• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

PM Harper's Foreign policy speech: 'Reviving Canadian leadership in the world'

Cloud Cover

Army.ca Fixture
Subscriber
Reaction score
841
Points
1,060
Thought I would place this here as a reminder to exactly what PM Harper has to say on the state of FA and where it is going under his government.  I think it was a good speech, but the media, particularly the CBC, took his words about Afghanistan and twisted them around to make it sound like the toll in Afghanistan was a price he was willing to pay for his own leadership, when in fact he clearly stated the toll was about Canada taking on a leadership role in the world. This was the objective of Mr. Martin and Mr. Graham, and it is being sustained and further carried out by PM Harper.

Reproduced under the fair dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/harper_stephen/foreignpolicyspeech.html

Foreign policy speech: 'Reviving Canadian leadership in the world'

CBC News Online | Oct. 6, 2006
by Stephen Harper


On Thursday, Oct. 5, 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper was in his hometown of Calgary to receive the Woodrow Wilson Award for Public Service from the Canadian branch of the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson Center. This is an excerpt from his speech on "Reviving Canadian leadership in the world."

As someone who has only served Canada as Prime Minister for eight months, I am not sure I've yet merited this recognition. But I am proud of the team I work with — the men and women who created the new Conservative Party of Canada, and what they've been able to accomplish in a fairly short period of time.

In those eight months, I have observed one thing in particular. If you tell people what you are going to, and then do it — Canadians respect that …

So what I want to talk to you about tonight is something I hope to accomplish in the longer term — if Canadians grant us the opportunity.

That objective is to make Canada a leader on the international stage. We want to ensure that we can preserve our identity and our sovereignty, protect our key interests and defend those values we hold most dear on the international scene.

If there is any one thing that has struck me for the short time I have been in this job, it is how critically important foreign affairs has become in everything that we do.

The globe is becoming a village. And virtually every significant challenge we face — economic, environmental, demographic, security, health, energy, you name it — contains an important, if not critical, international dimension.

I said I admire many people who have been presented with the Woodrow Wilson Award. But the person I want to talk about in this regard is Woodrow Wilson himself.

Now I'm going to ignore for a moment that he was a Democrat and the father of the income tax.

Woodrow Wilson was also an extraordinarily accomplished individual — an academic and a state governor who rose to become president of the United States, the only Ph.D ever to do so.

Most famously, he is known for his "Fourteen Points" — "the program for the world's peace," as he called it, and his advocacy of the first world-wide multilateral organization, the League of Nations.

He urged the United States to be a leader on the international stage and the American people to help "make the world safe for democracy." Today, it is easy to forget how radical a departure this represented from the historic U.S. foreign policy position of isolation.

Canada, by contrast, has never had the luxury or the illusion of isolationism.

While not among the ranks of world powers, we have long been a significant part of important and influential world bodies.

Our membership in the Commonwealth preserves the ties of the worldwide British Empire of which we were long a proud part.

Our position in the Francophonie reflects our cultural and historical ties to France, which remains a country of influence with global visibility.

We belong to the world's most important military alliance, NATO, due to our disproportionate role in the struggles against both fascism and communism.

We took the lead in the creation of NAFTA, our massive continental trading block.

And perhaps all of these things explain the seat we hold at the table of the G8, one of the world's most exclusive bodies.

All of these show that Canadians have always wanted a government that plays a role in the world.

But in a shrinking, changing, dangerous world, our government must play a role in the world.

And I believe that Canadians want a significant role — a clear, confident and influential role.

As proud citizens, they don't want a Canada that just goes along; they want a Canada that leads.

They want a Canada that doesn't just criticize, but one that can contribute.

They want a Canada that reflects their values and interests, and that punches above its weight.

Do we, as Canadians, have the desire and the ability to achieve all this?

Just take a look around this room; we're among Canadians who lead corporations that do business in every corner of the planet. And this is only one corner of our great country.

So, during the time in which I am privileged to serve as prime minister, I intend to make this a country that leads.

And if our government succeeds in achieving this goal, then perhaps some day I will be deserving of this prestigious award.

To accomplish such a goal will require more than membership in the various multilateral bodies I have just talked about. Previous governments have had all those club memberships, but they haven't always been leaders. 
We must have more. We must also have guiding values and interests as a country on which we are prepared to act. And we must have the capabilities to act according to those priorities.


We must be committed and capable of protecting our vital interests, projecting our values of freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law, and preserving balance and fairness in the international forums to which we belong.

That is the direction in which our government is moving. Let me briefly take stock.

First, the NAFTA summit at Cancun gave us an opportunity to start talking frankly to and getting things done with our most important ally, customer and neighbour, the United States of America.

That paid off with an historic softwood lumber agreement and a better U.S. appreciation of Canada's growing contribution to continental energy security.

It paid off with some very gracious and grateful words for Canada from Secretary of State Rice on the fifth anniversary of 9/11, and, just recently, a reprieve from Congress on their passport plan.

Then, the G8 summit in Russia gave us an opportunity to tell the rest of the world about Canada's phenomenal potential as a producer of energy and natural resources.

On the way there, I stopped in London to tell British investors about energy, especially about the oil sands, and to let them know what you all have known for a long time: That Canada is the world's only growing producer of this strategic commodity with a secure, stable government.

Canada is, as I have said, an emerging energy superpower.

It is one reason why Canada will increasingly be a leader and why Alberta is a leader within it.

But here in Alberta, where that energy power can almost be felt, something else must be equally appreciated. That with power comes responsibility.

Given the environmental challenges that energy production presents, Alberta must also become a world leader in environmentally-responsible energy production.

On the way home from the UK, I stopped in Cyprus to make a symbolic contribution to the biggest overseas evacuation of Canadians in our history. Canada was ultimately able to evacuate as many of its citizens and as quickly as the great powers that have immensely more military reach.

That was a testament to the coordination and results of which the public service of Canada is truly capable — capabilities that were also on display when it broke up the alleged terrorist plot in Toronto earlier this year.

I also took a few days this summer to tour the North. The trip had a twofold purpose.

I wanted to encourage northerners to embrace the jobs and prosperity that will come with private sector energy resource development.

But, by visiting Alert and observing Operation Lancaster, I also wanted to underline our government's commitment to rebuilding our military and to asserting Canadian sovereignty — to asserting sovereignty over all of our territory, including the islands and waterways of our Arctic.

Asserting sovereignty means a presence. And let me assure you, we intend to be there.

At the Francophonie, we were able to stress our support for the UN Convention on Cultural Diversity, a document that reflects the unique history and eclectic identity of this country.

We were also able, in once again addressing the situation in the Middle East, to show that our international positions are not based on tailoring our views to the crowd we are in front of, but on sticking to principle and working to forge consensus.

And let me just briefly mention how our Fisheries Minister, the Honourable Loyola Hearn, did just that recently at the meetings of the North Atlantic Fisheries Organization, where, by standing firm and making clear we are prepared to act, he managed to get real progress on our goal of ending international over-fishing off the Grand Banks.

But one thing stands out above the rest. That was my visit to the United Nations.

In that forum, I addressed our role in the mission where our security interests, our values and our capabilities come squarely together.

Afghanistan.


Five years ago, that long-suffering country was ruled by the Taliban — brutal tyrants bent on rolling back any vestige of civilization.

Men lived in oppression; women in bondage; and children in ignorance.

Some might say that's not Canada's problem.

Well, it is. And September 11th, 2001, shattered any illusion that it isn't — the day when the Taliban were revealed as accomplices in the horrific attacks against innocent civilians on this continent, including on citizens of this country.

Canada and our allies joined the United Nations mission to meet the Taliban challenge at its source and eliminate it once and for all.

The mission is being conducted on several fronts. We are providing security to the Afghan people. We are helping them in reconstruction and development. We are working with them in building the foundations of a sustainable democracy. And we are delivering on all fronts.

A democracy has been put in place. Presidential, parliamentary and provincial elections have been held — and women now hold a quarter of the seats in the Afghan legislature.

The economy is growing. GDP has doubled in the last five years.

Education is spreading. In 2001 only 700,000 children were in school, and all of them were boys. Today 7 million kids are in school, and a third of them are girls.

Reconstruction is happening. With Canada's help, over 13,000 communities have started or completed new schools, medical facilities, and water, sewer and electrical systems.

But we all know it hasn't been easy. And it isn't going to be. Canadian Forces have the lead in Kandahar province, the stronghold of the Taliban, the toughest in the entire country.

The Canadian men and women who serve there are the best we have to offer. They have gone willing, knowing that not all of them will return. And when I went to Afghanistan and visited our troops, I saw — as anyone can see firsthand, there on the ground — just how dedicated, professional, skilled and courageous they are.

We have seen just how proud Canadians are of our soldiers and their families. And we have also seen how difficult it is to bear the sorrow of their losses. But, ladies and gentlemen, that is the price of leadership.

It is also the price of moving our world forward. I recently met with the leaders of Latvia and Romania. In my lifetime, these nations were stuck in what we all believed were hopeless futures of oppression and stagnation.

But we never gave up our opposition to the Soviet empire, and they never gave up hope, and today those countries are growing democracies, serving alongside us in Afghanistan.

When I look ahead a decade or so from now, I still have great hopes for that country and its place in the world. But it's not going to happen unless countries like Canada step up, make sacrifices and provide leadership.

That is not new for this country. That is how this country was built. We were not built by the services we use, but by the sacrifices we made. Or more accurately by the sacrifices, big and small, of our forbears.

This summer Laureen and I visited Vimy Ridge in northwest France, the scene of some of the most terrible fighting in the First World War. It's the last resting place for her great uncle, James Teskey, and literally thousands of young men like him.

Most died in a few short days, in a battle where Canadians, considered backwater colonials, led the successful final assault.

But the monument at Vimy Ridge is much more than a remembrance of a victory or a memorial to the carnage of war.

Instead, placed as it is in a modern, democratic, prosperous, peace-loving nation, it constitutes a reminder of the abiding values on which our country is based, of the aspirations we share for other peoples, and of the actions we are prepared to undertake to make this a better world.

 
We have seen just how proud Canadians are of our soldiers and their families. And we have also seen how difficult it is to bear the sorrow of their losses. But, ladies and gentlemen, that is the price of leadership.

Call me delusional, but I just may have found faith in the country I have dedicated my life to serving...

Dave
 
Three cheers for Harper
HUZZA HUZZA HUZZA
He truly is a great primeminster and he seems to be doing a good job, taking action, promtoting Canada to the world as a world player.
Hopefully the rest of Canada will feel the same way I do and at the next election grant him and his party a majority government.
 
People looked at him a number of years ago and thought he was a cook, including myself sadly. He has shown us that he has the right stuff to lead this country and stick to his convictions and he isn't a senoir citizen, which appeals better with younger Canadians.

What he's doing for the military is long in coming, i just wish i was 20 years younger to be able to use some of that new equipment. Jeese the newest equipment we had was when we went from the 106 to the TOW missile system and from the FN-C1-2 to the C-7 C-8 & C-9's

So I  guess the CQ's can stop ordering extra rolls of gun tape in case we need it to keep our vehicles and equipment in one piece eh. WOW no more gun taped M-113's!! Its about time.

I think that at the next election he will win a majority government by a landslide.

 
Sometimes Globe and Mail columnist Jeffrey Simpson gets it right.  Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act, is his latest:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061007.wxcosimp07/BNStory/specialComment/home
[size-15pt] All politics is global — so get used to it[/size]

JEFFREY SIMPSON

From Saturday's Globe and Mail

Tip O'Neill's quip, now a cliché, that all politics is local needs amending. Just as plausibly these days, it could be argued that all politics is global.

Mr. O'Neill, the late Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, was describing politics in his country when he made his famous observation.

Local issues still count, and always will, since most people are too busy getting on with their lives to worry about international questions. But the globalized economy and international identity politics reach into almost every community these days, making life better or more threatening for citizens, and often stimulating deeply emotional responses.

Foreign policy and national security trump all issues in the United States. How the country relates to the world is at the core of national politics. The last U.S. election was based, more than anything else, on the question: Who can keep our country safe? That same question will influence next month's midterm elections and the next presidential one.

In January, Canadians elected an astonishingly inexperienced government in foreign affairs. Neither the Prime Minister nor any of his senior colleagues had travelled or dealt much with the world. Foreign affairs, and the way the world rushes in on Canada, never figured in the campaign. The parties didn't talk about those issues, and the media didn't force them to. Presumably, this striking omission occurred because the political elites believed the people weren't interested.

So, what issues have since galvanized the Canadian public? Almost every one relates to Canada in the world, or the world in Canada.

The war in Afghanistan is the most obvious example. Canadians are split on the issue. The war provokes strong reactions, pro and con. Canada's commitment there began under the Liberals. The Conservatives reaffirmed it and now wear the issue politically. It will not go away.

The Israeli invasion of southern Lebanon last summer created a political furor in Canada, both about the invasion itself and how the Canadian government responded to it. The Prime Minister greatly commended himself to the Canadian Jewish community and to other unfettered defenders of Israel, but lost ground in other quarters, especially in Quebec, where sympathy for Lebanon's plight ran high.

Domestic controversies about that war illustrated a deepening reality in Canada: Wider multiculturalism brings intensified domestic pressures to take one-sided positions on foreign disputes.

Put another way, Canadian governments are now more fiercely lobbied than ever by ethnic groups that want their new country to take up the cause of their old one. And the temptation to play domestic politics with foreign policy has never been more obvious, just as the need to avoid that temptation has never been more urgent.

Canadians don't think of U.S. relations as “foreign policy” or part of globalization, but they should. The U.S. is a “foreign” country with which we share a continent.

An issue such as softwood lumber, which took up so much of this government's time, was a foreign policy issue. So are the myriad of cross-border issues that usually excite Canadians far more than Americans.

Very soon but very belatedly, the Harper government will unveil new environmental policies, almost all of which will have a global dimension. Curbs on carbon emissions will be judged by how Canada will (or not) comply with its Kyoto Protocol obligations. Impacts on the auto and energy industries will be viewed by how they affect Canada's competitive position internationally.

Climate change, by definition, is the ultimate global issue. So increasingly is trade, on which the Canadian economy depends. Ask a Saskatchewan farmer or a Nova Scotia scallop fisherman or a Hydro-Québec employee or an Ontario auto worker or a B.C. lumberman on whose market their livelihood depends, and the answer won't be, or shouldn't be, Canada. It's the world, stupid.

The World Economic Forum's annual survey of country competitiveness just pushed Canada down to 16th position, well below the U.S., Britain, Japan and Scandinavia. How to enhance the country's productivity did preoccupy the previous Liberal governments, but the campaigning Conservatives remained silent on the issue in the last campaign, presumably because they didn't think it a political winner.

Now, happily, a few people in several ministries are thinking again about the issue on which depends the country's future wealth generation. And any thinking about competitiveness and productivity has to be about Canada's position in the world — a world of partners and competitors, all struggling to improve the standards of living and quality of life of their people.

Preparing Canada for this kind of challenge and navigating a foreign policy based on realism through the shoals of a turbulent international scene and the rocks of domestic politics are the prerequisites of political leadership in a world where what is local still counts but where all issues are global, whether or not people understand that reality.

jsimpson@globeandmail.com

First, and emphatically, this does NOT mean that the majority, the large majority of ’ordinary Canadians’ is, suddenly, going to abandon bread-and-butter politics and start considering, however ill informed those considerations will be, foreign policy.  In the next general election parties will still succeed by identifying ‘wallet’ issues and pandering to those who want more, More, MORE in their wallets.

Joe Lunch-box is still here and (s)he is still concerned, primarily, with personal, financial issues.  But differences have occurred over the past 50 years, especially: Joe is now, increasingly, Josephine, José and Yusef and (s)he has other, secondary, but still important issues:

• Josephine is, according to recent polling,  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/49908/post-457341.html#msg457341 , far less likely than Joe to support any combat operations; and

• José and Yusef distrust the United States, even as they envy what the citizens of that great republic have and do.  Both José and Yusef are far more religious than Joe (or Josephine) and they attend their church and mosque regularly, where they have their distrust refuelled and reinforced by radical priests and imans and by neighbours.

Simpson gets it right when he says: ” Wider multiculturalism brings intensified domestic pressures to take one-sided positions on foreign disputes.”

Second, and even more emphatically, the milk is spilled, stop crying!  Whether anyone likes it or not, whether or not ‘it’ was a good idea, we are a multicultural society – amongst the most multicultural on the planet – and that is not going to change, no matter how a tiny minority of little Canadians might fulminate.

Our new, but firmly established multicultural society creates some new and interesting problems and opportunities:

How, if at all, to deal with dual citizenship; is it a problem?  What sort of problem?

How to exploit cultural divides for electoral advantage?  Stephen Harper did, no doubt, alienate many Arab and Muslim voters with his recent pro-Israel stance.  He may, also, have won the affection and support of the prosperous, sophisticated and politically active Jewish community.  That may be a good short term tactic; is it a good strategy?

The Liberal Party of Canada came pretty close, in the ‘90s, to institutionalizing anti-Americanism. It served them well – especially in multi-cultural Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.  It served them less well in (electorally over-represented and predominantly ‘old’ and white) rural Canada.  It is most likely that George W. Bush will still be US President when Canadians next go to the polls.  Running against George W. Bush will work, again; Stephen Harper just started doing it. (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061006.warar1006/BNStory/National/home )  The NDP are working the anti-American vote very, very hard – trying to take seats away from the Liberals in Vancouver, Toronto and even Montreal.

Stephen Harper and the next Liberal leader do not, just, have to ’sell’ the Afghanistan mission; each needs to develop, enunciate and sell a coherent vision of Canada in the world in the 21st century.  Of necessity a coherent vision will not, because it cannot, be all things to all people.  Some of Canada’s multicultural communities will, must be offended and will, largely, abandon one party or the other (or both).  If that coherent vision of Canada in the world is also a principled vision then the party, whichever or both, will not regret losing some support.  Unprincipled leaders will try to appease most of the people most of the time; they will, probably, enjoy some short-term success but they will fail in the longer term.

Edit: typos


 
President Galtieri of Argentina was in trouble at home because of his domestic policies. He was very unpopular and the country was (and is ) divided.

His solution was to change the country's focus from the internal to the external.  He invaded the Falklands and made the UK the bad guy.  Unfortunately for him he chose the wrong bad guy

However his instinct wasn't completely wrong.  It has been used by many politicians and leaders with varying success over the millennia.

If the government of the day (whoever that may be) can craft an external policy that engages the majority of Canadians then perhaps some of the internal faultlines associated with Bi & Bi Commissions and Multiculturalism can be knitted together.

Canadians are not likely to come together on a pure warfighting, "us against them"  strategy.  However, is there enough of a reservoir of altruism within the country to support an "us with them" strategy?

The wooly-headedness associated with the UN and Darfur and Lebanon, along with the willingness of Canadians to donate to things like the Tsunami relief and engage in peacekeeping and NGOs suggest that there is. 

The question becomes convincing people that are unused to the notion of the need for personal sacrifice and also convincing them both nationalists and internationalists that the sovereign state is still the best foundation for establishing a global order.

 
There really is a little Winston Churchill in Stephen, isn't there....

Very impressive....again.


Matthew.  :salute:
 
Agreed Blackshirt, if isnt Churchill, it's atleast a very old school way of 'speechifying'. One I find I like alot more then the other styles out there.
 
Quote
We have seen just how proud Canadians are of our soldiers and their families. And we have also seen how difficult it is to bear the sorrow of their losses. But, ladies and gentlemen, that is the price of leadership.

Call me delusional, but I just may have found faith in the country I have dedicated my life to serving...

Dave

I've find that since Harper has been in power I am a little bit more proud to be Canadian, especially with the leadership he has shown during such a crucial time. But for some reason I have this feeling that Ontario will swing back to the Liberals again with either Ignatieff or Rae as leader which would be bad for the country.
 
The PM is showing himself to be not only a skilled politician but more importantly (for me at least) a statesman.  Politicians are a dime a dozen, statesmen shape a nation.
 
I think that the current PM's greatest achievement has been his ability to surprise the doomsday fearing people out there.  SURPRISE!  Harper does NOT eat babies!  It's also a bit refreshing to have a non-lawyer as a PM.  His oratory skills may not be that of an impassioned Jean Chretien (yes, when he was non-scripted and passionate, he was a very good speaker, IMHO), but it's his substance that I personally find appealing.
 
Harper is taking us in the direction I always wanted Canada to be in.  A leading force.  He can count on my first vote of my life at the next election.
 
its time for us to take our rightful place as leaders of the third world
canadians are proud to be members of the new world order!
one world one government! the war for peace! ordo ab chao!!

all hail harper!

:skull:
322
 
ACE_aifilaw said:
Harper is taking us in the direction I always wanted Canada to be in.  A leading force.  He can count on my first vote of my life at the next election.
Well, before you decide, wait until the election is called.  It is refreshing, however, to see such interest in the country at such a young age (apparently 18, that, or you've just decided not to vote before)

 
No probs. 
I can't even remember 18 or what it felt like.  :-[  Anyway, keep up the interest in your nation.  Bring your friends out!

Cheers

von G
 
Back
Top