US embassy cable - 03OTTAWA2473

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 OTTAWA 002473 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR WHA/CAN, WHA/PDA 
WHITE HOUSE PASS NSC/WEUROPE, NSC/WHA 
 
E.O. 12958:  N/A 
TAGS: KPAO, KMDR, OIIP, OPRC, CA, TFUS01, TFUS02, TFUS03 
SUBJECT:  MEDIA REACTION: IRAQ; WTO; AFRICA; U.S. 
POLITICS 
 
IRAQ 
1.   "Leaving Iraq would be unparalleled disaster" 
Columnist David Warren reflected in the nationalist 
Ottawa Citizen (8/27): "...[T]he situation [in Iraq] 
continues to improve. It was never going to be a rose 
garden, but it is clear to impartial observers within 
the country that Iraqis themselves are co-operating - 
the overwhelming majority within each of its religious 
and ethnic groups, including even the Sunnis, co- 
operating with each other and with the U.S. military to 
hunt down Baathists and insurgents, and rebuild the 
country both physically and institutionally, even 
through the baking summer heat. It is the most 
promising event in post-colonial Arab history. Yet it 
could all be overthrown tomorrow if the U.S. decides it 
cannot stay the course. Terrorism achieves its results 
by drama.... [T]he problem, from the political view, is 
that while the U.S. soldiers may be risking their lives 
for the good of Iraq, what they are doing for the folks 
back home is much less obvious. It is very real - for a 
functioning, non-totalitarian Iraq will make a huge 
difference in the fate of nations - but this requires 
some explanation. Back home in the U.S., people want to 
know how they are benefiting, by 
putting the lives of 'our boys' on the line.... The 
American people have grown tired of being in Iraq, and 
want to move on. Their attention is refocusing on 
domestic threats, and the Democrats are making hay with 
the notion that progress against the enemy abroad is 
made at the cost of progress at home. This is a lie, 
but it is a good one.... The question on my 
mind is thus, will the Americans funk out? And the only 
thing I can say for sure is that if they do, it will be 
an unparalleled disaster. For 9/11 itself was the 
payback for the last U.S. funk-out from its 
responsibilities as a superpower." 
 
WTO 
2.   "WTO: the rich get more" 
Columnist Paul Knox commented in the leading Globe and 
Mail (8/27): "...[I]f globalization is a win-win no- 
brainer, why are international trade negotiations in 
such a mess? There's continued pessimism about the 
chances of a comprehensive free-trade-area-of-the- 
Americas deal clicking into place on schedule at the 
beginning of 2005. That's also the deadline for 
finishing the Doha Round of negotiations under the 
World Trade Organization, and Doha isn't shaping up as 
a slam dunk either. Sharp splits among rich and poor 
countries, and those in between, will be exposed next 
month at a key meeting of WTO ministers in Cancun, 
Mexico.... Social activists have worked hard the 
past few years to challenge the notion that globally 
integrated markets will necessarily bring prosperity to 
the poor. Maybe they should relax. No one is 
working harder to discredit globalization than the 
representatives of rich countries at the WTO. When you 
cut through the verbiage, the message from the First 
World is this: globalization when it works for us; self- 
interest when it doesn't." 
 
AFRICA 
3.   "The result in Rwanda" 
The leading Globe and Mail opined (8/28): "...Mr. 
Kagame now begins a new seven-year mandate. Helped by 
large amounts of Western aid, he has made the economy 
grow and promoted reconciliation at the community 
level. He has the chance to lead the survivors of 
appalling atrocities toward a genuinely democratic, 
prosperous and harmonious future.... For their part, 
Western governments must move beyond genocide-related 
guilt and begin to measure Mr. Kagame by the standards 
they apply to others. They and he need look no further 
than Zimbabwe, a few borderlines to the south, to see 
what happens when power goes to a strongman's head. 
History will judge Mr. Kagame by his ability to ensure 
that the poison of ethnic hatred is not supplanted 
by the vices of one-man rule." 
 
U.S. POLITICS 
4.   "Howard Dean and the U.S. buzz" 
The leading Globe and Mail editorialized (8/28): "Is 
George W. Bush vulnerable in 2004? Until recently, the 
answer has been an unequivocal no.... But there are 
signs that may be changing.... Why the sudden buzz? For 
one thing, Dr. Dean is a ferocious and tireless 
campaigner. In the past five days he has made nine 
campaign stops in eight states. For another, his 
speeches pay scant attention to his Democratic rivals, 
focusing instead on attacking Mr. Bush and his 
policies.... Dr. Dean also appears to be tapping 
a growing vein of unease about the President's economic 
policies. He is a no-nonsense fiscal conservative, 
widely credited with balancing Vermont's 
books. He dismisses Mr. Bush's economic policies as 
'borrow and spend.'... Nor is Dr. Dean the only 
prospective Democratic candidate generating a buzz. 
General Wesley Clark, most recently CNN's top military 
analyst and formerly NATO's commanding general in 
Kosovo, has hinted that he may jump into the 
race. In addition to being a decorated Vietnam veteran, 
Gen. Clark is a Rhodes scholar and former lecturer in 
economics at West Point. Dr. Dean, no 
fool, has already named Gen. Clark as a potential 
running mate. Mr. Bush's second term is no longer a 
given." 
 
3.   "If only money grew on bushes" 
Columnist Marcus Gee wrote in the leading Globe and 
Mail (8/28): "...If Mr. Bush and the Republican- 
controlled Congress make the tax cut permanent, as 
they have promised, it will cost Washington a total of 
$1.5-trillion over the course of a decade. As if that 
were not enough, the White House also wants to start 
providing old people with subsidized medicines. The 
cost over 10 years: $400-billion.... Of course, it 
would be hard for Mr. Bush to change course now. He 
sees himself as a man of his word. When he says he 
will do something, whether defanging Iraq or cutting 
taxes, he does it. But real leaders know that a change 
of circumstances sometimes requires a change of course, 
however embarrassing. Instead of stubbornly sticking to 
an outdated and irresponsible fiscal plan, he should 
cancel or delay at least some of his tax cut. Americans 
would surely understand. As they must know, the only 
thing worse for the United States than a tax-and-spend 
liberal is a spend-and-don't-tax conservative." 
 
CELLUCCI