Minority jitters put Liberals off missile defence
Documents show pre-election intent was to join to ease relations with U.S.
Mike Blanchfield
The Ottawa Citizen
Monday, March 07, 2005
Shortly before last year's federal election, the Liberal government was leaning toward joining the U.S. ballistic missile defence program, pledging to explain its views "clearly and early" to avoid any misunderstandings with Washington, says a draft government document.
Discussion of the contentious issue is contained in a May 13, 2004, draft copy of the government's as-yet-unreleased international policy statement, which has been obtained by the Citizen.
In a list of items that "Canada will do" to bolster relations with the United States, the draft states: "participate in the BMD program, and seek to ensure that Norad's existing missile warning and attack assessment role is fully incorporated into the BMD mission."
The statement is bracketed in the text, to reflect the government had yet to decide to join the program. The draft document does not discuss the scenario of Canada not joining the program.
The government opted out of the missile defence program last month, after a long period of indecision that frustrated Washington.
The document also says the Paul Martin Liberals intended to bring international treaties before the House of Commons for consultation in "a historic new role for Parliament," but that never materialized after they were reduced to a minority government in the June election.
In August, the government amended the Norad treaty -- without consulting Parliament -- to allow the joint Canada-U.S. aerospace command to serve as the early warning system for the shield, something the draft policy statement called for three months earlier.
While the government can sign and amend international treaties without consulting Parliament, the opposition accused the Liberals of reneging on a promise to bring missile defence before the Commons for a debate.
In the face of stiff opposition from the NDP, Bloc Quebecois and from within the Liberal party itself, the government formally said no to the controversial program on Feb. 24.
That decision, in the words of U.S. Ambassador Paul Cellucci, "perplexed" the administration of President George W. Bush because Canada had indicated to Washington it would sign on.
According to a leaked copy of the foreign policy review, titled Building Canada's Global Advantage, the government was determined to avoid a repeat of this type of confusion with its U.S. ally.
Canada-U.S. relations had been strained in 2003 because the government delayed its decision not to politically support the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. Then-prime minister Jean Chretien announced the government's decision in Parliament without giving the White House a courtesy call.
"Canada must ensure that it clearly explains its goals and why we pursue them. There should be 'no surprises,' especially on issues where we differ. We will reinforce the perception that Canada is an innovative and reliable partner," says the draft policy statement.
"Where our views diverge, Canada will defend its views, explaining our position to our American partners clearly and early. In these cases, we will work with the U.S. in bridging the gap, including the management of our differences."
