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

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 OTTAWA 002113 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: CA PGOV PREL PTER
SUBJECT: CANADA: PUBLIC SAFETY MINISTER SPEAKS OUT ON 
TERRORIST THREAT 
 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary:  On July 11 Deputy Prime Minister Anne 
McLellan gave a speech that the Ottawa Citizen described as 
one of the most forceful ever by a Canadian minister on 
terrorism.  She stated "we have perhaps for too long thought 
that these were things that happened somewhere else.  But 
Canadians are not immune to what we see happen in London, 
Madrid, 9/11."  She suggested that Canadians are not as 
psychologically prepared for a terrorist attack as they ought 
to be.  McLellan's comments were a notable shift from the 
post-9/11 tradition of playing down the terrorist threat to 
Canada.  Her address and statements match the current trend 
among opinion leaders of demonstrating a remarkable amount of 
empathy for the United Kingdom, and growing awareness that 
Canada could very well be the next victim of an attack.  This 
sense of vulnerability and urgency does not appear to 
resonate with the average Canadian, however, who continues to 
evince a sense of aloofness from terrorist attacks based on 
the popular image of Canada's fair and generous position in 
the world.  END SUMMARY 
 
CANADA THE VULNERABLE 
--------------------- 
 
¶2. (SBU) In a speech delivered to the 15th World Conference 
on Disaster Management July 11, Anne McLellan, Deputy Prime 
Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency 
Preparedness, spoke frankly about Canada's vulnerability in 
the wake of the London bombings.  McLellan combined clear 
statements about the current threat to Canada with a list of 
what Canada has been doing to meet the threat, and suggested 
where there is more work to be done. 
 
MEETING THE THREAT 
------------------ 
 
¶3. (U) Since 9/11, McLellan said, Canada has spent CN$9 
billion in public safety initiatives.  She ticked off a long 
list of things Canada has done to improve its public safety 
posture since 9/11 and SARS: 
 
--    Intelligence-sharing network put in place after the 
Madrid bombings 
--    Creation of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness 
Canada (PSEPC) in December 2003 (the equivalent of DHS) 
--    Creation of Public Health Agency of Canada (modeled 
after CDC) 
--    Promulgation of Government's National Security Policy 
--    Development of Cabinet Committee on Security, Public 
Health, and Emergencies to coordinate cabinet level decisions 
--    Development of exercises within Canada and with 
international partners 
--    Establishment of Government Operations Center (under 
PSEPC, a 24/7 facility to monitor and respond to crisis), and 
National Emergency Response System activated June 30 to 
ensure a more harmonious response by federal agencies. 
 
¶4. (U) McLellan also spoke of a number of initiatives that 
are ongoing, stating that "the way Canada dealt with 
Emergency Management in the past is not good enough for the 
present."  She also suggested that Canadians need to "expand 
our idea of community and explore the wider implications of 
emergencies."  She suggested more work on the following: 
 
--    Co-locating regional emergency management offices with 
those of the provinces and municipalities (already completed 
in NS, PEI and the NW Territories, soon in Ottawa). 
--    Finalization of Critical Infrastructure Protection 
strategy, with timelines for implementation. 
--    Establishment of a National Task Force on Cyber 
Security to complement the Cyber Incident Response Center in 
the ops center. 
--    Ongoing effort to respond to emergencies in an 
integrated manner, developing new methods for coordinating 
between provinces, communities, and the territories, and 
between nations. 
--    Continuation of support for first responders. 
 
¶5.  (U) McLellan said that Canada's Emergency Preparedness 
System worked as expected when activated following the London 
bombings, but noted the need for closer collaboration between 
Canada's mass transit systems, and suggested the need to 
examine training systems for transit security officials. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Canadian officials have indicated a clear 
understanding that a nation's psychological preparation is 
important to weathering and recovering from an attack, and 
McLellan pointed out in her speech that she does not believe 
that "Canadians are as psychologically prepared for a 
terrorist attack as I think probably we all should be."  For 
too long, McLellan said, Canadians thought "that these were 
things that happened somewhere else.  But Canadians are not 
immune to what we see happened in London, Madrid, 9/11.  We 
are not immune to that kind of terrorist violence." 
 
¶7.  (SBU) At the same time, McLellan went out of her way to 
point out that there are no known imminent threats.  She said 
in her speech that "there is no specific threat against 
Canada at this time," and remarked to the press that "there 
is no necessity for Canadians to be in any way unusually 
alarmed."  The latter was likely a response to comments from 
the retiring head of the Canadian Security and Intelligence 
Service, Ward Elcock, who publicly suggested it was now a 
matter of if, not when, Canada will be attacked. 
 
SOLIDARITY WITH BRITISH COUSINS 
------------------------------- 
 
¶8. (SBU) McLellan's comments underscore the resonance which 
the London bombings has here, something which was not true of 
New York, Madrid or Bali (all of which garnered considerable 
sympathy, but not this kind of almost familial connection). 
Editorial and Opinion comment fell just short of a rallying 
call-to-arms, it was completely supportive of Canada's UK 
cousins and almost jingoistic in its accolades for British 
resolve and grit in the midst of attack.  Compliments on the 
reaction to the attacks praised post 9-11 counter-terrorism 
and disaster relief development, while also suggesting it was 
all a natural extension of the British character.  Some 
comment went so far as to dismiss the scale of the attack, 
suggesting that terrorists would have to put forward a 
markedly greater effort to truly rattle the Brits.  Frequent 
references were made to the Blitz of World War Two and IRA 
campaigns against England as examples of how Britain has been 
properly challenged in the past and has weathered the storm. 
 
IS CANADA NEXT? 
--------------- 
 
¶9. (SBU) Apart from the suggested connection between Canada 
and the UK, another clear focus in the coverage of the 
attacks is "could it happen here?"  This includes coverage 
beyond McLellan's call for Canadians to be psychologically 
prepared.  With a few exceptions the media suggests the 
answer is yes.  Much attention is dedicated to a list of 
targets held by Al-Qaeda that includes Canada.  Government of 
Canada officials are openly stating that Canada is on a 
target list of some kind, but are quick to point out there 
have been no specific threats or information to suggest an 
attack is imminent.  Media presentation of Canada being on a 
list does not completely stand up to examination, but the 
perception continues and is supported by comments such as 
McLellan's.  (Comment: Confusion does exist because different 
media outlets are clearly referring to different lists, some 
referencing statements made by Osama Bin Laden, others noting 
captured Al-Qaeda operatives.  As an example of the 
confusion, CBC coverage presented a report on the morning of 
the bombing that played a bin Laden recording listing the 
U.S., Australia, the U.K, France, Spain and Canada.  The 
graphic included the French flag with all the others, and the 
anchor indicated that Canada was the only country left to be 
hit without mentioning France.  End Comment) 
 
¶10. (SBU) Some experts have tried to temper the idea of 
Canada as next-on-the-list by saying out that while Canada is 
still a target, it has, in fact, always been a target and the 
attacks on London do not demonstrate an increased risk for 
this country.  The few voices that dismiss the threat to 
Canada suggest that no city in Canada, not even Toronto, 
holds a high enough profile to be worth the effort. 
Secondly, they state that any attack on Canadian soil would 
result in immediate and drastic changes on the border with 
the United States that would make already difficult access to 
the United States even more challenging.  These points of 
view appear, however, to accept a networked Al-Qaeda, not the 
disorganized Al-Qaeda movement that is being described with 
growing frequency. 
 
¶11. (SBU) COMMENT: Despite comments from Minister McLellan 
and media coverage that supports her more assertive position, 
televised 'man-on-the-street' interviews continue to indicate 
that Canadians do not really believe Canada is at risk. 
While London may have hit the closest yet in the psyche of 
the Canadian people, not even this would appear to change the 
general perception that terrorists simply wouldn't hit a 
country that is so generous and fair-minded in the world.  If 
London was an alarm clock, the snooze button here was quickly 
hit, and Ottawa is good for at least another thirty minutes 
of slumber. 
 
Visit Canada's Classified Web Site at 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/ottawa 
 
DICKSON