Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Canada shrugs off U.S. warning to back off

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Jalisco Lancer View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Mexico
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2112
  Quote Jalisco Lancer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Canada shrugs off U.S. warning to back off
    Posted: 14-Dec-2005 at 01:13

OTTAWA/SURREY, British Columbia (Reuters) - The United States made an unprecedented foray into Canada's election campaign on Tuesday, warning politicians not to bash Washington in their bid to win the January 23 election.

But an unapologetic Liberal     Prime Minister Paul Martin responded immediately by saying "c'est la vie" -- that's life -- if the United States did not like his remarks, and he would not accept anyone telling him he cannot defend his country.

In a hard-hitting speech in Ottawa, U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins lamented what he called relentless and incessant criticism of his country, which he speculated might begin to sow doubt about the strength of the binational relationship.

"Canada never has to tear the United States down to build itself up," Wilkins said.

"It may be smart election politics to thump your chest and constantly criticize your friend and your No. 1 trading partner. But it's a slippery slope and all of us should hope it doesn't have a long-term impact on our relationship."

Wilkins did not name the prime minister directly, but he specifically targeted a comment made last week at the Montreal climate change conference in which Martin called on the United States to heed a "global conscience" and join efforts to combat global warming.

That remark -- on top of criticism of U.S. policy on lumber, guns, passports and     Iraq -- appeared to have riled the White House the most, particularly since Canada has a proportionally worse record than the United States on reining in greenhouse gas emissions.

"I would respectfully submit to you that when it comes to a 'global conscience' the United States is walking the walk," Wilkins said, addressing the Canadian Club of Ottawa.

"And when it comes to climate change, we are making significant progress, greater progress than many of those who have been most critical of the U.S."

In the campaign for the June 2004 election Martin regularly said Canada did not want U.S.-style health care, fiscal deficits, taxes or attack ads.

But in the last several months, particularly in frustration over U.S. refusal to eliminate duties on Canadian softwood, he has made more direct attacks on U.S. policy, and continued to do so during the election campaign.

Martin refused to back down on Tuesday in Surrey, British Columbia.

"That our friends do not like what we say -- well, c'est la vie. I'm going to defend Canada and I'm right on softwood lumber and I'm right on climate change and I won't let anybody tell me that I should not defend my country," he said.

He also dismissed the idea that he was trying to single out Washington as part of his election campaign.

"I have not made the United States or any country a target in this campaign," he said, noting that he had outlined Canada's stand on softwood lumber and climate change long before the election was called.

Martin, whose minority government was brought down on November 28 after an official report detailed Liberal kickbacks which were used in election campaigns, currently leads Conservative leader Stephen Harper in the polls but not by enough to regain a majority in Parliament.

(Additional reporting by David Ljunggren in Ottawa)

source:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051213/wl_canada_nm/canada_poli tics_usa_col
Back to Top
flyingzone View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 11-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2630
  Quote flyingzone Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Dec-2005 at 13:48

I may not agree with all the things that our Prime Minister does and says (in fact I disagree with a lot of them), I am actually secretly proud of the fact that Canada, under the Liberals, never kowtows to our superpower neighbor regarding many issues (notably the invasion of Iraq) whenever they are not in accordance with Canadian values. Some leaders, including the leader of the Conservative Party Steven Harpers (who would definitely be happier if he's running for an election in the American "red states"), would definitely choose to remain silent when confronted with tough issues. Yet Paul Martin (as well as his predecessor Jean Chretien too) chooses not to even at the risk of antagonizing our powerful neighbor.

And please also look at the context of Martin's criticism of the United States. It's about the United States' continued refusal to join the rest of the world in combating climate change and global warming. I don't think what he said was particularly rude or undiplomatic. He just said something that's in the mind of pretty much everyone at the conference held in Montreal, my hometown. In fact I think what he said was VERY diplomatic. Being the host of the conference, should he have kissed the ass of the United States by congratulating its "positive" contribution to the world's environmental problems????

By the way, it's not the first time that the American Ambassador to Canada criticized our Prime Minister(s). Wilkin's predecessor was even more outspoken in the criticism of Canada's stand on many issues. I personally find that quite disturbing. Imagine if a Canadian Ambassador to the United States stands up criticizing U.S. foreign policies ... (maybe he or she should ...) ....  

Back to Top
arch.buff View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 18-Oct-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 606
  Quote arch.buff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Dec-2005 at 14:05
If Canada is such a good friend to the US, then why dont they bring some of these issues that they believe the US is overlooking to the attention of the US, rather than criticizing them openly. Canada criticizes the US but what would Canada do if it was invaded? Canada and the US both benefit eachother, why make bad blood for criticism? 
Back to Top
flyingzone View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 11-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2630
  Quote flyingzone Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Dec-2005 at 14:32

Again, please look at the CONTEXT of Martin's speech. Canada was hosting an international conference on climate change, and his speech was part of the conclusion to the conference. So to reply your first question, he's not really criticizing the U.S. "openly" as you put it, he's making a concluding remark that, as I said, was pretty much in the mind of everyone there, probably with the exception of delegates from the United States and Saudi Arabia.

To answer your second question: Canada was only invaded by a foreign power once in its entire history, and guess which foreign power was that?

But seriously, arch.buff, I don't want to start a row with you on US-Canadian relationship. For as much as I don't like a lot of things going on in the United States now, I am not that naive to think that everything about the United States is bad, and everything about Canada is good. Canada's own environmental record isn't the most enviable one. (In fact I think percentage-wise, the United States has made more progress than Canada when it comes to the reduction of greenhouse gas emission. So shame on Canada.) I also don't believe bashing the United States is a wise way to get voters' votes in a domestic election. In fact it's stupid. But looking at the CONTEXT of Martin's speech, I don't think Wilkin's remark was appropriate.

Back to Top
DukeC View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Nov-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1564
  Quote DukeC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Dec-2005 at 14:42

This is a small blip in a relationship between countries that is one of the most friendly in the world. Most Canadians recognize how important the U.S. is to Canada and vice versa. It doesn't mean that we will always agree on things.

During the Vietnam war there was tension between Jonhson and Pearson because of different philosophies. The same thing is happening now between Bush and Martin.

Back to Top
arch.buff View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 18-Oct-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 606
  Quote arch.buff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Dec-2005 at 14:44
Ok, forget criticism, what about hypocrisy. Canada talks of Ameicas short-comings but like you have already admitted America has made more of an impact regarding the reduction of greenhouse gas emission. I also am not looking for a government bashing discussion, seems the evils of media at work again.
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
  Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Dec-2005 at 16:07

It is the holidays.  Tis the season to catch up on some fighting with your relatives.

Everyone will get over it.



Edited by pikeshot1600
Back to Top
flyingzone View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 11-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2630
  Quote flyingzone Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Dec-2005 at 17:45

Yes, it was hypocrisy. No question about it. Criticism well taken here.

On environmental issues, every country can do more. The only thing is that, even when the United States is doing just a little more, the impact it is going to make is enormous. No one needs to be reminded about the fact that the United States is the world's biggest polluter - disproportionately so.  The disappointing thing is that, instead of promising to work with the rest of the world, the United States has adopted unilateral policies of its own based on unrealistic voluntarism. Voluntarism, as we all know, never works. This is what pisses people off most. And I think this is the "global conscience" that Martin was talking about.

One more thing. While we are engaged in a debate like this sort, it is so easy for us (all of us) to fall into the trap of blind patriotism. I myself have to constantly remind myself that I am above all a citizen of the planet earth, not of Canada. I think one of the most dangerous forces at work in modern history, apart from religious fundamentalism, terrorism, etc., is blind patriotism.  Once we start believing that everything our country does is sacred and shouldn't be criticized, we are putting "our country" above universal virtues such as justice, equality, and kindness. That, in my dictionary, is what constitutes blind patriotism, and that is very dangerous.   

Back to Top
flyingzone View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 11-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2630
  Quote flyingzone Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Dec-2005 at 18:30

I just stumbled upon another forum topic "US hypocrisy" (that I will not participate) and I realized whom I have been speaking with here ... Scary ... But I am at least quite consoled to realize that at least someone else in that heated discussion shares with me the idea of the danger of blind patriotism. Reading the comments made by some of the contributors to that debate only reinforces my belief that unchecked patriotism is such a destructive force and should be avoided at all cost. Certain universal ideals are way more important than national interests.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.