US embassy cable - 03OTTAWA1284

C O N F I D E N T I A L OTTAWA 001284 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/06/2013 
TAGS: MARR, PREL, PARM, CA, Missile Defense 
SUBJECT: CANADIAN CABINET DISCUSSES MISSILE DEFENSE 
 
REF: (A) OTTAWA 1123 (B) OTTAWA 492 AND PREVIOUS 
 
Classified By: Political Minister Counselor Brian Flora, 
Reasons 1.5 (b) and (d) 
 
1. (C) The Canadian Cabinet discussed missile defense 
cooperation with the U.S. in its May 6 meeting, but reached 
no conclusion and will continue discussions on May 13. 
Foreign Minister Graham and Defense Minister McCallum briefed 
Cabinet and encouraged a decision to engage in missile 
defense negotations with the U.S.  Deputy Prime Minister 
Manley told the Ambassador after the meeting that a consensus 
seems to be forming in favor of missile defense negotiations, 
and that some Cabinet officials whom he expected to be 
opposed were grudgingly supportive.  He also noted that 
Heritage Minister Sheila Copps, who is publicly opposed to 
Canadian participation in missile defense, did not attend the 
meeting. 
 
2. (C) Foreign Affairs sources told us that the lack of a 
Cabinet decision did not indicate a change in course.  Given 
"differing views" and other topics on the Cabinet agenda, 
there simply was not enough time to hear from all Cabinet 
members who wanted to speak on missile defense.  They 
cautioned that there will be intense debate in the days 
ahead, including at the Liberal MPs' weekly caucus meeting on 
May 7.  But they expected Cabinet to approve a negotiating 
mandate on May 13, and said that senior Canadian officials 
(probably Foreign Affairs Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) Jim 
Wright and Defense ADM Ken Calder) would want to visit 
Washington in the following days for preliminary discussions. 
 
 
3. (C) Up until now, the GoC has carefully avoided taking a 
position on missile defense.  Chretien made his first 
positive public comments on May 5, telling Commons that 
"there has been an evolution in this file" with Russia and 
China toning down their opposition, and saying that the GoC 
is reconsidering the program.  A few Liberal and opposition 
MPs immediately responded, criticizing missile defense as 
leading to a new arms race.  The chairman of the Foreign 
Affairs Committee recalled that the Committee had recommended 
against participation as recently as December. 
 
4. (C) Missile defense has also become an issue in the race 
to succeed Chretien, which will be decided at the Liberal 
Party leadership convention in November.  Last week, 
leadership frontrunner Paul Martin announced his support for 
missile defense cooperation with the U.S., which prompted 
Heritage Minister Copps, another leadership candidate, to 
reiterate her opposition.  Deputy Prime Minister Manley, the 
third Liberal leadership contender, is known to support 
Canadian participation in missile defense but has not yet 
gone public. 
 
5. (C) COMMENT: Graham and McCallum agreed in October that it 
made sense for Canada to participate in North American 
missile defense, but this proposed policy shift has been 
closely held until now (reftels).  Martin's endorsement 
lessens opposition within caucus, as most Liberal MPs want to 
stay onside with him.  There will be much criticism in coming 
days by opposition MPs and journalists, who charge that the 
Government's shift is an attempt to curry favor with the U.S. 
after the fallout over Iraq.  But with Chretien apparently on 
board, we expect to finally get a decision from Cabinet on 
May 13 to proceed with negotiations. 
CELLUCCI