Anger, or a Footnote?

If PM Martin continues to blunder, and finds himself out of office, the issues I’m about to deal with won’t amount to a thing. Even if he manages to win a landslide majority, it’s unlikely they will have a defining importance, and certainly no invasion and/or counter invasion plans from the 1920s and 1930s will have to be dusted off. However, it is in this latter case, that he wins even another minority, that these events may return to complicate an already strained relationship.

Not so long ago, US President Bush probably saw Paul Martin as a potential friend and working partner. After all, Jean Chretien had antagonized, frustrated and disappointed the Republican leadership in Washington. But after Martin arrived on the scene, he found himself in a position of having to defend and promote many of his predecessor’s foreign policy choices, if only as a way of preserving his leadership of the Liberal caucus. Just how far Martin has fallen out of favour in DC may be seen in recent US headlines, which explained Bush now sees Tory leader Stephen Harper as a potential new best friend.

But it has been over the past few weeks that Martin has escalated his attacks, prompting some to speculate that Martin himself has jumped on Carolyn Parrish’s anti-American bandwagon. This would not have made headlines, except for the fact that one person coming to that conclusion, and very publicly, was US Ambassador to Canada David Wilkins. Wilkins, who did not actually mention Martin’s name, hinted there could be reprisals, stating “It may be smart election-year politics to thump your chest and criticize your friend and your No. 1 trading partner constantly…But it is a slippery slope, and all of us should hope that it doesn't have a long-term impact on the relationship” [Wilkins’ remarks reported by CBC, 13 December 2005. Story posted at http://www.cbc.ca/story/canadavotes2006/national/2005/12/13/wilkins-051213.html]. Martin flatly rejected the charge, stressing, “I have not made the United States or any country a target in the campaign” [Cited in http://www.cbc.ca/story/canadavotes2006/national/2005/12/13/wilkins-051213.html].

US officials almost certainly understand that playing the Anti-American card sometimes benefits other national leaders, especially when an election is in play. Every one of Martin’s comments, ranging from those over the US position on Kyoto, trade, and the line announcing “I [Martin] will defend Canada,” should not have antagonized the Americans. Indeed, this prompted some to suggest Martin actually had prominent Republican friends, feeding him ammunition during the election campaign, which he in turn could use to whip up a following and secure another big Liberal win. But, seriously? Key Republicans, friends, involved in a conspiracy to reelect the Martin regime? There may be another answer.

Just days before Wilkins’ outburst, Martin, in Montreal, attended an international summit on climate change. Also there was former US President Bill Clinton, and the PM found himself faced with a photo op he couldn’t refuse. If Bono no longer wanted to make himself available, could Clinton’s superstardom benefit the Liberal leader? By 9 December 2005 both Clinton and Martin were in public explaining their very high profile meeting had no political purpose or impact whatsoever. “We’re here at an international conference that was organized ages ago and long before there was talk of any election…It actually never crossed my mind that when I heard that former president Clinton was coming here that I shouldn't meet with him,” said Martin [Quoted in “Paul Martin Denies Using Bill Clinton to Boost Election Fortunes,” CP, 9 December 2005. Story posted at http://news.yahoo.com/s/cpress/20051209/ca_pr_on_na/fedelxn_liberals]. But could it be that the meeting bothered Washington for reasons most observers do not suspect? Couldn’t it just be that some observers to the South might have been offended by what could be seen as a foray into US domestic politics? After all, isn’t it possible to argue that Bill Clinton hasn’t completely yet graduated to the rank of elder statesman, and that some may see that Clinton name still attached to presidential campaigns in the not too distant future?

Happy New Year.

Posted by Stan Markotich
Send comments to stanmarkotich@yahoo.com  ¶ 2:38 PM 0 comments

  What’s New?

The holiday break is about over, and the election campaign is restarting. So far, it seems most people have to keep reminding themselves voting will take place in just about three weeks. There has been, is, and will be nothing resembling Trudeaumania to inspire any segment of the public.

Even the latest Liberal scandal news seems somehow familiar, tired. While details may be new, any potential revelations are almost certain to be greeted with a mix of cynicism and assertions the developments ought not be regarded as unexpected. And so, with the latest on the scandal front, it is Finance Minister Ralph Goodale left between the chopping block and answering press questions that involve vague accusations of someone somewhere linked to the ministry involved somehow in alleged stock manipulation. Maria Babbage, in a piece titled ‘Mounties Launch Criminal Investigation Into Possible Income Trust Leak,’ explains “the whiff of scandal was pumped into the federal election campaign Wednesday [28 December 2005] with confirmation that the RCMP has begun a criminal investigation into the possibility of a leak from the Liberal government prior to an announcement on taxation of income trusts.” Federal police authorities acknowledge their “probe stems from opposition complaints following a surge in trading of income trusts units on the Toronto Stock Exchange in the hours immediately before a major government announcement on the popular investment vehicles” [See Babbage’s Canadian Press report, 29 December 2005. Story posted at http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=9fed81af-cb71-4dd4-be52-01a13544df32&k=86836]. Goodale, in what may be interpreted as a break with tradition and ministerial responsibility, so far says he will not resign while any investigation proceeds. He maintains there is not even a hint that anything could bring his conduct into question, and undoubtedly his action may serve to underscore Liberal contentions that there is no new scandal about unfold. Nothing new.

But what is new is the media position on both the latest possible scandal and the substance of the current Liberal campaign. Over the past weeks there has been a somewhat subtle shift. And just what’s causing this? Gone is the widespread lack of substantive criticism of the Liberals. Also gone is the media willingness to back off from explaining what the impact of any potential scandal may be. Some reporters and analysts are already surfacing to suggest the latest developments, particularly in the context of an election campaign, may unseat the Grits. Can all these changes serve to benefit the Tories or the New Democrats?

Another novelty is the emergence of foreign policy as an issue. In fact, that happened about ten days ago. Well, should that be a surprise? After all, Canada is about to play a role in Afghanistan and the geopolitics of that part of the world on a scale the people of this country haven’t experienced since 1885. So, foreign policy may belong on the agenda. But the substance the three federal leaders brought to public attention underscored how little time they may want to spend talking about the issue. No, there was no mention of Afghanistan. But it was revealed that US submarines had been discovered in Canada’s Arctic waterways. Jack Layton, Stephen Harper, and Paul Martin lined up to explain how they would defend against such incursions, how they would deploy resources for the protection of our Arctic sovereignty. With Afghanistan, trade with the US, Quebec’s real and possible roles in the international community, China, India, foreign aid, hostage crises, have our leaders finally found the most salient discussion point?

Posted by Stan Markotich
Send comments to stanmarkotich@yahoo.com  ¶ 3:47 PM 0 comments

  We are a tired nation.

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=3fc55d60-5716-4317-a62f-e24b4cecfbad&k=29555

Posted by Stan Markotich
Send comments to stanmarkotich@yahoo.com  ¶ 1:59 PM 0 comments

  If you're following daily election news, or interested in doing so, here's a most excellent place to start:

http://www.charlesadler.com/

Posted by Stan Markotich
Send comments to stanmarkotich@yahoo.com  ¶ 12:23 PM 0 comments

  Is there much more, or in fact a whole lot less, to this story?

http://www.cknw.com/news/news.cfm?dir=national&file=n121361A&n=1

Posted by Stan Markotich
Send comments to stanmarkotich@yahoo.com  ¶ 5:29 PM 0 comments

  More Canadians for Afghanistan?

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=89ecc653-dd7f-41d7-88f0-b143cc0d522b&k=14518

Posted by Stan Markotich
Send comments to stanmarkotich@yahoo.com  ¶ 7:28 PM 0 comments