Picture
12-29-06, 10:24 AM
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20061213/061213/20061228?hub=Politics
Whole new landscape for U.S. politics in 2007
Updated Thu. Dec. 28 2006 6:00 PM ET
Canadian Press
WASHINGTON -- It's a whole new world on Capitol Hill.
Democrats will be sitting in the big offices, heading the committees and setting the agenda in Congress in the new year. And many Republicans who once solidly backed President George W. Bush aren't believers anymore.
How does this new reality look from the White House at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue?
Not good at all.
Bush is grappling with the startling loss of Republican confidence and dominance in Congress after a spectacular thumping in November's mid-term elections.
Americans fed up with the president and the war in Iraq dumped many of the incumbent Republicans, shattering a lock on congressional power they had enjoyed for most of the last 12 years.
The radically different political landscape was predicted by pollsters and pundits who watched Bush's popularity plummet to new lows in 2006 as Iraq plunged toward civil war.
It's a repudiation, in part, of Bush's go-it-alone foreign policy. It means a lot more checks and balances for the president as he adjusts strategy in Iraq and tries to salvage the war effort. And he'll be forced to co-operate more with the rival party on a host of domestic issues in his last two years in the Oval Office.
While some Canadians may think this reshaping of the American order can't be anything but helpful, many south of the border are striking a cautionary note.
For one thing, it will be a challenge for Canada to get heard in a Congress where both parties are already preoccupied with jockeying for best advantage in the run-up to the 2008 presidential election.
Many analysts agree that Democrats positioning themselves for that critical race won't be reaching out to other countries in dramatically different fashion than Republicans did.
"They may not bring about as much change as people think,'' said Les Campbell, a senior associate at the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs.
"They may even get tougher on security. The Democrats may start looking like the hard-nosed realists,'' said Campbell, who is from Winnipeg.
U.S. legislators will be working overtime in 2007 to catch up after a year in which they were in session just 103 days during what one U.S. analyst called the mother of all do-nothing congresses.
Canadian officials, meanwhile, won't be spending any less time trying to ensure that security measures aren't impeding trade and travel between the two countries, said John Manley, the former deputy prime minister.
Manley doesn't think a Democratic Congress will be any more trade-friendly.
"A lot of what happens to Canada is inadvertent,'' he said. "When you talk to Americans about that, they seem surprised by it. They don't notice that it's happening.''
But there's no doubt there are opportunities too, including new power brokers to engage on key bilateral issues.
And, said analyst Patrick Basham, there may be an over-riding benefit in it all for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, accused by many at home of being far too tight with Bush.
Political realities will force the president to at least appear more pragmatic and reasonable on Iraq, he said. That can't be anything but good news for Harper.
"We thought Bush wouldn't change, right or wrong,'' said Basham, director of the conservative Democracy Institute in Washington.
"Harper can then say his relationship with Bush isn't so radically an ideological thing. It's his get-out-of-jail as George Bush's best friend card.''
Americans seeking an exit strategy for Iraq are also paying more attention to Afghanistan, where Canada has 2,500 soldiers in the violent southern part of the country and is lobbying for more combat support from NATO allies.
A prestigious U.S. panel of elder statesmen that spent months researching ways out of Iraq concluded that American forces freed up there should bolster efforts in Afghanistan. "We must not lose sight of the importance of the situation inside Afghanistan and the renewed threat posed by the Taliban,'' said the Iraq Study Group.
Robert Gates, the new U.S. defence secretary, has already revealed that his top priority in Afghanistan is persuading some NATO allies to drop so-called caveats that keep them from the fierce fighting that's claimed the lives of dozens of Canadians this year alone.
Gates said he's sympathetic to any suggestion that more troops are needed.
It may just be the kind of foreign policy issues that provide Canada with the opportunity to improve relations with Americans in the years to come, said analyst Chris Sands.
"Canada's contribution in Afghanistan has been substantial and far beyond the minimalist expectations of Washington,'' said Sands, at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
And with European countries reluctant to do the heavy lifting, Canada's role is "all the more dear, valuable and noteworthy.''
There's risks involved with creating expectations that Canada will do more in the world's trouble spots, said Sands. But with Bush's successor due to take a fresh look in 2009 at global challenges, there's a lot of room to have a bigger impact.
The election of Stephane Dion as Canada's Liberal leader will add some interest to common issues such as global warming, said former Canadian diplomat Paul Frazer.
"Whatever he pursues could have some resonance here,'' said Frazer, now a Washington consultant.
But he warned against assumptions about an automatic affinity. While the Democrats and Liberals may be intellectual soul mates, many of the newly elected U.S. legislators are moderates who share the views of Republicans on issues like gun control and family values.
And as always, but especially heading to 2008, politics is going to trump policy every time.
I just want to add that it was US President Ronald Reagan that called Canada the kinder and gentler nation...
Whole new landscape for U.S. politics in 2007
Updated Thu. Dec. 28 2006 6:00 PM ET
Canadian Press
WASHINGTON -- It's a whole new world on Capitol Hill.
Democrats will be sitting in the big offices, heading the committees and setting the agenda in Congress in the new year. And many Republicans who once solidly backed President George W. Bush aren't believers anymore.
How does this new reality look from the White House at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue?
Not good at all.
Bush is grappling with the startling loss of Republican confidence and dominance in Congress after a spectacular thumping in November's mid-term elections.
Americans fed up with the president and the war in Iraq dumped many of the incumbent Republicans, shattering a lock on congressional power they had enjoyed for most of the last 12 years.
The radically different political landscape was predicted by pollsters and pundits who watched Bush's popularity plummet to new lows in 2006 as Iraq plunged toward civil war.
It's a repudiation, in part, of Bush's go-it-alone foreign policy. It means a lot more checks and balances for the president as he adjusts strategy in Iraq and tries to salvage the war effort. And he'll be forced to co-operate more with the rival party on a host of domestic issues in his last two years in the Oval Office.
While some Canadians may think this reshaping of the American order can't be anything but helpful, many south of the border are striking a cautionary note.
For one thing, it will be a challenge for Canada to get heard in a Congress where both parties are already preoccupied with jockeying for best advantage in the run-up to the 2008 presidential election.
Many analysts agree that Democrats positioning themselves for that critical race won't be reaching out to other countries in dramatically different fashion than Republicans did.
"They may not bring about as much change as people think,'' said Les Campbell, a senior associate at the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs.
"They may even get tougher on security. The Democrats may start looking like the hard-nosed realists,'' said Campbell, who is from Winnipeg.
U.S. legislators will be working overtime in 2007 to catch up after a year in which they were in session just 103 days during what one U.S. analyst called the mother of all do-nothing congresses.
Canadian officials, meanwhile, won't be spending any less time trying to ensure that security measures aren't impeding trade and travel between the two countries, said John Manley, the former deputy prime minister.
Manley doesn't think a Democratic Congress will be any more trade-friendly.
"A lot of what happens to Canada is inadvertent,'' he said. "When you talk to Americans about that, they seem surprised by it. They don't notice that it's happening.''
But there's no doubt there are opportunities too, including new power brokers to engage on key bilateral issues.
And, said analyst Patrick Basham, there may be an over-riding benefit in it all for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, accused by many at home of being far too tight with Bush.
Political realities will force the president to at least appear more pragmatic and reasonable on Iraq, he said. That can't be anything but good news for Harper.
"We thought Bush wouldn't change, right or wrong,'' said Basham, director of the conservative Democracy Institute in Washington.
"Harper can then say his relationship with Bush isn't so radically an ideological thing. It's his get-out-of-jail as George Bush's best friend card.''
Americans seeking an exit strategy for Iraq are also paying more attention to Afghanistan, where Canada has 2,500 soldiers in the violent southern part of the country and is lobbying for more combat support from NATO allies.
A prestigious U.S. panel of elder statesmen that spent months researching ways out of Iraq concluded that American forces freed up there should bolster efforts in Afghanistan. "We must not lose sight of the importance of the situation inside Afghanistan and the renewed threat posed by the Taliban,'' said the Iraq Study Group.
Robert Gates, the new U.S. defence secretary, has already revealed that his top priority in Afghanistan is persuading some NATO allies to drop so-called caveats that keep them from the fierce fighting that's claimed the lives of dozens of Canadians this year alone.
Gates said he's sympathetic to any suggestion that more troops are needed.
It may just be the kind of foreign policy issues that provide Canada with the opportunity to improve relations with Americans in the years to come, said analyst Chris Sands.
"Canada's contribution in Afghanistan has been substantial and far beyond the minimalist expectations of Washington,'' said Sands, at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
And with European countries reluctant to do the heavy lifting, Canada's role is "all the more dear, valuable and noteworthy.''
There's risks involved with creating expectations that Canada will do more in the world's trouble spots, said Sands. But with Bush's successor due to take a fresh look in 2009 at global challenges, there's a lot of room to have a bigger impact.
The election of Stephane Dion as Canada's Liberal leader will add some interest to common issues such as global warming, said former Canadian diplomat Paul Frazer.
"Whatever he pursues could have some resonance here,'' said Frazer, now a Washington consultant.
But he warned against assumptions about an automatic affinity. While the Democrats and Liberals may be intellectual soul mates, many of the newly elected U.S. legislators are moderates who share the views of Republicans on issues like gun control and family values.
And as always, but especially heading to 2008, politics is going to trump policy every time.
I just want to add that it was US President Ronald Reagan that called Canada the kinder and gentler nation...