Harry Truman once said that if you want a friend in Washington, you should get a dog. Prime Minister Stephen Harper, famously a cat person, may want to adopt a dog before his next meeting with President Barack Obama.
Harper has been a great friend to Obama: supportive of the U.S. global warming approach at Copenhagen and Cancun, ponying up billions to support the auto bailouts, supporting the U.S.-led NATO mission in Afghanistan, and offering to sell renewable hydroelectric power as well as oil and gas to energize an American economic recovery. This from a Conservative whose political friends in the United States can't stand Obama.
But as many have discovered, it doesn't pay to be Obama's friend. Just ask Britain's Gordon Brown, Spain's José Luis Zapatero, Australia's Kevin Rudd, Israel's Binyamin Netanyahu or Egypt's Hosni Mubarak.
Why stop with foreigners? Here in the United States, the list of disappointed friends includes the labour unions (no card check legislation, and three free trade deals passed last month), Hispanics (no effort on immigration reform and deportations are up), African Americans (hardest hit by the recession), the peace movement (drone killings multiply and Guantanamo remains open), Wall Street (bailed out and then scapegoated), Occupy protestors, and environmentalists (no cap and trade, no carbon tax).
Domestic interests are different from foreign ones, though: they vote. So Obama is parceling out Grinch-like gifts to save his fading chances at a second term. And if that means selling out a few BFFs for the "friends needed now" (FNNs) then Obama will do it.
So labour bosses get a National Labor Relations Board investigation of Boeing, and "Buy American" provisions in the Obama jobs bill -- sorry Canada. And environmentalists get a decision not to decide on the Keystone pipeline -- sorry Canada, again.
Environmentalists needed something. Climate change has been their most successful fundraising issue ever, and in a depressed economy with charitable contributions down, they needed the prospect of carbon cap and trade legislation, or a carbon tax, to bring in donations.
When they didn't get cap and trade, many environmental groups fell back on extant agendas -- farmland preservation, protection of endangered species, organic food production, recycling, green energy, clean water and clear air efforts on the local level. The result was fragmentation: nothing united environmentalists like climate change had done.
Until Keystone, that is. The pipeline project had bad news (er, good news) for everyone in the green coalition: it enabled fossil fuel consumption, so was bad for the air; it crossed the Oglala aquifer, so it endangered water; it disrupted farmland and wilderness; it was not recyclable.
A presidential permit is required to overcome Nebraska's landowners, holding out for more compensation for the right-of-way and manipulating state politics (and green groups) to get it. Environmental groups asked the White House for more time, and more hearings -- to raise more money, some of which would help Obama and the Democrats in 2012.
Obama added more hearings in 2011, but told Canada privately that the decision would be made to approve the pipeline by the end of the year. Now, it won't be made until after the 2012 election.
If he is re-elected Obama's green friends may then discover that the president will approve the Keystone pipeline anyway, as all of the economic logic, scientific evidence and legal precedent suggests that he should.
Unless of course Obama decides then that he needs the environmentalists more than Harper and the Canadians. Sorry Canada. Try a dog.
Follow Christopher Sands on Twitter: www.twitter.com/sandsathudson
Harper, Obama discuss pipeline, border security - Politics - CBC News
President Obama Hosts Pacific Trade Meeting in Hawaii - NYTimes ...
Keystone XL Pipeline Delay: Canada Will Boost Exports To Asia ...
APEC Summit: Stephen Harper And Barack Obama To Meet Sunday ...
Given these simple facts, the study was rejected and will begin again.
If anybody listens to you in Canada, be sure to let them know they should keep TransCanada out of the assessment process. We can decide if the pipeline is in our national interest, and you can accept the result like a true friend.
Canada under Stephen Hubris regime has become a laughing stock internationally. Their disdain towards democratic values, pro war posturing based ethnocentric prejudices and ignoring science so their buddies in Alberta can profit should be sober reminder that we made a HUGE mistake giving these people a majority government.
Harper's only interest is his oil executive campaing donors. Conservative party of Canada feels absolutely no compunction for their criminal disregard of the climate change and the consequences of lies therein.
Now Obama was told, in no uncertain terms ,that we'll sell our energy elswhere, and as one US senator said "This could be one of the most costly blunders in US trade history"
So be it.
An elected leader is only responsible to his own people. Canada was not going to give the US oil (the dirtiest oil possible -tar sands - not just bad for america but the world) it was going to sell it. So its not a problem that Canada was trying to be nice and Obama betrayed them. It was a deal that on further consideration for what ever reasons might not be a good idea to one of the parties US and the US president acted accordingly. Harper didn't bail out the US auto industry as a sign of friendship and love to the American people - he did it to save Canadian jobs. Self interest is not an act of friendship. As to the buy American provision - Its american tax $ whose goal is to stimulate the American economy - if all the $ is spent in other countries (China Canada Mexico etc) it would not stimulate our economy. You want a stimulus use your own tax money. The military support Canada provides - Its the price you pay to be an ally. If its to high and against your national interests pull out of the alliance - its you right. But so far the alliance provides more to Canadians than it costs - and the goals of the alliance are good for Canada (according to Harper). So again not
Unfortunately, your American Right has a more and more bad influence on our own little Right here in Canada.... A majority PC government was a very bad move for us.... We'll take care of it....
The Tar Sands pose a huge threat to the environment. If Harper plans to ship oil to the West Coast through some kind of pipeline, he's going to have to face the wrath of Canadians who actually care about this planet.
HuffPost, shame on you if this is your approach to Canadian politics. The rightwingers in Canada are a minority taking advantage of the splintered nature of the opposition in order to form the government.
I would like to ask you whether during the years of Liberal control in Ottawa, were you referring to them as leftwingers taking advantage of a splintered conservative opposition?
Facing the wrath of Canadians who care more about the environment than they care about having big houses, automobiles and flying off on vacations is nothing of concern to the politicians, those concerned people represent a very, very small minority. Out of 100 people who mouth platitudes about care for the environment, 98 of them will scream their heads of if gasoline goes up 10 cents.
At least try a little to hide your conservative bias Christopher "Tar" Sands.
ENOUGH SAID. Whether Obama walked on water you would object.
Not all that Obama does would be agreeable to Canada, if you haven't noticed, he is the President of the United States and like all statesmen, he has to prioritize for his own country.
Until you can summarize all his actions without BIAS, I suggest you turn to a more Republican/Conservative/Right Wing rag to express them.
PM Harper wants to sell these oil products at any price... China has no clue on environment issue.... So be it.
Mr. "Sands"...is this your real name ? What a coincidence...
When foreign countries squeeze and/or cut off their oil supply, and gas prices jump $10 per gallon with rationing, don't whine to Canada for oil...You had your chance...