Disclaimer: This site has been first put up 15 years ago. Since then I would probably do a couple things differently, but because I've noticed this site had been linked from news outlets, PhD theses and peer rewieved papers and because I really hate the concept of "digital dark age" I've decided to put it back up. There's no chance it can produce any harm now.
| Identifier: | 05OTTAWA3090 |
|---|---|
| Wikileaks: | View 05OTTAWA3090 at Wikileaks.org |
| Origin: | Embassy Ottawa |
| Created: | 2005-10-14 20:55:00 |
| Classification: | CONFIDENTIAL//NOFORN |
| Tags: | CA ENRG ETRD ETTC PGOV PREL SCRS |
| Redacted: | This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks. |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available. 142055Z Oct 05
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 OTTAWA 003090 SIPDIS NOFORN FOR THE SECRETARY FROM AMBASSADOR WILKINS E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/13/2015 TAGS: CA, ENRG, ETRD, ETTC, PGOV, PREL, SCRS SUBJECT: A PARTNER IN TRANSFORMATION - YOUR VISIT TO CANADA, OCTOBER 24-25, 2005 Classified By: AMBASSADOR DAVID H. WILKINS, REASON 1.4 (B) AND (D). WHAT UNITES US IS GREATER THAN WHAT DIVIDES US --------------------------------------------- - 1. (SBU) As you prepare to visit Ottawa, I want to extend a warm welcome and reaffirm this Mission's strong commitment to making your trip a success. I have been on the ground in Canada for just under four months and have traveled to all but one of the country,s ten provinces and three territories. I have met with hundreds of Canadian officials, businesspeople, and citizens, and have gained a fairly good sense for what Canadians are thinking. Your visit will be an excellent opportunity to showcase one of history,s most unique cross-border partnerships, and to convey the key theme that what unites us is greater than what divides us. A PARTNER IN TRANSFORMATION . . . --------------------------------- 2. (C/NF) I strongly believe that Canada can be an active and reliable partner as we seek to transform societies around the globe, but only if we respond to the bilateral irritants that have become so politicized here. Should we bother to do so? Is Canada worth the effort? I believe it is. Unlike several years ago, where we opposed each other on a series of key international problems (e.g. de-mining, the ICC, and disarmament), on the key issues today we are united. This means that there are now many areas where Canada,s neutral posture, resources, and experience in nation-building and good governance are making a difference, and Canada could make an even greater difference if it were empowered and encouraged to do so. 3. (C/NF) In Haiti, Canada has been consistently engaged with police development and the political process for over a decade and is committed to staying the course in the future; in Sudan, there is a fair amount of public support for adding to a recent up-tick in involvement in helping bring the conflict to a successful conclusion; in Iraq, Canada,s unique experience with resource-lopsided federalism and election monitoring allowed it to play a positive role in the political process and constitution writing; on Avian Flu Canada has taken a proactive leadership role; and in Afghanistan Canada has just emplaced a PRT in Kandahar and is preparing to move a sizable unit into the theatre in the summer. Canada wants to play a larger role in the world and should continue to respond positively to our gestures that it do so, while partnering with us in a number of areas. . . .AFTER ATTENTION TO SOFTWOOD AND WHTI ----------------------------------------- 4. (C/NF) But for Canadian officials to truly partner with us, they will need to show progress on some of the issues that are poisoning the bilateral relationship. Canadians are concerned that our total commitment to the war on terror has distracted us from some of the day-to-day issues that concern them, currently softwood lumber and the WHTI. The USTR announcement that we would not implement a NAFTA ruling on softwood, coupled with our call to settle the dispute through negotiations, unleashed a firestorm of indignation in government and press circles. The uproar has not died down; many traditional supporters of North American integration, such as the Council of Chief Executives, have sounded the alarm over our policy in the dispute. Some of this is political theatre, but for many opinion leaders, it plays to historic views that Canada is being bullied by a larger trading partner. Their frustration over softwood and their inability to get our attention causes them to ratchet up the rhetoric quickly, playing their energy card again, after using it with BSE and Devils Lake. They uniformly cite our failure to comply with the rule of law. 5. (C/NF) The Canadians have shaped this issue as one no longer about the trade specifics of softwood lumber but rather about being treated fairly. The legal issues are obscure, and much of the Canadian industry reportedly would like to come back to the table, but Canadians see our position in broad and symbolic terms as a sign of lack of U.S. respect for NAFTA and for Canada. Prime Minister Martin,s speech in New York last week accusing us of bad faith was followed by an orchestrated ministerial visit to China in quest of new energy markets -- more political theater, but in tune with public sentiment. Deliberately diverting energy supplies away from the U.S. would flout NAFTA commitments and have substantial economic costs for Canadian energy producers, but there are historical precedents. Public perceptions fed by the GOC that NAFTA is becoming a dead letter, however unjustified, may embolden energy protectionists as key domestic industries (including forestry) and consumers suffer from rising energy prices. 6. (C/NF) The softwood issue will not only come up during your visit; it will set the stage for discussion of all other political and economic issues. I recommend addressing it head-on by reiterating U.S. commitment to NAFTA and our willingness to resolve this as quickly as possible. At a minimum, Canadian officials want a sign of good faith, and the assurance that the issue has high-level attention in the U.S. government. 7. (C/NF) Wherever I travel, the issue that quickly follows softwood as the key bilateral concern for Canadians, is the upcoming requirement for Americans and Canadians to possess a passport or other travel document in order to cross the border. Canadians believe this proposal, scheduled to be implemented in January 2008 for ground travelers, will curtail the level of cross-border travel and in the process harm the Canadian economy. While probably overstated, the figures that are being bandied about are of losses in the area of hundreds of millions of dollars per year for Canadian businesses, and the demise of the unified border-town culture. The key point in this is simply to emphasize that the precise document to be used for cross-border travel remains to be developed, and to stress that we will do so with full input from stakeholders on both sides of the border. When the system it implemented, it will probably actually improve cross-border travel, by allowing for more efficient border crossings with the standardization of documents. IN MINORITY GOVERNMENT -- IT,S ABOUT SURVIVAL --------------------------------------------- 8. (C/NF) The primacy of short-term politics to everything that is happening here cannot be overestimated. The Liberal government of Paul Martin is on the ropes, and it will do whatever is necessary to retain power. By the narrowest of margins, PM Martin was able to hold off a confidence vote this past May, but he did agree to hold an election some time early in 2006 (probably April). He is focused almost exclusively on winning a clear majority in this upcoming election, a tough proposition given current poll results. 9. (C/NF) All this has meant that, on top of historic Canadian reticence about being seen as "too close" to the U.S., this government is hypersensitive to the turbulent political winds with regards to their posture towards us on each and every issue. They dithered on missile defense cooperation for a year and then allowed the left to define the debate before they gave in to domestic pressure. They quickly embraced shrill rhetoric on disputes such as BSE, Devil,s Lake, homicide deaths in Toronto and softwood lumber, often merely to appear to be standing up to their powerful southern neighbor. While no Canadian leader can, in the current environment, ignore issues such as softwood, you should make the point that we believe the level of rhetoric and the elevation of some issues that could have remained at the bureaucratic level, to high-level bilateral irritants, is not helpful. Our message to Canadian officials and opinion leaders should be that we hope we can work together to accentuate the positive in the relationship and not let the small number of negatives define our association for our citizens. ECONOMIC TRENDS IN CANADA,S FAVOR --------------------------------- 10. (C/NF) In addition to the politics of minority government, there are economic trends that are affecting the bilateral relationship. As an energy exporter with immense nontraditional reserves in the Alberta oil sands, Canada enjoys a healthy and rising trade surplus with the United States, overwhelmingly its largest partner. Canada,s fiscal picture is also enviable, with persistent surpluses and net debt less than 40% of GDP. Rising energy prices, however, have created winners and losers among Canadian provinces and economic sectors, stressing the automotive industry (a key exporter) and other major industries such as forestry. Rising home heating prices are likely to become a hot political issue as we head into winter. The biggest driver of Canadian economic growth, of course, is the U.S. economy; Canadian policymakers are therefore worried about any signs of economic downturn in the U.S. as well as the issue of global imbalances and increased competition with China in the U.S. market. Aside from the $7 billion softwood dispute, our trade relationship is close and productive; our major trade concern is Canada,s delay at strengthening intellectual property rules that are still weaker than in most developed countries. ENVIRONMENTAL AGENDA -------------------- 11. (C/NF) Two environmental issues which Canadians continue to bring up are drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and climate change. PM Martin recently complained that exploiting the oil and gas resources in ANWR is not worth the risk of permanent environmental damage, failing to acknowledge that the total development footprint in the 19 million acre refuge would be less than 2000 acres. PM Martin brought this up with the President during his phone call on October 14. 12. (C/NF) I would also recommend if you have an opportunity to raise our record and our cooperation with Canada on climate change, it could go a long way to set the stage for a successful 11th Conference of Parties (COP-11) in Montreal later this year. Canadians are beginning to recognize that the President,s approach -- emphasizing concrete initiatives and research in collaboration with other countries -- is producing results. They would benefit in hearing this directly from you. 13. (SBU) I again reiterate our, and our Canadian host,s, enthusiasm for your visit. You will find the Canadians engaging and friendly and the Embassy team first-rate. We see this visit as a tremendous opportunity to advance the bilateral relationship and find new opportunities to advance our agenda of transformation throughout the world. Visit Canada's Classified Web Site at http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/ottawa WILKINS
Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04