IT'S NOT ABOUT WHAT'S GOOD FOR CANADA:

Missile plan called best for Canada (BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH, 3/07/05, Toronto Star)

Saying yes to missile defence would have ensured some protection for Canada from a possible missile attack, a top security adviser told Liberal MPs in a secret briefing last fall.

Jim Wright, the assistant deputy minister in charge of global security policy at the Department of Foreign Affairs, had blunt words when he spoke to a special caucus session convened to debate Ottawa's involvement in the U.S.-led program.

"It is in our national and strategic interests to be involved in decisions concerning the defence of North America, rather than being on the sidelines as the U.S. takes decisions unilaterally without regard to Canadian interests," Wright told Liberals on Nov. 3.

"By being credible partners with the U.S. in the defence of the continent, we ensure that we are consulted on decisions that affect Canada's national interests," he said.

He warned that while the risk of a missile strike on North America was low, "the consequences could be severe."

"We cannot foreclose the possibility that an inaccurate missile could strike Canada. But more importantly, an attack on the U.S. would have grave consequences for Canada's security, economic, trade and environmental interests," he said.

Nothing so clearly demarks Canada and the rest of Old Europe as minor nations than the petulance with which they ignore their own interests in order to take ineffectual pot shots at America.

Posted by Orrin Judd at March 8, 2005 11:33 AM