Republican presidential candidates, from left, Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul participate in a Republican presidential candidates debate in Charleston, S.C., on Jan. 19, 2012.
Canada's leaders have often wished our country was better known and more topical in the American political scene. For those grappling with issues like softwood lumber, border regulations or other trade irritants, the job of Canada's diplomats has always been made more difficult by the fact that few Americans know the basics about this unprecedented two-way economic relationship.
On Saturday night, Canada found itself virtually at centre stage in the bruising U.S. presidential election campaign.
The profile of the Keystone XL pipeline has been rising for months now, but when Newt Gingrich took the stage after winning the South Carolina Republican primary, he made it clear that if he is the nominee, America's energy relationship with Canada will be a regular theme of his campaign to defeat Barack Obama.
Mr. Gingrich's comments were remarkable in several respects. He spoke with ease and blunt efficiency. He is clearly starting to hit a stride, while others are dropping out, and front-runner Mitt Romney has sprung a leak. His message may well resonate beyond the Republican base, as he is drawing on the deep frustrations that many Americans have about the health of their economy, America's uncertain place in the world, and the sense that Washington D.C. is a dysfunctional mess.
He hammered Mr. Obama's Keystone decision, saying a Gingrich administration would welcome the pipeline, and the energy security and jobs for Americans that would result, while Mr. Obama, in the thrall of "extremist left-wing friends in San Francisco," was forcing a strategic marriage between Canada and China. He said U.S. energy policy should ensure that "no American President bows to a Saudi king."
Whether or not you agree with the arguments that Mr. Gingrich was making, like or dislike his politics, or think he would be a good president, he was landing very hard rhetorical punches to the President's solar plexus. The sort that Mr. Obama felled John McCain with only a few years ago.
Mr. Gingrich is a candidate that knows how to own a microphone and win a crowd. But he is also a candidate with flaws and a tendency to self-wound. His new momentum could easily evaporate, but for the moment it stems from three things. He's hung in, after the beating his campaign took in the early days, including from his own campaign staff as they resigned en masse. He's fearless and thus a totally unpredictable debater: Viewers watch him and know that he will be fresh and raw, not careful and scripted. Finally, Mitt Romney's awkward revelation about his income and taxes is the latest in a series of reasons Republicans are finding to shy away from the former governor.
The last piece to fall into place for Mr. Gingrich came courtesy of CNN's normally solid John King. Mr. King tossed Mr. Gingrich a hanging curve in last week's debate, opening the evening by asking the former speaker whether he wanted to answer an allegation by his ex-wife to the effect that Mr. Gingrich had asked her to go along with the idea of an open marriage. To the standing cheers of the crowd, Mr. Gingrich owned the stage for several minutes as he repeatedly hammered Mr. King, and the media in general, for a fascination with rumour and trivia.
The Republican race is now entering a new and close to final stage. However it turns out, it's a fair bet that Canada will be a more prominent topic than during any previous presidential campaign. And if Mr. Gingrich has his way, America's position on Canadian oil will be one of the defining elements of the battle between Republicans and Democrats.
Bruce Anderson