According to Paul Cellucci, the U.S. Ambassador to Canada, “a lot of people in Washington are disappointed and upset” with Canada over its failure to report for duty in Iraq. It was later revealed that Cellucci’s remarks were made on the direct instructions of Condoleezza Rice, who Bush once described as his “foreign policy tutor.” An unnamed American official told The Globe and Mail that “this statement came right from the top.”

So, should we care that the Bush Administration is disappointed in our government? Cellucci did acknowledge that “Canada will provide more support for this war in Iraq indirectly than most of those forty-six countries that are fully supporting us.”

Certainly, there is no shortage of Canadians lining up to support Ambassador Cellucci’s remarks. Some even took them a step further. Consider the following:

  • Canadian Alliance leader Stephen Harper asked during Question Period: “Why does the Prime Minister fail to grasp that his stance is deeply injurious to our national interests?”
  • The Alliance posted signs in the lobby of the House of Commons bearing an American flag with the words “I stand with President George W. Bush.” Alliance MPs are reportedly requesting additional signs to post in their ridings.
  • The National Post called for an end to “the slew of juvenile anti-U.S. posturing issued from within [the Liberal] party” and argued that Prime Minister Chrétien was living in “a lost age.” (An age, one must suppose, in which multilateral institutions still have influence.)
  • Ontario Premier Ernie Eves wrote an open letter to Cellucci saying that he “share[s his] expression of disappointment in the response of the Canadian government. We believe it is important to support our American neighbours to the South, as you have been our allies and our friends for many decades now.”
  • Alberta Premier Ralph Klein issued a statement indicating that Albertans deplore war, but also value freedom and security — freedom for people to live their lives as they wish and freedom from terrorism and weapons of mass destruction: “I wish to express my thanks to the United States, the United Kingdom and other countries who have committed themselves to achieving these goals.”
  • Former Ontario Premier Mike Harris appeared with Eves and Harper at a pro-war rally and waved an American flag. He later told a meeting of the right-wing Fraser Institute: “We need to let the Americans know and disassociate ourselves from the actions of the federal government and from some of the anti-American sentiment that’s been expressed.”

How refreshing! Should the United States ever decide to exercise its Manifest Destiny, a Fifth Column already exists in Canada who will welcome them with open arms.

Still, there may be reason to be concerned about Cellucci’s remarks. He warned, for example, that “security will trump trade” in the future if Canada does not support American military objectives. In other words, the United States might get so angry at Canada that it would slap punitive duties on our softwood lumber and steel — or even refuse entry to Canadian citizens who were born overseas. Of course, the U.S. is already doing all of those things.

Perhaps Canada should consider itself lucky that it didn’t receive the tongue-lashing given to Mexico — who, as a member of the United Nations Security Council, also refused to support the U.S. Tony Garza, the U.S. ambassador to Mexico, asked rhetorically, “Will American attitudes be placated by half-steps or three-quarter steps? I kind of doubt it.” Another U.S. diplomat was quoted wondering, with Mexicans living in the U.S., if Mexico “want[ed] to stir the fires of jingoism during a war?”

York University political scientist James Laxer told Now Magazine that Cellucci’s rosy view of past Canada-U.S. relations was entirely a work of fiction:

There’s been a lot of talk from various people about the possibility of American retaliation against us for the position we’ve taken on Iraq. Frankly, when it comes to the economy, I just think that’s scare talk. In a number of areas where we have problems with the U.S., like softwood lumber, they haven’t been doing us any favours anyway. I hear Paul Cellucci say in a whining way that Americans are very disappointed with Canada, that if Canada were facing some threat there would be no debate and the U.S. would immediately come to our assistance. I would like someone to find for me one example in the past 200 years when the U.S., when not acting in its own immediate interest, ever came to the assistance of Canada. The argument that the U.S. has been a great neighbour to us when we have been threatened is just total nonsense. The Americans have pushed for the advantage in every single dispute they’ve ever had with us.

picture-2299.jpg

Scott Piatkowski

Scott Piatkowski is a former columnist for rabble.ca. He wrote a weekly column for 13 years that appeared in the Waterloo Chronicle, the Woolwich Observer and ECHO Weekly. He has also written for Straight...