Mr. Speaker, Canada must not in any way be party to nuclear arms buildups or to actions which may lead to a cold war environment. Canada must loudly and proudly say no to the U.S. proposed national missile defence system. On behalf of the federal NDP I urge the government to take a stand sooner rather than later.
I raised the question of our participation in the system on March 16. The Minister of National Defence stated:
We cannot yet take a position. There are too many unknowns.
I could not believe my ears. Of course we can take a stand. We should take a stand and we must take a stand.
The minister is also fully aware that DND started work on a $637 million project to provide Canada with a foothold in the arms buildup strategy of the U.S. This expenditure involves putting military surveillance sensors in space. The U.S. treats Canada like the 51st state and the Liberal government reacts like a whipped dog.
The U.S. threw down its gauntlet in comments from U.S. deputy defence secretary in a speech to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce when he said:
We are at an important pivot point in our relationship with each other. Unfortunately I think that pivot point is going to revolve around the issue of national missile defence. Canada needs to take the lead.
This is an explicit threat from where I sit: either do what the U.S. says or we will suffer. I am shocked that the government did not respond to this thinly veiled threat. The foreign affairs minister said on March 22:
Unilateral efforts to build defences against these dangers are unlikely to provide lasting security, and might quite possibly increase insecurity.
The impulse to build walls should be resisted. The answer instead lies in creating a multilateral approach to stop missile proliferation in the first place.
On the other hand we have the minister of defence meekly stating:
We cannot yet take a position. There are too many unknowns.
Now, however, it seems as if the big defence corporations and the U.S. brass have given our minister of defence marching orders. More recently he is making statements which seem very much to suggest that NORAD is anything but a joint Canada-U.S. defence command and is in reality an easy way for the U.S. to tell us to heel and to roll over.
This is a serious matter. Canada's role in international affairs hangs in the balance. I ask the Liberal government for an answer to my question. Whose words rule the Liberal roost? Is it those of the defence minister or the foreign affairs minister? I ask the Prime Minister to make a public statement on Canada's opposition to the U.S. government's plans to crank up the arms race with this national missile system.
The defence minister says there are too many unknowns. Allow me to clarify the picture for him a little. The defence minister of France, Alain Richard, has said the threat of ballistic missile attack is sometimes hyped or exaggerated. Military affairs analyst John Clearwater said of the proposed system:
It is money down the toilet...any rogue country shooting a missile at the U.S. knows it will be wiped out.
This insane missile plan will destabilize the current state of arms control. Even the conservative Globe and Mail stated that Canada should deny U.S. support on this measure.
There is no question the U.S. is consciously heading on a collision course with Russia, despite Russia's most recent positive efforts at ratifying the START II, the Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. The NMD totally contradicts the 1972 ABM Treaty with Russia. The U.S. would have to withdraw from or violate the treaty.
Canada has the duty and the responsibility of playing a leadership role. The U.S. plans to fuel the arms race and to destabilize international relations must be actively opposed.
The government has a choice. It can continue to invest in this U.S. missile system and act like the 51st state or it can take a clear and strong stand against something that is fundamentally wrong and do so with pride.
The Liberals are perched on a very high and narrow fence and Canadians are waiting to see on which side of the fence they will fall. If the government falls on the side of complicity with the U.S. NMD system through silence on the matter or through open support, then all of Canada will be hurt in this fall. The pain will also be felt by those in other countries looking to Canada to play a leadership role.