Notes for an Address to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly
Bill Blaikie, MP

Mr. Chairman, I sought the floor to briefly bring a Canadian perspective to the debate about what is happening within the North Atlantic community as a result of the war on Iraq. My primary purpose is to criticize a caricature that plagues this debate. Too often in this assembly I hear the debate framed in the context of Europe vs. America, a way of talking about the alliance that is difficult in any event for Canadians. We are a part of North America ,but we do not think of ourselves as “America”.

This way of describing the debate about the war in Iraq takes no account of the diversity of opinion that exists within Europe and in the U.S., but it particularly ignores the fact that North America was certainly not united or monolithic on the issue. The fact of the matter is that neither Canada, nor Mexico, supported the war on Iraq, nor did they participate. Among other things, for example, Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien repeatedly expressed concern about the rationale of “regime change” as a reason for going to war.

This legitimate disagreement between Canada and the U.S. is just that, and does not prevent co-operation in the war on terrorism or Canadian participation in the reconstruction of Iraq. This legitimate disagreement is part of a longstanding and continuing tension between Canada and the U.S. over the role and significance of multilateralism. Canada takes a different position from America on the Kyoto Accord, the International Criminal Court, the Land Mines Treaty, and the need for Security Council approval for things like the war on Iraq. Not to

mention many economic, even ideological disputes between Canada and the U.S. over the Canadian Wheat Board and softwood lumber exports.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would caution the assembly against self-fulfilling caricatures. Canada is not America and the Canadian position often has more affinity with Europe than with our neighbour to the south.