[antiwar-van] Fwd: Canada's Foreign Policy

[Carole Karkhairan]

>Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 20:10:53 -0800
>From: Cathy Woods <cathywoods at shaw.ca>
>Subject: Canada's Foreign Policy
>X-Sender: cathywoods at shawmail
>To: cathywoods at shaw.ca
>
>Canada may back U.S. attack on Iraq without UN
>CBC
>Thu, 09 Jan 2003 19:12:58
>
>WASHINGTON - Ottawa and the Pentagon are discussing what role Canada 
>might play in a U.S.-led attack against Iraq, Canadian Defence 
>Minister John McCallum said Thursday.
>
>John McCallum, right, meets Donald Rumsfeld at the Pentagon (AP PHOTO)
>
>Even if the United Nations Security Council does not authorize the 
>use of force, Canada has not ruled out contributing to Washington's 
>efforts to disarm Iraq, he said.
>
>The two countries' forces must plan how they might work together now 
>rather than waiting, according to the minister.
>
>"It's necessary always to plan in advance of such a contingency," 
>McCallum told reporters after a meeting with his American 
>counterpart, Donald Rumsfeld.
>
>"This in no way guarantees that the government will take that 
>decision in the future. But we must plan for the future to keep that 
>contingency open."
>
>McCallum dismissed suggestions that it would be hard for the 
>Pentagon to draft plans without knowing whether Canada will 
>eventually come on board, and said Rumsfeld was "very happy" with 
>Ottawa's position.
>
>"Many, many countries are in a position where they are offering 
>contingency co-operation," he said. "Some may say, 'We're doing it 
>only with a UN mandate.' We're saying we much prefer that, but we 
>may do it otherwise."
>
>The federal government still hopes a peaceful resolution can be 
>found in the dispute between Washington and Baghdad, McCallum said. 
>Ottawa is also waiting to see whether the United Nations Security 
>Council will authorize the use of military action.
>
>But even if the UN doesn't back Washington in an attack, McCallum 
>told the U.S. that Canada may still agree to take part. A decision 
>won't be made until UN weapons inspectors have completed their work 
>in Iraq, and the Security Council has debated its next move.
>
>
>FROM JAN. 9, 2003: No weapons found in Iraq, but U.S. not content
>
>Right now, Canada has two frigates in the Persian Gulf area – HMCS 
>Winnipeg and HMCS Montreal. McCallum would not discuss what Ottawa's 
>part might be in a U.S.-led attack against Iraq. Military analysts 
>have said options include sending more warships to the region, along 
>with aircraft, land vehicles and troops.
>
>McCallum said that he and Rumsfeld also talked about possible 
>co-operation on a missile defence system to protect North America 
>against ballistic missile attacks. A Canadian delegation will travel 
>to the U.S. later this month to find out more about the Pentagon's 
>proposal for a shield.
>
>Written by CBC News Online staff
>__
>
>Canada shifts policy on Iraq war
>Defence minister suggests UN approval for attack not required
>Toronto Star: http://www.thestar.com
>__
>
>No weapons found in Iraq, but U.S. not content
>CBC Thu, 09 Jan 2003 21:14:08
>
>NEW YORK - The man charged with seeking out Iraq's secret weapons 
>says he hasn't found any, but that didn't satisfy the Western powers 
>that say they may have to invade Iraq to disarm it.
>
>Hans Blix
>The United Nations chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, told 
>reporters Thursday that "we have not found any smoking guns" after 
>almost two months of looking for chemical and biological weapons and 
>the missile systems to deliver them.
>
>And "we are getting access to all the sites," said Mohamed 
>El-Baradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which is 
>monitoring Iraq's nuclear program.
>
>Blix and El-Baradei made the comments after briefing the UN Security 
>Council on both the operations of the UN inspectors in Iraq and the 
>country's disclosure about its weapons.
>
>Since November, about 90 inspectors have visited 300 sites looking 
>for prohibited weapons.
>
>The Security Council asked the inspectors to increase their efforts, 
>said Britain's ambassador to the UN, Jeremy Greenstock. "The 
>inspectors need to build up the intensity of what they're doing," he 
>said.
>
>Iraq must become proactive
>
>Both Britain and the United States, the two countries that have 
>talked about invading Iraq, expressed concern that the country has 
>not been co-operating "proactively" with the inspectors.
>
>"Just providing access is not sufficient," said John Negroponte, the 
>U.S. ambassador to the UN.
>
>UN inspectors want private interviews with Iraqi scientists, but so 
>far, have not been able to meet them without their "minders."
>
>If the Iraqis were co-operating proactively, they would allow the 
>interviews, said El-Baradei.
>
>Negroponte said the U.S. wants the inspectors to interview Iraqi 
>scientists outside the country, where they would be less subject to 
>intimidation. But Blix said the UN cannot force people to leave Iraq.
>
>Questions remain
>
>Both Blix and El-Baradei said there are many unanswered questions 
>raised by the Iraqi weapons disclosure document provided to the UN 
>in December.
>
>"The declaration has not helped very much," Blix said.
>
>The senior science advisor to Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein earlier 
>Thursday said that's not correct. "People who claim there were gaps 
>
 have not read it," Amir al-Saadi said.
>
>But El-Baradei said Iraq's assertions that it has destroyed weapons 
>are not good enough.
>
>"We cannot simply take their word for it," and without adequate 
>documentation, the inspectors need access to people who destroyed 
>the weapons or physical evidence to endorse Iraq's claims.
>
>Blix and El-Baradei are going to Baghdad Jan. 19 and 20, a week 
>before they are due to make a formal report to the Security Council 
>on Jan. 27.
>
>But Britain's Greenstock said that date may not produce anything 
>new. And if something happens in the meantime – say if Iraq denies 
>inspectors access to any sites – Blix could come back to the council.
>
>Written by CBC News Online staff
>__
>
>Canadian policy towards Iraq
>2002-12-27
>Source: Cathy Woods, Creative Resistance 
>
>   I wrote to the Prime Minister in December asking him to send me 
>any public statements made by the Canadian Government about the 
>imminent threat of war on Iraq by the US and Britain and I received 
>this reply:
>
>"....Please know that Canadian policy towards Iraq continues to be 
>motivated by our concerns about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction 
>and the humanitarian situation of the Iraqi people. These concerns 
>are shared very broadly within the international community and there 
>is strong support for insisting that Iraq meet its disarmament 
>obligations in full.
>
>As you are no doubt aware, Iraq recently accepted United Nations 
>Security Council Resolution 1441. As the Prime Minister said in a 
>recent statement, Canada and the rest of the international community 
>will be watching closely to ensure that Saddam Hussein complies, 
>without condition or delay, and in all respects, with the spirit and 
>letter of the resolution. Should military action prove necessary in 
>the end because Iraq continues to defy the collective will of the 
>international community, we expect that it would take place under 
>United Nations Security Council authorization.
>
>I have taken the liberty of forwarding your e-mail to the Honourable 
>Bill Graham, Minister of Foreign Affairs, for his information and 
>review. I am certain that the Minister will appreciate being made 
>aware of your views and will wish to give them every consideration."
>
>L.A. Lavell
>Executive Correspondence Officer
>Agent de correspondance
>de la haute direction
>__
>
>Letter from Libby Davis, NDP, MP on January 7, 2003
>
>Hi Cathy,
>
>Thanks for your message outlining your opposition to any war on Iraq.
>
>I will do everything I can to speak out in Parliament, and 
>elsewhere, to oppose this horrific escalation of militarism and 
>violence on civilian populations. I hope very much that a growing 
>anti-war movement, combined with as much pressure as we can put in 
>Parliament, will help convince our federal government to not be 
>complicit in this planned war.
>
>Thanks for writing.
>
>Sincerely,
>Libby
>__
>
>
>Plan would give U.S. a say on our energy
>Canadian officials propose expansion of continental ties
>Toronto Star
>Jan. 9, 2003
>www.star.com
>
>GRAHAM FRASER
>NATIONAL AFFAIRS WRITER
>
>OTTAWA—Canada could give up the ability to regulate its energy 
>resources if a sweeping proposal being discussed by Foreign Affairs 
>and International Trade officials is accepted.
>
>The officials are developing a proposal to broaden and extend the 
>U.S.-Canada border accord to a far-reaching continental approach to 
>the North American economy that could eliminate Canadian regulation 
>of its energy resources.
>
>They are proposing that Canada, the United States and Mexico should 
>"examine and address (the) regulatory environment for trade in oil, 
>gas and electricity to eliminate all impediments to North American 
>energy security."
>
>If implemented, the proposal would create a common North American 
>approach to standards, testing, qualifications, regulations, 
>labelling, procurement and environmental protection.
>
>This could have an impact on areas as varied as Canadian health 
>inspections and regulations, training of pilots, truck drivers and 
>ship captains, consumer protection, bilingual labelling 
>requirements, independent environmental standards, regulation of 
>Canadian energy resources and provincial control of electricity.
>
>According to a two-page internal memo obtained by the Star, entitled 
>"Securing Growth: Beyond The Border Accord," these changes would 
>have the effect of reducing costs, improving productivity and 
>enhance prospects for growth, and "free up more resources that could 
>be devoted to our shared security interests."
>
>The proposal is clearly at only the internal discussion stage among 
>officials, and has not reached the point of being considered by 
>ministers.
>
>The memo lays out an unprecedented leap toward an even more 
>continental approach to the economy than the 1988 Free Trade 
>Agreement that would further limit the ability of national and 
>provincial governments to intervene.
>
>The memo argues that Canada and the U.S. now have "a unique 
>opportunity" to include Mexico and expand the North American Free 
>Trade Agreement and the Canada-U.S. border accord.
>
>On Dec. 12, 2001, John Manley, then minister responsible for 
>security, signed a 30-point Smart Border Declaration with U.S. 
>Homeland Security director Tom Ridge.
>
>The "Securing Growth" memo says "the tragic events of Sept. 11, 
>2001" risked undermining the North American market, but the Smart 
>Border Declaration succeeded in increasing border security and 
>making it easier for legitimate trade to continue.
>
>The memo stresses that business leaders in Canada and the U.S. have 
>been urging the two governments to do more.
>
>"Such an initiative is increasingly enjoying analytical support," 
>the memo states, pointing to a study done by the C.D. Howe Institute 
>and other reports. "And the costs of not doing so are immense."
>
>The memo illustrates what could be pursued under the auspices of 
>NAFTA and "the Partnership for Prosperity" process (a U.S.-Mexico 
>agreement signed last year intended to channel U.S. private sector 
>investment to specific regions of Mexico where unemployment is high) 
>"that would reduce costs, improve productivity, and enhance 
>prospects for growth ... free up more resources that could be 
>devoted to our shared security concerns."
>
>Under the category "Secure Flow of Goods," priorities are to:
>
>"Identify standards, inspection/approval procedures, labelling and 
>related requirements to be made compatible with view to applying the 
>principle of `tested once, acceptable in North America' (e.g., 
>pharmaceuticals, industrial goods, consumer goods).
>
>"Review rules of origin requirements, including documentation, to 
>reduce transactional costs; move to MFN-free (most favoured nation) 
>wherever possible.
>
>"Examine and address regulatory environment for trade in oil, gas 
>and electricity to eliminate all impediments to North American 
>energy security.
>
>"Agree on common approaches to exemptions from WTO (World Trade 
>Organization) safeguards actions."
>
>Under the category "Secure Flow of People," the memo calls for:
>
>"Building on NEXUS (the pilot project for quick border crossings for 
>business purposes), improve framework for temporary business entry 
>in a way that facilitates executive and professional mobility.
>
>"Expedit(ing) a work program to ensure a secure and efficient 
>transportation sector (e.g. pilots, drivers, ships' captains)."
>
>Under the category "Secure Infrastructure," the memo suggests 
>Canada, the U.S. and Mexico should:
>
>"Review electronic commerce, architecture and `backbone' with a view 
>to protecting the integrity of telecoms and computer networks.
>
>"Expedite a review of energy infrastructure, including pipeline 
>capacity, electricity reliability and transmission.
>
>"Building on existing Canada-U.S. co-operation against telemarketing 
>fraud, pursue opportunities to ensure a common regulatory 
>environment for electronic commerce, including cross-border consumer 
>protection.
>
>"Expand opportunities for non-discriminatory procurement, 
>particularly for small- and medium-sized business.
>
>"Expedite review of International Joint Commission and related work 
>programs with a view to preserving the integrity of our shared 
>environment, with emphasis on clean air, clean water, toxics and 
>hazardous waste.
>
>"Establish a process or mechanism for long-term binational border planning."
>
>The memo emerges at a time when Canada-U.S. relations are at a 
>particularly tricky point.
>
>Prime Minister Jean Chrétien has taken pains to keep his distance 
>from U.S. preparations for a war against Iraq.
>
>The softwood lumber dispute is unsolved, the Bush administration has 
>been pressuring Ottawa to increase military expenditures, and the 
>FBI admitted they were wrong when they claimed five men had entered 
>the United States illegally from Canada.
>
>The admission prompted federal Immigration Minister Denis Coderre to 
>call for an apology. 
>___
>
>
>Breaking Rank: A citizen's review of Canada's military spending
>Source: Steven Staples, Polaris Institute 
>http://www.creativeresistance.ca/canada/2002-dec27-a-citizen's-review-of-canada's-military-spending-steven-staples-polaris-institute.htm
>__
>
>Creative Resistance: Canada's Foreign Policy
>http://www.creativeresistance.ca/canada-toc/canada-foreign-affairs.htm
>
>cathywoods at shaw.ca
>www.creativeresistance.ca
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.resist.ca/pipermail/antiwar-van/attachments/20030110/f5b807c4/attachment.html>