An influential group of neo-conservatives and business executives, whose spiritual headquarters is Toronto's C.D. Howe Institute, has long been lecturing us on the need to be more accommodating to Washington.

They harken back to the glory days when Brian Mulroney really showed us how to curry favour in Washington — long before things got off-track with Jean Chrétien's refusal to join the U.S. invasion of Iraq and Paul Martin's dithering over missile defence.

Bush's re-election will no doubt be seen by this crowd as a helpful disciplinary tool to whip us into line and push forward plans for deeper Canada-U.S. integration.

Canadians who hoped a John Kerry victory would spare us from pressure to participate in wacky missile schemes or future "wars of liberation" have been confronted with a harsh reality.

As a National Post headline put it: "Life with Bush: Get used to it." More pointed was the headline on a Globe article, written by two C.D. Howe-affiliated commentators: "Why Ottawa must curry U.S. favour now."

So it seemed fitting that the very day after the U.S. election, the campaign to push Canada deeper into the U.S. orbit was revved up with a C.D. Howe-sponsored lecture by former Canadian ambassador to the U.S., Allan Gotlieb.

Kerry had barely delivered his concession speech when Gotlieb held forth about how Canada is a washed-up power in the world and our only hope lies in improving our connections in Washington.

According to Gotlieb, Canadians have to choose between "realism" and "romanticism" in their relationship with the U.S.

The "realistic" approach involves accepting U.S. power and for the most part co-operating with it, even when it violates international law.

The "romantic" approach involves championing international law and treaties, like those protecting children in conflict zones and banning land mines, despite lack of U.S. support for these initiatives. Gotlieb dismisses this approach as "narcissistic" and "sanctimonious."

Gotlieb calls for Canada to behave towards the U.S. in a way that I suspect most Canadians would regard as subservient and offensive — as helpmate to a bully. Canada would be the canny little sidekick who holds the bully's coat. By disassociating ourselves with Washington and emphasizing "rule-making," Gotlieb argues we have left ourselves marginalized in the world.

This is a strange conclusion, considering that most of the world is at odds with the Bush administration. Since the bully has little credibility in world capitals, it's hard to imagine how the bully's pandering sidekick would have much either.

For all his alleged "realism," Gotlieb harbours the fanciful notion that we have the "potential for influencing the world's greatest power."

The Bush administration refuses to be influenced. As Bush put it in his first post-election press conference: "I'll reach out to everyone who shares our goals." That's as far as his reach goes; to those already on his side. As he's pointed out before, you're either with him or against him.

Even those who are clearly "with him" have been unable to influence him.

Take British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Bush's chief foreign ally, who apparently felt he could win the president's ear, thereby allowing Britain to help shape events in Iraq and also to push Washington to focus on the Israeli-Palestinian problem. Both goals proved elusive. Blair's cozying up to Bush won him nothing more than the nickname "Poodle."

Gotlieb points to Canada's "reality based" approach during the World War II. But he leaves out a key difference: We were working towards a mutual goal in World War II — once Washington finally entered the war, that is.

We didn't have to compromise our values or principles to work with FDR, and other allies, in fighting the Nazis.

To pretend nothing has changed, that our values and interests are aligned in the same way as they were during World War II, ignores the fact that the U.S. under Bush has behaved in a way that most Canadians find unpalatable, if not downright repugnant.

Canadians are stuck with the re-election of George W. That's reality. But it's also reality that we're a separate country.

And we don't have to abandon what we believe in just because clever Republican strategists managed to get a few million extra God-fearing, gay-hating, anti-abortionists to the polls.

Linda McQuaig is a Toronto-based author and commentator.

© 2004 Toronto Star

###