This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 OTTAWA 000274 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FOR SECRETARY POWELL 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/23/2013 
TAGS: PREL MARR ETRD PTER CVIS CA IZ KN VE
SUBJECT: YOUR JANUARY 30 MEETING WITH CANADIAN FOREIGN 
MINISTER GRAHAM 
 
REF: (A) 02 STATE 234708 (B) 02 STATE 234719 (C) 
     OTTAWA 178 
 
Classified By: Deputy Chief of Mission Stephen R. Kelly, 
Reasons 1.5 (b) and (d). 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
------- 
 
¶1. (C) Your January 30 meeting with Foreign Minister Bill 
Graham will be an important opportunity to bolster Canadian 
support for our Iraq policy.  The Canadian Government's 
natural preference is for giving the inspectors more time and 
for the UN Security Council to reach consensus, but it wants 
to stand with the U.S. in the end.  Like in other countries, 
public skepticism is growing here over military action 
against Iraq.  Graham needs to hear the same message that 
President Bush gave the UNGA on September 12, that this is a 
test of the UN's ability to impose its will and to respond 
effectively to a crisis.  In addition to Iraq, Graham will 
want to discuss North Korea, Latin America, missile defense, 
softwood lumber trade, and entry/exit controls at border. 
END SUMMARY. 
 
---- 
IRAQ 
---- 
 
¶2. (C) While Canada's position on Iraq has not changed since 
your November 14 Ottawa meeting with Graham (refs. A and B), 
divisions among allies on the Security Council and within 
Canada's Liberal Party have increased pressure on the 
Chretien Government.  The Canadian position remains that it 
will participate in a UN-blessed operation against Iraq, and 
that it is reserving judgement on participation if there is 
no explicit Security Council approval.  Canadian military 
planners have been in Tampa since early January, consulting 
with CENTCOM planners about a possible Canadian contribution. 
 Publicly, Chretien does not want to admit the possibility 
that Canada might participate without UN blessing, and he 
reined in Defense Minister McCallum for doing so after 
McCallum's January 9 meeting with Defense Secretary Rumsfeld 
(ref. C). 
 
¶3. (C) Claude Laverdure, the Prime Minister's Foreign Policy 
Advisor, told the DCM on January 17 that Canada could indeed 
support military action in Iraq absent a second UNSC 
resolution, especially in a case where 11 or 12 Security 
Council members think there has been a material breach but 
China or another country vetoes a resolution.  Laverdure said 
there should be an "international consensus," but not 
necessarily UN action.  Chretien and Graham both told the 
press on January 23 that there is not yet justification for a 
war on Iraq, and that the inspectors need to keep up the 
pressure. 
 
----------- 
NORTH KOREA 
----------- 
 
¶4. (C) Graham has been a vocal critic of North Korea since 
the October announcement on its nuclear weapons program. 
Canada pushed hard for a G-8 statement during its Presidency, 
and called for the International Atomic Energy Agency to 
refer North Korea's actions to the UN Security Council. 
Canada established diplomatic relations with North Korea in 
2001, and North Korean diplomats have been searching for an 
Embassy location in Ottawa.  Canada is continuing 
humanitarian assistance to North Korea, but otherwise the 
bilateral relationship is on hold. 
 
------------- 
LATIN AMERICA 
------------- 
 
¶5. (SBU) Graham will brief you on his January 20-21 trip to 
Brasilia, where he met with Foreign Minister Celso Amorim and 
other newly appointed members of the Brazilian government. 
He will also want to discuss the situations in Venezuela, 
Colombia and Haiti.   Canada supports the mediation efforts 
of OAS Secretary General Gaviria in Venezuela, and has called 
for an end to political violence in all three countries. 
 
--------------- 
MISSILE DEFENSE 
--------------- 
 
¶6. (C) Canadian officials from Foreign Affairs and Defense 
will be taking part in missile defense consultations with 
U.S. counterparts on January 28.  Graham and McCallum plan to 
brief Cabinet following these consultations, and come to a 
decision sooner rather than later on Canadaian participation. 
 While missile defense remains a controversial issue in 
Canada becaue of arms control concerns, the GoC realizes that 
the train is leaving the station and that other allies are 
getting on board.  Graham may also note that our new 
binational Planning Group is up and running at NORAD, and 
that this will help us coordinate our military response to 
terrorist threats to North America. 
 
--------------- 
SOFTWOOD LUMBER 
--------------- 
 
¶7. (SBU) Under U.S. trade law, the Department of Commerce can 
determine that the circumstances leading to a U.S. industry 
request for countervailing duties have materially changed. 
Having made that determination through a "changed 
circumstances" review, Commerce can reduce or eliminate the 
duties in question without further formal action by the 
affected U.S. industry.  Except for British Columbia, 
lumber-producing provinces have been agnostic about current 
efforts to encourage changes in provincial lumber policies 
through this review process.  Commerce has set February 14 as 
the deadline for publication of the draft policy bulletin 
that will be the basis on which provinces may apply for 
changed circumstances reviews.  The draft will reflect input 
from GOC and provincial officials as well as Canadian and 
U.S. industry organizations, and will be open to further 
revision during the 30-day comment period ending in 
mid-March. 
 
¶8. (SBU) The changed circumstances review has been useful in 
encouraging all the provinces to look for market-oriented 
policies that are consistent with their own needs and 
forestry management objectives.  But the review is only a 
small step forward, even if BC manages to take full advantage 
of it.  At some point we will need to get back to the 
negotiating table.  The U.S. Government has made it clear to 
U.S. industry that we are not interested in border measures 
(export taxes or quotas) unless they are temporary and are a 
transition to an already negotiated end point.  You may wish 
to stress this point with Minister Graham if he raises the 
issue. 
 
------- 
BIOTECH 
------- 
 
¶9. (C) The European Union,s refusal even to accept 
applications for new biotech food products is an outrageous 
breach of WTO rules, sound science, good governance and 
common sense.  There is good reason for the United States to 
take the matter to a WTO dispute panel. If we do, USTR 
Zoellick has a commitment from Canadian Trade Minister Pierre 
Pettigrew for Canada to join the United States as a 
co-complainant.  Graham is generally supportive of Canada,s 
being a co-complainant, but it would be useful to reiterate 
to him our strong interest in partnering with Canada on this 
issue. 
 
------ 
BORDER 
------ 
 
¶10. (SBU) Graham may raise the National Security Entry/Exit 
Registration System (NSEERS), which you discussed in your 
November meeting.  NSEERS requires fingerprinting and 
registration of certain naturalized Canadian citizens and 
landed immigrants seeking admission at U.S. ports of entry. 
U.S. law still requires that nationals (including dual 
nationals) from an expanding list of "criteria" countries be 
registered, but the earlier public controversy over 
registration based solely on country of birth has dwindled. 
What may now be worrying Graham, as it does Deputy Prime 
Minister Manley, is implementation - by 2005 - of a new 
entry-exit tracking system for all visitors to the U.S., 
which may include Canadians.  Ottawa fears that the 
entry-exit system will create huge delays at border 
crossings, and continues to seek some sort of exemption or 
expedited measures for Canadians. 
KELLY