| Submit your comments on this article |
| Great White North |
| U.S. secretary of state delays trip to Ottawa |
| 2005-03-01 |
| The ripple effect created when Canada said 'no' to signing on to U.S. missile defence seems to have penetrated deeper south of the border than first believed. CTV News has learned that U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was so displeased by Canada's decision to opt out of the program that she's postponed a planned visit to Ottawa in mid-April. This contradicts Ottawa's official line that U.S.-Canada relations are proceeding smoothly after Prime Minister Paul Martin announced last week that Canada won't be a part of the controversial ballistic missile defence (BMD) program. A senior U.S. State Department official, who was on board a London-bound flight with Rice, confirmed to CTV News that the cancellation of the Canadian visit was a direct consequence of Martin's decision. Washington State Department spokesman Adam Ereli took a softer line, saying there's still discussion going on about the timing of the meeting, and that "it'll happen when the stars are all aligned in the right way." That could take a very long time, reports Clark. He adds that it wasn't just that Martin opted out of the American plan but the way in which he did it. Martin has sent signals in the past that he was in favour of Washington's missile defence program. "I think our sovereignty depends on our being at the table when discussions are taking place about the defence of North America," he said about a year-and-a-half ago. And last fall, Defence Minister Bill Graham made statements indicating it would be a serious mistake for the government not to be at the table with the Americans on the issue of missile defence. But on Thursday, Martin announced: "BMD is not where we will concentrate our efforts. Instead, we will act both alone and with our neighbours on defence priorities outlined in (the) budget." Chris Sands of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies says that the result of Martin's backtracking on the issue could have negative consequences for Canada-U.S. relations. "The one thing with Bush, the one thing you don't do with him is double-talk him. You tell him what you think," he tells CTV News. Paul Cellucci, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, says American anger and astonishment at Canada's decision runs deep. "As I said last week, I don't understand why Canada would give up its seat at the table, given our history of working together in the defence of North America, particularly at NORAD. But that was a decision for Canada," he tells CTV News. Rice is currently in London at a conference of Palestinian reforms, as is Canada's Foreign Minister, Pierre Pettigrew. An official in Pettigrew's office told CTV News that the minister will try to have a private word with Rice and perhaps even extend another invitation to Ottawa. The secretary of state's planned visit to Canada's capital was supposed to actually be a follow-up trip to another meeting. The White House has confirmed with CTV News that there will be a summit between Martin, Bush and Mexican President Vincente Fox in Mexico City on March 23. But with no follow-up, says Clark, "it begs the question: how seriously are Canada's concerns going to be taken at that summit? "Bush is very frustrated with Canada and the way Canadians are making their decisions, about everything from Iraq to missile defence," says Clark, adding that consequences of Martin's decision could impact trade areas such as softwood lumber. One analyst in Washington says Canada's rejection of missile defence is a historic shift in its relationship with the U.S. and could have deep, unforeseen results. Dwight Mason, former chairman of the American section of the Canada-U.S. Permanent Joint Board on Defense, said one impact will come next year when the Norad agreement comes up for renewal. "The decision to opt out of missile defence is an abandonment of some Canadian sovereignty," he writes. This wasn't the first time that Canada has angered the U.S. in recent years. Two years ago, then prime minister Jean Chretien decided Canada would not join the American-led coalition to invade Iraq. Bush promptly reacted by cancelling a visit to Ottawa, saying he was too busy with the war in Iraq to address a planned joint session of parliament in May, 2003. |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #15 ... U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was so displeased by Canada’s decision to opt out of the program that she’s postponed a planned visit to Ottawa in mid-April. Canada, this is Egypt. You two have something in common.... |
| Posted by: Pappy 2005-03-01 7:28:07 PM |
| #14 U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was so displeased by Canada’s decision to opt out of the program that she’s postponed a planned visit to Ottawa in mid-April. The Doctor is IN! |
| Posted by: BigEd 2005-03-01 7:18:41 PM |
| #13 The ripple effect created when Canada said ’no’ to signing on to U.S. missile defence seems to have penetrated deeper south of the border than first believed. CTV News has learned that U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was so displeased by Canada’s decision to opt out of the program that she’s postponed a planned visit to Ottawa in mid-April. There's a new woman in town, folks, and things are looking up for us. That they may be looking down for the Canadian Government is an additional benefit... |
| Posted by: Ptah 2005-03-01 12:21:13 PM |
| #12 CL - no offense meant to the normal folks of Canada - and we have enough loonies on our own side of the border that we understand your plight. When you hear us bashing "Canadians" just think of it as if we were bashing our own homegrown moonbats. |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-03-01 11:41:29 AM |
| #11 Norad is safe and should remain so. It is Canada's real contribution to BMD. As far as I can see the whole thing is primarily for domestic consumption to deflect attention from a real increase in defence spending from non-existent to pathetic. Nonetheless, there should be Canuck bashing and Quebecois bashing. The sooner the Canucks get fed up with the Quebecois, the sooner the problem gets fixed, either in an Anglosphere Canada or a dissolved Canada. I could care less which. Tell the frogs to take a flying... |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-03-01 11:25:52 AM |
| #10 So - should we boot them from NORAD?... |
| Posted by: mojo 2005-03-01 11:21:38 AM |
| #9 Let's tone down the Canada bashing please. My inner cannuck is becoming upset. Quebec bashing can continue apace. My inner quebecois can take it and has some choice words for you all in joual. I'd like to see some informed speculation as to why the backtracking occurred. The Liberals have got a good handle on what will fly and won't within the base. Doesn't make a lot of sense for the Liberal party leadership to line up (more or less) behind participating in missile defense, then stand us up at the alter. Is the rejection political expediency? Or has the Liberal leadership convinced itself this is a point of principal, and if so, what's the principal? If NORAD survives, don't expect to see a Canadian ever again in operational control. |
| Posted by: Classical_Liberal 2005-03-01 11:17:49 AM |
| #8 I'm 1/2 tempted to email their embassy and tell them I respect PM Martin's wish for sovereignty and I and my family will respect it. We will not violate Canada's airspace or landmass which is disappointing, because we were thinking about the Vancouver Olympics, but....that's their right. |
| Posted by: anonymous2u 2005-03-01 11:14:03 AM |
| #7 Do we HAFTA invade Canada? It's SO cold! |
| Posted by: Bobby 2005-03-01 11:00:06 AM |
| #6 Of course, Rice isn't calling for "regime change" in Canada; but I don't suppose the US would be terribly upset by a "regime change", there. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-03-01 10:18:29 AM |
| #5 They are more than useful idiots. The country is controlled by Quebecois politicians and it is becoming an ally of the frogs. It is becoming a department of frogistan. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-03-01 9:44:46 AM |
| #4 The whole deal on Canadians ranting the anti-american thing is so boring. Most of them are really nice people but they do have a cadre of ejits (including alot of politicians) who love the general and generally inarticulate rants about their southern neighbors. I'd say, make it known who the ejits are and then give them appropriate and persistent verbal SH_T should they or their families dare to come here! One female MP comes to mind for her thoughtfull dribble about Americans. You can google the topic, generally and find that mental midget pretty easily. Send her and email inviting her to your neighborhood for a "town meeting" and an opportunity to learn about the people she regularly defames. My chumpies could give her a quick and concise tutorial in heartfelt indignation and the best ways to express it. She could learn something. PS I didn't even vote for Bush! |
| Posted by: ShadowSuperCat 2005-03-01 9:39:30 AM |
| #3 There is no longer any compelling reason to source military (e.g. Strykers) equipment from Canada. Move the production back to the US. Future contracts should give as much consideration to Canadian firms as is given France or Argentina. |
| Posted by: ed 2005-03-01 7:58:25 AM |
| #2 "it’ll happen when the stars are all aligned in the right way." The next planetary alignment is in 500 years. Call me when it happens. |
| Posted by: Adam Ereli 2005-03-01 7:53:46 AM |
| #1 some Canadians get off on flipping off America - but the end result means that our airspace will be protected and theirs will not. Cutting off your nose to spite your face, as my mom used to say. |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-03-01 7:41:42 AM |