Mike Connell: Mr. Obama, tear down this wall
I know some Americans will find this hard to believe, but Canada is not North Korea.
It's not Afghanistan either. Or Iran. Or even Mexico. It is neither an Evil Empire nor a cog in the Axis of Evil.
It's just old Canada, a country that looks an awful lot like ours would if we pumped gas by the liter and set speed limits in kilometers per hour.
Those of us who live near the border get this. Canadians don't scare us much, except maybe when a white plate suddenly decides to swerve across three lanes of traffic to pull into a Tim Horton's.
Mostly though, we think of Canadians as good neighbors. Heck, they almost talk American, eh?
«« »»
CANADA MUST LOOK far more menacing if viewed from Kentucky or Kansas or, especially, the District of Columbia.
How else do you explain American foreign policy of the past decade? In the years since Sept. 11, 2001, we've been treating Canada as if it were the pulsating heart of darkness.
It doesn't help that so many pundits and politicians are in a competition to see who can be the most paranoid. If an elected official speaks of securing the borders, you can be sure the loyal opposition will one-up them with a call for 20-foot walls topped with concertina wire and sniper towers.
Gar Pardy, a retired Canadian diplomat, broached the topic in a commentary published last week by The Ottawa Citizen.
"Throughout the 10 years since 9/11," he wrote, "there has been a drum roll of comments by American leaders that Canada represents an existential threat -- a threat that needed to be countered by tough American measures including the arming and hardening of the border."
«« »»
OLD-TIMERS IN OUR AREA remember a time when they could cross the Blue Water Bridge on their lunch break for fish and chips at the Bridge Tavern in Point Edward or a pizza with the works at Firenze's in Sarnia.
Good luck with that today, assuming you don't get three hours for lunch.
Crossing the border falls somewhere between a hassle and an ordeal. It's serious business. Handing your passport to a customs agent and awaiting a verdict is roughly as comfortable as getting pulled over for speeding on the expressway.
Coincidentally, even as the United States was hardening its 5,525-mile border with Canada, a softening of borders was taking place in much of Europe.
Five years ago, the European Union issued a directive
on crossing borders without a passport. The policy calls on EU nations to "remove all obstacles to fluid traffic flow at road crossing-points at internal borders."
Today, motorists can navigate the 2,500 miles from Portugal to Estonia, crossing a half-dozen or so national borders, without showing a passport or visa.
«« »»
THE EUROPEAN UNION can allow this because member nations have accepted a common set of security rules.
Where a traveler from abroad enters the EU shouldn't matter. If they're arriving on a ship at Marseilles, an airliner at Geneva or an automobile at Jalowka, the regulations are the same.
This means the EU can concentrate on securing its outer perimeter without policing most of its internal borders.
Canada and the United States once shared the world's softest border. In theory, they should be able to develop a similar working arrangement. With a common set of rules, terrorists arriving on a ship at Halifax or a jetliner at Montreal would face the same scrutiny as they would at New Orleans or New York.
With a secured outer perimeter, there would be no good reason to throw money and energy at policing the internal border. To give just one example, the rationale for spending $300 million on a customs plaza at Port Huron goes away.
«« »»
COMMON SENSE, as far as I can tell, is not regarded as a particular virtue on Capitol Hill. An alliance with Canada on border security might seem logical and reasonable, but why would Congress worry itself with logic or reason?
Money, on the other hand, does matter in Washington. And when it comes to the border, we're talking big money.
America's No. 1 trading partner is Canada. Cross-border commerce generates at least $525 billion a year. As many as 10 million jobs depend on the free flow of goods between provinces and states.
Border issues, ranging from traffic snarls to paperwork thickets, cost businesses an estimated $16 billion a year. Soften the border, and most of those costs go away.
With this in mind, President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper met on the 70th anniversary of Pearl Harbor and unveiled their long-anticipated Beyond the Border deal.
"Last year, more than 100 million people crossed our shared border, including lots of Canadians who, I'd note, spend more money in America than any other visitors," Obama told the White House press corps. "Well, I'll make a pitch -- we want even more Canadians visiting and spending even more money here."
«« »»
HARPER AND OBAMA embrace the concept of perimeter security, at least in theory. They're looking to unleash the movement of people and goods on the internal border even as they guard the outer perimeter with more vigilance.
Beginning next year, Canada and the U.S. will share more information on travelers.
When a Sarnia resident crosses the Blue Water Bridge and clears U.S. Customs, for example, this exit information will be shared with Canadian authorities. The same will be done for Americans crossing into Canada.
It is not a minor detail. It would help identify people who have overstayed their visas, or roughly four of every 10 illegal immigrants in the U.S.
Sounds good, and yet not everyone is pleased.
Generally speaking, Canadians hold their right to privacy much more dearly than Americans do. Canada even has a privacy czar -- Jennifer Stoddart -- and she seems wary of providing U.S. Customs and Border Protection with personal information on millions of her fellow Canadians.
"There is a vast difference when it comes to privacy oversight between our two countries," she said. "Law enforcement and national security authorities in the U.S. simply do not operate under the privacy oversight structure that exists in Canada."
Americans might be soft on privacy, but we're tough on crime. As part of the deal, Canada is agreeing to adopt our hard-nosed rules for identifying and red-flagging foreign visitors who are deemed "high risk" for crime in general and terrorism in particular.
«« »»
ON PAPER, THE DEAL between Harper and Obama has potential. Just remember, it is mostly talk at this point.
Many of its provisions will be rolled out as pilot projects. It could be years before the border truly begins to soften, if it ever does.
In an editorial, the Toronto Star described Beyond the Border as "a plan to come up with a plan."
"Down in the weeds," the editorial continued, "the deal looks ... more like a cautious work in progress that will be figured out, fought over and rolled out in pilot projects for years to come."
Given Canada's concern for individual privacy, and America's demand for unblinking vigilance, a cautious approach would seem justifiable and unavoidable.
«« »»
OUR REPRESENTATIVE in Congress -- Candice Miller, R-Harrison Township -- leads the House Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security. It gives her a strong voice on what happens along the border.
She hailed the Obama-Harper deal, describing it as "the best news we have had for the Blue Water Bridge during my time in Congress."
Miller, who is wrapping up her ninth year on Capitol Hill, noted Port Huron is the second-busiest commercial crossing on the northern border. She described it as the "perfect artery" to run many of the pilot programs.
Obama identified agriculture and automobiles as priorities for enhanced trade, and as Miller observed, both industries rely enormously on the Port Huron border crossing.
«« »»
THE ODDS OF RESTORING a soft border might be bolstered by Obama's friendship with Harper.
At first blush, they seem unlikely pals. Harper is a buttoned-down conservative while Obama is a rolled-sleeves liberal.
L. Ian MacDonald, writing in the Sudbury Star, said the two men became fast friends while working together on the GM and Chrysler bailouts of 2009.
"Harper at 52 and Obama at 50 belong to the same cohort and grew up listening to the same music," MacDonald wrote. "And they became partners, on top of being neighbors, with the ... deal that saved the North American auto industry."
Another Canadian journalist, John Ibbitson of the Globe and Mail, agreed the friendship brightens the prospects for the border deal.
"Geopolitically, such an agreement is in both countries' interest," he wrote. "But it helps that the two men call each other Stephen and Barack."
«« »»
MAYBE IT'S A PIPE DREAM, but let's hope the day comes when Port Huron residents can visit Sarnia as freely as St. Paul residents go to Minneapolis. No passports, no questions, no hassles.
Google Maps insists it's a five-minute drive from the Pine Grove Avenue entrance of the Blue Water Bridge to Firenze's Pizza on Colborne Road.
That's not true in the real world, of course, but perhaps it's prophecy.
It's not Afghanistan either. Or Iran. Or even Mexico. It is neither an Evil Empire nor a cog in the Axis of Evil.
It's just old Canada, a country that looks an awful lot like ours would if we pumped gas by the liter and set speed limits in kilometers per hour.
Those of us who live near the border get this. Canadians don't scare us much, except maybe when a white plate suddenly decides to swerve across three lanes of traffic to pull into a Tim Horton's.
Mostly though, we think of Canadians as good neighbors. Heck, they almost talk American, eh?
«« »»
CANADA MUST LOOK far more menacing if viewed from Kentucky or Kansas or, especially, the District of Columbia.
How else do you explain American foreign policy of the past decade? In the years since Sept. 11, 2001, we've been treating Canada as if it were the pulsating heart of darkness.
It doesn't help that so many pundits and politicians are in a competition to see who can be the most paranoid. If an elected official speaks of securing the borders, you can be sure the loyal opposition will one-up them with a call for 20-foot walls topped with concertina wire and sniper towers.
Gar Pardy, a retired Canadian diplomat, broached the topic in a commentary published last week by The Ottawa Citizen.
"Throughout the 10 years since 9/11," he wrote, "there has been a drum roll of comments by American leaders that Canada represents an existential threat -- a threat that needed to be countered by tough American measures including the arming and hardening of the border."
«« »»
OLD-TIMERS IN OUR AREA remember a time when they could cross the Blue Water Bridge on their lunch break for fish and chips at the Bridge Tavern in Point Edward or a pizza with the works at Firenze's in Sarnia.
Good luck with that today, assuming you don't get three hours for lunch.
Crossing the border falls somewhere between a hassle and an ordeal. It's serious business. Handing your passport to a customs agent and awaiting a verdict is roughly as comfortable as getting pulled over for speeding on the expressway.
Coincidentally, even as the United States was hardening its 5,525-mile border with Canada, a softening of borders was taking place in much of Europe.
Five years ago, the European Union issued a directive
on crossing borders without a passport. The policy calls on EU nations to "remove all obstacles to fluid traffic flow at road crossing-points at internal borders."
Today, motorists can navigate the 2,500 miles from Portugal to Estonia, crossing a half-dozen or so national borders, without showing a passport or visa.
«« »»
THE EUROPEAN UNION can allow this because member nations have accepted a common set of security rules.
Where a traveler from abroad enters the EU shouldn't matter. If they're arriving on a ship at Marseilles, an airliner at Geneva or an automobile at Jalowka, the regulations are the same.
This means the EU can concentrate on securing its outer perimeter without policing most of its internal borders.
Canada and the United States once shared the world's softest border. In theory, they should be able to develop a similar working arrangement. With a common set of rules, terrorists arriving on a ship at Halifax or a jetliner at Montreal would face the same scrutiny as they would at New Orleans or New York.
With a secured outer perimeter, there would be no good reason to throw money and energy at policing the internal border. To give just one example, the rationale for spending $300 million on a customs plaza at Port Huron goes away.
«« »»
COMMON SENSE, as far as I can tell, is not regarded as a particular virtue on Capitol Hill. An alliance with Canada on border security might seem logical and reasonable, but why would Congress worry itself with logic or reason?
Money, on the other hand, does matter in Washington. And when it comes to the border, we're talking big money.
America's No. 1 trading partner is Canada. Cross-border commerce generates at least $525 billion a year. As many as 10 million jobs depend on the free flow of goods between provinces and states.
Border issues, ranging from traffic snarls to paperwork thickets, cost businesses an estimated $16 billion a year. Soften the border, and most of those costs go away.
With this in mind, President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper met on the 70th anniversary of Pearl Harbor and unveiled their long-anticipated Beyond the Border deal.
"Last year, more than 100 million people crossed our shared border, including lots of Canadians who, I'd note, spend more money in America than any other visitors," Obama told the White House press corps. "Well, I'll make a pitch -- we want even more Canadians visiting and spending even more money here."
«« »»
HARPER AND OBAMA embrace the concept of perimeter security, at least in theory. They're looking to unleash the movement of people and goods on the internal border even as they guard the outer perimeter with more vigilance.
Beginning next year, Canada and the U.S. will share more information on travelers.
When a Sarnia resident crosses the Blue Water Bridge and clears U.S. Customs, for example, this exit information will be shared with Canadian authorities. The same will be done for Americans crossing into Canada.
It is not a minor detail. It would help identify people who have overstayed their visas, or roughly four of every 10 illegal immigrants in the U.S.
Sounds good, and yet not everyone is pleased.
Generally speaking, Canadians hold their right to privacy much more dearly than Americans do. Canada even has a privacy czar -- Jennifer Stoddart -- and she seems wary of providing U.S. Customs and Border Protection with personal information on millions of her fellow Canadians.
"There is a vast difference when it comes to privacy oversight between our two countries," she said. "Law enforcement and national security authorities in the U.S. simply do not operate under the privacy oversight structure that exists in Canada."
Americans might be soft on privacy, but we're tough on crime. As part of the deal, Canada is agreeing to adopt our hard-nosed rules for identifying and red-flagging foreign visitors who are deemed "high risk" for crime in general and terrorism in particular.
«« »»
ON PAPER, THE DEAL between Harper and Obama has potential. Just remember, it is mostly talk at this point.
Many of its provisions will be rolled out as pilot projects. It could be years before the border truly begins to soften, if it ever does.
In an editorial, the Toronto Star described Beyond the Border as "a plan to come up with a plan."
"Down in the weeds," the editorial continued, "the deal looks ... more like a cautious work in progress that will be figured out, fought over and rolled out in pilot projects for years to come."
Given Canada's concern for individual privacy, and America's demand for unblinking vigilance, a cautious approach would seem justifiable and unavoidable.
«« »»
OUR REPRESENTATIVE in Congress -- Candice Miller, R-Harrison Township -- leads the House Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security. It gives her a strong voice on what happens along the border.
She hailed the Obama-Harper deal, describing it as "the best news we have had for the Blue Water Bridge during my time in Congress."
Miller, who is wrapping up her ninth year on Capitol Hill, noted Port Huron is the second-busiest commercial crossing on the northern border. She described it as the "perfect artery" to run many of the pilot programs.
Obama identified agriculture and automobiles as priorities for enhanced trade, and as Miller observed, both industries rely enormously on the Port Huron border crossing.
«« »»
THE ODDS OF RESTORING a soft border might be bolstered by Obama's friendship with Harper.
At first blush, they seem unlikely pals. Harper is a buttoned-down conservative while Obama is a rolled-sleeves liberal.
L. Ian MacDonald, writing in the Sudbury Star, said the two men became fast friends while working together on the GM and Chrysler bailouts of 2009.
"Harper at 52 and Obama at 50 belong to the same cohort and grew up listening to the same music," MacDonald wrote. "And they became partners, on top of being neighbors, with the ... deal that saved the North American auto industry."
Another Canadian journalist, John Ibbitson of the Globe and Mail, agreed the friendship brightens the prospects for the border deal.
"Geopolitically, such an agreement is in both countries' interest," he wrote. "But it helps that the two men call each other Stephen and Barack."
«« »»
MAYBE IT'S A PIPE DREAM, but let's hope the day comes when Port Huron residents can visit Sarnia as freely as St. Paul residents go to Minneapolis. No passports, no questions, no hassles.
Google Maps insists it's a five-minute drive from the Pine Grove Avenue entrance of the Blue Water Bridge to Firenze's Pizza on Colborne Road.
That's not true in the real world, of course, but perhaps it's prophecy.
Mike Connell is a freelance writer. Contact him at
fortgratiot@gmail.com or visit
his website at www.abbeyrow.com.
..
.
No comments:
Post a Comment