Latex lizzie
Well-Known Member
By LLOYD AXWORTHY
Dear Condi, I'm glad you've decided to get over your fit of pique & venture north to visit your closest neighbour. It's a chance to learn a thing or two. Maybe more.
I know it seems improbable to your divinely guided master in the WH that mere mortals might disagree with participating in a missile-defence system that has failed in its last 3 tests, even tho the tests themselves were carefully rigged to show results. But, gosh, we folks above the 49th parallel are somewhat cautious types who can't quite see laying down billions of dollars in a 3-dud poker game.
As our erstwhile Prairie-born & bred (& therefore prudent) finance minister pointed out in presenting his recent budget, we've had 8 yrs of balanced or surplus financial accts. If we're going to spend money, Mr Goodale added, it will be on day-care & health programs, & even on more foreign aid & improved defence.
Sure, that doesn't match the gargantuan, multi-billion-dollar deficits that your govt blithely runs up fighting a "liberation war" in Iraq, laying out more than half of all weapons expenditures in the world, & giving massive tax breaks to the top 1% of your population while cutting food programs for poor children. Just chalk that up to a different sense of priorities about what a natl govt's role s/b when there isn't a prevailing mood of manifest destiny.
Coming to Ottawa might also expose you to a parliamentary system that has a thing called question period every day, where those in the exec are held accountable by an opposition for their actions, & where demands for public debate on important topics such a missile defence can be made openly. You might also notice that it's a system in which the governing party's caucus members are not afraid to tell their leader that their constituents don't want to follow the ideological, perhaps teleological, fantasies of Canada's continental co-inhabitant. And that this leader actually listens to such representations.
Your boss did not avail himself of a similar opportunity to visit our Hse of Commons during his visit, fearing, it seems, that there might be some signs of dissent. He preferred to issue his diktat on missile defence in front of a highly controlled, pre-selected audience. Such control-freak antics may work in the virtual 1-party state that now prevails in Wash. But in Canada we have a residual belief that pols s/b subj to a few cks/balances, an idea that your country once espoused before the days of empire.
If you want to have us consider your proposals & positions, present them in a proper way, thru serious discussion across the table in our cabinet rm, as your previous president did when he visited Ottawa. And don't embarrass our PM by lobbing a verbal missile at him while he sits on a public stage, with no chance to respond.
Now, I understand that there may have been some miscalculations in Wash based on faulty advice from your resident gov of the "northern territories," Ambassador Cellucci. But you shld know by now that he hasn't really won the hearts & minds of most Canadians thru his attempts to browbeat & command our allegiance to US policies. Sadly, Mr Cellucci has been far too closeted with exclusive grps of 'experts' from Calgary think-tanks & neo-con lobbyists at cross-border conferences to remotely grasp a cross-section of Canadian attitudes (nor American ones, for that matter).
I invite you to expand the narrow perspective that seems to inform your opinions of Canada by ranging far wider in your reach of contacts & discussions. You would find that what is rising in Canada is not so much anti-Americanism, as claimed by your & our rt-wing commentators, but fundamental disagreements with certain policies of your govt. You wld see that rather than just reacting to events by drawing on old conventional wisdoms, many Canadians are trying to think our way thru to some ideas that can be helpful in bldg a more secure world. These Canadians believe that security can be achieved thru well-modulated efforts to protect the rights of people, not just nation-states.
To encourage and advance international co-operation on managing the risk of climate change, they believe that we need agreements like Kyoto.
To protect people against internatl crimes like genocide & ethnic cleansing, they support new institutions like the Internatl Criminal Court--which, by the way, you might strongly consider using to hold accountable those committing atrocities today in Darfur, Sudan.
And these Canadians believe that the UN shld indeed be reformed--beginning with an agreement to get rid of the veto held by the major powers over humanitarian interventions to stop violence & predatory practices. On this score, you might want to explore the concept of the 'Responsibility to Protect' while you're in Ottawa. It's a Canadian idea born out of the recent experience of Kosovo & informed by the many horrific examples of inhumanity over the last half-century. Many Canadians feel it has a lot more relevance to providing real human security in the world than missile defence ever will.
This is not just some quirky notion concocted in our long winter nights, by the way. It seems to have appeal for many in your own country, if not the editorialists at the Wall St Jn or Rush Limbaugh. As I discovered recently while giving a series of lectures in southern CA, there is keen interest in how the US can offer real leadership in managing global challenges of disease, natural calamities & conflict, other than by military means.
There is also a very strong awareness on both sides of the border of how vital Canada is to the US as a partner in N America. We supply copious amts of oil/natural gas to your country, our respective trade is the world's largest in volume, & we are increasingly bound together by common concerns over depletion of resources, esp very scarce fresh water. Why not discuss these issues with Canadians who understand them, & seek out ways to better cooperate in areas where we agree--& agree to respect each other's views when we disagree.
Above all, ignore the Cassandras who deride the state of our relations because of one missile-defence decision. Accept that, as a friend on your border, we will offer a different, independent pt of view. And that there are times when truth must speak to power.
In friendship, Lloyd Axworthy
(Lloyd Axworthy is president of the U. of Winnipeg & a former Canadian foreign minister) http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/westview/story/2610442p-3026695c.html
Dear Condi, I'm glad you've decided to get over your fit of pique & venture north to visit your closest neighbour. It's a chance to learn a thing or two. Maybe more.
I know it seems improbable to your divinely guided master in the WH that mere mortals might disagree with participating in a missile-defence system that has failed in its last 3 tests, even tho the tests themselves were carefully rigged to show results. But, gosh, we folks above the 49th parallel are somewhat cautious types who can't quite see laying down billions of dollars in a 3-dud poker game.
As our erstwhile Prairie-born & bred (& therefore prudent) finance minister pointed out in presenting his recent budget, we've had 8 yrs of balanced or surplus financial accts. If we're going to spend money, Mr Goodale added, it will be on day-care & health programs, & even on more foreign aid & improved defence.
Sure, that doesn't match the gargantuan, multi-billion-dollar deficits that your govt blithely runs up fighting a "liberation war" in Iraq, laying out more than half of all weapons expenditures in the world, & giving massive tax breaks to the top 1% of your population while cutting food programs for poor children. Just chalk that up to a different sense of priorities about what a natl govt's role s/b when there isn't a prevailing mood of manifest destiny.
Coming to Ottawa might also expose you to a parliamentary system that has a thing called question period every day, where those in the exec are held accountable by an opposition for their actions, & where demands for public debate on important topics such a missile defence can be made openly. You might also notice that it's a system in which the governing party's caucus members are not afraid to tell their leader that their constituents don't want to follow the ideological, perhaps teleological, fantasies of Canada's continental co-inhabitant. And that this leader actually listens to such representations.
Your boss did not avail himself of a similar opportunity to visit our Hse of Commons during his visit, fearing, it seems, that there might be some signs of dissent. He preferred to issue his diktat on missile defence in front of a highly controlled, pre-selected audience. Such control-freak antics may work in the virtual 1-party state that now prevails in Wash. But in Canada we have a residual belief that pols s/b subj to a few cks/balances, an idea that your country once espoused before the days of empire.
If you want to have us consider your proposals & positions, present them in a proper way, thru serious discussion across the table in our cabinet rm, as your previous president did when he visited Ottawa. And don't embarrass our PM by lobbing a verbal missile at him while he sits on a public stage, with no chance to respond.
Now, I understand that there may have been some miscalculations in Wash based on faulty advice from your resident gov of the "northern territories," Ambassador Cellucci. But you shld know by now that he hasn't really won the hearts & minds of most Canadians thru his attempts to browbeat & command our allegiance to US policies. Sadly, Mr Cellucci has been far too closeted with exclusive grps of 'experts' from Calgary think-tanks & neo-con lobbyists at cross-border conferences to remotely grasp a cross-section of Canadian attitudes (nor American ones, for that matter).
I invite you to expand the narrow perspective that seems to inform your opinions of Canada by ranging far wider in your reach of contacts & discussions. You would find that what is rising in Canada is not so much anti-Americanism, as claimed by your & our rt-wing commentators, but fundamental disagreements with certain policies of your govt. You wld see that rather than just reacting to events by drawing on old conventional wisdoms, many Canadians are trying to think our way thru to some ideas that can be helpful in bldg a more secure world. These Canadians believe that security can be achieved thru well-modulated efforts to protect the rights of people, not just nation-states.
To encourage and advance international co-operation on managing the risk of climate change, they believe that we need agreements like Kyoto.
To protect people against internatl crimes like genocide & ethnic cleansing, they support new institutions like the Internatl Criminal Court--which, by the way, you might strongly consider using to hold accountable those committing atrocities today in Darfur, Sudan.
And these Canadians believe that the UN shld indeed be reformed--beginning with an agreement to get rid of the veto held by the major powers over humanitarian interventions to stop violence & predatory practices. On this score, you might want to explore the concept of the 'Responsibility to Protect' while you're in Ottawa. It's a Canadian idea born out of the recent experience of Kosovo & informed by the many horrific examples of inhumanity over the last half-century. Many Canadians feel it has a lot more relevance to providing real human security in the world than missile defence ever will.
This is not just some quirky notion concocted in our long winter nights, by the way. It seems to have appeal for many in your own country, if not the editorialists at the Wall St Jn or Rush Limbaugh. As I discovered recently while giving a series of lectures in southern CA, there is keen interest in how the US can offer real leadership in managing global challenges of disease, natural calamities & conflict, other than by military means.
There is also a very strong awareness on both sides of the border of how vital Canada is to the US as a partner in N America. We supply copious amts of oil/natural gas to your country, our respective trade is the world's largest in volume, & we are increasingly bound together by common concerns over depletion of resources, esp very scarce fresh water. Why not discuss these issues with Canadians who understand them, & seek out ways to better cooperate in areas where we agree--& agree to respect each other's views when we disagree.
Above all, ignore the Cassandras who deride the state of our relations because of one missile-defence decision. Accept that, as a friend on your border, we will offer a different, independent pt of view. And that there are times when truth must speak to power.
In friendship, Lloyd Axworthy
(Lloyd Axworthy is president of the U. of Winnipeg & a former Canadian foreign minister) http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/westview/story/2610442p-3026695c.html
