The Hill Times
http://www.thehilltimes.ca/2003/june/2/staples/Martin's endorsement of national missile defence was a major victory for
Canada's corporate lobbyists
By
Steven Staples
Last week, the Chretien government decided to take Canada one step closer to joining the Bush administration's
national missile defence system.
But strangely, no one has explained what missile threat Canada faces
leaving
Canadians to wonder if national missile defence is more about
defending the country from rogue U.S. trade policies than
from rogue
nations.
The current debate, which was sparked by Paul Martin's endorsement of
missile defence, has
revealed how business interests are influencing
Canada's foreign and defence policies.
Business groups have been
campaigning for months to push the Liberals closer
to the Bush administration on a range of issues especially national
missile
defence. In the back rooms of the missile defence debate one might
find many of the players who were behind the Canada-U.S.
Free Trade
Agreement and NAFTA .
The old Business Council on National Issues is back, but it has rebranded
itself
as the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE). It's still run by
long-time free trader Tom D'Aquino, but today it
has broadened its attention
from liberalizing investment and cutting deficits to boosting the military
as well.
In
a recent policy paper the CCCE argued that Canada must "enhance the
interoperability of Canadian and U.S. armed forces...
including Canadian
participation in a continental anti-ballistic missile system." It has
organized an action group of
30 CEOs to promote its plan for "North American Security and Prosperity."
Last month CCCE corporate members went to
Washington, D.C., to meet with Bush administration officials, including defence adviser Richard Perle.
According to
one shaken participant, the hawkish Perle gave the Canadian
corporate leaders a stern dressing-down and told them that
"Canada had
better realize in future where its best interests lie."
The corporate lobby got the message.
The
Aerospace Industries Association of Canada (AIAC), which includes
heavyweight members such as Bombardier, has joined the
CCCE in urging the
government to get on board with the Americans.
Ron Kane, an AIAC vice-president, told The Globe
and Mail that he fears that if Canada does not join the missile defence plan, member corporations will
be shut out of the
multi-billion dollar defence contracts. Perhaps not
surprisingly, Kane said his fears were based on a personal conversation
with
U.S. Ambassador Paul Cellucci.
But Canadians should know that the debate is unfolding just as the Bush
administration
had hoped it would.
The Bush administration has been manipulating the missile defence program in
order to activate
domestic corporate lobbies in countries around the world,
especially those countries that have been reluctant to endorse
the United
States' pursuit of the controversial program.
The respected U.S. defence industry magazine Defense News
revealed last
summer that the U.S. Missile Defense Agency wanted to "lure foreign firms
with U.S. defense dollars and
hope the contractors sway their governments to
get on board."
Boeing is the lead contractor on national missile
defence, and in July it
penned an agreement with Britain's BAE Systems in a deal that the The Daily
Telegraph described
as "an attempt by President George W. Bush to persuade
Tony Blair that national missile defence is worthwhile." Within
months the
once skeptical Tony Blair had dropped his objections and even invited the
Americans to use a U.K. radar station
for the system.
By October, Boeing had gotten around to Canada. It signed a vague agreement with CAE Inc. for modelling
and simulation services, but there was no dollar figure attached to the contract.
CAE's technological contribution
is insignificant compared to its political
contribution. Its president is Derek H. Burney, former chief of staff to
Prime
Minister Brian Mulroney, former ambassador to the United States, and
along with Tom D'Aquino one of the chief architects
of the Canada-U.S. Free
Trade Agreement. Today, Burney is an influential executive member of both
the CCCE and the Aerospace
Industries Association of Canada.
But the truth is that there will be little benefit to Canada in joining
missile
defence, despite what the CEOs may argue.
Canadians need only look at the reconstruction of Iraq, where even Britain,
a
close ally in the war, is being shut out of lucrative contracts. Moreover,
most of the major missile defence contracts
will remain in the hands of U.S.
corporations, and Congress will insist on "Buy American" policies.
In the end,
the government could be bilked out of billions of dollars to pay
for Canada's contribution to missile defence over the
life of the program,
while still facing protectionist trade policies from Washington.
Paul Martin's endorsement
of national missile defence was a major victory
for Canada's corporate lobbyists. It resulted in his ranks of caucus
supporters
falling into line on the issue, and even made a true believer out
of the dovish Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham.
But
Canada's foreign and defence policies should never be driven by
financial interests; they should instead be an expression
of Canadians'
values by promoting diplomacy and disarmament. Paul Martin seems to need
reminding that our traditional
peacekeeping role is not for sale.
Steven Staples is a defence analyst with the Polaris Institute, a public
interest
research group based in Ottawa.
______________
Steven Staples
Director,
Project on the Corporate-Security
State
Polaris Institute
312 Cooper Street
Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0G7
CANADA
t. 613 237-1717 x107
c. 613 290-2695
f.
613 237-3359
e.
steven_staples@on.aibn.comwww.polarisinstitute.org
