![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rfmcdonaldThe Marmot's Hole linked to J.L. Granatstein's Tuesday National Post article "Sometimes, making peace means making war." In this article, Granatstein takes on Canadian anti-Americanism, particularly the Canadian identification of the United States as uniquely militaristic.
Granatstein goes on to argue that although Canada has punched above its weight in the great world conflicts, the United States remains indispensable.
He ends his article by asking Canadians to adopt a different attitude towards the United States.
The thing is, though, that this stereotyped Canadian attitude is right about certain critical matters. Imagine if the United States had involved itself on the side of the British Empire in the First World War in 1914, instead of in 1917 after years of brutal trench warfare and suffering all around. What if the United States had cared enough about international affairs after Wilson to worry about the global balance of power? Perhaps the United States would have gotten involved in the Second World War early on, not more than two years after Hitler's invasion of Poland and more than one year after his conquest of most of northern and western Europe. Was the Vietnam War really necessary, at least the massive war that we were unfortunate to witness and that the Indochinese were cursed to live through? Can the brutal covert war waged against Nicaragua in the 1980s be plausibly excused? Do the sanctions against Cuba make any particular sense, given the United States' interest in trade with China and Saudi Arabia? Isn't a fundamentally flawed occupation policy in Iraq worthy of criticism?
Granatstein's right to argue that unreflexive anti-Americanism is unworthy of Canadians. This is equally true of unreflexive Ameriphilia. Balance, as always, is needed, as is distance. Canada might not possess the first, not always, but we are lucky enough to have the minimum required distance for now. May we always keep the latter and soon acquire the former.
[T]he Yanks? The Americans are the superpower that fought in Vietnam and sprayed its jungles with Agent Orange. They waged war against the Nicaraguan and Cuban peoples, invaded Iraq twice, and continue to station troops all over the world to serve U.S. interests and ensure control over oil supplies. If we're the good guys, the Americans are the world's bullies. Too many Canadians accept this view of their neighbours.
Granatstein goes on to argue that although Canada has punched above its weight in the great world conflicts, the United States remains indispensable.
Yes, Canadians have done their part in the great conflicts, too. There are more than 100,000 dead soldiers, sailors and airmen to testify to our commitment to freedom and democracy. But Canada is a small, relatively weak country and the United States is a superpower. However much Canada contributed, none of it would have mattered without the support of allies. And the most powerful ally, the indispensable ally, was and remains the United States.
Yet Canadians sneer at their neighbours. They were late into the First World War and then claimed they had won it, we say. They were late again in the Second World War and once again believed they had saved Britain's bacon.
He ends his article by asking Canadians to adopt a different attitude towards the United States.
Sometimes, the Americans make mistakes, and Canadians will let them know they're wrong. But is shouting abuse the way to be heard in Washington? Or is co-operating with the U.S. politically and, if it serves Canada's interests, militarily a better way to proceed? It worked for Mike Pearson during the Korean War. It might still work in a very different but no less dangerous world.
Canada is part of Western civilization, and we share the values and beliefs of that civilization. So do Americans. We must get beyond the reflexive desire to criticize the superpower next door and to understand that if the United States is crippled, we too will suffer. We can pretend we keep the peace if it pleases us to do so, but we simply must recognize that without America's strength and will, our civilization will disappear. More realism, fewer myths, please.
The thing is, though, that this stereotyped Canadian attitude is right about certain critical matters. Imagine if the United States had involved itself on the side of the British Empire in the First World War in 1914, instead of in 1917 after years of brutal trench warfare and suffering all around. What if the United States had cared enough about international affairs after Wilson to worry about the global balance of power? Perhaps the United States would have gotten involved in the Second World War early on, not more than two years after Hitler's invasion of Poland and more than one year after his conquest of most of northern and western Europe. Was the Vietnam War really necessary, at least the massive war that we were unfortunate to witness and that the Indochinese were cursed to live through? Can the brutal covert war waged against Nicaragua in the 1980s be plausibly excused? Do the sanctions against Cuba make any particular sense, given the United States' interest in trade with China and Saudi Arabia? Isn't a fundamentally flawed occupation policy in Iraq worthy of criticism?
Granatstein's right to argue that unreflexive anti-Americanism is unworthy of Canadians. This is equally true of unreflexive Ameriphilia. Balance, as always, is needed, as is distance. Canada might not possess the first, not always, but we are lucky enough to have the minimum required distance for now. May we always keep the latter and soon acquire the former.
