• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Bush cancels Ottawa visit over war

  • Thread starter Thread starter ninty9
  • Start date Start date
N

ninty9

Guest
Bush cancels Ottawa visit over war
U.S. president unhappy with anti-American comments by Liberal MPs

Robert Fife
CanWest News Service


Saturday, April 12, 2003

U.S. President George W. Bush has cancelled a planned visit to Canada on May 5 because of unhappiness over the federal government‘s stance on the war in Iraq and anti-American comments by members of the Chrétien government, sources say.

The Prime Minister‘s Office has been informed by Condoleezza Rice, the president‘s national security adviser, that Mr. Bush will postpone his first official visit to Ottawa. Mr. Bush was to address Parliament and hold high-level meetings on several issues, including energy policy.

One source said the final straw for the White House was the prime minister‘s order to the Canadian commander in charge of a multilateral naval task force in the Persian Gulf that fugitive members of the Iraqi regime must not be turned over to U.S. forces.

"People of good faith can disagree on this (war) but the (Chrétien) government tries to split it so well that the (Americans) see them as just muddling along. Why have an interdiction force in the Persian Gulf if Canada is not going to pick up people? What‘s the point of being there?" the source said. "They are just trying to please everybody."

Mr. Chrétien raised the possibility on Thursday that the president‘s visit might be postponed because of Mr. Bush‘s busy agenda.

"I don‘t know what will happen ... So far it is on, but it is coming at an awkward time perhaps for him. He is still invited but if he were not able to come, I will invite him to come later," Mr. Chrétien told reporters.

A U.S. Embassy spokesman said there has been no announcement that the visit has been postponed due to the president‘s schedule.

In Washington, Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman, was guarded whether Mr. Chrétien‘s refusal to join the war and the spate of anti-American remarks by Liberal MPs would affect the president‘s visit.

"Well, the president visits countries and has relations with countries not depending on just their reactions involving Iraq," Mr. Fleischer said. "We have many broader relationships and broader issues that also unite us, and common values and common friendship. And that‘s the context of any visits the president would take to any nation, whether they are with us or not."

However, a senior source said Claude Laverdure, the prime minister‘s foreign policy adviser, has spoken with Ms. Rice several times "trying to work out a joint announcement (on postponing the visit) and they haven‘t worked it out yet."

Although relations between the president and Mr. Chrétien were never close, the source said they are now "very strained." The two leaders have not spoken since February and Mr. Chrétien did not phone Mr. Bush to inform him that Canada would not support the U.S.-led war.

It is not known whether the president will wait until after Mr. Chrétien leaves office in February to come to Canada. The Bush administration has indicated it is looking forward to improved relations if either Paul Martin, the former finance minister, or John Manley, the current finance minister, succeeds Mr. Chrétien.

Heritage Minister Sheila Copps is also running for the Liberal leadership but on a strongly Canadian nationalist platform.

The strains in Canada-U.S. relations broke into the open after the United States invaded Iraq. U.S. Ambassador to Canada Paul Cellucci rebuked the Chrétien government for not supporting the invasion and for failing to denounce MPs who had made anti-American remarks. They include Carolyn Parrish, the Liberal backbencher who said she hated American "*******s," and Herb Dhaliwal, the natural resources minister, who said Mr. Bush had failed as an international statesman.

On Wednesday, Mr. Cellucci again criticized Canada‘s position, calling Mr. Chrétien‘s refusal to turn over fugitive Iraqis to American forces "incomprehensible."

On Friday, the prime minister said Canada is willing to help in the reconstruction of Iraq and is prepared to send RCMP officers to help keep the peace, as it did in Haiti and Kosovo.

"We‘ve sent RCMP officers to Haiti and elsewhere," he said. "If it is a contribution that we can make, we will do it. If they want us to do something else, we will do something else ... We are certainly prepared to help out as soon as possible."

A U.S. embassy official said the administration was waiting for a concrete Canadian proposal on reconstruction.

Jason Kenney, a Canadian Alliance MP, said the prime minister was trying to curry favour with the Americans after having wrongly chosen to stay out of the war.

"There is an awful lot of backpedalling in Ottawa. All of the naysayers were wrong. The United Nations Security Council failed miserably in this test and we hope the government has learned to contribute constructively to Iraq regardless of who is managing the reconstruction," Mr. Kenney said.

Defence Minister John McCallum admitted yesterday the federal cabinet had no policy for dealing with possible Iraqi prisoners when it deployed the latest contingent of Canadian warships for anti-terrorism enforcement and surveillance in the Gulf region.

In the wake of the controversy over the government‘s declaration that Canadian ships would not automatically hand over fleeing members of the Iraqi Baath party or Iraqi soldiers to U.S. forces, Mr. McCallum insisted the Canadian military would not let them go either.

"It certainly never was a question of letting Iraqis go, if they were part of the regime," Mr. McCallum said.

Mr. McCallum said Canada will not send peacekeeping troops to help restore order in Iraq, where looting and lawlessness are spreading.

"I don‘t think I see a military role but I certainly see a role for Canada in other areas where we have traditionally done very well: humanitarian training, police and governance," he said.

http://www.canada.com/national/story.asp?id=3BC9416C-8AB1-496B-BA77-3AAA7F28319B
 
http://www.thestar.ca/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1035780991219&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154

Ottawa‘s Iraq stand led Bush to scrub visit: Cellucci


OTTAWA (CP) — U.S. President George W. Bush likely would have proceeded with his visit to Canada next month if Canada had backed the war in Iraq, the U.S. ambassador said today.

And Paul Cellucci said Washington‘s coalition partners will be the first to be consulted on rebuilding a postwar Iraq.

"A visit to talk about rebuilding Iraq with a coalition member would have been more likely to happen, put it that way," Cellucci said of Bush‘s cancelled visit in an interview with CBC News.

"I think he feels, you know, in the first instance, you need to talk to the people who were there fighting the war because it‘s their initial responsibility to get that off the ground," he said.

Bush was to have visited Ottawa on May 5, but cancelled citing the pressures of dealing with the Iraq situation.

Just a day after Prime Minister Jean Chrétien confirmed the trip was off, Bush announced plans to host Australia‘s prime minister at his Texas ranch on May 2.

The cancellation was widely taken as a snub over Canada‘s refusal to take part in the Iraq war without UN sanction, prompting State Secretary Colin Powell on Tuesday to assure that good Canada-U.S. relations would survive the difference of opinion.
 
Its amazing how quickly things went down the toilet between our two countries.

I can remember Ottawa and Washington playing each other in the NHL playoffs and Clinton and Chretien Wearing their respective jerseys and the loser had to wear the winners jersey...you just don‘t see any of that between Canada and the US anymore. Its a shame.

I really hope that with our new PM, which will e Paul Martin, that things will get better. f were not cozy with the US, were kind of on our own. This raises another question: The PM is in power to make decisions for the benifit of the people who live in our country. Most people at the time said no Iraq War. So essentially the PM did the right thing by listening to the majority. However, would it have been justified for the PM to back the war for the sake of saving Canada from being different from the US? By this I mean is it justfied to support someone not for the cause, in this case Iraq and its WMD, but because it benifits our country to do so. (Economically, Politically, and in pretty much every other way)?

I think im just rambling. Ignore this if it doesn‘t make snese.
 
Everyone, don‘t forget,the U.S. is like a kid with all the Toy‘s and get‘s upset when one kid wont go long with what he/she want‘s to do,but soon forget‘s about it,as they have few real friend‘s in the long run except those who defie them now and again.
 
At least that jackass Svend Robinson won‘t be afforded the chance to make Canada look like an even bigger set of *******s on live CNN coverage.

I do find it somewhat humourous that the Whore of Missassauga‘s (the ever-illustrious Ms.Parrish‘s) comment about "those American *******s" gets the bad language pee-pee smack on here. Just an observation from the nosebleeds.
 
I was going to start a new thread called "You are only as good as your last war" but hooking into this one is just as good.

We have supported the US in Gulf War I, Somalia, Haiti, Kosavo, and Afghanistan. We actually sent combat troops to region. (Although they never saw combat, nobody foresaw that at the time). We even lost troops to the Americans. We still have ships there fighting the war on terrorism. We are a part of NORAD. We took all those planes on Sept 11 even though any one of them could have had terrorists on board. And we were forgotten and snubbed then. And the US administration is pissed at us. And now they lump us with France and Germany. I wonder why Mexico isn’t included? Does anyone have an answer to that. And you wonder why people get pissed at the US. They only see things in black and white, no shades of gray. The only freedom they talk about is their freedom. There is another thread asking: “not to hate my country”. I would ask the same contributors on that thread, “Why do you treat our country (when you actually remember us) like toilet paper”. It’s only remembered when actually need it.

The US wanted our support. What support were they looking for. Troops or moral support. If it was moral support, then they received that once the war started. The majority of Canadians opposed the war, and the government followed that (I admit that was the easier course for them to follow.) That was our free system. The US ambassador comments are inappropriate. If our ambassador down there had publicly spoke out and told Americans they were wrong to start the war without UN backing, the Americans would have taken notice and he would probably been on the first plane out of there. As for being pissed at comments by elected officials. Although calling them *******s is in appropriate, calling the president a poor statesman is in the ballpark. (Canada tried to compromise and move D-Day back by only 2-3 weeks. Bush refused. His mind was already made up.) However, we have the same right to free speech as they do. When we lost our soldiers to their hot dog, the President barely acknowledge it, and the pilots home state government financed their defense and sent no apologies. Talk about a slap in the face.

Now that Iraq is finished, the sights have moved onto Syria. Do we have to support the US there also? The US is opening up a whole can of worms, and blithely unaware of the long-term consequences of their actions. **** , they’re unaware of the short-term consequences. Why wasn’t a battalion of MPs following the ground forces into Baghdad. This is not armchair quarterbacking. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to see that anarchy will ensue after a totalitarian regime is removed and a vacuum is created.

The Americans only take notice of us when they need something or they feel their trade is compromised. Is that what good friend does? Free Trade focused all our attention south as opposed to expanding into other markets. And now we are stuck with it. For those who whine we are going to lose business. New Flash. War is national policy, not economic policy. Having our troops put in harms way so Bombardier can sell more planes is not worthy any comment. Another question. Why are tariffs put on softwood lumber and wheat, and not oil and hydro.

I would be very interested in comments from any Americans out there. Canadians (if rumours are correct are being targeted (ie tires slashed, being snubbed) because of the war in Iraq. You have forgotten (or don’t even know) the sacrifices we have made. As I said “ We are only as good as our last war…”
 
RCA - I tend to agree with much of what you say. As you say - everyone wants to make this black and white. The Yanks are oil-hungry imperialists; the Canadians are hand-wringing panty-waists, and poor friends to boot. I‘m not going to dispute your analysis, you obviously have researched it more than I. In regards to MPs however, they are over there - many of the Nat Guard troops from Arizona are MPs. How are they being used? I don‘t know. Frankly, I don‘t even care if Canada cuts all relations with the US, and doesn‘t support them in anything. Is that the point where we‘ll finally pull up our straps and become self-sufficient in defense/sovereignty? I rarely hear of Canadian people being chastised - the Canadian Government is perceived as getting a free ride from the US. Not just in defense matters - people come here in droves for jobs, medical care, etc. Not my opinions, I‘m just telling you the feelings I get. The avg. Joe isn‘t aware of what Canada does for the U.S. Ironically, I spend a great deal of time on predominantly American boards, educating people about Canada. As far as retributions, I live in Phoenix, have a Cdn Flag license plate, and am proud to talk about my Nationality. I have encountered no problems. Sorry for rambling, but I‘m trying to stay in the grey. Some of the most bitter disagreements I‘ve had have been with close friends - if it is a friendship worth keeping, it gets worked out.
 
Back
Top