News

Prime Minister Jean Chrétien toughened his antiwar message Tuesday, saying the planned U.S.-led invasion of Iraq is unjustified, even as the Bush administration vented its displeasure at its northern neighbour.

In the House of Commons, Mr. Chrétien would not say whether the Liberal government believes an invasion would violate international law, but he did say such an attack is unjustified.

"I have said clearly that it is not justified," Mr. Chrétien said. "If it was justified and approved in a resolution by the Security Council, we would have said yes. When we said no, it was because we believe the case had not been made, that they had not proven the need for a war on Iraq at the moment."

Mr. Chrétien added that it might have taken only a few more weeks to obtain full co-operation on disarmament from Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

"We are of the view that some more weeks would have achieved the goal. We think that it is better not to have war as the first instance but as the last instance," he said, adding that he respects the authority of President George W. Bush to act in defence of the American people.

Canada's isolation from the U.S. war effort was brought into further focus as the State Department issued a list of 30 nations that are part of the coalition openly supporting military action. Ottawa opted not to be included on the list, in line with its stand that the warships and troops it has in the Persian Gulf are there to fight the war against terrorism, not Iraq.

In Washington, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the Canadian decision not to participate in the war is disappointing.

"We're disappointed that some of our closest allies, including Canada, do not agree on the urgent need for action," Mr. Boucher said. He did, however, note Canada's continuing role in the broader war on terrorism.

Mr. Boucher hinted there might be consequences for the Canada-U.S. relationship, already fraught with trade disputes, uncertainty over security along the world's longest undefended border and the decidedly cool relations between Mr. Chrétien and Mr. Bush.

"I don't know how to predict any particular effect," Mr. Boucher said, adding, "Whether it changes attitudes, the one to the other, I don't know.

Mr. Bush is scheduled to visit Ottawa on May 5, and a senior official in the Prime Minister's Office said there has been no indication of any change in plans.

Amid the growing storm in bilateral relations, Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham warned in a cabinet meeting that the Liberal government must ensure that its antiwar message is not perceived as being anti-U.S., senior sources said.

"He raised some concerns about making sure that people understand this position is not meant to be anti-American," said one cabinet minister, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The minister added that Mr. Chrétien allowed little debate on the issue.

Mr. Graham's admonition came after back-bench Liberal MPs slammed Mr. Bush as a warmongering, religious zealot.

In the U.S. Congress, where Canada is already regarded by many as a haven for terrorists and a irksome source of illegal drugs, a new dimension may be added — that of an unreliable ally.

Canadian Alliance Leader Stephen Harper said the Canadian position is full of contradictions and bound to cause a backlash south of the border.

"The Prime Minister's actions are gutless — these guys are just reading the polls," he said. "We have historically as a country stood beside our best friends and allies whenever they've been together — that's where we should be now."

Mr. Harper added, "I don't know what the ramifications are but I know they won't be good."

Deputy Prime Minister John Manley, the point man on Canada-U.S. relations, said he is certain that there will be no negative fallout from the Canadian decision.

Mr. Manley, who is scheduled to meet with U.S. Homeland Secretary Tom Ridge in two weeks, spoke to his American counterpart Tuesday and said both sides have a commitment to working together to keep the border open and trade flowing.

"It was acknowledged that Canada's position is consistent with what we've been saying all along, that it's based on principle, that it has not been unduly critical of the decisions taken by the United States," Mr. Manley said.

He added: "My gosh, we're a sovereign country. We have to be able to take a position on issues that are important that may be different from the United States. Otherwise we may as well just sign on as the 51st state."

With a report from Steven Chase in Ottawa