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

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 OTTAWA 000713 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: MCAP PGOV MARR PREL CA
SUBJECT: CANADA'S LIBERAL PARTY CONVENTION: NO TO MISSILE 
DEFENSE BUT YES TO INTERNATIONAL ENGAGEMENT 
 
REF: OTTAWA 00696 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary: Both PM Martin and Defense Minister Graham 
used early speaking opportunities at the Liberal Party 
Convention to remind delegates that non-participation in the 
ballistic missile defense program does not preclude Canada,s 
participation in global security matters.  Both leaders 
sought support from Liberal Party members for increased 
military spending, while being careful to phrase their 
program in terms of peacebuilding, not offensive military 
operations.  The reaction of delegates appeared to be 
supportive.  End Summary 
 
PM Martin to the Young Liberals 
------------------------------- 
 
¶2. (SBU) Poloffs attended a number of sessions in the Liberal 
Party convention and were struck by how the issue of defense 
was managed by party leadership.  In his first speaking 
engagement of the convention, PM Martin addressed the Young 
Liberals on March 3.  The Young Liberals of Canada are a 
large (by some estimates as much as one-third of the 
convention), boisterous, left-leaning, and very organized 
group that was extremely prominent at the convention.  As an 
official Liberal Party Commission, the YLC can forward policy 
resolutions and vote, and it was the Young Liberals of Canada 
who had successfully lobbied the party to include a policy 
resolution against BMD participation. 
 
¶3. (SBU) The PM was received with great enthusiasm, and made 
very brief, complimentary remarks before opening the floor to 
questions and answers.  He adeptly rephrased and redirected 
questions to get instant feedback from the delegates.  In the 
Prime Minister,s conclusion, he congratulated the YLC for 
their drive and action on missile defense, but then adopting 
a more stern tone.  He insisted that non-participation in BMD 
was not a signal that Canada would disengage from 
international security commitments, and in what could have 
been a gentle rebuke to the YLC,s focus on internal social 
and environmental issues, requested the support of the young 
Liberals in spreading the message that Canada must exert 
itself outside its own borders.  Much like Michael Ignatieff 
the day prior (reftel), the PM referenced humanitarian aid, 
peace building, fledgling democracies, and failing states 
before suggesting a country would have to exist in a 
&fool,s paradise8 if it thought it was possible to build a 
hospital or a school before there was peace on the ground. 
Some delegates bristled slightly at the change in the Prime 
Minister,s tone, but he was nonetheless again enthusiastic 
applauded. 
 
DEFMIN Graham to the Defense Workshop 
------------------------------------- 
 
¶4. (SBU) Defense Minister Bill Graham made a similar pitch to 
an audience of general delegates at the Defense and 
International resolution policy workshop on March 4.  In his 
brief opening address he asked for the help of the delegates 
in forwarding the message that Canada needs a strong defense 
policy and stronger armed forces to both completely 
participate in the defense of North America and to be able to 
meaningfully contribute to humanitarian efforts and peace 
building overseas.  When a long-winded delegate asked Graham 
how he felt about the BMD decision, he conceded that he had 
lost the policy battle on the issue, but was now looking at 
the future of Canadian security, not the past.  Like the PM, 
Graham took the opportunity to reiterate the importance of 
Canada,s defense relationship with the United States and 
again asked for Liberal Party help in assuring that Canada 
has a robust defense program. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Comment:  Though they chose their words carefully, 
the Prime Minster and the Defense Minister both presented 
reasoned arguments for why Canada needs a strong defense 
policy and more robust armed forces.  The Prime Minister,s 
insistence that democracy cannot be developed in a failed 
state without stability, and the Defense Minister,s point 
that Canada must meaningfully contribute to North American 
defense were both arguments that are not commonly heard at 
Liberal conventions, and were by no means guaranteed a 
receptive audience.  But Liberal Canadians seem to be coming 
around to the notion that is shared by most Canadians, that 
Canada can do more in the world but it will need a stronger, 
more deployable military to make a difference. 
 
Visit Canada's Classified Web Site at 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/ottawa 
CELLUCCI