The report on the leaked information is followed by an on-line copy of the original cables. I rooted through the latter website; I believe it is legitimate. /Sandra
WikiLeaks : US bid to “shore up” Harper from the day he was elected
http://creekside1.blogspot.com/2011/06/wikileaks-us-bid-to-shore-up-harper.html
Tuesday, June 07, 2011
An embassy cable written by US Ambassador David Wilkins the day the Cons were first elected in 2006 suggests Harper would be useful in advancing the US agenda for Canada and that giving him ” a success story” like the softwood lumber deal would “shore up” his ability to stay in office without appearing to “sell out to the Americans”.
It’s pretty well a quid pro quo blueprint for every Canada-US initiative Harper has dutifully followed ever since.
Excerpted: (THIS IS WHAT WAS WRITTEN IN THE CABLES THAT WIKILEAKS PUBLISHED)
The election of a new government, after thirteen years of Liberal rule, presents opportunities for advancing U.S. interests in such areas as law enforcement and continental security, and in developing Canada as a more useful partner in the Hemisphere and around the globe.
Significantly, the socially liberal core values of the opposition are more in line with most Canadians than the minority Conservatives, weakening their mandate even further. Given a relatively weak mandate and tenuous hold on power, Harper will move deliberately but cautiously to get a few successes under his belt before doing anything even remotely bold.
Relations with the U.S. will be tricky for Harper, who along with many members of his caucus has an ideological and cultural affinity for America. But as he has done already with many of his core social and fiscal values, he will simply have to sideline this affinity in order to not be painted as “selling out to the Americans” to a skeptical Canadian public. I know Harper will be warm and cordial in his dealings with the U.S., but he also has to demonstrate that he has the ability to advance Canada’s interests with Washington, and he may feel compelled to step back from gestures that could be construed as a close embrace.
That said, I see a real opportunity for us to advance our agenda with the new government. I recommend early on that we look for an opportunity to give Harper a bilateral success story by resolving an irritant such as the Devil’s Lake filter system or entering into good faith negotiations to reach a solution on softwood lumber. Early success on a bilateral issue will bolster Harper and allow him to take a more pro-American position publicly without as much political risk.
Another area where the new government will seek engagement will undoubtedly be border security. Finding a few high-profile SPP-type deliverables to improve cross border movement of goods and services would help our image here as well as shore up Harper’s credentials. Laying this groundwork would then open the way for progress on cross-border law enforcement initiatives of interest to us, such as enhanced information-sharing, joint maritime operations, and more robust counter-narcotics efforts.
Enhanced info sharing on Canadians, the shiprider program, the imported war on drugs.
On other issues, Harper is committed to increasing spending on the armed forces and will do so, making the Canadian Armed Forces a more capable and deployable force; we have little to contribute to this debate and should stay out of it. He has also suggested that the missile defense decision could be re-examined.
With regards to our transformational agenda, there will be numerous opportunities for engagement. However, I suggest quietly working such cooperation with the new government through official, non-public channels, and that we focus on a handful of priority areas — keeping Canada in the game in Afghanistan as the mission turns more difficult and possibly more bloody; continuing to work together to keep the pressure on Iran; increasing support to the new government in Haiti, possibly even taking on more of a leadership role there.
And right about now I’m guessing you’re remembering some of Harper’s more bizarre outbursts on Iran, his caginess about withdrawing troops from Afghanistan, and Canada’s new “leadership role in Haiti“ where DFAIT is buying up property to house an infusion of Canadian officials.
Back to Wilkins’ cable :
“We’re going to be recommending senior level visits and consultations on foreign policy issues to help bring Harper and his new, generally inexperienced team into the fold as more useful partners.
I look forward to helping connect the dots with the new government so we can effectively advance our agenda.”
Afghanistan, Iran, Haiti, enhanced information sharing, war on drugs, joint maritime operations, security perimeter … There’s also a section on Canada “engaging more actively in other hemispheric trouble spots such as Venezuela, Colombia, and Cuba.”
Has Canada done anything independent of this cable under Harper?
David Emerson, who crossed the floor to the Cons to implement the soft wood lumber deal a week after he was elected as a Liberal in Vancouver, is mentioned in a second Wilkins cable just after the deal was signed with USTR Ambassador Susan Schwab eight months later.
Here they are quoted discussing International Traffic in Arms Regulations, a US law which proscribes (INSERT: forbids, BY LAW) Canadian dual nationals from some countries from work on the arms deals that comprise 40% of Canadian defense procurement from the US, and the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative :
“It would be better, she continued, if we could look at issues as if there were a common border surrounding Canada and the U.S., rather than as an issue caused by the Canadian-U.S. border. Emerson agreed. He said that policies such as the WHTI are a “running sore” in the bilateral relationship and are inconsistent with policies to integrate the Canadian and U.S. economies to the maximum extent possible.”
So, again, Steve, we ask: How’s that US security perimeter deal with Barry coming along?
. . . . . . .
Posted by Alison at 5:18 AM
Labels: Afghanistan, Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement, David Emerson, deep integration, Haiti, Harper, Obama, security perimeter, softwood lumber, SPP, WHTI, WikiLeaks, Wilkins
= = = = = = = =
Was softwood lumber deal a gift so Harper government could be more pro-American?
Even before Conservatives were elected, leaked cables show US was looking to influence new government on Americas, Afghanistan, cross-border initiatives.
By Lee Berthiaume Published Jun 6, 2011 6:05 PM
A newly-released diplomatic cable indicates the deal to end the softwood lumber dispute in summer 2006 was a gift from the Americans to bolster the Harper government’s credibility so it could be more pro-US in future dealings.
In addition, the document shows that even before it was elected, American officials were planning on how they could use a Harper government to advance their own agenda on law enforcement, border security and co-operation in the hemisphere. The cable lays out a number of potential policies and areas of co-operation—most of which have since come to pass.
The document from the US Embassy in Ottawa is dated Jan. 23, 2006, hours before Paul Martin’s Liberals were defeated by Stephen Harper’s Conservatives, giving the latter their first minority government.
“The election of a new government, after 13 years of Liberal rule, presents opportunities for advancing US interests in such areas as law enforcement and continental security, and in developing Canada as a more useful partner in the Hemisphere and around the globe,” reads the cable from then-US ambassador David Wilkins.
It does go to pains to note the weak position the Harper government would be in, not just because of its minority status, but also because most Canadians were more socially liberal than the Conservative government.
In addition, “relations with the US will be tricky for Harper, who along with many members of his caucus has an ideological and cultural affinity for America,” Mr. Wilkins wrote. The new prime minister would “have to sideline this affinity in order to not be painted as ‘selling out to the Americans’ to a skeptical Canadian public.”
“That said, I see a real opportunity for us to advance our agenda with the new government,” Mr. Wilkins wrote. “I recommend early on that we look for an opportunity to give Harper a bilateral success story by resolving an irritant such as the Devil’s Lake filter system or entering into good faith negotiations to reach a solution on softwood lumber. Press reports here indicate a growing willingness across Canada to get back to the table. Early success on a bilateral issue will bolster Harper and allow him to take a more pro-American position publicly without as much political risk.”
Less than four months later, Canada and the US reached an agreement on softwood lumber, with the Americans returning 80 per cent of the $5.3 billion in duties it had collected on lumber imports over the years.
However, if the deal was supposed to give the Conservative government an accomplishment to show the public it could stand up for the country and defend Canada’s interests in dealing with the US, it badly backfired.
A large number of softwood lumber industry groups, the BC government and the federal Liberals and NDP strongly opposed the agreement, declaring that the Harper government had in fact sold out to the Americans. The Conservatives retaliated by describing it as the best agreement possible and made the deal a confidence motion. The Bloc Québécois ended up supporting it to avoid an election, and the BC government also eventually signed on after a number of amendments. [ . . . ]
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == =
http://www.cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id=06OTTAWA194
Cable reference id: #06OTTAWA194
“All of them, those in power, and those who want the power, would pamper us, if we agreed to overlook their crookedness by wilfully restricting our activities.” — “Refus Global“, Paul-Émile Borduas
Full-text search Browse tags Overview Publishing history Private cart WL Central The magic of WikiLeaks: telling it like it is Andrew Fowler on Assange
| Subject | Canada’s New Government: Opportunities And Challenges |
| Origin | Embassy Ottawa |
| Cable time | Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:42 UTC |
| Classification | CONFIDENTIAL//NOFORN |
| Reference id | 06OTTAWA194 |
| Source | http://wikileaks.fi/cable/2006/01/06OTTAWA194.html |
| Release time | Wed, 18 May 2011 03:30 UTC |
| History | First published on Thu, 19 May 2011 10:42 UTC |
VZCZCXRO9050 OO RUEHGA RUEHHA RUEHQU RUEHVC DE RUEHOT #0194/01 0231542 ZNY CCCCC ZZH O 231542Z JAN 06 FM AMEMBASSY OTTAWA TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 1194 INFO RUCNCAN/ALL CANADIAN POSTS COLLECTIVE IMMEDIATE RHMFISS/HQ USNORTHCOM IMMEDIATE RUEKJCS/OSD WASHDC IMMEDIATE RUEKJCS/JCS WASHDC IMMEDIATE RUEAHLC/HOMELAND SECURITY CENTER WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
Hide headerC O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 OTTAWA 000194 SIPDIS NOFORN SIPDIS FOR THE SECRETARY FROM AMBASSADOR WILKINS E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/22/2016 TAGS: PGOV [Internal Governmental Affairs] PREL [External Political Relations] CA [Canada] SUBJECT: CANADA’S NEW GOVERNMENT: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES Classified By: AMBASSADOR DAVID WILKINS, REASONS 1.4 (B) (D) ¶1. (C/NF)
Summary: Unless the polls are badly mistaken, Canada’s Conservatives will win today’s election and Stephen Harper will be asked by the Governor General to form a minority government. The election of a new government, after thirteen years of Liberal rule, presents opportunities for advancing U.S. interests in such areas as law enforcement and continental security, and in developing Canada as a more useful partner in the Hemisphere and around the globe. However, managing the bilateral relationship with an inexperienced, inherently weak minority government also poses challenges and calls for some soft treading. End Summary
¶2. (C/NF) Assuming that the polls are right and he falls short of a Parliamentary majority, Harper will know that the Conservative hold on power will be tenuous. The Tory seat total will allow them to form government, but the combined forces of the opposition (Liberal, Bloc Quebecois and NDP) could cause the Conservatives to fall at virtually any time. The Conservatives also have no natural allies among the three opposition parties, so Harper’s government will have to take things one issue, and one week, at a time. Significantly, the socially liberal core values of the opposition are more in line with most Canadians than the minority Conservatives, weakening their mandate even further. Working in the Conservative’s favor, however, and giving them a bit of operating space, is the fact that the Liberals will need to switch leaders, and the Bloc may have hit its high-water mark, so no one will want to see an election too soon. But fairly early in 2007 the Conservatives know that the political sharks will start to circle in earnest. The last Tory minority government lasted eight months, and we could easily see another election within a year.
¶3. (C/NF) Given a relatively weak mandate and tenuous hold on power, Harper will move deliberately but cautiously to get a few successes under his belt before doing anything even remotely bold. His first initiatives will likely deal with the core issues he was elected to improve — corruption and accountability — for which he can gain widespread Parliamentary and popular support. This will allow him to test the waters in Parliament and get his team organized before moving on to areas that may spark controversy.
¶4. (C/NF) Relations with the U.S. will be tricky for Harper, who along with many members of his caucus has an ideological and cultural affinity for America. But as he has done already with many of his core social and fiscal values, he will simply have to sideline this affinity in order to not be painted as “selling out to the Americans” to a skeptical Canadian public. I know Harper will be warm and cordial in his dealings with the U.S., but he also has to demonstrate that he has the ability to advance Canada’s interests with Washington, and he may feel compelled to step back from gestures that could be construed as a close embrace. I would also note that, unlike Martin, Harper has very little foreign experience; he will tend to focus, at least initially, on bilateral issues closer to home such as softwood lumber and the border.
¶5. (C/NF) That said, I see a real opportunity for us to advance our agenda with the new government. I recommend Qadvance our agenda with the new government. I recommend early on that we look for an opportunity to give Harper a bilateral success story by resolving an irritant such as the Devil’s Lake filter system or entering into good faith negotiations to reach a solution on softwood lumber. Press reports here indicate a growing willingness across Canada to get back to the table. Early success on a bilateral issue will bolster Harper and allow him to take a more pro-American position publicly without as much political risk.
¶6. (C/NF) Another area where the new government will seek engagement will undoubtedly be border security. Finding a few high-profile SPP-type deliverables to improve cross border movement of goods and services would help our image here as well as shore up Harper’s credentials. Laying this groundwork would then open the way for progress on cross-border law enforcement initiatives of interest to us, such as enhanced information-sharing, joint maritime operations, and more robust counter-narcotics efforts.
¶7. (C/NF) On other issues, Harper is committed to increasing spending on the armed forces and will do so, making the Canadian Armed Forces a more capable and deployable force; we have little to contribute to this debate and should stay out OTTAWA 00000194 002 OF 002 of it. He has also suggested that the missile defense decision could be re-examined, but I strongly recommend letting him define to us what this means and only then respond to it. With regards to our transformational agenda, there will be numerous opportunities for engagement. However, I suggest quietly working such cooperation with the new government through official, non-public channels, and that we focus on a handful of priority areas — keeping Canada in the game in Afghanistan as the mission turns more difficult and possibly more bloody; continuing to work together to keep the pressure on Iran; increasing support to the new government in Haiti, possibly even taking on more of a leadership role there; following through with good governance and economic assistance to the new Iraqi government; working closely with us and other partners on Sudan; and engaging more actively in other hemispheric trouble spots such as Venezuela, Colombia, and Cuba. We’re going to be recommending senior level visits and consultations on foreign policy issues to help bring Harper and his new, generally inexperienced team into the fold as more useful partners.
¶8. (C/NF) In short, I see both opportunities and challenges in the coming year in this bilateral relationship, and I look forward to helping connect the dots with the new government so we can effectively advance our agenda. Visit Canada’s Classified Web Site at http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/ottawa WILKINS