Washington's ambassador to Canada has delivered the sternest public rebuke by a U.S. representative since the Trudeau era, saying Americans are upset at Canada's refusal to join the war in Iraq and hinting there could be economic fallout.
At a breakfast speech yesterday to the Economic Club of Toronto, U.S. Ambassador Paul Cellucci said "there is a lot of disappointment in Washington and a lot of people are upset" about Canada's refusal to join the United States in its efforts to depose Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
"There is no security threat to Canada that the United States would not be ready, willing and able to help with," the ambassador told the Bay Street audience.
"There would be no debate. There would be no hesitation. We would be there for Canada, part of our family, and that is why so many in the United States are disappointed and upset that Canada is not fully supporting us now."
Related Articles
In Ottawa, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien retorted that Canada is a "sovereign independent country" that makes its own decisions and that there is unhappiness all around over the war in Iraq.
"We, too, are disappointed" that the United States went to war in Iraq without the approval of the United Nations, Mr. Chrétien said.
Strong public criticism of Canada from a U.S. ambassador is extremely rare. Ambassador Paul Robinson created controversy in 1982 when he accused Canada of spending too much on social services.
But experts on Canada-U.S. relations say Mr. Cellucci's comments are more comparable to remarks from U.S. ambassador William Porter, who caused a stir and prompted a public rebuke from prime minister Pierre Trudeau in 1975 when he criticized a host of Canadian policies, including Saskatchewan's plans to nationalize the potash industry. The comments were made just eight months after the end of the Vietnam War, which Canada opposed.
Mr. Chrétien and U.S. President George W. Bush, whose personal relationship has never been close, were to meet in Ottawa in May, but Mr. Cellucci said that bilateral summit — one that might have helped smooth the rough waters — has become somewhat tentative.
"Obviously [Mr. Bush is] now a wartime president. We'll have to see how things are going with the war," the ambassador said.
Mr. Cellucci said the relationship between the two countries will endure in the long term, but "there may be short-term strains here."
Asked what those strains would be, Mr. Cellucci replied, "You'll have to wait and see." But he cryptically added it is his government's position that "security will trump trade," implying possible implications for cross-border traffic.
Liberal political strategists say they do not expect serious consequences from this tiff with Washington.
"Even if we had conscripted 50,000 troops and sent them to fight in Iraq we would not be one bit further ahead on the softwood lumber file," a senior Liberal official said, referring to one of the longest-running trade disputes between Canada and the United States. "And we would not be one bit further behind either."
Despite the fears of some Canadian business people, the U.S. government is not going to retaliate economically against Canada, the official predicted.
"If we were out there alone we might have to worry," but Mexico and many other important trading partners in Europe and elsewhere also objected to the way the United States went to war, the official said.
The U.S. State Department was unable to say yesterday whether the ambassador's message was being delivered in other countries such as Mexico that have also opted against joining the war or whether Canada had been singled out for censure.
One Canadian political scientist said he could not remember the Americans taking Canada to task in such a fashion. "Neither did Canada rebuke the United States in World War II when Canada was involved and the United States wasn't," said Gerald Hill of the University of British Columbia, an expert on Canada-U.S. political relations. "This is part of an orchestrated campaign of intimidation coming straight out of the White House."
Mr. Cellucci took great pains to preface his admonition with a discussion of the close ties that have marked the relationship between Canada and the United States. On many issues, including the free flow of border traffic, that relationship must remain strong, he said.
But he made it clear that the United States considers Saddam Hussein a direct threat to the American people and said there is much hurt south of the border that Canadians have not taken up arms against what he considered a potential aggressor.
"The war in Iraq, we believe, is a necessary step in the global war on terrorists. We believe ... that this combination of a rogue state that possesses weapons of mass destruction and has known ties to terrorist organizations is a great threat to the people of the United States and to other countries around the world."
After his speech, Mr. Cellucci said recent displays of anti-Americanism had not helped the Canada-U.S. relationship. A reference to American "bastards" by Liberal MP Carolyn Parrish, the booing of the U.S. national anthem at a hockey game in Montreal and a suggestion by Natural Resources Minister Herb Dhaliwal that Mr. Bush is a failed statesman have all received coverage south of the border.
"When [Alberta Premier Ralph] Klein issues strong support for the United States, the Canadian government comes down hard on him. When Mr. Dhaliwal makes totally inappropriate remarks about the President of the United States, they kind of ignore it," Mr. Cellucci said.
He acknowledged that Canada, while staying out of the war, is providing the United States with some of its most important support in the war on terrorism.
With reports from Tara Perkins in Toronto and Jeff Sallot in Ottawa
