Today, I watched an interview with the U.S. AMBASSADOR to Canada, by Vashi Kapelos of CTV. Vassy can be hot or cold in her interviews. Which I imagine depends to a great deal on the extent and specifics of the directions she gets from her bosses. In this case she was the no nonsense like it or lump it Vassy that I quite admire. Her questions were honest and fair, but without compromise. Her questions were good, but my commentary is about the Ambassador’s answers.
First let me say clearly that carrying water for Donald J Trump, has got to be one enormously difficult job. To try with a straight face to explain the ramblings of a crazy old man, is hard, and to try to pretend that what you are saying is intelligent or rational, you have to leave your self-respect at the door, or you have to have drunk the whole pitcher of kookoo koolade.
Canadians, however, cannot assume underlying meanings for what a nation’s Ambassador says. He repeats what he is told to say. His words are those of the leader of his nation, they must be taken unambiguously.
In Ambassador Hoekstra’s comments, there were some that require discussion.
NORAD and the Golden Dome
Hoekstra’s position was that NORAD (North American Air Defence agreement) is a long standing mutual defence program and Trump’s Golden Dome is simply an extension of this agreement. He pointed out that Canada participating in Trumps Golden Dome theatre would be a natural progression of NORAD. He also pointed out ( ie: threatened, that if Canada did not purchase the F35 fighter jets it would somehow affect NORAD. Interoperability – (U.S. speak for “you must buy our stuff). Lets dissect that a bit.
NORAD
There are three different U.S. positions with regard to NORAD.
- NORAD is proof that the U.S. protects Canada while Canada freeloads.
- NORAD requires Canada to buy U.S. military hardware (ie:F35 aircraft))in order to ensure interoperability within the NORAD structure.
- NORAD Is the only bilateral defence agreement in the world and it protects the North American continent. ( only used when gaslighting mixed audiences of Americans and Canadians).
Obviously all three statements cannot be true. Either Canada is a partner and interoperability is important or the U.S. is protecting Canada in which case interoperability isn’t necessary
Another view is that NORAD is just an American defence plan that protects the U.S. while Canada simply gets to be where the bombs and rockets land during any future conflict. It’s true that Canada’s government accepted and sold the myth of continental defence to Canadians possibly to save money, but realistically it’s a fraud.
There are 195 countries in the world, 194 of them take responsibility for their own defence. They maintain militaries capable of defending themselves and/or maintain international relations such that significant militaries aren’t necessary. There is no reason for Canada not to take responsibility for its own defence. Ambassador Hoekstra’s made a point that China was our enemy. China may well be the enemy of the U.S. but China isn’t threatening to annex Canada or to bring our country to its knees economically. Russia is a threat to our friends in Europe and to Ukraine, but Russia, while a diplomatic problem for Canada and possibly a concern in our north, (as is both China and the U.S.). It isn’t directly threatening Canada either. It’s true, China and Russia as well as India, want to influence our elections, but then again the U.S. has been doing that for decades without a word of complaint until recently. So short answer to the Ambassador. The U.S. may need NORAD, and a Golden Dome, but Canada most certainly does not.
Canada does need to determine what we require in order to defend ourselves, and from whom. We need to determine what allies we need to assist us and what allies we need to assist. And we need to determine to what extent we need to use diplomacy, and where we need to display military might to achieve our objectives. But Canada must decide these things for ourselves.
Trade and Tariffs
Ambassador Hoekstra’s made it clear that the U.S. position was that the U.S. would impose tariffs on Canada and any other country, but that they expected all other countries including Canada to have zero tariffs on the U.S. Apparently, the concept of a level playing field is foreign to the Ambassador. The concept of Free Trade requires that it also be Fair Trade. Hoekstra’s wants 100% free trade, but not in any way does he want fair trade, and not even the island inhabited only by penguins is dumb enough to buy that plan. Fair trade being an agreement where the people of both participant countries benefit with jobs and a valuable standard of living. Hoekstra’s and Trump’s plan is to beggar the world in order to enrich only Americans.
During the CTV Interview Hoekstra’s pulled out his 99.9% cue card in order to try to embarrass his host. He stated that 99.9 % of exports from Canada to the U.S. were tariff free. But like so much we hear from Americans today, it was utter cow patty material. The 99.9% number refers to line items on the NIAC (North American Industry Classification System ) trade list and not items actually traded. That list has over 1000 items with 14 line items just for milk . Of the 1000 items, many simply don’t get traded. The .1% left over in the Ambassador’s party trick, Aluminium and Steel represents nearly 26 Billion dollars in Canadian trade, hardly insignificant.
Hoekstra made an issue of Vassy’s question as to whether Canadians should trust the U.S. He suggested that Canada not spending 2% on NATO was somehow a justification for the U.S. not to trust Canada. His gross false equivalency not withstanding, militarily Canada supported the U.S. or U.S. interests in Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq and currently in Latvia. We have been, and are trusted military allies, even in wars that the U.S. started in order to further their own imperial goals. Should Canada spend more on its own defence? Absolutely. Have various Canadian governments neglected their responsibility in this regard? Absolutely. Have recent events changed the dynamics on the subject? ABSOLUTELY.
The U.S. betrayal of our trust isn’t a case of maybe not being as supportive as one may want, it is out and out aggressive and threatening. Threats to annex our country are not just a misunderstanding, or a disagreement that can be discussed and mediated. No, Ambassador, your country has designated Canada as not having anything that the U.S. wants or needs. Our memory of those words will be remembered and taught to our children for generations. It will also be remembered in any future trade with your country. We also remember another American government official who pointed out that there was a special place in Hell for us Canadians.
So, Mr. Hoekstra, have a nice time while you’re in Canada, but honestly, the shorter your stay, the better.
