VZCZCXRO5579
PP RUEHGA RUEHHA RUEHMT RUEHQU RUEHVC
DE RUEHOT #0634/01 2302103
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 182103Z AUG 09
FM AMEMBASSY OTTAWA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9762
INFO RUCNCAN/ALL CANADIAN POSTS COLLECTIVE PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 OTTAWA 000634 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR WHA/CAN, WHA/PDA, S/P, G, AND R 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PGOV KPAO CA AF
SUBJECT: CANADIAN OPINION LEADERS ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT NEW 
U.S. FOREIGN POLICY TONE BUT LOOKING FOR ACTION 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary: Canadians have noted a new tone in U.S. 
foreign policy and have responded enthusiastically, according 
to a group of Canadian opinion leaders who met with the 
Charge on August 13.  They praised the Secretary's recent 
Council on Foreign Relations speech and commented the new 
rhetoric from the administration has built an enormous 
reservoir of Canadian good will.  However, they see less new 
substance in the specific policy proposals in the Secretary's 
speech, and find many policy statements by the new 
administration to be consistent with those of the Bush 
Administration.  They commented that most Canadians will be 
looking closely to see whether the U.S. change in tone is 
matched by action.  Some expressed concern that the U.S. is 
too consumed with domestic priorities at present to exert 
sustained global leadership.  Despite continued Obama-mania 
in Canada, Canadians overwhelmingly believe their own leaders 
should resist any U.S. request to extend Canada's combat role 
in Afghanistan.  End summary. 
 
¶2. (SBU) The Charge d'Affaires hosted nine national opinion 
leaders on August 13 for discussion of the new 
administration's foreign policy direction, drawing particular 
attention to the Secretary's recent speech to the Council on 
Foreign Relations.  The participants, all of whom are high 
profile international affairs commentators, offered uniformly 
strong praise for the new administration's changed tone 
compared with the Bush administration.  They singled out for 
special praise the new rhetorical emphasis on multilateral 
consultation, the use of international institutions, and 
increased consultation and coordination with allies.  One 
national columnist said, "It was hugely important for 
Canadians to set a new tone.  You can't underestimate that 
because (President Bush's rhetoric of) 'for us or against us' 
and 'wanted: dead or alive' went over very badly in Canada." 
Many also gave strong praise to President Obama's Cairo 
speech, noting that it was "widely and favorably noted in 
Canada." 
 
¶3. (SBU) While highly enthusiastic about the good will and 
intentions expressed by the new Administration, many observed 
that they found nothing "really new" in Secretary Clinton's 
speech.  Others contrasted the speech's claim to a bold new 
direction with the many policy continuities with the Bush 
administration or its "incrementalism" where it does strike a 
new direction.  One academic commented that new 
administration had talked a great deal about climate change 
and energy security, but that "Canadians are waiting to see 
some sort of new agenda, rather than a re-hashing of old 
problems."  In lamenting that the new administration seems to 
be "writing off everything associated with the Bush 
administration," one guest asked "Why has the Millennium 
Challenge Corporation gone so far off the radar?"  U.S. 
public diplomacy on the importance of robust diplomatic and 
development engagement has penetrated into Canadian 
consciousness, according to many attendees, who commented 
that "U.S. diplomacy seems to be 'back' and well resourced." 
One criticized the speech for having "very little substance" 
in references to development issues. 
 
¶4. (SBU) Iraq was a central topic of discussion among the 
group.  One academic asked whether the U.S. can achieve a 
"stable political system" in a country that is "very fragile 
with lots of unresolved issues."  He questioned whether the 
U.S. and Iraqis can "reconcile those significant fractures to 
allow the U.S. to stay out."  He noted the "confident" 
Qallow the U.S. to stay out."  He noted the "confident" 
references in the Secretary's speech about U.S. withdrawal 
and said, "I don't understand where that confidence comes 
from."  Another noted that the U.S. drawdown is "clearly 
diminishing the U.S. ability to influence events in Iraq." 
Another wondered whether the U.S. timetable for withdrawal is 
"a real one or a negotiating tool."  A pollster commented 
that Canadians feel a "collective sense of Schadenfreude" 
about their country's decision to defy the U.S. on the 
invasion of Iraq, believing that "We got that one right and 
you got it wrong."  He underlined that experience is coloring 
Canadian views of Afghanistan, with the majority of the 
public believing that the international community is unlikely 
to achieve its objectives in Afghanistan, as it failed to do 
in Iraq. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Most participants expressed a keen desire to 
understand better what the Secretary means by a "new global 
architecture."  One said, "The Secretary talks about engaging 
allies, but what does that mean concretely for the North and 
the South?"  All participants noticed the lack of references 
to Canada, Western Europe, or any Western Hemisphere 
countries -- except Brazil.  One said that the Secretary 
seemed to be "writing off everything except Iraq, 
Afghanistan, and Pakistan.  You seem to have forgotten Africa 
 
OTTAWA 00000634  002 OF 002 
 
 
and Latin America."  Another chimed in that "the Millennium 
Development Goals seem to have been sacrificed to the war on 
terror."  Another questioned whether the U.S. will "truly 
take into account the views of others or whether it will 
continue to be a 'G-1.'"  Another opined that "We've heard 
this tune before from another Clinton, and it all came to 
naught." 
 
¶6. (SBU) An academic commented that "during the Bush years, 
Canadians came to question U.S. values and competency;" now 
"they no longer question whether the U.S. is leading for the 
right reasons...(but) ... the question remains whether the 
U.S. can change the perception of its competence, especially 
when it is taking on so much on so many fronts," including 
important U.S domestic priorities in economic recovery and 
health care reform.  Several agreed that they had been 
seeking in the speech some recognition by U.S. officials that 
"the world is expecting it to deliver" results.  One claimed 
to have found only "a little acknowledgment" of that need. 
 
¶7. (SBU) Another argued, in contrast, that while the 
Secretary's rhetoric is "recycled," the administration's 
actions are "bold and wise, especially as related to Latin 
America."  He noted that the U.S. "measured reactions" to 
events in El Salvador and Honduras are a stark contrast with 
past Republican rhetoric and actions, notwithstanding the 
Bush administration's "very skillful handling of Chavez."  He 
expressed regret that U.S. foreign policy "really has changed 
but you don't see that reflected in the words of the new 
administration."  He praised the "new outreach to Cuba" as a 
"major change to be applauded." 
 
¶8. (SBU)  A pollster observed that Canadians had feared being 
overwhelmed by the U.S. in the 1970s and 1980s.  More lately, 
however, Canadians fear being shut out of the U.S. agenda. 
Canadians want to engage the U.S. and wonder if the U.S. 
recognizes the strong hand it has in Canadian public opinion. 
 He noted that President Obama has a job approval rating 
consistently over 70 percent in Canada, which is more than 
double that of any Canadian politician.  Another observed 
that Canada "needs a partner on the other side (of the 
border) to be successful, and unfortunately, that partner has 
huge economic problems and trade preoccupations right now." 
The pollster cautioned that President Obama's vast popularity 
does not in and of itself translate automatically into 
approval for new U.S. foreign policy initiatives.  He noted 
especially that 80 percent of Canadians consistently express 
the opinion that their own leaders should resist any Obama 
administration requests to extend Canada's combat role in 
Afghanistan. 
 
Visit Canada,s North American partnership community at 
http://www.intelink.gov/communities/state/nap / 
 
BREESE