FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Dec 2

Canada and U.S. Need to Consult More on How to Manage Artic Waters

by bcurry

Increasingly, the Artic waterways are open for a longer period to limited shipping, including commercial vessels, due to the impact of climate change in warming the oceans’ waters. For years, the former Soviet Union and now Russia have been building a greater capacity to travel through the Northwest Passage, even when the ice is still fairly thick. North of Russia shipping from Europe to Asia now takes place on an intermittent basis. Russia is far ahead of both Canada and the U.S. in creating ice-breaking capacity and particularly in the building of large nuclear-powered icebreakers. Currently the U.S. has two heavy icebreakers that are in their last days of service, and no new replacements are under construction at this time. Under a previous Conservative government, Canada proposed building a heavy polar icebreaker, but almost no progress has been made toward its actual construction.

Besides the potential natural resources that the Artic has, the Artic waters are of an important strategic value, militarily and politically, to both Canada and the U.S.  This year Canada released a comprehensive Arctic policy framework that places the emphasis for future development on civilian development. However, Canadian policy does not address Arctic shipping concerns.  This certainly is not a way to reinforce Canadian sovereignty off our Arctic coast.  Alaska’s two senators, Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, recently proposed the creation of an Arctic Shipping Federal Advisory Committee to centralize discussions about shipping in Alaskan waters.

I would go one step further and suggest that a joint North American body needs to be created, just as we have one for common defense concerns in the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and the International Joint Commission (IJC) to deal with mutual issues involving the Great Lakes waterways, commercial shipping and environmental concerns. Not only do we need to monitor Russian activities in Artic waters, but both countries can better coordinate investments in the creation of an ‘Artic seaway’ and the development of Artic ports.

At this time, neither Canada nor the United States has much to offer in the event of a maritime disaster in North American Arctic waters. Isn’t it about time that both countries get together to share resources and expertise to counter the growing Russian influence in Artic waters.  Instead of investing in military capabilities in outer space, it might be wiser to invest more resources right here on earth where more immediate and important needs must be addressed.

Canada Cimate Change Climate Change Foreign Policy Foreign Policy Military Prowess US

Leave a comment »
Jun 2

Now Trump Has Gone Too Far With His Tariff Strategy

by bcurry

U.S. Vice-President Pence just visited Ottawa this week to discuss the ratification of the proposed new North American free trade agreement, which includes Mexico. In order to encourage Canadian ratification of the agreement, the U.S. just lifted its tariffs on Canadian and Mexican steel and aluminum products. Tariffs that should never have been implemented to begin with given the President’s use of ‘national security’ as a justification.  No sooner had these tariffs been lifted, President Trump’s administration placed new tariffs on Mexican imports.  Only this time, Trump is using these tariffs to try to force the Mexicans to do something more about stopping Central American refugees from crossing into the U.S.  Most would agree, including some of Trump’s own advisors, that this tactic will have little effect with respect to the border issue.

Instead, the new tariffs on Mexican products will cause as much economic harm to the Americans as it will to Mexicans. Many goods, including vehicles assembled in Mexico and agricultural goods, will cost American consumers even more. Combined with the recent increases in tariffs on Chinese imports, Americans can be expected to pay even more for consumer products of all kinds.  Remember, at one time about eighty percent of Walmart’s sales inventory involved cheaper Chinese imports.

Recent headlines in The New York Times (May 31, 2019) read: “Things Were Going Great for Wall Street. Then the Trade War Heated Up.” Basically, the article notes that up to now the U.S. economy was going fairly well. However, since the introduction of further tariffs on Chinese goods, the benchmark index of the stock exchange ended down 6.6 percent in May, its first monthly decline of the year and its worst drop since an ugly sell-off at the end of 2018. As well, stock markets in trade-dependent economies such as Canada, Japan, South Korea and Germany also saw steep losses in May. In addition, government bond markets have been sending some of the strongest warning signals.

I have been warning for some time that we could be heading for another major global recession if the U.S. continues its protectionist policies. The President’s use of economic threats and a trade war appears to be unravelling. Many economic indicators in the American economy are showing a growing weakness, despite the current low unemployment rate and high corporate profits. As indicated in the above article, investors are becoming increasingly fixated on any signs that growth is flagging. Consumer debt is high and consumer spending is on the decline in both Canada and the U.S. It just may be that Trump’s tariff strategy has gone too far. There is little doubt that ordinary Americans and Canadians will pay the price under his economic policies.

Canada Foreign Policy Global Economy Protectionist Trade Policies US

Leave a comment »
Jul 26

If Tariffs Are “So Great”, How Come Trump Appears To Be Backing Off?

by bcurry

President Donald Trump backed off his threat to levy tariffs on cars imported to the U.S. from the E.U. during a recent meeting with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker. It appears that Trump had warned that he would move forward with 25 percent tariffs on auto imports if the meeting with Juncker didn’t go well, prompting the E.U. to respond that such a move would bring significant retaliatory measures on U.S. goods. Wow!  Now Trump indicates that he’s willing to open up further trade negotiations with the E.U.

Trump has also tweeted that his administration is considering introducing tariffs on auto imports from Canada and Mexico, much to the displeasure of the American auto industry. You see, in today’s world, many auto parts are supplied from sources outside the U.S.  Indeed, the average Big Three vehicle is comprised of anywhere between 40 to 60 percent of parts manufactured outside the country.  American auto tariffs will simply disrupt the supply chain, reduce efficiencies, increase costs, cause a major downturn in the industry, and eventually increase the costs of all vehicles to American consumers.

American tariffs on Chinese goods, including steel and aluminum, are already having an impact on the agricultural sector, especially on soybean exports. As a result, Trump has pledged $12 billion to farmers to help ease trade pain caused by tariffs aimed at China which had retaliated against U.S. farm products. However, farmers have made it clear that they don’t want handouts, but prefer to be able to sell their products and are concerned about the long-term damage caused by tariffs.

As for negotiating separate trade agreements with Canada and Mexico, the chances are pretty slim that either country would agree to do so. Mexican and Canadian officials have reiterated that talks on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) will remain a three-way negotiation. Canada has a strong participant in Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland who has proven to be an excellent representative from the Canadian Cabinet. She has made it very clear that Canada is working to obtain a modern NAFTA which is fair and beneficial to all three countries. Minister Freeland met with Mexican President-elect Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who will take office on Dec. 1rst, and was given assurance that Mexico also has the same objectives for a trilateral trade agreement.

I firmly believe that President Trump has underestimated just how much the E.U., China, Mexico and Canada are willing to go to protect their interests and promote free trade. Before the terrible and costly consequences of international trade wars happen, I would suggest that the President take a close look at his strategy and consider backing off even more.  I’m sure even the Republicans, who historically promoted free trade as opposed to protectionism, would very much support such a move.  We can only hope.

Canada Donald Trump Foreign Policy Protectionism Protectionist Trade Policies US

Leave a comment »
Jun 11

President Trump’s Behaviour At The G7 Meeting In Canada Was Disrespectful To Host Leader

by bcurry

Justin Trudeau is the Prime Minister of the sovereign nation of Canada and as such deserves the normal respect given to any head of state. For the past four decades, Canada has been a recognized member of the G7 Group. This body is there to provide a valuable opportunity for the seven participating countries to discuss a number of important world issues, including trade.  Normally, at the end of each meeting a joint communiqué is issued highlighting the results of the discussions. However, although the U.S. delegation appeared to have endorsed the draft communiqué, the American President abruptly left the meeting refusing to sign off on the document. Instead, Trump launched a tirade against Prime Minister Trudeau calling him “dishonest and weak”.

Other leaders and delegates were surprised by Trump’s outburst, although not completely shocked given recent events. After all, some of these leaders have been disparaged by Trump’s statements in the past.  Some observers have labelled the tirade released by Trump and his advisors against the Canadian PM as a form of ‘bullying’.  Having placed tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum, Canada has indicated that tariffs will be imposed on a number of American products exported to Canada.  In addition, Trump is not too happy with the negotiations surrounding the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) which have been going slower than he would have liked.  Both Canada and Mexico believe that negotiations on a new agreement need to be thorough in order to achieve a fair and equitable result for all three nations. Given the complexity of some of the trade items, this process cannot be done over night.

President Trump needs to realize that the Prime Minister has the full backing of not only his government, but also the opposition members and Canadians in general. Unlike recent contradictory statements by Trump, the Canadian position on the NAFTA negotiations and on free trade in general has been consistent.  Indeed, the Canadian position reflects that of many of its European allies who have also been hit with American tariffs.  Regrettably, the U.S. protectionist situation leaves Canada, Mexico and the European Union with no other option but to retaliate in kind. No one wants to give in to a bully.  Unfortunately, workers and consumers in the U.S. and the other affected countries will ultimately suffer.

It’s time that Donald Trump realises that he is no longer part of a reality T.V. show. He is now on the world stage and needs to act in a respectful, informed and reflective manner.  Name calling and bullying have no place in diplomacy.  Years of cooperation and trust among nations are at stake.  Trump’s administration needs to be very careful as to whom it defames and attempts to discredit.  It’s one thing to launch a trade war and quite another to start diplomatic conflicts among one’s allies.  There could be grave consequences for the so-called leader of the free world.

Canada Donald Trump Foreign Policy NAFTA Protectionist Trade Policies US

Leave a comment »
May 2

President Trump, Cozying Up To ‘Dictators’ Can Be Very Hazardous

by bcurry

In 1938, British Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, flew to meet Germany’s Adolf Hitler at his private mountain retreat in Berchtesgaden in an attempt to resolve the Sudetenland crisis in Czechoslovakia. If history has taught us anything, Chamberlain’s appeasement policy made war much more likely because Hitler thought he could get away with anything.  Meetings between legitimate elected leaders and ‘dictators’ are seen as legitimizing ‘dictatorial’ regimes.

Trump’s description of Russia’s Vladimir Putin as a “nice guy” two years after Russia annexed Crimea from the Ukraine baffles one’s mind. The incursion by the Russian military was seen as responsible for the defeat of Ukrainian forces. Many countries, including the U.S. and Canada, implemented economic sanctions against Russia or Russian individuals or companies.  Amnesty International expressed its belief that Russia is fuelling the conflict, noting that there had been an estimated 8000 casualties resulting from the conflict.  The Russian Federation was accused of fuelling the ongoing violence with the presence and continuing influx of foreign fighters and sophisticated weapons and ammunition.  More recently, Putin has aligned himself with Syria’s dictator, Bashar al-Assad, who has used chemical weapons on his own citizens. Maybe, not so much a “nice guy” or one to be admired!

Now one sees President Trump continuing to outreach to rogue leaders, even declaring that he would meet North Korea’s dictator, Kim Jong-un and Philippine president, Rodrigo Duterte. Kim’s grandfather Kim Il-sung established a Stalinist state after the Korean War.  Kim has continued to build a huge military arsenal, including a nuclear potential, while human rights are abused and North Koreans are starving from a lack of food.  Of course, we are familiar with Duterte who is accused of supporting thousands of extrajudicial killings of drug suspects in his country.

Having a face-to-face meeting between two or more businessmen is not the same thing as it is in the world of international diplomacy. You are not only the President of the world’s most powerful nation, but you are also a leader among ‘democratically elected’ national leaders.  You have alliances, both military and political, and their policies and positions must be respected.  The international community looks to you for coherent and strategic leadership, not showmanship.  Simply by meeting with the likes of Assad, Duterte and Kim can look like recognition of and support for their regimes, both internally and externally.  For the most part, this is exactly what they relish and seek out.  Such meetings will achieve very little towards resolving the real issues and dictatorial behaviour.  Only comprehensive and aggressive international actions and their economic and political consequences can help to prevent further abuses in these countries and future threats to global peace.  Indeed, beware of the Chamberlain effect!

Canada Donald Trump Foreign Policy Foreign Policy US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Nov 27

Fidel Castro – A Legend In His Own Time

by bcurry

When I was just a lad, I remember watching on television Edward R. Murrow, a well-known American broadcast journalist, who interviewed Fidel Castro shortly after coming to power in Cuba in 1959. Castro was in New York City at the time, and was welcomed by the American administration and people as a hero. Of course, Castro was casually dressed in olive-drab fatigues and combat boots, while typically smoking his large Cuban cigar. At the time, I didn’t really know much about Castro, but found him to have a larger than life presence.  Castro was not a Communist at that moment, but more a devoted socialist.

As the years passed, I followed closely the success and failures of the Cuban revolution. For whatever reason, the U.S. had supported the previous Cuban dictator, Fulgencio Batista Zaldívar, who had negotiated lucrative relationships with the American Mafia and with large U.S.-based multinationals who in turn were awarded lucrative contracts. The Mafia controlled the drug, gambling, and prostitution businesses in Havana.  In a manner that antagonized the Cuban people, the U.S. government used its influence to advance the interests of and increase the profits of the private American companies.  These companies dominated the island’s economy.  Batista, who murdered thousands of his political opponents in what was then a police state, fled Cuba for Portugal in 1958 with the arrival of Castro’s movement.

After Castro kicked out the Mafia and U.S. multinationals (expropriating billions of dollars in U.S. property), the U.S. turned on Castro. This led to the C.I.A.’s failed Bay of Pigs invasion involving hundreds of Cuban exciles and American strict embargo on Cuban sugar, tobacco and other products.  Given the severe hit on Cuba’s economy and the constant fear of American military campaigns against Cuba, Castro was forced to turn to the Soviet Union for economic and military assistance.  It was at this point that the Americans declared his regime as Communist.

Despite such adversity, Cuba introduced and developed the best free education and universal health care systems in the region, whereby over 90% of Cubans became literate. Castro dispatched Cuban-educated doctors and Cuban-developed vaccines to the poorest corners of Latin America. Superbly trained Cuban musicians and athletes have travelled the world, reflecting excellence in their various disciplines.  Cuban diplomatic and military assistance was provided in the fight against South African apartheid and poverty in various West African nations. In recent years, Cuba has eased its restrictions on religious and individual economic freedoms.

Unlike the U.S., Canada maintained diplomatic relations and trade with Cuba. Canadian tourists and officials frequented Havana and the surrounding country side.  Canadian students volunteered to travel to Cuba to help with the yearly sugar cane harvest.  Just recently, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau visited Cuba, reiterating the strong ties between the two peoples.  Unfortunately, Fidel Castro died shortly after.  However, Cuban-Canadian friendship will live on.  Indeed, Castro is a legend in turbulent times.

Canada Foreign Policy Foreign Policy US

Leave a comment »
Nov 16

Will the Paris Attacks Create a Backlash in Canada?

by bcurry

Already a fire was deliberately set at a mosque in Peterborough, Ontario.  Police believe that this may represent a hate crime.  Some prominent Canadians are increasingly questioning the Canadian Government’s stated intention to try to bring in 25,000 Syrian refugees by the end of the year.  Critics are concerned that radicals may be allowed to enter under the program, despite the Government’s assurance that all potential refugees will be adequately screened. For the most part, they will be selected from refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey.  Many will be families with women and children.  Remember that the horrible war in Syria has left more than 250,000 people dead and has displaced half of that country’s population.  Despite the hard work of numerous agencies, many refugees have been living in difficult conditions for several years.

Given the recent tragic events in France and elsewhere, including ISIS-related attacks in Lebanon and Turkey, this is not the time for “fear mongering” when it comes to providing humanitarian aid to these refugees.  It is also not the time for attacking Muslim communities in Canada, even if they are isolated events.  If this occurs, we are giving the radicals exactly what they want.  Such actions by Western countries will be used in ISIS propaganda as examples of why their so-called causes should be supported.  This in turn could very likely lead to a further radicalization of certain individuals who are already susceptible to such propaganda.

We need to work within our communities to ensure that inclusive policies and programs are in place to combat radicalization.  We need to be better informed about the complexity of the issues creating the Syrian situation and the general unrest in the Middle East.  We need to combat ignorance, extreme forms of backlash and xenophobic policies.  The best way that Canadians can combat extremism at home and abroad is by continuing to promote our finest traits as a caring, inclusive and diverse populace.

Canada Foreign Policy Iraq and ISIS Refugee Policies

Leave a comment »
Oct 1

Iraq – America’s Biggest Blunder Could Become Canada’s

by bcurry

Well, why don’t they just bomb Iraq once again! The U.S. is flying armed missions across Iraq, only this time bombing sites occupied by the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). All under the pretext that somehow ISIS represents a direct threat to the West. However, as far as we know, ISIS has no weapons of mass destruction (like Saddam Hussein), but only tactics of mass terrorism. Once again, the U.S. has assembled a “coalition of the willing”, including Canada this time, to fight the perceived menace of some estimated 3,000 ISIS fighters in Iraq. A menace that the heavily armed Iraqi government security forces couldn’t stop, but instead fled from battle. Only the Kurds appear willing to stand up to this foe with appeals for heavier weapons from the West and further humanitarian aid.

President Obama has promised that no American boots will be on the ground in this latest struggle. A new Iraqi government has replaced Maliki’s corrupt Shiite-backed government which had carried out its own form of terrorism against the Sunni population. Otherwise, we continue to have one big political mess in Iraq, creating instability and insecurity. The Americans overestimated the capabilities of Iraqi security forces and underestimated the resolve of ISIS. Thus, conditions ripe for the effective entry of a terrorist bunch like ISIS.

All the so-called Middle Eastern experts forecast that defeating the likes of ISIS is no short-term deal, air strikes or no air strikes. The battles can only be won through winning the hearts and minds of all Iraqis, and by Iraqi successes on the ground. Otherwise, you just have another stalemate and one more human disaster, in terms of Iraqi refugees and civilian casualties.

So why is the Canadian government even contemplating providing fighter jets to participate in a decade-old war that it had never been involved with from the outset? Does this small bunch of fanatics represent a real threat to Canadians, or is the Government’s hype just a ploy to gain support for more military action? Just as the senior Bush had warned his son, there’s appears to be no clear cut exit plan for this Iraqi campaign.  Canada is not in a position to fight in another long-term war after a decade of fighting in Afghanistan at tremendous costs in both human and monetary terms.  ISIS is largely a result of disastrous long-standing U.S. involvement in the Middle East, Iraq being the worst case scenario. Needless-to-say, Prime Minister Harper will have to shoulder full accountability for any further Canadian military involvement in Iraq.

Foreign Policy Iraq Today

Leave a comment »
Jul 31

Stephen Harper – the George W. Bush of the North!

by bcurry

OK. We have the Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, reiterating his government’s hard line on Hamas in Gaza, Russia’s involvement in Ukraine and Chinese cyberattacks on Canadian government computers. Now, no one would blame any Western leader for expressing his or her government’s position with respect to foreign policy. However, if one is going to continuously take such forceful stances in opposition, then you better have the force and accompanying strength to back up your tough words. Such is not the case for Canada.

Unlike some other countries directly affected by recent regional events, Canada has little to loose in taking such a hard line stance. Canada’s dealings with Russia and the Middle East are minimal when compared to the U.S. and the Europeans. Cyberattacks by China and other countries are not all that unusual and more common then we think. Just think of the American spying on many of its own allies, most notably Germany. Maybe Canadian authorities and security agencies aren’t all that innocent as well.

So what does Canada have to back up its harsh words? The military, while very professional and dedicated, is among the smallest in the West in absolute numbers. The military is also dealing with aging and inadequate equipment in all its services, and is totally reliant on NATO to service most missions abroad. The Canadian economy is very reliant on external trade, especially for markets of the country’s natural resources — with 70% of trade still being carried out with the U.S. All said and done, Canada can huff and puff all it wants, but it won’t blow anyone’s house down.

Unless Mr. Harper plans to do standup comedy at Yuk Yuks in Moscow, Beijing or Tel Aviv, he and Foreign Minister John Baird might want to tone down the rhetoric somewhat. Let’s not make Canada’s international reputation suffer any more than it already has. Once, Canada was viewed as a moderate voice on the world scene, ready and trusted to help bring conflicting parties to the table. Canada has lost its non-alignment status which served it so well during the Cold War and past world conflicts. Now it appears that Mr. Harper would like to become the George W. Bush of the North! Needless-to-say, this is no laughing matter.

Canada Foreign Policy Foreign Policy

Leave a comment »
Newer Entries »
Blog at WordPress.com.