Sun, August 7, 2005 American sends us an ominous message
By <http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Calgary/Ted_Byfield/home.html> Ted Byfield -- Calgary Sun <outbind://53-00000000625F35DA9B8E2C43B0A3422CC3CDB74D84343601/http://www.ca noe.ca/CNEWSImages2003/byfield_ted66.jpg> Now here's an odd thing -- very important, I would think, to anybody doing business in Western Canada, or for that matter to anybody interested in the increasingly bizarre conduct of the government at Ottawa. Late last month, a full-page article appeared in the National Post over the signature of Harvey M. Sapolsky, director of the Security Studies Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In it, he frankly warned that if Canada "continues its international meddling at our expense and forgets its geography," then the U.S. will have to let Canada "know where its economic prosperity originates." "Canada is easy to squeeze," observes Sapolsky. "Military trade preferences for Canada should end. The tag-along trips and combat observation opportunities should stop." These might be "small steps," but if Canada continues doing what it's doing then further steps involving "even greater costs for Canada" should be taken. Sapolsky spells out the American concern. It's not that "anti-Americanism is the unstated essence of the modern Canadian identity." This might have occasionally "irritated" some American officials, but by and large "no one much cared what Canada said or did." But in certain areas, this anti-Americanism began to take dangerous form. He cites two examples: 1. Canada's aggressive promotion of the treaty prohibiting the use of land mines, which are necessary to protect American bases in hostile areas. 2. Canada's equally aggressive promotion of an International Criminal Court to prosecute the perpetrators of the kind of evils done in Rwanda and Bosnia. President Bill Clinton refused to send it to the Senate because he saw that the treaty could be used by anti-American powers to prosecute American peace-keepers. These treaties "intentionally undermine America's military equities" and "seem to represent a deeper and more dangerous decision by Canada's foreign policy establishment to lead the international effort to hobble the American military." Americans "should not tolerate Canada seeking a leading role in the global coalition to thwart American power needed to protect U.S. citizens and interests." "Canada has given up on warfare," he observes. Forty years ago it virtually abandoned its responsibilities in NATO long before the Berlin Wall fell. It "briefly sought an international reputation in peacekeeping, but greatly tempered this initiative after disastrous experiences in Somalia, where its troops misbehaved, and in Rwanda, where its leadership was ignored. Today Canada spends only about 1% of its GDP on national defence." Since the U.S. will defend the continent with or without Canada's assent, "Canada can afford to do this, though the U.S. cannot." Now the odd thing is this. Sapolsky's article appeared on July 27, 11 days ago. It shows little regard for the tender sentiments of Canadians and tramples brutally on some of our most cherished delusions. Yet Ottawa has not rushed to answer it. Ordinarily they would have prompted some academic to write an immediate rebuttal article. But none has appeared. Neither has there been any editorial rejoinder. Now this is either because they consider the article beneath notice, or because they take it so seriously they don't want to call attention to it. I tend towards the second explanation. This was no mere op-ed piece. MIT's security studies group will have close connections with the U.S. State and Defence Departments, and it's altogether probable that they approved the article. So it's a missive just below the diplomatic level. Furthermore, one region of the country most vulnerable to American economic reprisals would be western Canada, particularly Alberta. But we're not the only ones. Ontario and Quebec are vulnerable too. Sapolsky points out, for example, that "billions" of dollars in U.S. defence spending go to Canada. About two thirds of the U.S. Army's latest combat troop carriers are made in this country. Surely therefore it would well behoove the Alberta government to quietly draw to the attention of Americans that the West elected neither the Chretien nor the Martin governments. In fact, we've done everything constitutionally possible to throw them out. So the Americans might focus punitively upon Ontario industry. They're the people who keep putting them. in. Moreover, when it comes time for big Ontario to thump Alberta again, via its over-riding hold on Ottawa, it would be good for Alberta to have an ally that could thump Ontario even harder. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> <font face=arial size=-1><a href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hdr7o6n/M=362329.6886306.7839369.3040540/D=groups/S=1705323667:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1123684280/A=2894321/R=0/SIG=11dvsfulr/*http://youthnoise.com/page.php?page_id=1992 ">Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!</a>.</font> --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
