How others see us: Canada Day in London’s Trafalgar Square.LEFTERIS PITARAKIS/The Associated Press
According to former prime minister Jean Chrétien, Canada has lost international stature. Readers, print and digital, suggest that we are seen differently at home and abroad. Where the agreement stops is whether that's a good thing
I've been hearing my whole life how Canada is losing international stature. People in other countries do not really care what Canada thinks.
And that's perfectly fine, because why should they? Do Canadians spend a lot of time asking themselves, "Gosh, I wonder what Bulgaria's position on this matter is?" Of course not. Let's get over ourselves, for God's sake.
Rick Jones, Burlington, Ont.
.........
Canada has lost its soul, and respect around the world. We were once counted on for our intelligence and integrity. Now, we are not taken seriously and, for the most part, we are ignored. And that so many have either forgotten or never knew the difference saddens me deeply.
Janet Miller, Vancouver
.........
I'm a Canadian living in France and I agree that we've lost stature. Before, Canadians were happy to carry the Maple Leaf with them. Now, overseas, we hide!
Joseph Cardeira, Paris
.........
I agree we have lost stature, but what we have lost environmentally perhaps has been somewhat reversed by our economy. However, one cannot eat money.
Don Colby, Midland, Ont.
.........
The day Canada begins running its affairs with popularity being a goal, this country will begin the march to Third World status, and will succeed in a hurry.
David Waterhouse, Victoria
.........
Jean Chrétien is absolutely correct in his observation that Canada has lost some of its international stature. One major reason for this is that the Canadian government has adopted a less nuanced policy at the United Nations. In the eyes of the world, this has given us the appearance of being an but echo chamber for our good neighbour to the south. Canadian diplomats can and should play a more constructive role at the UN in addressing international disputes, but this will be possible only if our policies don't lock us into predetermined, predictable positions.
As to our not winning a seat on the Security Council, a hockey metaphor comes to mind. Just because you don't score a goal in the first period doesn't mean you take your team off the ice.
Earl Hansen, Vernon, B.C.
.........
Jean Chrétien did nothing to enhance Canada's reputation throughout the world (assuming, if you will, that befriending dictators and despots does not enhance a nation's reputation).
Since his departure, Canada once again stands proudly in the world as a defender of democracy, the rule of law, freedom of thought and expression and human rights.
C. Bryce Code, Calgary
.........
Canada used to be a respected middle power that could punch above its weight. No more. People around the world are scratching their heads and thinking, "What happened to Canada?"
David Boult, Stittsville, Ont.
.........
A lot of delusion is going on here. Canada never has been a major player on the international stage. Just doesn't have the clout.
Never did.
More than ever, Canada is hobbled by internal dissensions, by massive debt, declining manufacturing, provinces that are virtually bankrupt, a military without equipment, and by lobbyists/activists who wish to strip Canada of making use of its natural resources.
B. Andrew Wilson, Toronto
.........
People in other countries treat Canada as a joke, they question our environmental record, they ask why we blindly support anything Israel does, and why we continue to push dirty oil instead of greener policies. They also can't understand why we seem so determined to follow the U.S. in areas such as guns and social issues, and the truth is I don't know why, either.
Lynn Zimmerman, Cape Breton, N.S.
.........
Why are the musings of a highly partisan former prime minister concerning Canada's "lost stature" on the international stage considered front-page news? It would have been more newsworthy if Jean Chrétien had praised the foreign affairs record of the current government.
John Bannerman, Calgary
.........
I travelled a bit in the past few years; generally, Canadians are well received. Not because of our government but who we are as individuals. I do see that changing as well.
On a recent trip to Maui, it was the Canadian tourists who were the rudest. Not to me, but to the shopkeepers and folks on the street.
I think that we've been told we are sooo nice, for sooo long, that we are starting to think we're just sooo special.
John Horseman, Armstrong, B.C.
.........
Jean Chrétien says, "We don't have the image we used to have." He is right: There was a time when Canada was pictured as the kid who wanted to play on the team; thanks to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, we are now globally respected and sought after to lead the team.
Irwin Diamond, Toronto
.........
Suffice it to say that I believe Canada gained stature the day Jean Chrétien announced his resignation. Yes, we appreciated his refusing to participate in the invasion of Iraq – but then it is usually the Americans who, rightly or wrongly, often do the heavy lifting.
Gerald White, Mississauga
.........
Jean Chrétien is absolutely correct. The Harper government has gutted federal capability in the area of natural resources and environmental protection. Yet Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver is telling the Americans that our federal environmental protection programs are up to date. They're not fools.
William Logan, Cobourg, Ont.
.........................................................
MORE LETTERS
Pick a neighbour
If the people who bothered to hear NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair speak in Washington the other day did their homework, they would know that he favours big government and high taxation, is anti-business and, at least in Canada, seldom has a good word for the United States (Key Democrat Voices Doubts About Benefits Of Planned Pipeline to U.S. – March 15).
Is that the kind of neighbour they want on their northern border? They already have one to the south like that and it's called Cuba.
Jerry Amernic, Toronto
..........
Left spluttering
The spluttering by Tory ministers after Thomas Mulcair's Washington visit has left me spluttering! I listened to his speech: He was a credible statesman, enlightening his audience on many Canadian issues; he repeatedly said Keystone was a U.S. decision.
I am not an NDP supporter. But I am seventh-generation Canadian and my ancestors enjoyed a vigorous debate on national matters. Thanks to Mr. Mulcair's visit, others outside Canada hear that there are alternative visions and possibilities for Canada's future.
Carolyn Ferguson, Calgary
.........
Wordly things
Your article referencing Pope Francis using the subway as a cardinal suggests to me this is a case of Sic transit gloria mundi (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Man Of Contrasts – March 14).
Humility is a most attractive virtue, especially in a Pope.
Robert Soucie, Toronto
.........
They do 'get it'
I agree with Robert Swain (Language Lament – letters, March 15) that Quebec's language laws burden young people by restricting employment options. But unlike him, I think the people behind the policies do "get it." The idea is to create a linguistic Berlin Wall that forces young workers to remain in the province.
Whereas Saskatchewan reversed its population decline in recent years through innovation and economic development, Quebec politicians insist that children leave school with impaired job mobility.
Jeff Fairless, Kanata, Ont.
............................................................
ON TOPIC: Has the battle against fat gone too far?
Sarah Palin and New Yorkers don't often see eye to eye, but the former Republican candidate for vice-president channeled the frustration of many Big Gulp fans in the Big Apple this week when a state judge struck down Mayor Michael Bloomberg's attempt to restrict sales of sugary beverages. Only hours after Judge Milton Tingling called the ban "arbitrary and capricious," Ms. Palin took to Twitter to chirp: "Victory in NYC for liberty-loving soda drinkers. To politicians with too much time on their hands we say: Govt, stay out of my refrigerator!"
But after The Globe and Mail ran an editorial declaring the mayor's "battle against fat went too far," readers suggested that was a simplistic response to a complex problem. A few, apparently inspired by the graphic images adorning cigarette packages in some parts of the world, floated the idea of slapping a photo of a fat child on supersized servings, and re-naming the drinks. "Who's going to order an 84 oz. Big Fat Lazy Brat?" asked one reader. Said another: "Americans have an inalienable right to do stupid things. They certainly exercise that right each and every day."
Still, others agreed with the editorial (and Ms. Palin). "How dare people have the ability to buy something under their own free will," said one. "Not only was the law unenforceable, but it would have done nothing to fix the obesity issue," said another.
Some policymakers had hoped Mr. Bloomberg's ban might set up New York as a live case study that could prove the efficacy of such efforts. That, after all, is how policies often spread in the U.S., with one city or state enacting a law – say, health care coverage for all, or the legalization of gay marriage – and others sitting on the sidelines until it is proven out.
Mr. Bloomberg, a billionaire who rides the subway but is often dismissed as being out of touch with the common folk, has hit similar road bumps before. For years, he took flak for an anti-gun stance that is now gaining traction. And his insistence that restaurants post nutritional information about their meals was also derided as needlessly nannyish; now, it is held up as a model of good policy. Sure enough, after Monday's decision, he vowed to continue with his anti-soda campaign. "Any time you adopt a ground-breaking policy, special interests will sue," he said, standing in a diner whose owner endorsed the ban. "That's America."
By Simon Houpt, a media columnist with The Globe and Mail