The Weekly Standard Meets The Commentator

The Weekly Standard is a respected conservative magazine in the United States. Recently, one of its writers, Matt Labash, made Canada the subject of his most recent article.

If this writer did not have such a strong sense of humour and was, instead, a thin- skinned Canadian nationalist, I would be irritated.

Over the last few weeks, if not months, Canada has made headlines, for all the wrong reasons it turns out, in the United States. In addition to The Weekly Standard, The Wall Street Journal and New York Times have also opined, with less humour, about Canadian-American relations. The relationship, for those who are completely oblivious, is not exactly tight these days. In this cycle of our diplomatic relations, it is, not surprisingly, downplayed by Canadians (almost to delusional levels). Some academics scoff at a 'permanent damage' notion as they feel the Americans will come off their excitement and return to their senses. Canada never needs to come, observations behold, their senses in their eyes.

Are the Americans justified in their thoughts about Canada? Yes and no. Americans are in no mood for the anti-American rhetoric filtering out of this country. For an ultra-sensitive society aware of how they are portrayed in the U.S., Canadians show a remarkable lack of judgment and inability to help their own cause. However, the American press is picking and choosing once again what to hold Canada accountable for.

True, Canada's behavior on the international stage before the cameras leaves much to be desired. Canada often comes up short in matching the rhetoric with action. It is, on the other hand, unfair to claim that Canada is not doing what it can, for example, in the War on Terror. The government, behind closed doors, are quietly taking measures to ensure that security is improved as they cooperate with the Americans.

The main difference this time around is that the Americans are forcing Canada to grow up. They are, wittingly or otherwise, waking Canada from its protected slumbers. If Canadians have an issue with Americans, anti-American buffoonery will not be sufficient, it is time they act like statesmen reflecting confidently the values and aspirations of an advanced intelligent and civilized society. Americans are no longer willing to humour Canadians.

It is not surprising then, that American commentators, thinkers and writers alike are beginning to take notice. What did Canadians think? That by engaging in provocative (some say isolated*) anti-Americanism was legitimate? Canada, to be sure, is not guilty of anything illegal. They are exercising their right to free speech in a democracy.

Up until 2001, Canada could get away with ruffling feathers for political expediency, but post 9/11 has ushered in a new global system that Canadians have been slow to adjust to. There are no feathers left to ruffle.

What is interesting is that it is not just conservatives (whether they are classical, paleo or neo in their orientation) who are critically assessing Canada. Liberals too are also pontificating. As mentioned earlier, NYT did so recently in listing an inordinate amount of disagreements for two staunch allies and WSJ opined about the free ride gets living off the protection of the United States. Which brings me to the latest article by Matt Labash in the Weekly Standard.

His article was typical in its use of American cliches. Except this time it was not the RCMP and igloos but hockey goons and Nickleback. While his article could be interpreted as tongue in cheek, it does reveal how disinterested Americans can be regarding all things Canadiana. Canadians are partly, if not mostly, for this.

Americans do not appreciate how difficult it is for Canadians to live independently next to the most powerful entity the world has ever known. It has made navigating through domestic politics hell for Canadian leaders. Canada has always had to operated betwixt two great powers. No wonder Canada sometimes exhibits bi-polar symptoms. As one 19th century Mexican revolutionary once said "Poor Mexico, so far from God yet so close to the United States." Indeed, one can easily replace Mexico with Canada.

Labash uses our exports as metaphors as to somehow reveal that we lack substance. Of course, two can play this game. Americans have been exporting pop-culture trash via J-Lo and Jessica Simpson for decades. Americans exports, they should be made aware, have not always been beneficial to Canada. As some Canadians libertarians have pointed out, much to the horror of The Weekly Standard, that the socialism Americans are wary of was itself imported from the United States. In a sense, we import each other's garbage leaving the good stuff behind.

It is understandable that Americans are annoyed with Canada. Approaching this, however, by attacking Canadian integrity is counter productive. Just like how futile it is for Canadians to do the same. America is the big brother with major responsibilities and Canada is the younger rebellious brother who does not fully appreciate this.

Interestingly, some good can come of this. America is indirectly saying that Canada can contribute much. If only Canada could once and for all shed its insecurities and join the table of great nations with a strong sense of itself.

The Weekly Standard article, despite its cliches, should force Canadians to ponder more about how they are perceived in America. Both countries need to work harder in understanding one another in a post 9/11 world. Doing otherwise is a direct ticket to Nowheresville.

Note*I have wondered about this. Indeed, historian Jack Granatstein says that anti-Americanism is and has been a 'state-religion' in this country. However, with 87% of our exports disproportionately going to one country this should in theory, convert into millions of Canadians who have a clear stake in having healthy bi-lateral relations. The business community is most definitely realistic and concerned about the behaviour of Canadian politicians. On the other hand, humans are funny and it would not surprise me that this reality flies right over the heads of many.