Martin sees aggressive, active foreign policy

[CHIMO]

Vancouver — Canada's days as simply an honest broker between the world's big powers is over, Prime Minister Paul Martin said Friday.

“The role of traditional mediator that Canada has played consistently between great powers is not the foreign policy that I would envisage,” he told a meeting of B.C. civic leaders.

“That's why it is so counterproductive when one nation decides to flout the rules,” he said. “NAFTA is not something to be ignored just because it suits narrow domestic interests.”

“Unfortunately the reaction of the United States in the face of the latest NAFTA panel decision on softwood lumber mocks that principle, and in so doing it sends the wrong message to the world.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050930.wmart0930/BNStory/National/

Or in other words B*sh, find another mediator or linchpin.

[Spazito]

1. Good article!

We are, finally, pursuing other markets and reducing our dependence on exports to the U.S. which, given the massive US debt and shaky economy, is essential for us to do.

Now, I just want Martin to serve notice to withdraw from NAFTA and I might be more inclined to like him, might being the operative word, lol.

[CHIMO]

2. Doesn't Look

Like it from the article. He makes the statement that whether B*sh likes it or not the North American market is one market.(My words)

Looks to me like he is throwing off the old purpose of Canada, functioning as the go between for US/Britain, US/Soviet Union or US/China and is telling the US to find another mediator, that Canada has a life for itself.

In addition I would think that the government's energies in the trade issue will be to China/India and others in that area with the US market having to get by with what has already been given to them. I would look to see government inducements for trading in Asia. As someone pointed out, we have been a trading nation not a nation of traders. Maybe that will change now?

[Spazito]

3. I agree, I don't see the government serving notice, sadly, but

I can keep urging them nonetheless, lol. You pose a good question on the issue of trading nation versus a nation of traders, it will be interesting to follow with this in mind for sure.

[CHIMO]

4. Picked That

Up from HAROON SIDDIQUI of The Toronto Star.

Missing links in Martin manifesto

Problem is, we are a trading nation but not a nation of traders.

With the U.S. next door, we don't explore new markets. Attempts by Pierre Trudeau to diversify to the Pacific and Europe failed. That's why Martin talked mostly about selling "oil, gas and nuclear." Expect a new push to sell reactors and get tankers lining up on the West Coast.

He didn't talk about what can get us the biggest breakthrough: the Chinese and Indian diasporas here — 1 million strong each, educated and entrepreneurial.

Overall, Martin's message is clear: The future will belong to those who can deal across cultures, races and religions, both at home and abroad. Monocultural, even bicultural, individuals, businesses and public institutions will fall by the wayside.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1127512214078&call_pageid=970599109774&col=Columnist969907621513

Unfortunately the limitations that NAFTA imposes upon energy, will limit the possible foreign investment in that area, but with Martin's consensus type approach to politics it seems to me that we will have to wait for those investments to be held over the head of the respective premier(s) in order to have them removed.

[Spazito]

5. Thanks for the link, it is interesting reading!