Wall’s question during a Western Canadian & American meeting came in a direct address to President Obama. The question that he made was which president within history has ever had Canada’s interest at heart. My guess is that he would say Ronald Reagan. Since he's had a particular fascination with the former President Reagan, whose relationship with Prime Minister Brian Mulroney was a particular source of pride. In fact, some of Wall's closest political colleagues and advisers argue to this day that Reagan was America's greatest president because it was Reagan's emphasis on massive, debt-accumulating military spending that bankrupted the communist states and ended the biggest threat to the globe from potential nuclear war. The theory is interesting and has some validity, but it ignores the fact that the threat to world peace didn't exactly end as predicted, and that debt-plagued Reaganomics has had serious implications for the American and global economies ever since. For Canada and Saskatchewan, the outcome of Reaganomics included a recession that made our oil less profitable and increased U.S. protectionism in the 1980s that produced massive tariffs on softwood lumber exports, uranium, and potash. It is with this perspective that we should explore a remark Wall made in Saskatoon on Monday about President Barack Obama at the Pacific Northwest Economic Region Summit. People think in this country, perhaps they do, that the Obama administration is good for Canada... The facts say something else. Clearly, the premier could and should have been wiser with his words to reporters, especially since his tone can so easily be interpreted as injecting a personal bias into the democratic affairs of Canada's biggest trading partner. That said Wall’s slights hardly constitute an international etiquette.
There is no doubt that Wall was playing to his audience of right-wing American and Canadian political and business types at the conference held in Saskatoon. His actual PNWER speech was considerably more diplomatic and made the point that a premier should make. Yet I would surmise Ottawa, Canada's capital had Wall's phones and staff given a cordial Canadian kick in the behind. There are trade irritants between our countries. Canada-U.S. relations may not be the worst in decades. A claim by former Mulroney chief-of-staff and Canadian ambassador to the U.S., Derek Burney, which even Wall disputed Monday. However, it also would be nonsense to suggest, as current U.S. ambassador to Canada David Jacobson did, that relations have never been better. Which they have but in the recent years, there has been more progress between Prime Minister Harper and President Obama. Whether it's been trade challenges against the former Canadian Wheat Board, or the George W. Bush administration's mostly politically motivated response to the discovery of BSE in Canada, to the embarrassment of protectionist U.S. farm bills under every U.S. administration or those 1980s tariffs, Canadian politicians have spent decades struggling with protectionism by U.S. federal and state legislators.
The "Obama Protectionism" to which Wall refers seems more of the same. In that vein, the premier acknowledged that the Keystone XL pipeline delays are likely a temporary condition related to U.S. election year politics. This doesn't mean that Wall isn't legitimately frustrated by American environmentalists' misguided view of "Dirty Canadian Oil," or that Obama's “Buy American Rule” in the most recent U.S. stimulus package isn't unfair to Canadian suppliers. However, is this something unexpected or unusual? In addition, does it make Obama bad for Canada or worse than any other recent American president? It's at this point that Wall's argument lacks any historical perspective. Exactly what constitutes a good American president for Canada is unclear. However, one would think it would involve a U.S. leader making the world more peaceful, allowing trade and avoiding the kind of protectionism that makes commerce more difficult. Perhaps Obama's record is hit and misses on both fronts, but that puts him on par with most of his predecessors in the White House. It certainly doesn't prove that the Obama’s administration is any worse for Canada than any other U.S. administration that Wall might find more appealing politically.
Yet Brad Wall hardly handled it in a more diplomatic manner. He came out intentionally as the word is that he will be running for the next Prime Minister of Canada.
Interview by James Gormley with Brad Wall attached in mp3
I don't know too much about politics, or what would be best for Canada, but I do remember President Reagan and his "Reaganomics". We are still living with the effects of them. I feel he actually drove the standard of living down. He and his "trickle-down" theory were just awful.... I am surprised anyone is fascinated with him.
ReplyDeleteAmerica and Canada have always been friends. I don't know about the details of business and trade relations. But I do know the the people on both sides feel like good neighbors (or at least that is my impression).
ReplyDeleteAs far as I know and have read, Canada had the best in the person of Madame Thatcher. Her iron staunch but with a touched of motherly love placed Canada to where she is now. Her International policies and the way she treated International economics are the lliving proofs of these.
ReplyDeleteRecently there was a meeting and I know Brad Wall. Some of his thoughts here are valid yet he never thought on this one before he spoke.
ReplyDeleteWithin Saskatchewan it's a growing province which is like a state. Yet Brad used the platform for his own benefit which is not the manner
which Prime Minister Harper does. Within times where I believe that there is more which has been done Dee between Harper and Obama
I believe Brad made a slip of the tongue as ironically he will be running for Prime Minister. Hence the convention was used for a little bit
of his own benefit.
Rich Canada and America have come a long way within the last five years. I guess this is a little more behind borders as it's not within the people.
ReplyDeleteBut more within the people within government. Your impression of our relations is that there is more within common than otherwise.
ReplyDeleteShe was great however she was the Prime Minister of London and had a great relationship with Ronald Reagan.
I've not heard the negative term referred here either. I am surprised for so much emphasis to be with Montana. I think the international relationship is better than average. Interesting
ReplyDeleteCinn they are yet he was referencing predominantly at this convention which is within a Nothern Pacific coalition. He was actually coming out very frank
ReplyDeleteas out of the three provinces in Canada - Saskatchewan right now is within a boom. Montana's govenor is apart of the coalition and right now Prime Minister Harpers agreements with Obama have been placed on hold till the election is over so Brad spoke his mind as he knew it would get to Washington.
We do have a good relationship. It indicates that up here there is more going that often most never will see on American media - but there are some
relationships and pacts that are made within governments that need not be publicly expressed by a Premier. That is the Prime Minister's position.
He got his image in the New York Times....yes I guess it's apart of Canadian politics --- EXPOSED.
Ah I understand better now. Thanks
ReplyDeleteIt's a lengthy utube and write but most of what Canada has done within the last 1.5 years is create the largest free trade agreements around the world.
ReplyDeleteSome within positions of office where very dissappointed that when due to a lengthy campaign all was placed on the side. So Canada formed multilateral agreements I believe the largest now within the world. That was to the dissappointment of the Canadian government.
Yes I understood the outsourcing. It's great debate here as to the positive an negative consequences.
ReplyDeleteOui..but that is politics exposed.
ReplyDeleteC'est la vie.
Reagan was the greatest actor ever
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteYour point?
I do not share Mr. Wall's fascination with Reagan. Yes, the military spending by NATO led by the United States contributed to the fall of the Soviet Union. But don't anyone forget that military spending has been a priority vis a vi Russia and the Eastern Bloc since 1947-48 and theadoption of the Truman Doctrine. The economic progress in Europe and the USA versus centralized planning in othernations played a key part as did thr ascent of Gorbachev. Even Reagan acknowledged those last two parts.
ReplyDeleteWall seems to think the Obama administration should give any pipeline from Canada an automatic okay. A lot of Americans care about the environment and I personally resent this guy trying to rush the President on this issue. It's NOT just about freetrade, Premier Wall.
ReplyDeleteFrom everything I've read and seen tar sands is a dirty energy source and we don't need a pipeline disaster in the depleting Ogalala Aquifer that provides drinking water to millions.
I cordially invite Mr. Wall to calm up about how the US President goes about his domestic business. Threats to sell tar sand oil he just happens to be standing on to the Far East does not impress me or many Americans I suspect. We had a belly full of threats from the OPEC nations back in the 1970s-1980's about US/Israeli relations and other policies.
It doesn't go down well with those of us outside the short-sighted wing of big business.
Douglas I shall wager you that after the election you shall see this go through. I do believe that Brad did state the truth. No decisions are made while America is within the Campaign process. Pity, as Brad was voicing Harpers earlier concerns. A lot of Canadians care about the enviorment.
ReplyDeleteThe agreements where all done over a year ago between Harper and Obama. Then nearing the American campaign it came to a halt.
Right now you have inland pipelines moving oil as we speak within America.
Wall was off the edge on this one as it's was not the normal manner of politics of and international kind. Mind you Brad Wall was reinforcing what Harper has already put into place. Harper (PM) has created the largest amount of free trade agreements in history. Due not to just oil, but with all it's natural resources. Which are the largest (fact) within the world....At the end of this meeting with the exception of one American Democrate - the former Ambassordor actually got up and stated that this is the first time that Canada has with poise presented a case which is of the culture of America's manner. Furthermore, he stated that he came into office not understanding a thing about Canada. Yet with the aid of the Canadian Embassy he had come to learn more of a country - which he saw as an attribute to Canada's humble nature.
Business between Canada and the USA continues. There are now more Canadian investments into America - than there are American investments into Canada.
Jack I'm not questioning good trade relations between the United States and Canada. What I specifically resent is a provincal offical with his sights on higher office trying to interfere in a matter to be decided in Washington.
ReplyDeleteI am also aware there are other pipelines in that region. But this is an issue that has crossed party lines in the USA and this should be judged without interferance or implied threat from any official on foreign soil. To put it bluntly, we've seen what BP did to the Gulf of Mexico and I do not want to see it repeated in the MIdwest by a rush-up job because of pubic and provincal Canadian pressure tactics.
If certain Canadian businesses and government officals are impatient, they should voice their impatience in private.
Douglas you and I should be within office now that would be a great ticket - It could be billed;
ReplyDelete" The International Affirmative Diplomacy Treaty Act".
:)
I like that.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteJust accurd to me and frankly I do as well.