Canada Loses Seat On UN Security Council

[Sionnach Glic]

Thoughts from our Canadian members?

OTTAWA - In a stunning swipe at Canada's foreign policy shift under the Conservative government, United Nations voters Tuesday rejected Canada's bid for a seat on the prestigious Security Council.

Within minutes of the historic loss, Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon was blaming Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff, who last week questioned whether Canada deserves a seat on the 10-member council.

"I can say that Michael Ignatieff's statements hurt us," Cannon told reporters in New York.

Ignatieff had criticized Canada's foreign policy record, particularly when it comes to climate change and foreign aid priorities.

Ignatieff and other opposition parties are expected to respond to the UN loss later Tuesday afternoon.

Cannon said international diplomats noted that lack of unity in the Canadian bid when it came time to vote.

Canada was up against Portugal and Germany for two seats the council reserves for "Western European and Other States."

To win a seat, a country must get two-thirds of the votes cast.

In the first ballot, Germany won outright. Portugal finished second but five votes shy of the super-majority while Canada was third, 14 votes short of the required majority.

On the second ballot, both Canada and Portugal still failed to receive the two-thirds majority but Canada lost a third of the support it had on the first ballot and, once again, finished behind Portugal.

Before a third round of voting could take place, Canada withdrew. Portugal went on to claim the prized seat.

Cannon rejected the suggestion that the failure to win a seat is connected to his government's foreign policy, particularly its stance towards Middle East politics. Since taking office in 2006, the Conservatives have been strong supporters of Israel, at times even describing Canada as Israel's ally.

Former and current diplomats believe that shift towards Israel cost Canada support with Arab and Muslim countries, which together control more than a third of the votes at the UN.

"I do not think that this is a repudiation of Canada's foreign policy. Canada ran a campaign based on principle," said Cannon.

As recently as two weeks ago, Prime Minister Stephen Harper pitched Canada's candidacy for the Security Council to the 192 member countries at the UN.

But despite depositing bottles of maple syrup on the desks of voters Tuesday and bringing in some uniformed Mounties as part of a last-minute pitch for support, UN voters soundly rejected Canada's bid for a seat.

In six tries - about once every decade since the creation of the UN - Canada had never lost an election to the Security Council.

[Mikey]

Holy crip, its a crapple!

Wow, I never thought I'd see the UN take a potshot at a prominent member's internal politics like this.

[Tyyr]

That's pretty much bullshit. Fucking Portugal?

[Mark]

Well, Canada could always get another shot.......if they become our 51st state!


I kid, I kid

[Mikey]

Well, it is telling that it's even considered plausible that being a supporter of Israel could be grounds for lack of support in the UN.

Be that as it may,

But despite depositing bottles of maple syrup on the desks of voters Tuesday

Really, Canada? That's how you tried to buy votes?

[SolkaTruesilver]

Well, it is telling that it's even considered plausible that being a supporter of Israel could be grounds for lack of support in the UN.

Be that as it may,

But despite depositing bottles of maple syrup on the desks of voters Tuesday

Really, Canada? That's how you tried to buy votes?

Stephen Harper and his conservative government are a bunch of illiterate rednecks who happens to be able to finance their party with the oil from Alberta, which is probably the most polluting oil producing process on earth.

His fucking foreign minister showed up at a diplomatic event in France wearing no tie, "because he was going on vacation with his wife thereafter". They got no prestance, they got no perspective of anything going in the world, simply drawing lines regarding Good and Evil as simplistic as Bush's. Ergo, Israel = Good, whatever they might do. Gay = Evil.

[BigJKU316]

Well, it is telling that it's even considered plausible that being a supporter of Israel could be grounds for lack of support in the UN.

Be that as it may,

But despite depositing bottles of maple syrup on the desks of voters Tuesday

Really, Canada? That's how you tried to buy votes?

Stephen Harper and his conservative government are a bunch of illiterate rednecks who happens to be able to finance their party with the oil from Alberta, which is probably the most polluting oil producing process on earth.

His f***ing foreign minister showed up at a diplomatic event in France wearing no tie, "because he was going on vacation with his wife thereafter". They got no prestance, they got no perspective of anything going in the world, simply drawing lines regarding Good and Evil as simplistic as Bush's. Ergo, Israel = Good, whatever they might do. Gay = Evil.

This is better than the usual neutralist, non-committal mush that constitutes most of Canada's foreign policy. At least they have an opinion.

[SolkaTruesilver]

This is better than the usual neutralist, non-committal mush that constitutes most of Canada's foreign policy. At least they have an opinion.

There has been plenty of Canadian influence through the world, even for a country this size (which is still somewhat light-medium weight), just not on the scale of the US or France.

The guy repudiated Kyoto and blamed it international on the Liberal party of Canada. They made a mess of the environment conferences they were appointed to. The recent G20 meeting in Canada was a debacle.

The Conservative party is a freaking mess and ruining our international reputation.

[BigJKU316]

This is better than the usual neutralist, non-committal mush that constitutes most of Canada's foreign policy. At least they have an opinion.

There has been plenty of Canadian influence through the world, even for a country this size (which is still somewhat light-medium weight), just not on the scale of the US or France.

The guy repudiated Kyoto and blamed it international on the Liberal party of Canada. They made a mess of the environment conferences they were appointed to. The recent G20 meeting in Canada was a debacle.

The Conservative party is a freaking mess and ruining our international reputation.

What reputation? Canada has had it pretty easy making international friends considering they face no threats at all and have little responsibility in the world. I have always found it funny when Canadians get all huffed up about Israel or Europe or some other part of the world where nations face real threats and have real problems.

Canada is a very nice place but its international weight comes from the fact that it is not a threat to anyone and no one can threaten it, not from some sort of enlightened policy set forth by its national leaders.

[Mikey]

I wouldn't say that Canada is a complete non-entity. The Canuck contributions in Afghanistan are well-documented, as they were in WWII - remember the Devil's Brigade? However, Canada is generally seen internationally as a contributor and something of a follower, rather than a shaper of policy; which one would believe would lead to a non-threatening aspect to more assertive nations on the Sec Council.

[Tyyr]

I have trouble viewing Portugal as more relevant on the international scene than Canada.

[Mikey]

I have trouble viewing Portugal as more relevant on the international scene than Canada.

Agreed. If there were a UN Council on brandy or port, then maybe.

[SolkaTruesilver]

I wouldn't say that Canada is a complete non-entity. The Canuck contributions in Afghanistan are well-documented, as they were in WWII - remember the Devil's Brigade? However, Canada is generally seen internationally as a contributor and something of a follower, rather than a shaper of policy; which one would believe would lead to a non-threatening aspect to more assertive nations on the Sec Council.

My point. We are far from being as heavyweight as the US, UK, France, Russia, or ther other giants of this world. But for a 30-millions population country, we are pretty influential. It's just that being right next to the World's most influential country make us seem small by comparison. Just compare the other countries in our range of population. Let's start with Nepal, at 29,8

Nepal, Iraq, Morocco, Uganda, Algeria, Poland, Kenya, Argentina, Sudan, Tanzania, Colombia, Ukraine, Spain

(after Spain, we reach the near-50 mil people)

Out of those, only Poland, Ukraine and Spain happens to be of relevance on the international world. Poland has it's importance boosted because of Russia's resurgence, and the US are using them as a military buffer. Ukraine, but it kinda rebecame Russia's puppet, and Spain, which has it's economy in wreck.

For a country as "small" as the Canada, I'd say we hold our own not half bad in term of influence and power. Luckily for us, the presence of the world's biggest military on our doorstep makes it irrelevant for us to try to meddle militarily around the world; the U.S.'s interests are our interests.

[Tyyr]

the U.S.'s interests are our interests.

Yes, now about statehood. There's a lot of paperwork but we might as well make it offical...

[SolkaTruesilver]

the U.S.'s interests are our interests.

Yes, now about statehood. There's a lot of paperwork but we might as well make it offical...

The worst this is, I'd be happy if Canada were to join as 10 states.

After all, we HAVE 10 provinces, so we are used to have layer governments, as you do. As long as the ex-canadian provinces can retain some of their previous federal structure - like the paid healthcare, against, obviously, extra taxes, I am sure we could make this thing work.

After all, most of the "big" economical decisions taken that affect Canada are made in Washington, and we just don't have any say in it. If we were to join the U.S., we'd at least be representated proportionnaly to our population, and we'd never have to fear unfair protectionnism from the U.S. (which is rampant, too sad Canada can't do anything about it) as interstate protectionnism would make little sense.

Here is my list of "preferred destiny" for Quebec, from most favourite to least favourite

1) Independant and Sovereign Republic
2) State of the U.S.
3) Autonomous region in Canada (moreso than right now)
4) Status quo

Why I prefer the U.S. to Canada? Well, the U.S. have a strong history of the federal government minding it's own business about Federal/State relation, while the Canadian government is currently losing a LOT of money trying to be "more present" in the lives of Canadian citizen. Specially Quebec residents, as it's doing it's best to use propaganda to convince Quebecois to not leave Canada.

And losing billions in inneficiencies in the process.