There was a quiet unease on both sides of the U.S.-Canada border following the terrorist attacks in London.

Public Security Minister Anne McLellan, at a recent disaster management conference in Toronto, warned Canadians against complacency regarding terrorism, remarking, “I actually don’t think this [terrorism] has a lot to do with whether you participated in the Iraq war.”

In truth, Osama bin Laden’s oft-repeated “hit list” of countries to be targeted shows Canada as the only target on the list not attacked yet.

Adrian Gordon, Executive Director, Canadian Centre for Emergency Preparedness, told CTV News “By its very nature, Toronto being the financial hub of Canada, we must probably be the highest potential target,” Gordon said.

Gordon said specific targets within Toronto could include the Rogers Centre, CN Tower, subways and commuter trains.

Needless to say, there’s a heightened sense of security on the Toronto subway system, which I expect to see in evidence during my impending visit to Toronto. In Washington, security troops armed with automatic weapons have taken to patrolling Metro subway stations there since the London attacks.

Are Canadians on public transport any less blasé, by comparison, to strap hangers in Chicago? Will we be able to spot the U.S. tourists on the Toronto subway by their nervous expressions or will those be shared by Torontonians as well?

The twin factors of the passing of time since 9/11 and no subsequent terrorist attacks on the U.S. mainland has led to a complacency here as well, perhaps one trait which we can point to as being shared by the U.S. and Canadian populations.

In that atmosphere, McLellan, changing her tune from previous statements on terrorism, is attempting to at least psychologically prepare Canadians for the eventuality of an attack.

The Globe and Mail reported that McLellan said she’d like the media’s help in crafting a discussion about terrorism “in a way that doesn’t scare Canadians, but informs them and motivates them in a level of understanding that will help them when — God forbid — some bad things happen.”

Meanwhile, the U.S. experience post 9/11 continues along a steady line. In Washington, Republican legislators are steadily ramming through a re-authorization of the Patriot Act, serene in both the complacency of the general population and their ability to make the case that the lack of terror attacks on the U.S. since its passage proves it works.

But London’s thousands of surveillance cameras and security measures couldn’t stop determined terrorists. Neither will any law.

As both George W. Bush and Paul Martin continue to fine-tune border security issues and Canada’s business class pushes for deeper integration with the U.S., one has to ask the question: If Canada were attacked tomorrow, what path would it travel in its reaction — invoking and/or revising the Emergencies Act, mimic the post 9/11 measures of the Bush administration, or something else?

And what would that mean for U.S.-Canada relations, trade and border issues as well now and in the future?

Preparing the population “to think about evacuation for their own family, keeping their own family safe,” as Emergency Preparedness Canada advisor James Young recently said, is entirely proper but there may be more at stake. Would the aim also be to prepare Canadian society not to mistake overreacting with draconian measures, confusing colour-coded warning levels or scapegoating immigrant populations as appropriate responses?

Bob MacDonald in his July 10 Toronto Sun column is already raising dark spectres, claiming “it’s also probably true that many non-Muslims in countries like Canada, Britain and the U.S. suspect that their fast-growing Muslim communities really sympathize with these fundamentalist Muslim terrorists.”

MacDonald, citing CSIS sources that say 50 al-Qaida sleeper cells may already be operating in Canada, asks “what are we going to do about it — besides mumbling in our beer and hoping it won’t happen here?”

In the end, we can argue about many things related to the rise of Islamic terrorism in the last 20 years: politics, oil, colonialism, religion, racism, Israel and Palestine and so on. But after all is said and argued, ordinary Londoners, Montrealers and Chicagoans ride public transport to work everyday — we may not like the risks that have been thrust on us, but like it or not, we have to live in this world. And ours is a multicultural world.

How we deal with either vague or real threats in our day-to-day existences mirror the makeup of our societies. London’s stiff upper lip, New York’s tough guy posture — all reflect the willingness of people either to succumb to their fears by trading essential liberty for perceived safety, to paraphrase Ben Franklin, or stubbornly cling to our rights as a free people and remain tolerant of differences while fighting terror.

The discourse McLellan is seeking is one I hope Canada will have soon. And as I travel in Toronto on the buses and trains, I’ll be interested to get a sense of how Canadians might react to a terrorist attack — and how they would want their government to react.

Keith Gottschalk

Keith Gottschalk

U.S. Keith Gottschalk has written for daily newspapers in Iowa, Illinois and Ohio. He also had a recent stint as a radio talk show host in Illinois. As a result of living in the high ground...