Fight For Canada

[Oscar]

The Fight for Canada: four centuries of resistance to American expansionism (1998 edition) by David Orchard - A Review by Dick Beames, April 2005

This is a carefully researched book that took Orchard eight years to write, to be published in 1993. This revised edition was published five years later. As with all good history books, the text is annotated. The author presents the facts based on irrefutable records which are provided in the text, often as quotations, and as references in an extensive bibliography. In the rare cases where Orchard does express an opinion, he first presents the factual documentation. Much of his argument is based on exposing the insincerity, superficiality and opportunism of many people on both sides of the border.

All the great people in this book, regardless of country of origin, race, religion or language, understood the important factors in making Canada strong and forging it into a sovereign nation. These factors were a strong central government, a transcontinental railway, resistance to all attempts from outside to erode sovereignty and independence, and the need for all citizens to respect each other and work together. This last-mentioned point was well expressed in the inscription on the George-Etienne Cartier statue in Mt. Royal Park, Montreal “We are different races, not for strife, but to work together for the common welfare. Cartier, 1865”.

The book, particularly with a title such as this, is critical of the United States and could be discarded by some as blatant anti-Americanism, which is a term that should be reserved for criticisms that are not justified. It conclusively demonstrates that the U.S., from the early days of the establishment of French and British settlements on the north-east of the continent to the present day, has been aggressively attempting to incorporate Canada into the U.S., or, failing that, to dominate its economy. Orchard writes the book from the perspective of a true Canadian patriot. Although he is a member of the Conservative party, albeit with a somewhat strained relationship at the time of writing this review (2005), his attitude towards politicians is not influenced by this, with his giving both credit and criticism where he considers it is due with regard to the preservation of Canada as a sovereign nation.

It was not until John A. Macdonald, with the strong support of his close French-Canadian friend George-Etienne Cartier, in the early 1860s decided to tie the country together from the Atlantic to the Pacific with a railway, that Canada could speak with one voice. The nation of Canada was formed in 1867.

The story starts with the arrival of Jacques Cartier in 1535 and the first French settlement in Port Royal in Acadia (now Nova Scotia) in 1605. In 1607 the English established their first permanent settlement in Jamestown, Virginia. Six years later they attacked the Acadians and forced those who survived to flee. Some later returned. In 1690, a vastly superior force of Americans attacked Quebec city, but were repulsed. In 1711, the Americans again attacked Quebec city, this time with the help of the British and again were repulsed. In 1713 Acadia ceded to Britain. In 1755 the Americans attacked Acadia and drove the 20,000 Acadians out of the settlement, leaving alone the 5,000 British settlers. In 1755, the Americans, with a superior force, attacked the French in the Ohio valley, but were defeated. Three years later, Louisbourg and Fort Duquense (now Pittsburgh) fell to the Americans. In 1759 the British, under the command of General Wolfe, with the aid of Americans, took Quebec city. The Americans were then sent home, but the British stayed and settled, and later cooperated with the French-Canadians and many Indian bands under the command of the great leader, Tecumseh, to repel later American invasions. American expansionism was more successful to the South and West. In 1819, Florida was taken from Spain and in 1845 Texas was taken from Mexico. Over the period 1845 – 1848, Mexico ceded California, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah and parts of Colorado and Wyoming. With the signing of the Oregon Treaty in 1846, Britain ceded all of what is now Oregon and Washington State and receded to the 49th parallel.

Orchard devotes considerable space to a discussion of the glorious but tragic story of Louis Reil and his Métis compatriots in the Red River settlement (where Winnipeg now stands). At the time of Confederation (1867), this settlement was not part of Canada, and was being seriously threatened from the south for incorporation into the U.S.. Reil and his followers were responsible for holding off this threat until the Canadian government got sufficiently organized for Manitoba to decide to become a province in 1870. Although now recognized as one of Canada’s greatest heroes and patriots, Riel was eventually hanged in 1885 as a result of misunderstandings, religious and racial intolerances, bigotry and ignorance.

At the turn of the century, Theodore Roosevelt went to the “aid” of the Cubans in the 1898 Spanish – Cuban War (when the Cubans had almost won the war on their own) and stayed there. For good measure the U.S. took control of the Philippines and Guam at the same time. Over the years expansionism has waxed and waned, but a constant has been a U.S. reluctance to relinquish any territory it has occupied (e.g. Guantanamo, which was leased to the U.S. “in perpetuity” in 1903). In the first half of the 20th Century, the U.S. had become isolationist to the extent that it took the sinking of the Lusitania by a German U-boat in 1915, with the loss of American lives, for the U.S. to enter the First World War in 1917; similarly it took the attack on Pearl Harbor to bring the U.S. into the Second World War. From 1945 to the present day, the overriding basis of U.S. policy has been to defend its way of life, even if this needed the establishment of military bases or military invasion. At the present time the U.S. has military bases in 55 foreign countries (New Internationalist, March, 2005).

At the end of the Second World War in 1945, Canada was a powerful sovereign nation. It had resisted attempts by the U.S. to annex it. Industry was in a strong position as a result of the tremendous effort put into war-time production. It seems that either the government of this time lacked the will to build on this strength in industry and to defend sovereignty, or external forces dictated the subsequent turn of events in both areas. Two examples from this book (the aero industry and the merchant marine) illustrate this sad situation prior to 1960:

Aero industry: By 1945, Canada had developed extensive expertise in aircraft design and construction. In the following years it built on this expertise, and had produced its first jet engine by 1949, and in 1950 had its own jetliner in commercial use, eight years before the first U.S. jetliner (Boeing 707). In 1957, Canada had the Avro Arrow (a fighter, complete with a Canadian-designed engine) in the air, with a top-speed of approx. mach 1.7. It was years ahead of any other fighter in the world at that time. The Arrow was about to be tested with a much more powerful Canadian engine when the then prime minister, John Diefenbacher, stunned the nation by announcing that the project had to be terminated. Not only that, but all existing planes and components and plans had to be completely destroyed, to the extent that the plane, for all intents and purposes, never existed. The ridiculous excuse was that the programme was becoming too expensive. All of this destruction took place so fast that the citizens of the country did not know what had happened until it was too late to do anything to prevent it. The only possible conclusion was that the Prime Minister was taking orders from a foreign government that felt threatened by this situation. These were early days of the Cold War, and communist spies were “everywhere”.

The Merchant Marine: In 1945 Canada had the fourth largest merchant navy in the world, with 500 ships and 20,000 men employed. In 1947, the CSU (Canadian Seaman’s Union) was strong, with 12,000 members. The AFL (American Federation of Labor) resented this, as at the time, its affiliate, the SIU (Seafarers’ International Union), did not have many members in Canada. In1944, the AFL had unilaterally decreed that the SIU would have jurisdiction over all “seamen and fishermen in all waters of North America and Canada”. The purpose of this plan was to eliminate the Canadian fleet and replace it with American ships. The then prime minister, Mackenzie King, strangely, was not in opposition to this. The man assigned to make this pronouncement a reality was Harold Banks, an American gangster. With stong-arm tactics and with much help, even some from the RCMP, he did a thorough job. By 1964, the Canadian fleet had only two ships and the Canadian shipbuilding industry was dead. In contrast, the United States prohibited foreign-owned ships from operating in U.S. coastal waters. One has to wonder why the Canadian government not only allowed this to happen, but supported this route. Surely there must have been pressure from the U.S. government.

Orchard goes to great lengths to discuss subsequent events that threatened both the nation’s strength (the Meech Lake Accord and the Charlottetown Accord) and its independence (the FTA- Free Trade Agreement, and its successor the NAFTA [to include Mexico] – North American Free Trade Agreement).

The Meech Lake Accord, whose aims was to transfer many of the responsibilities of the federal government to the provinces, was tabled in parliament in 1987. The attempt by the Mulroney PC Party to force this document into law was thwarted largely as a result of an impassioned presentation by Pierre Trudeau (who came out of political retirement for this very purpose) that made the public realize the damage this accord could do to Canadian sovereignty. Delaying tactics by Elijah Harper in the Manitoba Legislative Assembly prevented approval by that province, and thus defeated the Accord. Attempts to revive the issue in 1992 as the Charlottetown Accord met with no success.

The FTA, which was later expanded to the NAFTA, was introduced by Mulroney and his PC party in May, 1988, even though, prior to the PC party winning the elections in 1993, he had campaigned on not being in favour of an agreement. It was portrayed to the general public as an agreement between Canada and the U.S. that would benefit Canada by increasing the opportunities for Canadian businesses to profit from increased access to the American markets. Little, if anything, was said about the increased access to the Canadian markets for U.S. companies. Orchard exposes many other facts that were down-played or hidden from the public, such as:
Paragraph 8 (1) states that where there is any conflict between any Canadian law and the FTA, the rules of the FTA are to take precedence. In contrast, the U.S. government had made sure to include the statement that U.S. law would take precedence over the rules of the FTA. But then it gets worse for Canada. The dispute resolution process involves a board that is (nominally) beyond the control of either government, and takes precedence over any WTO ruling. To have given away so much for so little gain, one can only conclude that the Canadian negotiators of the FTA and the NAFTA were either incompetent or were not concerned with improving Canadian interests or safeguarding Canadian sovereignty. Not that the Liberals proved to be any more sincere when, under Jean Chrétien, before they won the 1993 election, they campaigned on the stance of withdrawing from the agreement or greatly modifying it. They subsequently did absolutely nothing. The honesty and intensity of disgust that had been expressed by the then leader of the Liberal Party, John Turner, in 1988 when this party was the official opposition, had evaporated.

Of great concern for Canadians with the existing NAFTA is the fact that Canada has lost control of its energy (oil and, gas) and fresh water supplies. With energy, the American share of Canadian oil and gas can not be reduced as supplies diminish in the future, even though Canada may not have enough to meet its own needs. There is no statement in the NAFTA that excludes water as a good. Although the government has verbally stated it is not included, there has never been any documentation to confirm this. Over the next four years at least, and maybe longer, the U.S. government policy will be to focus not on energy conservation, but on the aggressive drive to control the supply of overseas oil to augment the dwindling U.S. reserves (e.g. in Iraq and Saudi Arabia) (see The Party’s Over: oil, war, and the fate of industrial societies by Richard Heinberg; It’s the Crude, Dude: war, big oil and the fight for the planet by Linda McQuaig). Michael Ruppert, in his book, Crossing the Rubicon; the decline of the American empire and the end of the age of oil, presents strong evidence to support his contention that the U.S. government capitalized on the events of 9/11 as it rallied the nation to support the nebulous “war on terror”. This “war” could then be used for a vast range of activities whether or not they had any connection with terrorist control. This lack of a desire to conserve energy is seen also in the U.S. auto industry. Amazingly, General Motors can not or will not understand the economic disadvantages of its continued emphasis on large trucks and SUVs, especially when Japan is now producing so many hybrid vehicles.

There is a widespread misunderstanding that Canada is the land of massive excesses of water. Although much of the land surface is covered with lakes and rivers, only one percent of this water is renewed each year by precipitation (rain and snow), according to David Schindler, a professor at the University of Alberta and a world expert on water management. Most of this water is in delicate ecosystems. Already some regions are under extreme stress. An example is the area containing the Athabasca tar sands. A large percentage of the oil-bearing sand is deep down, and requires the injection of large amounts of hot water, which either stay below the ground, or come to the surface as an intractable emulsion which is virtually impossible to treat, and thus has to be stored in massive ponds. If the walls of these ponds were ever to rupture, the whole of the Mackenzie River would be polluted, right to its mouth.

The threat to Canadian water posed by the possibility of large scale exports under the existing NAFTA is extensively discussed in Blue Gold, by Maude Barlow. It is certain that the U.S., in the near future, will have to either import water or drastically change its level of consumption, particularly in the dry south-west, where population level is rapidly increasing and the water levels in the Ogalalla aquifer (the main water source) and other aquifers are falling at alarming rates. Prospects for maintaining or lowering present consumption levels are not bright

Concern about the strength of Canadian sovereignty continues to this day. With the ruling Liberal Party in trouble with the sponsorship program, there is a very real chance of the Conservative Party taking over the reins. This party is in favour of strengthening ties with the U.S. and the devolution of power to the provinces.