Grove discussion, summer 2022)
June 15, 2022, Doug Anderson to MP Julie Dzerowicz
I am finally getting to a response to your meeting with some constituents last month at St. Anne’s regarding the Ukraine crisis. Leaving aside the galling decision to festoon the street along the front of the church with your political posters ahead of the meeting (an entirely inappropriate decision for reasons which should have been very obvious to you without needing it pointed out), I want to share concerns I have with a number of the statements you made there. In fact, I have so many questions about your stance in this crisis that I will not raise them all here, since I don’t want to put a long essay into an e-mail. I’ll start with a few that stuck out for me.
1 - You stated that canada’s military support for Ukraine was related to “defending democracy”, and as far as I could gather (please correct me if I’m wrong) that was one of only 2 reasons you offered (see 2 below for the second). I am perplexed by this statement and require clarification on what exactly you meany by “defending democracy.” Ukraine is and has long been generally regarded by diverse western experts (including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and other independent observers as being corrupt and autocratic, resembling Russia in many regards, better in some respects and worse in others. At best, you might say we are defending one corrupt regime with autocratic tendencies aganst invasion by another. What business is it of ours to embroil ourselves in this conflict on the other side of the ocean, the far side of Europe? (I suspect “defending democracy” has very little to do with it. If such values were paramount in your government, your relationship with any number of brutal autocracies, from Saudi Arabia to various Latin American countries and beyond, could never be so cozy as they are).
2 - You spoke of Russia’s “unprovoked” invasion. I condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and as noted above will not compose a long essay here, but can back up this statement: whatever we may think of Russia, no expert in geopolitics I am aware of -of any political stripe- with any degree of intelligence or integrity has described this invasion as “unprovoked.” Anyone who knows recent history knows that the west and certain (not all) Ukrainian leaders have been very much involved in provocations for some significant period of time, since long before the invasion. Whether those provocations are justified or not can be debated, but there have long been very clear provocations. I would call the invasion “unjustified”, but not “unprovoked.” Big difference. And so, I am interested in why you choose this particular term, and how you would defend using it.
3 - You reassured the Ukrainian canadians present that canada is committed to supporting the “defence” of Ukraine, without defining any clear military objectives. Nor does Ukraine seem to have any clear, achievable military objectives, certainly no sane ones. It is pretty clear that Ukrainians and Russians are dying in large numbers and that the country is being devastated, and that furthermore, unless we are willing to enter into open warfare with Russia (WW3!), sending weapons is just getting more people killed, stalling any possibility of ending the conflict, and ultimately, leading to more and more destruction and territorial losses for Ukraine. In short, I regard your policies “supporting” Ukraine as destructive to Ukraine. I shared in the meeting, and it appears events are proving me right, that the hopes of Ukrainian canadians in this crisis are not being met by canadian politicians and policies. I would now add that your policies are adding to the dashing of hope for Ukrainians everywhere. The turning away from Ukraine that we now see as it continues to be torn apart is sickening. Sending a few artillery pieces, or even billions of dollars worth, is achieving what, exactly? What, exactly, are the military objectives, and how will they be achieved? I need an answer to this question. Ukraine itself is defining objectives that are unattainable, short of us all entering into open warfare with Russia. But this is not my war. My sense is, Ukrainian canadians I know are so upset about this that I am not even comfortable raising many of these issues with them, since in my experience I get either attacked or people just feel hurt and think I’m somehow defending Russia’s invasion (which, again, I condemn as barbaric, although certainly no worse than what our closest ally, the US has been doing for many decades now - which leads me to think this is all more about “realpolitik” than care or concern for Ukrainians - in which case, the “realpolitik” is being incredibly poorly managed, i.e., with almost no strategic intelligence…).
4 - One gentleman present mentioned the need for some kind of solution oriented to peace needed to feature in canada’s response to the crisis. I heard nothing from you regarding any diplomatic initiatives on the part of canada and its allies. Please enlighten me in that regard.
There is more, much more, but enough for now. I look forward to your written response to these concerns, and reiterate here that I hope we can convene in the garden at St. Anne’s at some point in the coming months to continue these important discussions.
July 8, 2022, from Doug to MP
Hi Orianna, and Julie. My days are filling up fast as far as time commitments for work and family go. I am happy to receive a written reply to these questions rather than an in-person meeting, if that suits Julie better (and that’s all I really wanted to begin with). I want to be clear, I cannot afford to pursue this further time-wise; if you cannot answer these questions, or cannot answer them to my satisfaction, or (as I suspect) are simply hamstrung in terms of what your government policies and talking points might enable you to say publicly, I get that, and am not interested in an ongoing debate - although I would add that if I can take time out of my own busy life to pose these kinds of questions, it might behoove you as the chair of the NATO Parliamentary committee to spend a half hour addressing them. I hope that others may find the energy to continue engaging with you, and with the Canadian government on these kinds of questions, since these issues are perhaps the most important ones facing us at this moment in history.
To summarize, I’d appreciate a public statement on the following, in order of importance (so reversing the original order). Simple short answers are fine, although you can make the responses as long as you like:
1 - What diplomatic avenues to supporting a negotiated peace between Russia and Ukraine are being considered and acted on by Canada? How can this even happen if you have clearly taken a side?
2 - If you have “taken a side”, What exactly is the NATO/ Canadian understanding of Ukraine’s military objectives and what are NATO/ Canada willing to do, and not willing to do, to support them? Related to this, is Canada willing to work to rule out escalation involving direct conflict between NATO and Russia (i.e., World War 3)?
3 - Related to (1) above, what is being done to recognize the very real provocations that have come from “the West” over the past 3 decades following the fall of the Soviet Union, which leading scholars allege have led to this conflict? I can’t see diplomatic negotiations ensuing successfully without understanding around the grievances alleged by Russia. This war did not simply start out of a vacuum in 2022. There is a long list of actions on the part of NATO and the west that arguably have contributed much to this disaster, and if you are not aware of these provocations, it’s time you were; but I don’t have time to educate you. It is clear to me that your words in this area betray either an ignorance of recent history or a deliberate obfuscation to suit some political end (perhaps reflecting the government’s "party line"). Again, to be clear, I do not place all the blame on “the west”, nor do I support the Russian position in this conflict, although in some (not all) of the cases of grievances alleged by Russia, my sense of it is that there have been clear western/ NATO provocations, bad faith actions, and just very poorly thought out strategies by a succession of recent western governments. I see the Russian invasion as a horrific crime, not justifiable in any way. However, that is not to say it’s not understandable; negotiations must be based on understanding both sides and addressing concerns.
4 - Not really as important as the above questions, but really, I have to ask: how are you “defending democracy” in Ukraine, and even if you were (which is a hard case to make), why is it up to Canada to defend a non-NATO member? Again, as bad as I feel for Ukrainians, this is not my war, in any way. I am consistent in this unwillingness to get embroiled in causes that are not my own on the other side of the world (which are always complex, never “black and white”, and always involve parties that both see their own interests threatened). I am horrified, for example, about what the Saudis are doing to Yemen (with western support I would add), but you don’t see me calling for Canada to send weapons to Yemenis (although this at least would not be risking escalation between nuclear armed powers).
I look forward to your written answers and will pass these answers on to those others who have expressed an interest in some way but I cannot afford to lead any effort actively suing for peace. If you cannot respond, I will simply tell people you have not got answers to these questions. After that I must move on to my own life's focus, which is certainly more nourishing to me than debating what are apparently foolish and obstinate political policies leading to potential catastrophe. Thanks for considering all this, and have a great weekend. As important as these questions are, I don’t see myself being any kind of activist on them. I just have other things I need to do, honestly. Others may pick up on these questions, or not.
July 12, 2022, Mayssan to MP
I'm also surprised to see the eagerness with which Canada supports even more NATO expansion (Finland, Sweden).... as if things weren't tricky enough geopolitically.
What is your position on the questions Doug emailed above? I've added a few more friends to this list.
Your newsfeed has so much in it about how the solution to the Ukraine war is more military spending, to Ukraine, to Latvia, more political bases in Europe, billions to NORAD.
but so little about how to make sense of the negative impact of war on climate change, refugees, marginalized peoples, unemployment, perpetuating war, HUNGER.
These are new problems that NATO members are creating for the GLOBAL population.
Canada could be a broker of peace, and support the voice of war dissenters, both at home and abroad.
July 12, from Donna
An article from Canadian Dimension
"Ottawa must be honest with Canadians about troops in Ukraine"
July 13, 2022, from Doug
Thanks Donna. Don, this does relate to the church.
Interesting how that journalist was “ushered out of the room” before receiving a response from the person who is arguably Canada’s real head of government (she’s certainly a lot smarter than the PM, and I suspect she’s kind of like the Cheney to America’s bush...). That’s the tip of the iceberg for how badly this is all being managed by western powers, and how badly it has been managed in the west for a long time (a wide consensus from those with intelligent minds, ranging from Chomsky all the way to Kissinger, although the hive-mind "think-tanks” and their careerist “intellectuals” we keep hearing from in the media love this war, of course). Tragically, Ukraine and Ukrainians are the sacrificial lambs in this game. What frightens me is, the only strong popular reaction to this (aside from a few increasingly censored socialists in alternative media and some scattered and ineffectual communists and socialists leftover from the peace movement decades ago) are the populist, isolationist “alt-right.” Like the marxists in previous centuries, they have a withering and often quite accurate critique of what is really happening (read the comments section in the national post to articles on Ukraine, which is dominated by angry right wingers attacking the western imperialism promoted in that conservative rag). But as far as I can see, these right wing critics (a growing movement), like the old marxists, also have no viable plan that doesn’t seem likely to involve the oppression of many people, should they ever attain real power. The reaction of the liberal order? Shut down ALL the critical voices and demonize them. This could elevate and amplify the most intolerant, and even vicious and radical sectors on the right, and even end in a very dark hardening of the liberal order (already darkening, although Julie is not smart enough to see this, so I don’t see her as a cynical political figure - just a simpleton who follows templates of power, with all the sophistication of a really bad high school student council president). The end result of all this foolishness could be an inordinate seizure of power by very dangerous personalities from either the hard right or the current centres of power, also hardening fast as a matter of self-preservation (it is increasingly obvious that they are failing very badly, so they are feeling the heat, and their reaction is not self-analysis, it’s self-preservation). In the end, as tragic as Ukraine is, I’m more concerned (after the possibility of WW3) about our own part of the world. My own home could in a matter of years or even months be increasingly run by ideologues (not so worried about the left and the communists, who are pretty much out of the picture; as for Jagmeet and his whole party, they are largely part of that liberal order, and Jagmeet has no integrity, according to friends I know well in the Sikh community).
The Peace movements of the 20th century in the west sometimes featured some very devoted communists and socialists, some of whom are really genuinely good people, but in my own experience (at least in the 80’s), they were just as often USED by the reds, and were in reality led much more by people with a spiritual analysis, namely the churches in the west. Where are the Christians in all this? A significant minority of Christians in recent centuries used to be all about speaking truth to power, picking up the cross, risking everything for the truth, even their own lives. Now it seems those professing Christianity are either waiting passively (albeit in a state of mania) for the “rapture” of the Biblically illiterate, or they are uncritically virtue signalling with Ukrainian flags draped in front of their buildings, apparently unaware of how our western strategies are resulting in prolonged war, in more and more destruction and death in Ukraine, and in the loss of more and more Ukrainian territory, all allegedly developments the powerful western "leaders” would claim they want to avoid. The west’s real game is very clear to me. Use Ukraine (among others) to retain and expand the hegemony they have enjoyed for decades, but which now appears to be crumbling rapidly… and use it by any means necessary, with no regard whatsoever for Ukrainians, in ways driven by the engines of the “masters of war”, the military industries. Because western hegemony is crumbling so fast, and because there is apparently no capacity to look within on the part of our “leaders”, we all appear to be increasingly being led into ever worsening disasters. These are the crimes against humanity (and all of nature) being committed right in front of our eyes, all around us. And aside from a few old communists and a rising “alt-right”, all I am hearing for the most part…. is crickets.
July 14, from MP
Thank you for following up and for sharing these questions with MP Julie Dzerowicz. We have received your emails and Julie will absolutely answer all the questions listed below. Julie wants to ensure we answer all your questions and are able to provide a thoughtful and thorough response.
Kindly note, it will take a few days to respond to all the questions listed above and we will be sure to have these for you next week.
Again, thank you for writing to MP Julie Dzerowicz.
July 14, 2022 from Doug
While I am not a leader, and certainly cannot afford to be any kind of activist let alone “build a peace movement”, I am especially interested in how the question about "supporting war dissenters at home and abroad” could be the best hope for a meaningful international peace movement - although I would not want to look to any government to lead such a movement, lest it become infected by the dismal behaviours and strategies of politicians on all “sides”, Ukrainian, Russian, American, Canadian, and more. I want to share an idea that arose among very brave young dissenters in Russia in the 70’s and 80’s that called themselves “the Group for Establishing trust between the USSR and the USA", most of whom were brutally repressed, of course, and who were also almost totally ignored by peace activists here. See the link here:
https://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/113889.pdf?v=3558d916e2e2ea40d440d72755a12b87
Their “Statement to young people in the USA” in this document touched me deeply in 1985 when I somehow got hold of it (I was very involved in the peace and disarmament movement as a youth in the 80’s). I was saddened back then at how they were largely ignored by the peace movement in the west. Who knows how this document got smuggled out of Russia in 1985, but the price they paid for challenging the arms race at the level of both the Soviet and American empires was enormous.
Politicians like Julie are “boxed in” by systems that define policy at very high levels, in ways that respond to fast moving realities beyond their individual control, and they are also constrained by the need to move institutionally at a very large scale, in relation to very diverse interests, which often results in a kind of “lowest common denominator” approach to policy and action. I really believe the hope lies in how grassroots people build trust across borders, and the trick is to NOT get manipulated or used by powers from EITHER side. What I loved about the Group for Establishing Trust between the USSR and the USA was that they appeared to be truly independent of US influence. It’s conceivable I guess that they were a CIA op, but if you look at the case against them in the soviet courts and the wording and focus of their efforts, it seems unlikely to me, and they appear to have been truly independent, or that the leaders at least were independent for the most part. Maybe they were infiltrated somewhat, I don’t know, but my point is, the barriers to their attempt at international activism (somehow getting paper out of Russia) do not exist today. Internet censorship is moving fast, but we do have the the internet. Today the big challenges for real peace activists are separating the independent peace activists on either “side” from those who are TAKING a side in some way, and networking the work of the real, independent activists and their work in ways that speak truth to power on both sides. I would not want to be involved with any peace movement in the west that takes Russia’s “side”, nor with those in Russia who take the side of the “West.” Who does that leave? I suspect many people, and even though they may still be a minority, they may do much good, even prevent global catastrophe.
Alas, we have left much difficult work to the young, perhaps more than any generation in history. My role is to advise and support those who might lead, in my limited way….
July 21 from Mayssan
After some discussion with friends and reading the MPs latest news letter (and waiting another 7 days from Orianna's last message) -
I realize now that this war is led by a politics that is not going to be swayed by a handful of constituents emailing. So why wait?
Instead, I suggest that we step away from this forum and reorganize to strengthen our anti war position in Canada and internationally, however we can.
The last episode of European MPs Clare Daly and Mike Wallace really clarified for me that supporting Ukraine is: #1 pushing for a ceasefire and peace agreement #2 securing concessions from Russia that benefit the Ukraine. Both do not involve pumping arms into a battle - which is what our MP Dzerowicz supports... which is also the mainstream position.
But there are seeds of change. Many more can see that ending the war must be the FIRST step.
I'll be meeting with the Canadian Voice of Women for Peace this weekend, happy to report back to anyone interested.
July 25, from Rachel
I wanted to mention that an email list was recently started for some local Toronto folks interested in doing some antiwar organizing, or at least figuring out what makes sense to work on locally.
Rachel Small
Canada Organizer, World BEYOND War
rachel@worldbeyondwar.org
Check out our new twitter account at @WBWCanada
We're also on Facebook, Instagram, Youtube, and LinkedIn
July 25, 2022
Rachel Small World BEYOND War
Jul 25, 2022, 12:13 PM (6 days ago)
to Doug, Donna, Anna, Don, Steve, William, Murray, Mary, Merlin, Tim, Laura, Mayssan, me Hi all, Thanks for including me in this discussion. FYI I have removed Julie's staffer from this particular email. I also live in Julie's riding and have had several frustrating conversations with her about antiwar issues (among other issues!) both as a constituent and through my job as Canada Organizer with World BEYOND War. The best position I've heard her espouse on anything vaguely related was on a phone call her and I had 2 weeks ago where she did break party lines (at least while talking to me) to condemn Canada's ongoing export of billions of dollars in tanks to Saudi Arabia. Now I'm trying to get her to say so in writing / publicly!
I wanted to mention that an email list was recently started for some local Toronto folks interested in doing some antiwar organizing, or at least figuring out what makes sense to work on locally.
Rachel Small
Canada Organizer, World BEYOND War
rachel@worldbeyondwar.org
Check out our new twitter account at @WBWCanada
We're also on Facebook, Instagram, Youtube, and LinkedIn
Jul 22, 2022 from Doug
I am interested in following and supporting any further/ ongoing conversations in this important matter when I can (but not leading them). As for a written reply from Julie, we were told she "will absolutely" answer all our questions, so even though it’s later than promised, I anticipate that something must surely be forthcoming soon. These e-mails are a public record, and they have committed herein to a response.
Orianna, we are all looking forward to Julie’s promised response, which deserves a public airing. I hope to be proven a fool, and that something truly substantial emerges from your office with regard to this rapidly degenerating and unprecedentedly dangerous catastrophe. Could there be some few in the bowels of your government who can procure some faint sign that we are not being led into the apocalypse by marionettes? Is there some way to rise above the long-expired western hegemonic assumptions and discourses that were sophistries even when they were still relatively fresh, so many decades ago? I really do want to be proven a fool, to see some sign that our “leaders” have not all succumbed completely to the madness now gripping the world almost entirely….
July 27, 2022, from MP
I am sorry that it has taken me so long to get back to you. I am also experiencing a labour shortage in my office and so responses are taking longer than usual.
Question:
1. What diplomatic avenues to supporting a negotiated peace between Russia and Ukraine are being considered and acted on by Canada? How can this even happen if you have clearly taken a side?
Response:
At every opportunity, I raise the importance of finding a path to ending the current war between Ukraine and Russia. I also believe that finding paths to end the war is a key objective of Secretary General of NATO Jens Stoltenberg.
It should be noted though, that President Putin speaks to very few foreign leaders. Beyond his immediate circle of advisors, he is not listening to anyone. In addition, he is not trusted to honour agreements he signs.
A recent example is the agreement negotiated between the UN, Turkey and Russian to allow for the safe export of grain from Black Sea ports to the Middle East and African, and to avert a major food security issue. Within days of the agreement, Russia attacked Odessa -one of the ports that they had promised not to attack as part of the deal. It is hard to negotiate peace or any agreement with a leader who is acts in bad faith.
In terms of ‘taking a side’, our federal government stands firmly with Ukraine against the illegal invasion of Ukraine by Russia. ‘Taking a side’ doesn’t mean that the federal government and NATO don’t want and aren’t actively pursuing an immediate end to the war and pursuing peace in Ukraine, Russia, Europe, and the rest of the world.
Question:
2. If you have “taken a side”, What exactly is the NATO/ Canadian understanding of Ukraine’s military objectives and what are NATO/ Canada willing to do, and not willing to do, to support them? Related to this, is Canada willing to work to rule out escalation involving direct conflict between NATO and Russia (i.e., World War 3)?
Response:
Ukraine’s objective is to win the war against Russia, and to defend and restore their territorial integrity.
NATO (which Canada is a part of) will do everything in its power within the confines and mandate of their obligations to support Ukraine.
Canada is contributing militarily which includes resources to buy the military equipment Ukraine needs, and also is providing generous economic, financial, humanitarian, and immigration assistance to Ukraine. For a full list, click here.
No one in NATO (all thirty countries) including Canada wants to provoke or engage in war.
We want to fully support Ukraine in their fight against Russia’s illegal invasion.
All additional (enhanced) NATO forces on Europe’s eastern flank are for deterrence.
Every action of NATO is thoughtfully and carefully made to avoid direct conflict between NATO and Russia.
Question:
3. Related to (1) above, what is being done to recognize the very real provocations that have come from “the West” over the past 3 decades following the fall of the Soviet Union, which leading scholars allege have led to this conflict? I can’t see diplomatic negotiations ensuing successfully without understanding around the grievances alleged by Russia. This war did not simply start out of a vacuum in 2022. There is a long list of actions on the part of NATO and the west that arguably have contributed much to this disaster, and if you are not aware of these provocations, it’s time you were; but I don’t have time to educate you. It is clear to me that your words in this area betray either an ignorance of recent history or a deliberate obfuscation to suit some political end (perhaps reflecting the government’s "party line"). Again, to be clear, I do not place all the blame on “the west”, nor do I support the Russian position in this conflict, although in some (not all) of the cases of grievances alleged by Russia, my sense of it is that there have been clear western/ NATO provocations, bad faith actions, and just very poorly thought out strategies by a succession of recent western governments. I see the Russian invasion as a horrific crime, not justifiable in any way. However, that is not to say it’s not understandable; negotiations must be based on understanding both sides and addressing concerns.
Response:
Before I respond directly to your questions, I just want to remind all of us why NATO was created and its mandate.
NATO is a defensive body. It was set up to avoid war at all costs and to finds solutions they will ensure peace and stability among its members, allies and partners. The Strategic Concept, which was updated this year, reaffirms this along with the shared vision of, “a world where sovereignty, territorial integrity, human rights and international law are respected and where each country can choose its own path”. It states that Allies will retain a global perspective on peace and security and work closely with partners, other countries and international organizations.
Collective defence is at the heart of NATO and enshrined in Article 5. In addition to collective defence and key values, the principle of consensus decision-making and the importance of consultation define the spirit of NATO, together with its defensive nature and its flexibility.
On the political front, NATO promotes democratic values and enables members to consult and cooperate on defence and security-related issues to solve problems, build trust and, in the long run, prevent conflict.
On the military front, NATO is committed to the peaceful resolution of disputes. If diplomatic efforts fail, it has the military power to undertake crisis-management operations. These are carried out under the collective defence clause of NATO's founding treaty - Article 5 of the Washington Treaty or under a United Nations mandate, alone or in cooperation with other countries and international organisations.
While I am not a historian nor is this my area of expertise, I am interested in global affairs and have a relatively good understanding of the current geopolitical situation. The actions of the West haven't been perfect, and neither have those of Russia. The West tried a “hands-off” approach to the annexation of Crimea unsuccessfully together with global condemnation, but that did not work and it has led us to this moment.
There are a lot of questions/discussions that have come to the forefront as a result of this war including past actions by the West, the rules around international trade, the participation of Russia in international agencies and bodies among many other things..
Moving forward, we need to address all of them; but the immediate concern and urgent priority is finding an end to the current brutal conflict in Ukraine that is killing so many innocent people and disrupting the global order and economy.
Question:
4. Not really as important as the above questions, but really, I have to ask: how are you “defending democracy” in Ukraine, and even if you were (which is a hard case to make), why is it up to Canada to defend a non-NATO member? Again, as bad as I feel for Ukrainians, this is not my war, in any way. I am consistent in this unwillingness to get embroiled in causes that are not my own on the other side of the world (which are always complex, never “black and white”, and always involve parties that both see their own interests threatened). I am horrified, for example, about what the Saudis are doing to Yemen (with western support I would add), but you don’t see me calling for Canada to send weapons to Yemenis (although this at least would not be risking escalation between nuclear armed powers).
Response:
In Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland’s 2017 Speech she said the following:
“Canada has a huge interest in an international order based on rules. One in which might is not always right. One in which more powerful countries are constrained in their treatment of smaller ones by standards that are internationally respected, enforced and upheld.
The single most important pillar of this, which emerged following the carnage of the First and Second World Wars, is the sanctity of borders. And that principle, today, is under siege.”
No country should be able to invade and take over another country regardless of their size and power. What we are doing in Ukraine is supporting NATO and defending the international rules-based order put into place after WWII.
NATO has always been firm in its support of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders.
While it is up to Ukraine to win the war, NATO, including Canada, will be there to support them in every way possible without actively attacking Russia … to support them in doing so.
On a side note, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated over the weekend that Russia’s overarching goal is to overthrow President Zelenskyy and the rest of the Ukrainian government, which was democratically elected.
Thank you for your questions and for your patience.
It may be hard to get a full sense of everything I am convey via email but this is my best attempt!
If you have more questions and/or want another in-person Q&A session that would be open to the community, I’d be happy to host.
July 27, 2022 from Doug
This response betrays a deeply troubling level of historical ignorance (or worse, a cynically crafted cluster of cherry-picked facts taken out of context, combined with a wilful omission of significant historical realities bearing on this situation). It is a wallop of strategically incompetent and shortsighted thinking, and, more than anything, a meaningless series of words that are too often belied by the actions carried out by those professing those noble words.
I am astonished at how long this empty response has taken to craft. If I had an hour to spare, which I really don’t, It would be not hard at all to take apart almost every aspect of this response with a fulsome response of my own. Unfortunately, unlike our MP’s I am not paid obscenely to engage with this in a detailed manner and have many other commitments, so I leave it to others who may be more well-informed than Julie (I am absolutely sure there are many in this riding). Although I recognize how depressingly challenging it is to see any benefit whatsoever in debating with those who choose to remain so profoundly ignorant of the diverse and frightening realities now escalating all around us.
I will end by saying, I fear for us all, if this is the level of “intelligence” now manipulating geopolitical events. God help us!
July 29, 2022 from MP
Thank you to everyone who has written to me in response to my answers. I appreciate your understanding and these kinds of dialogues.
Respectful comments, whether in agreement or disagreement, are always welcome. However, when the conversation devolves into meanness and rudeness it becomes unproductive for all of those involved and unhelpful to the overall conversation. I am no longer willing to engage with those who are not respectful to either myself or my team and will not be continuing to participate in this email thread.
For anyone who would like to continue this conversation or any other, I am always here to serve Davenport residents. You have my email (julie.dzerowicz@parl.gc.ca) and my phone number is 416-654-8048.
Have a wonderful weekend and summer!
July 30, 2022 from Doug
That’s OK. This thread is over. Pretty sure Julie is referring to me regarding the “meanness and rudeness”, which is also fine. As I’ve made clear, I cannot engage any further with the colossal ignorance and dangerous “thinking” informing Julie’s positions, for the sake of my own health and wellbeing. My main purpose has been served, which is to finally get her to respond to some of my questions on the record, in writing, however poorly. These responses speak for themselves, and I will leave it for others to respond to them.
As for offending Julie and her team, I do apologize for any stress caused to Orianna and the other support staff (not sure what kind of stress I may have caused them, but any “rudeness” was certainly not meant to come your way Orianna). Regarding Julie’s hurt feelings (aside from the obvious fact that politicians must have thicker skins than she evidently has), I will say here that I have actually been restrained in my comments. I say this because so much is at stake for such people to be paid so well to be so incredibly ignorant while promoting such foolish agendas and policies, which threaten the very survival of my family, and of all the coming generations.
I stand by my words, and leave it to others with less cranky temperaments to continue this conversation, if they are so inclined. Thank you all for tolerating a loquacious old man’s gargantuan e-mails in a world that has us all suffering through avalanches of information - or, in Julie’s case, “disinformation."