Posted on 02/25/2005 8:00:41 PM PST by quidnunc
Ottawa – Canada's rejection of missile defence is a historic shift in its relationship with the United States and could have deep unforeseen consequences, analysts warn.
This week's announcement is more significant than Canada's refusal to join fighting in Iraq or Vietnam because, some say, this time the country has rejected a domestic defence plan.
One military analyst in Washington says Canada has turned its back on a 67-year-old agreement signed by then-prime minister Mackenzie King and president Franklin Roosevelt to jointly defend North America.
"This is a significant policy change, and it will clearly have consequences," says a briefing paper released Friday by Dwight Mason.
He served for eight years as chairman of the American section of the Canada-U.S. Permanent Joint Board on Defense and was a diplomat in Ottawa.
The first impact, he suggested, will come next year when the Norad agreement comes up for renewal, but it could also have economic consequences as yet unknown.
"The decision to opt out of missile defence is an abandonment of some Canadian sovereignty," he writes.
"This brings the basic partnership policy underlying the U.S.-Canadian defence relationship into question. These developments will have long-term consequences that will take time to be revealed fully."
One immediate consequence could affect Prime Minister Paul Martin's role on the international stage.
If he had any hope the United States would help him create his cherished G-20 group of world leaders, those hopes may have been extinguished permanently.
One U.S. official emitted a deep, extended laugh when asked for an assessment of the prime minister and said Canada no longer qualifies as a trusted ally.
While wary of speaking on the record, the Americans are particularly annoyed with Martin over what they perceive as weak leadership.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at canada.com ...
< snicker > That quote about "no longer a trusted ally" is *great*. Can we kick the Canadians out of NORAD and take all our stuff back from them now?
As opposed to waiting for the deal renewal, that is. Sounds like Martin has already withdrawn, hasn't he?
Hope he can figure out how to generate a military from scratch in less than a year, because I strongly suspect that we're not going to be interested in defending what's left of Canada any more.
the canadians that i meet from time to time from western canada seem like normal folks.
it's the oui-oui folks from the east that have chirac disease.
But the leader of the NDP said the only delusion is in the minds of people imagining scare scenarios of some potential missile attack.
"These are the kind of hypothetical questions that (George) Bush has tried to create in the minds of people to elevate a sense of fear.
"The fact is that if Canada is a part of a program like this, then we become a target."
Now that is sound logic!
If Bush squashes the Food for Oil investigations I'm sure Martin will come around. Could be what he's bargaining for.
I really hope there was supposed to be a sarcasm tag in there.
This makes about as much sense as the statement, "If you carry a gun for protection against thieves, muggers, and mass murderers, thieves and muggers and mass murderers will target you."
"Can we kick the Canadians out of NORAD and take all our stuff back from them now?"
Imagine if, in the 1950's, Canada had refused to allow American troops to man the DEW Line. What would NORAD have looked like? What would our relationship have become as the Cold War and missile race heated up?
Martin indeed is "no longer a trusted ally."
"The fact is that if Canada is a part of a program like this, then we become a target."
How diplomatic! He pretty much said that since the US is probably the key target, Canada won't be bothered and therefore doesn't care if the US gets nuked. Well, mr. prime minister, we won't care either if your country ever needs ours. You have taken us for granted for way too long. There's nothing more healthy than a lazy people living under tyranny for a few years before they learn to appreciate liberty and the price for it (just ask Eastern Europeans, Iraqis, and the Iranian people).
"The top U.S. envoy to Canada - Ambassador Paul Cellucci - says Canada would be "outside of the room" when his country decides whether to fire at incoming missiles."
"But Martin said Friday: "We would expect to be consulted."
Who is delusional? What an incredible pair of statements.
What part of "outside of the room" does Martin fail to grasp?
No, I think the reasoning is just what passes for reasoning in the French affected areas of the world. When you plan to surrender, you don't want anything that will catch your rifle when you drop it.
Before 9-11, the lefties in the US were for dropping the missile defense shield, because after all, "We don't have any enemies" It could well be that Canada is immersed in this same reasoning. Certainlhy they need all their tax money for the social programs they are running. Its a good thing there are no enemies up north, because they don't have any money to fight them with. (I sure hope terrorists don't move into Canada and use it as a base to strike the US. /Oh dear, I should not have given anyone any ideas, Eh?)
Yeah, like annexation.
Paul Martin is a gutless wimp. Another problem is that Canada is made up of a collection of liberals, socialists and separatists, with a few conservatives in the West.
The military is broken and broke and yet Martin won't take the steps required to defend this continent. At the same time he is trying to shove gay marriage down our throats in Parliament. It does appear that these two policies are connected doesn't it?
Let me tell you folks - I am one thoroughly disgusted Canadian.
(Denny Crane: "There are two places to find the truth. First God and then Fox News.")
(Denny Crane: "There are two places to find the truth. First God and then Fox News.")
Now that Canada has "opted out" of missile defence, is there any reason we shouldn't tell them they lost their chance? I say, even if they do some day come to their senses, we make sure they know the door is now closed and the umbrella is not for them. I'm sure they made this decision with the happy assumption that we'll end up protecting them anyways.
Just why did we need canada in on our missile defense system anyways?
Because we need some territory over which to shoot down incoming nuclear missiles ... wouldn't want to have them scattered over our territory, now would we?
It was NDP leader Jack Layton who made that idiotic statement, not Paul Martin (the PM).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that how things stand right now?
The only reason I saw for canada to join our missile defense system was so we could place forward detection installations to make sure nothing lands in North America. Now, with canada out of the picture, we just need to make sure nothing lands within the United States. To hell with anything north of the 49th parallel.
Canada has hosed themselves royally by "opting out". I see no reason why we should't make sure they are aware of all the ramifications of their decision.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.