What's the message?

It's been a somber day in Canada as many of us observe Remembrance Day on the 90th anniversary of the armistice of the Great War. I was fortunate to have the day off and spent the morning at The Military Museums with 10,000 other people as part of the Remembrance Day ceremonies.

There are a few posts on this blog about past wars and the nature of war today. This fits in with it.

Throughout today's ceremony, I was struck by seemingly central message to the surrounding crowds about the reasons for war: these soldier's died so that we may enjoy freedom, democracy, security, etc.

It's not a particularly surprising message. In fact, I'm sure many of us would say it's something we've heard many times before. "The fought and died for us..."

Now, I'm not intending to be disrespectful toward those who serve in our military, but I just don't buy it. But, why shouldn't I? If this message has been around so long, why doesn't it resonate with me? Not only does it not resonate with me... this message also makes me uncomfortable. I'd say it even rings hollow when I hear it.

Does it bother you?

The communicator in me thinks that the message about the protection of our liberties is an old one meant for a different audience perhaps 30 years ago. It is a message meant for persuading a populace that their military is needed because "the hun" (whoever they may be) is at our door. Any military action at home or abroad is meant to truly protect us from certain destruction.

That just isn't the case any more for today's Canadian citizen. Or, then again, maybe I'm wrong... maybe Canadians are worried that Al Qaeda is just waiting to take over our country... maybe they are concerned that a Taliban-run Afghanistan is a serious threat to our democracy, freedom, existence, etc.

But for me, that just doesn't seem realistic. And so the messages I heard today at the Remembrance Day ceremonies worn... they couldn't hold up to how I see the world and our role in it. Instead, throughout the hour-long ceremony, I found myself silently rephrasing the reasons for war--re-articulating our military raison d'etre.

Military action, for me, is about protecting the human rights of those who are at risk. It is about stopping/preventing genocide. It is about ensuring an international standard of humanity and equality.

I have Romeo Dallaire to thank for that one.

But does anyone else out there see it that way? My government representatives seem confused because their messaging seems to move back and forth. But, as soon as you suggest we have soldiers in Afghanistan to protect my way of life, I get suspicious.

Is it because the protection of other people isn't enough to get a populace to support it's military? Is it easier to gain political points by saying it's about protecting ourselves?

I'd like to think we're more humanistic than that. I'd like to think the protection of human rights (including the right to exist) is more important than that... even if it isn't our own human rights we're protecting.

So, the next time my elected official makes that argument, I'm with them. Until that, I'll just assume they're not speaking to me.