Some people are wondering why the Liberals’ federal leadership campaign has become such a bore.

In part, it’s because summer is upon us and Canadians mellow out in warm weather, replacing their politics with the pleasures of beach and grass.

Others have suggested that there are too many candidates and blame the multi-player, equal-time debate format for making things boring. The format permits little in the way of spontaneous, intelligent or heated contact between the candidates. No one talks much about the sponsorship scandal anymore but because of the scandal, some Liberals have abandoned the possibility of their Party regaining office any time soon.

Still others are searching for a Trudeauesque leader among the pack, someone who could excite and charm them like a John F. Kennedy or a Bill Clinton. Judged against these characters or even a Rene Levesque or a Lucien Bouchard in their separatist heydays, the leadership candidates look pretty tame in comparison. That does not mean that they lack intelligence or charisma. It simply means they have yet to put much of it on the public table.

Frankly, I think there is another issue lurking in the background that better explains the lack of energy in the Liberal campaign.

It is a political truism that oppositions are not elected, governments are defeated.

The same can be said for leadership campaigns. Sometimes, parties elect a leader because he or she represents a set of values or a set of principles shared by a majority of its members. More often they elect somebody who they believe can win an election and keep them in office or help them regain office.

When people perceive their party as being without a chance to win, they’re not much interested in a leadership campaign. On the other hand when there is the perception that their party could win because the other guys are stumbling, interest in leadership campaigns rises exponentially.

Watch for this interest to begin rising in the fall. Consider the circumstances that will facilitate that climb.

It begins with a Strategic Counsel poll released this week.

• According to the poll, only 32% of Canadians support Stephen Harper’s decision to back Israel in its bombing of Lebanon.
• In Quebec that number drops to 17%.
• Again, according to the poll 77% of Canadians say Canada should be neutral in the conflict.
• Perhaps more telling is response to a related question, 53% of Canadians believe Harper backed Israel because the position is in line with President Bush.

A few weeks ago, Mr. Harper characterized Israeli bombings in Lebanon as a “measured response” to Hezbollah guerillas who kidnapped two Israeli soldiers. Harper’s characterization echoed comments by Bush and his Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

So far, Mr. Harper’s ‘measured response’ has produced more than 500 Lebanese dead and hundreds more who are injured and maimed. Israel has moved thousands of troops into Lebanon. It’s reported that Israel is killing about 40 Lebanese civilians for every Israeli civilian killed. Is that a measured response?

A cynic might suggest that the Americans are stage-managing the Israeli invasion of Lebanon for profit. Last Friday, the Bush Administration announced that it plans to sell $4.6 billion of arms to friendly Arab states, including tanks, helicopters gunships, missiles and aviation fuel, even as they sell jet fuel and missiles to Israel.

That in itself is nothing new. The United States has been selling hundreds of billions of dollars worth of weapons to the world for decades. Sales went up dramatically after 9/11.

In 2003, the Bush administration delivered arms to 18 of 25 nations now engaged in active conflicts. 13 of those nations have been defined as "undemocratic" by the U.S. State Department but still received $2.7 billion in American weaponry. Whenever you see George W. Bush talking about winning the "War on Terror," you are looking at the biggest arms dealer on the planet.

This is the man Stephen Harper chooses to follow.

The Israeli war is just one example of Harper’s mirror relationship with Bush. They hang together on Kyoto. Bush refuses to support the international Kyoto Accord on climate change so Mr. Harper pulls Canada out of it.

In the meantime, the UK’s Tony Blair has joined with California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to sidestep Bush and launch a fight against global warming by creating a joint market for greenhouse gases. Former President Bill Clinton has joined with a half dozen of the world’s major cities to combat climate change by increasing energy efficiency and reducing carbon emissions.

The Bush Administration refuses to recognize Court rulings on softwood lumber that favour Canada so Harper agrees to a softwood lumber agreement that would allow the United States to keep about $1 billion of the $5 billion in penalties on Canadian softwood lumber, illegally collected by the U.S. since 2002.

Every one of the Liberal candidates will be measured against the incumbent Prime Minister and the President of the United States. They will also be measured against their positions on such issues as climate change, the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon and cross-border issues such as softwood lumber and passports.

The world is grappling with some very serious issues in the Middle East but the dangers inherent in significant climate change may even be greater.

If that’s not enough, the rising cost of healthcare and the serious financial crisis faced by the United States as a result of tax cutting and war mongering will touch us all. Canadians, regardless of their political persuasion should pay close attention to who the Liberals are courting for leadership.

The current government may defeat itself sooner than later.

W.E. (Bill) Belliveau is a Shediac resident and Moncton business consultant. He can be contacted at bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com Atlantic Insight is a published Blog inventory of opinion articles published weekly in New Brunswick's print media as written by W.E. (Bill) Belliveau, who is a resident of Shediac, New Brunswick, and small business owner, operating his Moncton-based marketing consultancy, Bell Strategic. He can be reached by e-mail at bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com