| |
Even Before the 'Moron' Flap, Canada was Petty in U.S. Eyes
|
|
|
Even
Before the 'Moron' Flap, Canada was Petty in U.S. Eyes
|
|
by
William Walker
|
| |
|
WASHINGTON—Lost in the fiery cross-border debate over a former Prime
Minister's Office staffer calling President George W. Bush a "moron" is the sobering
reality of current Canada-U.S. relations.
As bad as the "moron" comment was, the underlying truth is much more troubling
for Canada as one half of the world's two largest trading partners.
Canada is viewed inside the Bush White House as a minor irritation; a nation with
little credibility on major issues such as the war on terrorism that nonetheless
still "cries out" occasionally like a child angered with its parents.
Canadians are a bunch of "weenies," said CNN Crossfire host Robert Novak,
summarizing the conservative view.
"We may be able to trust the Saudis, but can we trust our shifty neighbors to
the north?" Novak asked this week.
Canada is "a whining kid who's got to start acting like a man," wrote conservative
columnist Jonah Goldberg in a cover story he penned for National Review
magazine.
Novak and Goldberg are plugged in to Republican senior officials. Their views
echo the unspoken words Bush's White House officials are too well trained to utter
in public.
In Bush's view, Canada doesn't contribute enough militarily to warrant being a
major player. It can be part of the team for symbolic reasons, but when it wants
to have a say on the play calling, the coach — Bush — smirks and sends
it off to the sidelines.
When Prime Minister Jean Chrétien called Bush a "cowboy" several months ago in
a closed-door Liberal caucus meeting — as revealed by the Star's Tim Harper
— this newspaper's story was circulated around the White House via e-mail.
One White House staffer reacted with mild amusement tinged with boredom.
"Look, as far as this White House is concerned," he told the Star at the time,
"the U.S.-Canada relationship is defined by Canada. If they want to trade with
us, fine. If they want to co-operate on bilateral security issues, fine. If they
want to bitch and complain, fine. We're doing our thing."
In Washington, the Bush White House views Canada — as have other administrations
for decades — with benign neglect.
Bush, the first MBA president, has no time or inclination to get involved in personal
disputes. Aides say he finds Canadian complaints, including the one about a lack
of recognition from him after the Sept. 11 attacks, a waste of time.
His relationship with Chrétien, whom White House aides have nicknamed "Dino,"
is extremely poor. Chrétien is the only leader of a major U.S. ally who hasn't
been invited to stay at the White House, at Blair House (the Washington residence
reserved for foreign heads of state) or the Bush ranch in Crawford, Texas.
Even Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has stayed at Crawford. But the chances of
Chrétien ever seeing Bush's sprawling ranch, except as a tourist, are bleak.
Presidential-prime ministerial relations between Canada and the U.S. have historically
been a mixed bag.
President Richard Nixon once referred to Pierre Trudeau as "that a--hole." But
Brian Mulroney had infamously close — some say too close — relationships
with Ronald Reagan and Bush's father. Chrétien and Democratic president Bill Clinton
got along well, even though their personalities could not have been more different.
Those relationships have little to do with Canada-U.S. policy and how it affects
Canadian citizens. The U.S. has proven in the past it will deal with Canada on
substance if Ottawa is engaged.
The problem now is that Canada — despite the crucial importance of its economic
relationship with America — has not enhanced its status in Washington, but
diminished it.
Bush is far more engaged with Britain, and its Prime Minister Tony Blair, than
with Canada. Bush's focus on Mexico has diminished, but still exceeds his interest
in America's northern neighbor.
When it comes to border controls, North American perimeter security, the war on
terrorism, or other issues, Bush would rather hear substantive Canadian contributions
than gripes about perceived slights, such as the PMO's assertion that Bush was
"hijacking" the NATO summit in Prague to promote his Iraq strategy.
Clearly, what Bush would prefer is irrelevant to Canada.
Still, the White House is said to be waiting patiently to deal with Paul Martin
as prime minister, a man Bush knows and someone who has close ties to U.S. Treasury
Secretary Paul O'Neill from their dealings with the G-20 group of international
finance ministers.
In the meantime, Chrétien's spokesperson Francie Ducros has resigned over her
"moron" comment. That should not end the debate over Canada-U.S. relations. Unless
Canada steps up to the plate, it risks being steamrolled under a new North American
and world order that this Bush administration intends to establish.
Copyright 1996-2002. Toronto Star Newspapers Limited
###
|
 Printer Friendly Version
E-Mail This Article
|
|
|
| |
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
|
|
