Good article, sums up everything we've been saying.
Fri, February 25, 2005
Little time for dithering ally
By Greg WESTON
IF AVERAGE Americans had been following Paul Martin's stand on U.S. missile defence, they would surely be relieved by yesterday's announcement that Canada will not be part of it. An Armageddon warhead incoming at 4 km per second is no time to be sharing command and control of North American air defence with a dithering prime minister.
But one thing worse than an ally who can't make decisions is an ally who makes them for all the wrong reasons.
Martin's announcement had nothing to do with missiles or defence or even the U.S. It was a pre-emptive strike to head off an embarrassing uprising with his own Liberal ranks.
Ten days from now, Liberals from across the country are gathering here in Ottawa for their first policy convention since the last election, and likely the only such Grit conflab before the next call to the polls.
The hottest item on the agenda was Canada's participation in U.S. missile defence, an issue that was guaranteed to garner a mass thumbs-down from the Grit grassroots.
At the same time, public opinion polls in the Liberal heartland of Quebec do not favour Canada's joining George Bush's missile defence program.
If Martin were a stronger leader, he might have stared down his opponents within his party and elsewhere.
Instead, the PM has opted for doing what seems popular, not what is right, justifying his actions with excuses that are pure bunk.
"Ballistic missile defence is not where we will concentrate our efforts," Martin told reporters after a cabinet meeting yesterday.
Instead, the prime minister said, Canada would focus "both alone and with our neighbours on (other) defence priorities" such as re-equipping the military and beefing up border security.
All of which might make good sense, except for one small point.
So far, the Americans haven't asked Canada to contribute "efforts" or anything else to the missile defence program -- not money, not technology, not manpower, not missile sites -- nothing that would detract from the Martin government's new-found military priorities.
Canada's only commitment to missile defence so far was an exchange of diplomatic letters with the U.S. just after Martin's election last year.
The two countries agreed to amend their bilateral NORAD agreement under which Canada and the U.S. have shared security of North American air defence for over 40 years. The change extended the functions of NORAD to the new U.S. ballistic missile defence command.
Yesterday, less than 60 seconds after Martin said Canada "will not take part in the proposed ballistic missile system," he confirmed Canada will honour the NORAD deal.
"Canada remains steadfast in its support of NORAD which is essential to continental security and our national sovereignty.
"And that's why we agreed last summer to enhance our longstanding commitment to track missiles through NORAD. We stand by that commitment."
So much gobbledygook from one prime minister on an issue so politically important to the Bush administration it is guaranteed not to sit well in Washington.
But nothing has suffered more collateral damage in the past 24 hours than Paul Martin's own credibility.
For the past two years, the prime minister has been arguing that whatever physical role Canada might -- or might not -- decide to play in missile defence, it is better to be "at the table" with the Americans than locked out of the process altogether.
"I think our sovereignty depends on our being at the table when discussions are taking place about the defence of North America," Martin said not 18 months ago.
"I don't think that for us to live in some silo away from that would make any sense."
And finally, in another interview: "My position is that I don't want the Americans coming up here defending us."
The feeling today is probably mutual.
