On April 7th Canada’s Assistant Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs David Mulroney circulated a memo to departmental staff announcing the formal creation of the Muslim Communities Working Group Operational Unit. The unit had been operating informally since summer 2005 and has been responsible for producing speeches, briefing notes, and "managing emerging issues such as the recent Prophet Muhammad caricatures issue." The memo also announced an official role for the unit as a "clearing house" within the department for all things related to the Muslim community worldwide.

The decision to formalize this ad hoc group and expand its reach instead of shutting it down is a mistake.

The Conservatives were elected on an agenda of change. One area where change is critically needed is in the area of foreign policy. Canada can no longer afford to neglect its foreign and national security interests, or tolerate the Liberal practice of subordinating these vital interests to a partisan domestic political agenda.

Since January 23, Harper has shone. He reacted swiftly and decisively to the election of Hamas, spelling out the minimum conditions they would have to satisfy upon assuming office if they were to continue receiving direct aid from Canadian taxpayers, and cutting off that aid when they failed to meet those conditions.

Canada was the first country after Israel to act on Hamas. As it happens, I was in Washington when the announcement was made. The reaction among American policy-makers I spoke with was that Stephen Harper is a man to be reckoned with – a real leader, unlike his three predecessors. This assessment has been reinforced by Harper’s visit to Canadian troops in Afghanistan, his performance at the Cancun summit, and finally, by his government’s decision to outlaw the Tamil Tigers terrorist organization in Canada.

As impressive as all of this has been, however, serious observers understand that announcing policy is not synonymous with its implementation. It’s easy to tell people what you’re going to do; it’s another thing entirely to get the job done, particularly when you are depending on others to do the actual work – others who, in the case of government, are committed to the very policies you want to change.

Which brings me to the Muslim Communities Working Group Operational Unit.

Superficially, the idea seems sound: Why not create a bureau that can be a resource to decision-makers to help them understand the Muslim world and guide them as they (the decision-makers) struggle to develop and implement policy?

The very idea, however, betrays a child-like understanding of the subject. In fact, there simply is no such thing as the Muslim world. That 'world' is as linguistically, ethnically, nationally, economically and culturally diverse as…well – the human race. Even theologically, one cannot refer to the Muslim community except in the most general sense. Sunni, Sufi, Shi'ite, Wahabi, Ismaeli (to name a few)…all have their distinct character and tradition, and each are themselves divided along lines identical to those mentioned above.

Diversity aside, there is also the very real question of what role Islam even plays in the "emerging issues" this unit is supposed to manage.

To illustrate the point, consider Canada’s relationship with three countries –Afghanistan, Iran and Turkey – all Islamic.

In Afghanistan, Canadian troops are currently fighting – and dying – defending that country’s devoutly Muslim people against the return of the murderous Taliban.

Iran, meanwhile, poses a special problem by virtue of its nuclear agenda. The fact that Iran is a Muslim state is merely coincidental to this crisis. There are many strategies available to deal with this issue, but none is reserved for Muslims.

As for Turkey, our relations with that country are strictly routine. The most interesting aspect of Turkey’s Islamic character is the ongoing debate over what role religion should play in Turkish society.

Like other Muslim countries, each of these three nations has a unique set of issues, each requiring its own distinct response. In no case is their Islamic character a factor in Canadian policy. Given that this is so, what exactly is the vital purpose that a Muslim Communities Working Group will serve, particularly with the broad purview it is being assigned, and precisely what perspective does it bring to the table?

The Mulroney memo contends that one the great benefits anticipated of the unit is its ability to manage "emerging issues such as the recent Prophet Mohamed caricatures issue."

Excuse me? The Prophet Mohamed?

Since when is it Canadian policy to recognize that Mohamed is a genuine prophet? Does anyone really believe that normal relations between Canada and officially Islamic countries are predicated on such obsequiousness?

Some may regard this criticism as trivial. After all, the media itself has a habit of using the word Prophet as a proper noun in reference to Mohamed. That may well be, but aren’t these so-called experts supposed to be capable of offering policy-makers a little more insight than the Toronto Star? Isn’t that the whole point?

In fact, if one examines the record of the previous government it becomes clear that the goal of this team is neither to promote an in depth understanding of Islam that it manifestly does not possess, nor is it to manage, or at least guide, Canada’s relations with a non-existent Islamic 'world'.

On the contrary, its goal is to promote the theory that the ‘root cause’ of extremism, violence and terrorism are poverty, world economic disparity and Western – read Israeli where Palestinians are concerned, and American everywhere else – chauvinism and aggression. That the unit is focused on the ‘Muslim world’ is only a coincidence. If the preponderance of violence and extremism were emanating from East Asia or Africa, the same unit, likely staffed by the same people, would be producing briefing notes and papers hawking the same discredited theories under the guise of promoting better understanding of the ‘oriental’ or ‘black' world.

Of course, the 'root causes' theory is plain balderdash, and the Conservatives, to their credit, know this. Violence is the cause of poverty and instability, not the result. Why is the government not disbanding this unit then?

Part of the problem may be the individuals hired in the last month to fill two important foreign policy appointments, one in the Prime Minister’s Office and the other at the Privy Council Office. Both are career foreign service personnel and both are champions of the Muslim Communities Working Group Operational Unit, each having played a key role in its creation. In fact, it was one of these individuals who wrote and circulated the memo, David Mulroney.

This raises the broader question of how Harper intends to bring about real and long-lasting reform if he and his ministers recruit senior advisors who are so heavily invested in the very policies and departments that need to be changed.

One of Canadians’ chief complaints about the political process is that it doesn’t matter who they elect, nothing really changes. There’s a reason for this: in Canada today the bureaucracy and its bought NGO allies make policy, not Parliament. If Stephen Harper and the Conservatives are serious about changing this fundamental fact, the minimum they must do is recruit reform-minded individuals from outside the public service to serve as their senior policy officers, and give them the authority to ensure that ministerial decisions are being implemented.

Absent this, Harper may spend many years occupying 24 Sussex, but in the end, his legacy will still be that of so many of those who came before him – a Prime Minister who just couldn’t quite deliver on what both he and his strongest supporters expected and what Canada desperately needed.