PDA

View Full Version : Canada shrugs off U.S. warning to back off


Felix the Cat
12-14-2005, 01:57 AM
Canada shrugs off U.S. warning to back off (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2005-12-13T212902Z_01_YUE369406_RTRUKOC_0_US-POLITICS-USA.xml&rpc=22)

OTTAWA/SURREY, British Columbia (Reuters) - The United States made an unprecedented foray into Canada's election campaign on Tuesday, warning politicians not to bash Washington in their bid to win the January 23 election.

But an unapologetic Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin responded immediately by saying "c'est la vie" -- that's life -- if the United States did not like his remarks, and he would not accept anyone telling him he cannot defend his country.

In a hard-hitting speech in Ottawa, U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins lamented what he called relentless and incessant criticism of his country, which he speculated might begin to sow doubt about the strength of the binational relationship.

"Canada never has to tear the United States down to build itself up," Wilkins said.

"It may be smart election politics to thump your chest and constantly criticize your friend and your No. 1 trading partner. But it's a slippery slope and all of us should hope it doesn't have a long-term impact on our relationship."

Wilkins did not name the prime minister directly, but he specifically targeted a comment made last week at the Montreal climate change conference in which Martin called on the United States to heed a "global conscience" and join efforts to combat global warming.

That remark -- on top of criticism of U.S. policy on lumber, guns, passports and Iraq -- appeared to have riled the White House the most, particularly since Canada has a proportionally worse record than the United States on reining in greenhouse gas emissions.

"I would respectfully submit to you that when it comes to a 'global conscience' the United States is walking the walk," Wilkins said, addressing the Canadian Club of Ottawa.

"And when it comes to climate change, we are making significant progress, greater progress than many of those who have been most critical of the U.S."

In the campaign for the June 2004 election Martin regularly said Canada did not want U.S.-style health care, fiscal deficits, taxes or attack ads.

But in the last several months, particularly in frustration over U.S. refusal to eliminate duties on Canadian softwood, he has made more direct attacks on U.S. policy, and continued to do so during the election campaign.

Martin refused to back down on Tuesday in Surrey, British Columbia.

"That our friends do not like what we say -- well, c'est la vie. I'm going to defend Canada and I'm right on softwood lumber and I'm right on climate change and I won't let anybody tell me that I should not defend my country," he said.

He also dismissed the idea that he was trying to single out Washington as part of his election campaign.

"I have not made the United States or any country a target in this campaign," he said, noting that he had outlined Canada's stand on softwood lumber and climate change long before the election was called.

Martin, whose minority government was brought down on November 28 after an official report detailed Liberal kickbacks which were used in election campaigns, currently leads Conservative leader Stephen Harper in the polls but not by enough to regain a majority in Parliament.

daisy
12-14-2005, 03:27 AM
canadians are pretty tough usually they don't back down from anything
Canada shrugs off U.S. warning to back off (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2005-12-13T212902Z_01_YUE369406_RTRUKOC_0_US-POLITICS-USA.xml&rpc=22)

Felix the Cat
12-16-2005, 10:59 AM
Voters electrified as Canada's PM hits back in war of words with US (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/12/16/wcanada16.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/12/16/ixworld.html)

Canada's increasingly heated war of words with the United States intensified yesterday, with the prime minister demanding that Washington halt attempts to "dictate" to its northern neighbour.

Paul Martin responded after the US ambassador to Ottawa accused him of playing politics with the relationship between the two countries.

Mr Martin, who has called an election for next month, shot back: "I am not going to be dictated to as to the subjects that I should raise.

"I will make sure that Canada speaks with an independent voice now, tomorrow and always, and you should demand nothing less from your prime minister."

The row has become the main issue in Canada's hitherto lacklustre election campaign, with newspapers feasting on the exchanges between the two allies. Mr Martin is fighting to keep his job following a series of corruption scandals which have tarnished his Liberal party.

Ambassador David Wilkins shrugged off the prime minister's words yesterday.

Explaining that his words were designed to improve relations between the two countries, he said: "I had no intention of in any way affecting an election which is the business of Canadians. I don't presume I can dictate to anybody."

The US state department made plain that the ambassador's comments had its full support, saying the intervention had been "offered in the best traditions of US-Canadian neighbourly relations".

Washington has been increasingly irritated by Mr Martin's regular attacks. The Canadian leader, who once said relations with the US should be conducted more maturely, has criticised Washington's approach to international trade and climate change.

That culminated in comments last week when Mr Martin told international climate change negotiators: "To the reticent nations, including the United States, I'd say there … is such a thing as a global conscience and now is the time to listen to it."

His words infuriated Washington and provoked the near-unprecedented intervention from ambassador Wil-kins.

The exchanges have complicated the electioneering efforts of Mr Martin's rivals, largely because the Bush administration is so unpopular in Canada. Mack Layton, the leader of the Left-leaning New Democratic Party, des-cribed Mr Martin's comments as "shameless posturing".

He added: "Whipping up the rhetoric about George Bush is very easy to do … Canadians have known that the Liberals will say anything in an election to get elected."

Conservative opposition leader Stephen Harper said he was perplexed by the American intervention: 'Anyone who's watched Martin on Canadian-US relations in the past couple of years knows you can't take anything he says very seriously."

The Vancouver Sun was one among a number of newspapers which suggested yesterday that the dispute was proving helpful to Mr Martin and his Liberal Party.

"The Liberals are clearly counting on [ambassador] Wilkins's intervention in the election to stir up strong nationalist sentiments among Canadians. They believe many of those voters will swing towards Martin, particularly if he is portrayed as a strong national leader."

Canadians have been infuriated this year by Washington's decision to ignore a World Trade Organisation ruling that its duties on Canadian lumber were illegal. Washington has since backed down.

raven
12-16-2005, 02:07 PM
Well at least the Canadians are not sucking Bush off like Blair is. Though some Canadians, including my brother are neo-cons. :p

Hakluyt
12-16-2005, 06:53 PM
TEAM CANADA

http://www.thestar.com/images/thestar/img/051130_martin_ottawa_300.jpg

raven
12-16-2005, 07:03 PM
TEAM CANADA

http://www.thestar.com/images/thestar/img/051130_martin_ottawa_300.jpg
HEIL MARTIN! WIR MUSSEN DIE AMERIKANER AUSROTTEN!
lol jk. :p

Vindex
12-16-2005, 08:46 PM
Martin is just talking tough to get votes from the masses of asses.

Felix the Cat
12-17-2005, 01:27 PM
How do the polls look? How do folks think the elections will go?

Hakluyt
12-17-2005, 02:00 PM
The Leadership debates were last night, so new polls are forthcoming. Nationally the Liberals are at 39% support and the Conservatives 33, though tied at 41% outside Quebec (the Conservatives have little to no support in Quebec, and the Bloc Quebecois leads the Liberals 50%+ to about 30% there, so the latter figure is closer to what the actual outcome will be in the context of first-past-the-post) The NDP have 12% support and the Greens fluctuate between 5 and 10.