Wednesday, February 23, 2005


Yesterday Frank McKenna said that Canada is already a part of the American ballistic missile defence program. Then the minister of defence got bombarded in question period with demands to know what Canada's policy was. By the evening the prime minister had declared, after months of indecision, and apparently contrary to the next U.S ambassodor, that Canada would not endorse the missile defence plan...mostly.... sort of.

Quoted one annonymous official from the PMO:

"It is a firm 'no.' I am not sure it is an indefinite 'no.''"

My confusion continues.

Kevin Brenann's analysis seems accurate. Martin, in what is becoming familiar Martin style, is trying to satisfy Canadian public opinion with his words and the Bush administration with his actions. My guess is that neither are going to be entirely convinced.

However, is there a possibility that this whole BMD scenario of the past twenty-four hours was planned by the PMO? Could the intent have been something like this?

1.Martin sends the next American ambassador to say Canada is already in on the missile defence plan (note: not infront of the Parliamentary committee but to the press). This tells the American's that Canada is effectively on side.

2. That evening Martin says Canada will not be involved, thereby placating Canadians.

3. By the next afternoon the federal budget has taken over the news cycle.

Implausible? Gives the PM too much credit? Yeah, I thought so.

Posted by Matthew @ 12:16 p.m.