Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

U.S. envoy dismisses Harper's Arctic plan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
tuvor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 09:40 AM
Original message
U.S. envoy dismisses Harper's Arctic plan
The United States opposes a plan by prime minister-designate Stephen Harper to deploy military icebreakers in the Arctic in order to assert Canadian sovereignty, says the U.S. ambassador to Canada.

"There's no reason to create a problem that doesn't exist," David Wilkins said Wednesday as he took part in a forum at the University of Western Ontario in London.

"We don't recognize Canada's claims to those waters... Most other countries do not recognize their claim."

During the election campaign, which culminated with Harper's win this week, the Conservatives promised to spend $5.3 billion over five years to defend northern waters against the Americans, Russians and Danes.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/01/26/wilkins-harper060126.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sasha031 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
1. doesn't look like Canada is in for a peaceful existence
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bob3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
2. Well there you - creating a problem that didn't exist before
An ocean covered with ice is what we are talking about - don't people have anything better to do with their time?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tempest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Or money?
Looks like Harper is going to follow in Bush's footsteps and squander Canada's surplus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeybee12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. Yeah, but with global warming, there won't be ice much longer, and
that's the point...claim the land to get to all that oil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Angry Girl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
4. this is bound to turn ugly, and then some
Now that the ice is thawing and revealing previously unattainable minerals, the race is on.

Then there's the issue of water: The U.S. is experiencing a shortage and Canada has some, although not as much as you'd think (article does great job of describing the problems of Canada'a nonrenewable water)
http://www.recorder.ca/cp/National/060101/n010107A.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tuvor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Thank you for the link, AG!
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 02:05 PM
Response to Original message
6. The only way to get through the arctic is through the archipelago
of Islands. Canada on the north, south, east, west.... Unless you head straight to the pole and cross there (probably only a few miles long.. a great place to cross really... except for the permanent icecap) where you are surrounded by Greenland, Canada & the Soviet Union.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
7. uh oh -- Harper made a big thing of this during the campaign
Edited on Thu Jan-26-06 06:24 PM by Lisa
That was how he was hoping to attract the Canadian nationalists (some of whom had been in the David Orchard wing of the old PCs) -- not all the people who voted for Harper support Bush. Harper implied that he was going to assert our sovereignty even against the US.

So for the moderates, his promises on Arctic involvement (and disaster response for the big cities) were pretty major factors. If he ends up backing down now, the Liberals may be able to rally around this point. The "honeymoon" could be shorter than expected.

p.s. I know that his Western base can be quite snarky if they think they are being cheated out of something. They aren't so in love with Dubya that they would simply lie down and take it, just for the sake of "better relations". It wouldn't take much to shift the focus of their ire from Ottawa Liberals to the White House (some of them are so bitter about softwood lumber and the beef restrictions that if Harper doesn't get them satisfaction, they could even dump him!). Harper could end up in quite the corner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HuffleClaw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 06:38 PM
Response to Original message
8. "We don't recognize Canada's claims to those waters..."
gee, i can't imagine why. might it possibly have something to do with OIL perhaps? harper's gonna screw 'em on 'missile defence' too i think, mostly because he knows his minority government won't let him. and i DO hope bush comes here. i'd love to go and protest the chimp. we don't have 'free speech zones'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CHIMO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
10. There You
Go again. Basing the US of A.

And all them peoples wanted you to make nice with georgie.

Guess that Canada doesn't have good relations with the US anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harper_is_Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 11:07 PM
Response to Original message
11. "Wilkins also said he expects less anti-American sentiment......"
"...from Harper's minority government"

You stupid fuck, don't confuse anti-Bushism with anti-Americansism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KakistocracyHater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 11:08 PM
Response to Original message
12. so, does this mean Canada is at (cold)war with Russia, Denmark, & the USA?
Or is it just a way to make money for certain shareholders who may have helped him get elected? I don't know much about Canada.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harper_is_Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. No, it means the USA is in for an ass-kickin'
Stay out of our waters!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC