Where I Stand — Brian Greenspun: Canada is a true friend

Friday, April 25, 2003 | 5:24 a.m.

THE POLITICS of intimidation.

I just returned from a short sojourn to the Dominican Republic, where I learned -- among many other things -- the closeness the people of the DR feel toward Americans. They love us. And they should, because we have been very good to our Caribbean neighbors over the years.

But we should also love them because they care about our people and our politics. They care about our presidents, present and past, and they care about our success because it breeds success and an increased measure of happiness for them. In short, ours is a relationship built on mutual concern and respect for one another.

Actually, I already knew that much about our two countries because I have had the good fortune to visit the Dominican Republic a few times before, and it takes only a moment to understand and appreciate their love for all things American. But I have to admit, something I saw and heard before I left last week caused a level of concern that neither I nor my friends in the DR deserved.

What I saw, of course, was my own fault because I, like a number of news junkies in this country, intermittently subject myself to Fox News and a certain guy who spins his own web of deceit in a "self-described" spin-free zone. What I heard was Bill O'Reilly spinning his own particular brand of intimidation around a planned golf game between two friends, both of whom would also be vacationing with their families at separate ends of the beautiful island.

I first heard about the planned golf game from a good friend of mine who lives in Canada. Yes, I admit it, I have friends and even relatives who are citizens of our good neighbor to the north. The friends were citizens by ancestral choice and most of the relatives became Canadian citizens a century ago when, fleeing pogroms and brutality in Eastern Europe and Russia, they were accepted with open arms while being turned away by the United States. Need I say more about moral high ground?

My friend was excited about his prime minister, Jean Cretien, and a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton, playing golf during their respective vacations. He liked the idea of old friends getting together for a round of golf and, he admitted, he was hoping I might be around to meet his prime minister. That was the view from Canada.

The view from the United States was usurped by the spinmeister who railed against Clinton having anything to do with the Canadian leader because Canada, like Mexico, most of Europe and a significant part of the rest of the world, did not give its blessing to President George W. Bush's attack on Iraq without United Nations sanction. Not that any of them wanted Saddam in power, they just wanted to do it a different way. Given the brewing controversy -- which is what makes ratings success for O'Reilly and Fox and is, therefore, encouraged above all else -- I could hardly wait to meet this awful man from the north and give him a piece of O'Reilly's mind.

By chance, I met Prime Minister Cretien, a man who after 41 years in public service was retiring at the top of his game. He not only has a darned good golf game -- he is consistently down the middle which, I suppose, has been his secret for good leadership, not too far to the right or too far to the left -- but he owns a sense of humor about life and politics that is not only enviable but also should be required of all people in leadership positions.

He, too, must have heard of the attempt by some of the hard-core spinners in our country to make something out of not very much. I suspect, given his years of political service and accumulated savvy, he found it all amusing. My own sense was that if our President Bush could not intimidate him into doing something he did not believe in, then a petty television ratings hound was not going to get the job done. My words, not his.

So what was Canada's position regarding the United States' effort to unseat Saddam and unearth the weapons of mass destruction?

It has been very public and very clear. It was the same position that the former Canadian Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney, took with President Bush's father in 1991. If the United States had the backing of the United Nations' Security Council, Canada was in. If not, it would watch. In 1991 the first President Bush got the vote he needed from the United Nations. Canada was in. This time our president did not get the vote. Canada demurred as did most of our friends for the same reason. In the world of politics and international relationships, consistency is among the greatest virtues.

By the way, just in case that Fox fellow wants to spin his followers into a boycott of Canada like he has with France, we should understand that Canada is, perhaps, our largest trading partner. It also supplies the United States with more and more stable oil flow than Saudi Arabia -- the prospect for oil independence from the Middle East should not be lost -- and it has the ability to provide our country with cheaper, cleaner and more responsible hydroelectric power for decades into the future, if only we would ask.

Besides all of that, Canada is and has always been a good neighbor and doesn't deserve to be hammered just because it disagrees with our president once on a matter of principle. In our personal lives, we allow and should expect our best friends to disagree with us from time to time. That is why we have good friends. Should we treat countries that are our good friends any differently?

So what should be the definition in today's world of a good friend?

I would say, at a minimum, a country that has been at our side during World War I and World War II. It would have to be a country that stood shoulder to shoulder and fell with us in Korea. It would include a people who fought with us in Haiti, Bosnia and Kosovo. And, above all else, a friend would have to be a country that traveled across the world to Afghanistan to avenge the deaths of thousands of Americans and others and that remains there to this day trying to find, kill or capture the really bad guy in this world, Osama bin Laden.

By that definition, the United States doesn't have that many friends. Canada, however, is one of them.

Welcome to the real no-spin zone. Should we treat countries that are our good friends any differently?

archive