back to notes

Canada's Iraq policy: Inconsistency ho!

March 19, 2003 | G&M | editorial

Nobody splits hairs the way Jean Chrétien does. The late F. R. Scott said of former prime minister Mackenzie King that he'd do "nothing by halves that cannot be done by quarters." Prime Minister Chrétien calibrated his moves by eighths and 16ths, then waited until the last moment to say Canada wouldn't go to war against Iraq.

It was the wrong choice. Ottawa wholeheartedly endorsed United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 last fall, which gave Saddam Hussein a last chance to eliminate all weapons of mass destruction. The Liberal government has pulled back just as the military consequences of Mr. Hussein's failure to abide by the resolution seem about to commence.

The United States didn't think Canada could provide much support on the battlefield, given the state of this country's armed forces. But the Bush administration must still marvel at Mr. Chrétien's announcement.

The Prime Minister didn't unduly condemn an invasion of Iraq, so as not to offend unnecessarily our American and British allies. Nor did he condone it, certainly; our French and German allies can feel reassured. It's just that Canada won't get involved.

Remarkable. The Canadian straddle that has served the Prime Minister well for months continues to a degree even after he has made up his mind. Mr. Chrétien may be less exposed politically now than any other major Western leader, but Canada's Iraq policy barely casts a shadow. Neither does the Prime Minister.

Mr. Chrétien was particularly canny to commit 3,000 troops recently to a one-year deployment in Afghanistan. This was welcomed by Washington. It also made it virtually impossible to make a substantial Canadian commitment to an invasion of Iraq.

But what of the resources that Canada already has in the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf, which lead to Kuwait? Three Canadian ships are there and HMCS Iroquois is on its way, soon to be the flagship for the Canadian commanding a multinational fleet.

Washington's view is that the war against terror and the impending war against Iraq are synonymous. Canada insists otherwise: that the Canadian ships are fighting terrorism just as the contingent in Afghanistan will. A similar rationale applies to the 31 members of the Canadian military on exchange programs with the U.S. and British forces. Canada has decided not to pull them out, saying they won't participate in combat.

It's hard not to conclude, though, that Canada is a furtive member of the "coalition of the willing." Canadian military resources now near Iraq may be greater than those of many overt U.S. partners, such as Spain.

Remarkable. Some countries provide rhetorical support without tangible help; Canada does the opposite.

Equally curious is Mr. Chrétien's position that Canada required a second UN resolution, specifically authorizing war, to participate in an invasion. As recently as January, Mr. Chrétien suggested that 1441, which was passed unanimously and threatened "serious consequences" if Mr. Hussein didn't abide by it, might be all that was needed.

Foreign Minister Bill Graham agrees that Iraq is a threat to international security, including Canada's. He suggests the United States, by massing troops on Iraq's border, sparked what disarmament Mr. Hussein did carry out. Canada's concern, Mr. Graham told the CBC Monday night, lies with "the choice to use force at this time."

But passage of a second UN resolution required the support of France, which wields a UN veto, and France would not agree to deadlines that smacked of "the logic of war." So Canada's real choice may not have been force now or later, but force now or never. And by requiring a second resolution, Canada effectively gave France authority over whether Canadian troops could invade Iraq.

Remarkable. In rejecting U.S. unilateralism, Canada has acquiesced in French unilateralism.

Canada will now sit out, at least officially, the war that could begin as early as tonight. Having made this unfortunate decision through pretzel logic, Mr. Chrétien should be especially willing in the months ahead to commit Canada to the reconstruction effort. This country has great capabilities in building infrastructure, peacekeeping, law-enforcement training and development of federal institutions. Canada can't remain aloof indefinitely, and this postwar involvement would at least fit the Chrétien mould and be politically popular.
Word count: 699