Cablegate: Taking Stock of U.S.-Canadian Relations -- An End

This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

171517Z Mar 05

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 OTTAWA 000800

SIPDIS

E.O.12958: N/A
TAGS: ASEC ECON OPRC PREL CA
SUBJECT: TAKING STOCK OF U.S.-CANADIAN RELATIONS -- AN END
OF TOUR ASSESSMENT

U.S.-Canadian Relations
-----------------------

1. My core message as I depart Ottawa is that our
relationship with Canada has changed fundamentally in the
last four years, and we as a government need to catch up
with this new reality. Canada is the front line of our
efforts to protect the U.S. homeland. There is no priority
in the hemisphere, in the world greater than that, and we
will have to make sure that we are properly set up in Canada
to address this priority.

2. The complexity of U.S.-Canadian ties, and of Canada's
internal political and social reality, has played out
visibly during my four-year tenure here. When I arrived,
Jean Chretien was in his third term as Prime Minister and
Canada was in the process of disengaging from its former
middle power status and withdrawing from the global stage.
The bruising debate over Quebec separatism was largely over
but the fissures it left in the country had not healed, and
there was extreme caution in political decision-making.
More recently, Chretien's replacement by Paul Martin,
followed by elections which yielded a minority government,
further restricted bold initiatives. U.S. Canadian
relations during this period were complicated, with
increasing economic integration and strong support in the
immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, but also growing
negative reactions to festering trade disputes such as BSE
and softwood lumber, and strong popular disagreement over
the U.S. operation in Iraq.

3. Mission Canada has made broad strides over the past four
years to strengthen all areas of the bilateral relationship,
but most significantly in the realm of security, as
manifested specifically by the Smart Border Action Plan and
our daily support to implementing the programs and providing
support to those in Washington pushing our policy agenda
related to the plan. We have also helped prod Canada to
increase defense spending and have improved our cooperation
on multilateral issues such as human rights, trafficking in
persons, and curtailing the spread of weapons of mass
destruction. We did come up short on missile defense and
military support for Iraq, but Canada has compensated in
part by managing the international observer mission for
Iraqi elections, contributing 300 million dollars to Iraqi
reconstruction and supporting first Iraqi police training
and now NATO's Iraqi army training. On the economic side of
the relationship Mission Canada has supported the policy and
structural framework of deepening our economic ties. In
many ways we have reached the natural limits of the current
NAFTA-led construct, as "border risk" has become a major
theme of senior Canadian officials -- for instance, Toyota
decided to locate a new plant in the U.S. because of concern
with border crossings. There are two sets of issues --
those related to border processing and delays, and the
deeper issues related to failure to resolve trade disputes
such as softwood lumber and BSE.

The Ambassador's Role
---------------------

4. Overwhelmingly, the bilateral relationship occurs across
the U.S.-Canadian border between individuals, businesses and
communities who do not check in with Ottawa and Washington.
Even at the government-to-government level, a great deal of
interaction takes place directly between government
agencies. In this unique environment, I have found it
effective to assume a high profile in Canadian public
discourse for three key reasons.

5. First, we enjoy excellent working relations with the
Government of Canada, and Canadian government officials,
especially in law enforcement and the Canadian Forces, fully
understand our current concerns and issues. The same,
however, cannot be said of the Canadian public, especially
the media. Moreover, Canadian political leaders are often
reluctant to make the public case for close U.S.-Canada
cooperation on controversial issues -- missile defense being
the most recent case in point.

6. Secondly, while Canadians understand us better than
perhaps any other country, they don't understand us as well
as they think. Canadians have long described their public
discourse as a "dialogue of solitudes," in which they
largely listen to each other. Canada needs to hear from
Americans directly on our views, impending decisions, and
courses of action taken. There is no American in Canada in
a more authoritative position to communicate our views than
the Ambassador of the United States.

7. Finally, it has been necessary to interpret Canada and
to serve as a first alert for those in Washington who are
immersed on issues of interest in all other parts of the
world. Canada believes it has a hard time getting
Washington's attention. This sometimes occurs through our
own indecision but more often it is the result of our
inability to bring to closure issues that are relatively
small for us but that loom large for Canadians.

8. My public role has meant traveling widely throughout
this vast and diverse country. The fundamental message to
all audiences has been highlighting the scope, depth and
strength of the bilateral relationship; and emphasizing the
need for Canada and the U.S. to continue to work together to
ensure our mutual security and prosperity, across the globe
as well as on the North American continent we share. I have
been able to explain our views directly, at a retail level,
to a broad group of opinion leaders, including in civic and
business organizations, think tanks and universities. The
importance of our bilateral relationship has also ensured
that my remarks have received wide dissemination in the
Canadian media.

The Centrality of Public Diplomacy
----------------------------------

9. Obviously, our public diplomacy efforts here and
elsewhere need to include more than the Ambassador. We were
fortunate to have a steady stream of visitors from the
Executive Branch, including the President, who each time
helped advance our agenda and put forward the face of the
U.S. as partner and friend. Our few public diplomacy
program dollars consistently prove their worth as Canadians
who ought to know us better are predictable in their
surprise at our dynamism, our diversity, and our friendship.
Yes, even in Canada, exchanges, speaker and visitor programs
are invaluable, especially with the uniformly positive
reception for our outreach efforts in diaspora communities
of Haitians, Middle Easterners, and South Asians.

10. Through all of this, I do not accept the notion that
America and Canada are growing apart. But I do believe that
our economic ties and mutual prosperity could be greater,
our security enhanced, and Canada could take a more active
part in solving global problems, if we focused more
consistently on tending this relationship. Following are my
thoughts on where we need to engage Canada in the coming
years, and what I have learned about how best to do so.

A Checklist of Opportunities for Enhanced Bilateral
Engagement
--------------------------------------------- ---------------
--

11. There are a number of excellent opportunities to better
engage the Canadian government on global issues, economics,
and security in the coming years:

-- First, Canada is searching for a greater role to play in
the world and might be willing to commit more resources and
possibly even troops to the right missions, or might be
willing to lead certain international processes. There is
general embarrassment here over the slippage in Canada's
international position, and many Canadians would accept a
more assertive. We should quietly urge, and openly support
Canada to fully take stewardship of a hemispheric or
international problem such as Haiti.

-- Second, in the short-term we should continue to increase
our law enforcement and border engagement. We have achieved
substantial coordination with Canada in information sharing
and law enforcement liaison but need to continue to develop
our programs and increase personnel to ensure a seamless
flow of information and close operational coordination. We
also need to continue to develop the physical infrastructure
on the border to allow for faster and more secure movement
of goods and people. Specifically, we want to support the
new DHS staffing for the Container Security Initiative, but
find ourselves looking at reducing support staff at the same
time.

-- Third, over the long-term we should continue to pursue a
new framework for economic and security integration with
Canada and where possible with Mexico which will help solve
the two largest problems of border delays and business
costs. A package of policies that includes enhanced border
infrastructure (physical and technical), improved economic
productivity, and shared security measures would strengthen
security while expanding trade. If such a partnership is to
succeed, we need to see it as a source of real change in a
long-term, strategic framework, and not shy away from
addressing issues that may require legislative changes.

-- Fourth, we need more visitors. I have been surprised by
how little interest there is in Canada by the U.S. Congress.
This is unfortunate. We have excellent Executive Branch
Agency-to-Agency ties and strong State-Provincial contacts,
but the crucial middle link between the Congress and
Parliament is largely missing. It would help us on a number
of levels if we could increase the volume of U.S. Senators
and Representatives who are knowledgeable about Canada based
on their travel here. It would also help us immensely to
have more visits and exchanges on the crucial issue of
energy, which has similarly been shortchanged.

-- Fifth, we need to guard against the narrow protectionist
tendencies that are clouding this very beneficial trade
relationship. Allowing narrow interests in the U.S. to
dominate certain markets and issues, e.g. softwood lumber,
increases the cost of products to American consumers and
harms the larger economic relationship while also making it
more difficult for Canadian leaders to deliver on political
issues of concern to us. Canada wants to work with us to
solve trade disputes, but the legalistic path we have
pursued over the past several years has eroded Canadian
faith in NAFTA, and that erosion may have long-term costs
for us. We should explore ways to focus trade remedy
actions in a manner which yields resolution, whether we like
it or not.

The Fight for Resources
-----------------------

12. Protecting the 5,000 miles of American borders that we
share with Canada is Mission Canada's highest priority.
About 70 percent of our personnel resources are focused on
law enforcement and border security. Yet the financial
resources provided to us are clearly not commensurate with
the importance and needs of the goals we have outlined in
our Mission Performance Plan. As I depart Canada I leave
behind a major funding problem that threatens to unravel
much of the fine work we have accomplished since 9/11. Our
State Program funding target is equal to the target we had
two years ago even though the US dollar has depreciated
almost 30 percent. We have enacted extreme travel
restrictions, a hiring freeze and have squeezed savings out
of every aspect of our operations. Yet we are faced with
the strong likelihood of layoffs unless our funding level is
significantly increased.

To Watch For
------------

13. I have found that one other role of an Ambassador is to
sound an early warning to Washington on problems ahead. In
a relationship so large and integrated, there is a certain
sense of permanence to irritants. I remember when I first
did my briefings for Congressional testimony, these items
included Pacific salmon, PEI potatoes and acid rain. Now,
although the specific issues have changed, there is also a
new feature: time. The time it has been taking to attend
to these irritants seems to have been increasing. Neither
side has total wisdom in these disputes, but our broader
national interests have fallen victim to the concerns of an
isolated, small group seeking specific protection.

14. No better example of this exists than softwood lumber,
but there are also a couple of others on the horizon: BSE,
Devil's Lake. Their cost to our overall bilateral
relationship outweighs their potential and often narrow
benefit. Over time, these relatively minor irritants
fester, undercutting public support and undermining the
ability of political leadership to support our policies. We
need to recommit to solve disputes and not allow them to
drag on with no hope of resolution.

Closing
-------

15. It has been an honor and privilege to serve my country
these past four years. I have had but one consistent
message for people all over Canada which is that the United
States is a force for good around the world. I leave with
this unshakable belief.

© Scoop Media