Home The Ambassador Canada's chief representatives to the U.S. Michael Kergin Ambassador Kergin's Speeches May 10, 2001

Remarks delivered to the Meridian International Center, Washington, D.C.

Speech by Michael Kergin, Ambassador of Canada to the United States at the Meridian International Center

Washington, D.C.
May 10, 2001

Thank you for that kind introduction.

An ambassador in Washington marks a number of milestones early in his or her tenure. The presentation of credentials at the White House is the first. Speaking at the Meridian Center is a close second. Tonight, after eight months on the job, I'm very pleased to complete my initiation to Washington.

I'm going to talk to you about "Canada's place in the Americas". It is an appropriate subject in the wake of the Quebec City Summit of the Americas.

And it is particularly significant for my country, because the summit marked the conclusion of a fundamental shift in Canada's geo-political map. The Economist magazine recognized this shift: in 1997 it added an "Americas" category to its table of contents, and placed Canada inside. Three years ago, the State Department also recognized this shift: moving Canada from the European bureau into its inter-American bureau. The National Security Council has just done the same thing.

But the story of Canada's geo-political migration to the America's is not well known. It took over a century, and it is a story, I think, that is worth telling.

Today's date is significant for my theme. On May 10, 1497 Amerigo Vespucci set sail for what was known as the "new world".

Vespucci embarked on his voyage only five years after Columbus first bumped up against our continent's shores. What set Vespucci apart from Columbus was that he was a cartographer. He literally put this new world on the map. And so the economic and cultural ties between the Americas and Europe began.

With the failure of Bolivar's dream, the early history of the new world was characterized by the development of largely separate regions: South America, Central America and Mexico, the Caribbean, and of course, the United States of America -- the latter with such enormous economic and political weight that it overshadowed the rest.

And then there was Canada -- a country without a region -- not naturally a nation of the Americas. Canada was not a member of the original Americas initiative -- the 1890 International Union of American Republics. Nor was Canada a member of the 1910 Pan-American union. The Organization of American States was established in 1948. But Canada turned down an invitation to join.

A chair dedicated to Canada at the OAS would remain empty until 1990, one hundred years after the America's initiative was launched. Why did it take us so long to come home? Well, to be frank, until recently, it didn't feel much like home.

In effect, for a long time, it was really difficult for Canada to disentangle the Americas from America. Canada enjoyed such close relations with the United States that it sometimes obscured our vision further south. Of course, we did establish thriving relationships with individual countries of the hemisphere but these were on a bilateral, not a regional basis.

But we also had our reasons for limiting our engagement -- for minimizing our multilateral involvement in the Americas.

Differing U.S. and Canadian approaches to the hemisphere were evident as early as 1903, as demonstrated by the following two quotations:

In 1903, Theodore Roosevelt said:

"There is a homely old adage which runs: speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far. If the American nation will speak softly, and yet build ... an ... efficient Navy, the Monroe Doctrine will go far."

In that same year, 1903, a song called "Canadian born" was popular in our country. The final stanza includes:

"The Dutch may have their Holland, the Spaniard has his Spain, the Yankee to the south of us must south of us remain."

As the century progressed, Canada remained ill at ease with the security dimension of the OAS, the so-called Rio Treaty.

For example, the United States cited this treaty as justification for a number of interventions in Central America and the Caribbean. In Canada there was significant public opposition to this "gun boat diplomacy".

These latter day manifestations of the Monroe Doctrine had consequences for Canada's approach to the Americas. They inhibited our enthusiasm for inter-American institutions. And they prompted Canadian policy makers to be "strategically ambivalent" on the Americas.

Canada was naturally reluctant to foment unnecessary tensions with the United States. This was particularly true for hemispheric situations in which Canada had limited influence and less vested interest.

As one Canadian academic put it, we were "too close to America and too far from the Americas."

But later on, as our late Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau said:

"Sharing the continent with the United States is rather like sleeping with an elephant -- he may not know you're there, but you must be sensitive to his every twitch."

Well, we had a pretty damn big pachyderm between us and the rest of the Americas. But that fact didn't always limit us to one side of the bed!

For example, Canada had a plain disagreement with the U.S. over Cuba. Canada was the only country in the hemisphere, along with Mexico, which did not break relations with Cuba in the 1960's and participate in an economic embargo of the island.

But on balance, Canada sought to retain strong relations with the U.S., relegating hemispheric ties to a secondary position.

Then came the 1980s -- a decade of significant global changes. The resulting colossal upheavals had a major impact on Canada's place in the Americas. During the 80's, nearly every nation in the Americas adopted basic political and economic ideals based on democratic values and principles. The end of the cold war prompted a shift in U.S. policy toward its southern neighbours -- therefore ideological concerns no longer threatened to put Canada at odds with its strongest partner and ally. The lowering of external trade barriers created new opportunities for Canadian business throughout the hemisphere. And the importance of emerging issues such as drugs and the environment meant that Canada could no longer afford to leave an empty chair at the hemisphere's table.

These important changes meant that huddling in the cold, well above the Rio Grande, was no longer an option for Canadians. Our policy moved from "strategic ambivalence" to "strategic action". We wanted -- and needed -- a Canadian house in the Americas.

The cornerstone of the house had already been laid. In 1971, when Canada joined the Inter-American Development Bank. I have a personal stake in this as I was a member of the initial Canadian team at the bank. And I would like to acknowledge tonight my wife, Margarita, who was the very first employee of the Canadian office at the IDB. It was she who transformed a gringo from the far north into a diplomat who made much of his subsequent career in the region.

Following the changes of the 80s, the construction of this "Canadian house in the Americas" accelerated. On January 8, 1990, Canada joined the OAS as the 33rd member. That day, we became its second largest financial contributor. We also came to the OAS with a dowry, if you will, by creating the unit for the promotion of democracy. This provided member states with technical assistance based on best practices in order to strengthen democratic, police and judicial institutions throughout the hemisphere.

In addition to joining the OAS, Canadians also learned to make a living in the neighbourhood. And we did this by signing free trade agreements. First with the U.S. -- the FTA in 1989, with Mexico and the U.S. -- NAFTA in 1994, then a bilateral agreement with Chile in 1997, and two weeks ago with Costa Rica, including docking provisions for the rest of central America.

We also made it a point to bring the hemisphere to Canada. In just the last three years, Canada has hosted numerous inter-American events, including: the Pan-American games -- one of the largest sports events ever held in our country; the free trade area of the Americas ministerial; the OAS general assembly; and last month, the Summit of the Americas in Quebec City.

These developments -- our OAS membership, our trade relationship with the Americas, and our role as summit host -- have defined Canada's hemispheric role.

As a member of the OAS, Canada has endeavored to effect change in the hemisphere. Issues which Canada has championed at the OAS have included: protection of human rights and democracy; judicial and police reform; anti-corruption initiatives; promotion of corporate social responsibility; and, regional and broader multilateral cooperation in the fight against illicit drugs.

Canada took the lead with the OAS to bring pressure to bear on Peru and Haiti when these countries' commitment to democracy faltered. Peaceful democratic elections were negotiated for Peru. Regrettably, Haiti remains on the watch list.

If I may now turn from political institutions to commerce, our free trade agreement with the United States was another seminal moment for Canada's role in the hemisphere. The FTA led to the negotiation of NAFTA. Two friends became three amigos.

Increasingly, as NAFTA has taken hold, our focus is shifting to the hemisphere. The free trade area of the Americas will be a market and a community stretching from the Arctic Circle to the Southern Cone. Together this community has a GDP of seventeen trillion dollars. There are great prospects for expanding prosperity for the 800 million citizens of the hemisphere.

For Canada, the time had come for trade with the Americas. From 1989 to 1999, our two-way trade with the nations of Latin America and the Caribbean increased by 173 percent. Compare that to 66 percent with Europe and 60 percent with Asia. Our total investments in Colombia, Peru, Chile and Brazil are now close to $25 billion. And since 1990, when we joined the OAS, our investment in the entire region has grown fivefold.

These numbers are important for Canada. One in three jobs in our country is related to exports. About 45 cents on every dollar produced in Canada is exported. And we are one of the largest importers and exporters per capita in the world. Trade with all of the Americas, therefore, offers us an opportunity to diversify our markets beyond the United States and to build on substantive investments in Latin America and the Caribbean. And its time has come.

The summit process has been the fulcrum of Canada's emergence in the hemisphere. Our Prime Minister has called it "la gran familia"

The stage for Quebec was set by the historic summits of Miami in 1994 and Santiago on 1998. At Miami, Canada pressed hard for a focus on freer trade throughout the hemisphere -- and the Free Trade Area of the Americas was launched with a target for completion by 2005. In Santiago the process was broadened to include social policy issues. Canada was amongst the strongest of advocates of this change.

Everything converged at Quebec: the leaders, the politics, the issues and the ideas. Under Prime Minister ChrŽtien's leadership, the summit declared that democracy is an essential condition for participation in the summit process. This clearly and eloquently illustrates the leaders' intention to protect human rights and to collectively pursue freedom and stability.

For Canada, the Summit of the Americas, held appropriately in one of the continent's oldest communities, was the culmination of the geo-political shift I have described. And it was an important milestone on the road to building our hemispheric community.

In my view, the key summit outcomes give us a clear idea of where the hemisphere is headed. Let me summarize them as the "three t's": technology, trade and transparency. I believe they can serve as building blocks to a more prosperous and stable future.

The Quebec Summit adopted a declaration on connectivity. It calls on the governments to use information and communications technologies to achieve social and democratic goals. The summit thereby laid the groundwork to begin the important process of bridging the digital divide -- of incorporating the marginalized into the mainstream. And Canada is doing its share: our prime minister pledged a fund of $20 million for such projects -- to bring citizens closer together through information and communication technologies. It is expected that this investment will leverage other resources throughout the hemisphere to bring the less connected societies up to a higher standard.

On trade, summit leaders reaffirmed at Quebec their collective intention to negotiate clear and predictable trade rules for the countries of the hemisphere by 2005. But reconciling market needs with popular expectations is tough at the best of times. Given the scrutiny to which international meetings are subjected in this era of globalization, holding the Quebec Summit was a particular challenge. I think Canada came off pretty well.

Which brings me to transparency. Much of the summit's success was due to leaders' vigorous engagement with civil society. For example, the agreement to open up the negotiating documents associated with the FTAA was both unprecedented and crucial. Additionally, every effort was made to ensure dialogue between the elected representatives of the people inside the meeting rooms and those skeptics outside who questioned their motives, objectives and sincerity. The Canadian government sponsored a parallel "people's summit" held in Quebec, only days before the leaders arrived. It produced its own declaration. The opening statements by leaders were televised as were most of the proceedings. Ministers from many of the participating countries met formally during the summit for a structured two hour discussion with representatives of civil society.

This transparent approach is truly the way of the future. Whether you happened to be in the meeting rooms or on the streets, the Quebec Summit illustrated in many ways that the hemisphere is "una gran familia".

As tangible evidence of their resolve to bind this hemispheric family, the leaders endorsed significant funding in support of their declared objectives. Indeed, over the next three years, more than US$56 billion will be channeled through the inter-American development bank and the world bank to reinforce democratic institutions, economic infrastructure, education, health care and connectivity.

This trend towards hemispheric integration continues a process begun almost half a millennium ago with Amerigo Vespucci's voyage. We are moving away from someone else's characterization of us as the "new world" to the establishment of a hemispheric community. We will indeed create an identity for ourselves as "a new Americas".

Let me conclude by saying that Canada is now in a highly enviable position. We are at the crossroads between Europe, Asia and the Americas. We have a well educated, multi-lingual and multi-ethnic population. We are open to five continents. And we participate in many of the world's best international clubs such as the commonwealth, la francophonie, asia pacific economic cooperation, NATO, and the United Nations.

But we have also proudly claimed our seat at the hemispheric table and we have established our credentials as members in excellent standing.

Canada is no longer a country without a region. We are firmly anchored in the Americas. Indeed, we have come home at last.

Thank you.