Wednesday, August 8, 2018

U.S. Will Not Help Canada In Its Dispute With Saudi Arabia



Reuters: Canada to ask allies to help cool Saudi dispute; U.S. offers no aid

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada plans to seek help from the United Arab Emirates and Britain to defuse an escalating dispute with Saudi Arabia, sources said on Tuesday, but close ally the United States made clear it would not get involved.

The Saudi government on Sunday recalled its ambassador to Ottawa, barred Canada’s envoy from returning and placed a ban on new trade, denouncing Canada for urging the release of jailed rights activists. Riyadh accused Ottawa on Tuesday of interfering in its internal affairs.

One well placed source said the Liberal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau - which stresses the importance of human rights - planned to reach out to the United Arab Emirates.

“The key is to work with allies and friends in the region to cool things down, which can happen quickly,” said the source, who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the situation.

Read more ....

Update #1: U.S. State Department urges Canada, Saudi Arabia to resolve dispute (Reuters)
Update #2: ‘We Can’t Do it For Them’: Washington Bows Out of Saudi-Canada Row (Sputnik)

WNU Editor: What got the Saudis upset was the use of two words in the Canadian government's statement .... ‘immediate release’ .... “We urge the Saudi authorities to immediately release them and all other peaceful human rights activists.” .... The Two Words That Made Saudi Arabia Furious at Canada (The Atlantic). This former Canadian ambassador to Saudi Arabia is also correct in his assessment .... Canada-Saudi dispute could have been handled differently, former ambassador says (CBC). Saudi Arabia is going through a very difficult political/social/and economic transition right now, and whether we like it or not, Saudi Arabia is a very important strategic partner with the West. Western diplomats and foreign ministries need to be careful on what they say publicly when it comes to these nations (privately is another story, and that is where harsh criticisms should be voiced). But this entire incident raises other concerns. Countries like China, India, Brazil, etc., are now significant players on the international scene, but how these countries are governed are not what we in the West may call ideal. If we want to do business with these countries we may have to compromise some of our principles .... or not .... but this is a debate that we should at least have. As for the U.S. not helping Canada .... who would blame them. This is a mess that Canada and Saudi Arabia will need to work out together.

28 comments:

  1. Virtue signaling is a prized virtue of lefties worldwide. I enjoy when their conceit is shoved down their throats.

    ReplyDelete
  2. ah, the lefties...is it possible to deal with an issue without sticking in silly bias
    Here is what Saudis have done while arguing with Canada about human rights. Now that, offbase one, has nothing to do with your odd perspectives on reality

    ReplyDelete
  3. Saudis conduct isn’t up to Western standards. SMH. Nor are most countries around the world up to Western standards. Canada’s neglible importance to Saudi Arabia means any Canadian grand standing is pointless to anyone suffering in Saudi Arabia. Just good for headlines favorable to the lefty Trudeau government. That’s all this is, the Saudis don’t like being used as a prop by Trudeau to strike a statesman pose so they strike back.

    ReplyDelete
  4. and so they threatened Canada with 9/11 attack! then, called on that, they took back their despicable threat
    But that threat is Trudeau's fault too, right?

    ReplyDelete
  5. If we want to do business with these countries we may have to compromise some of our principles .... or not ....
    But: do you have a position...or not?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anon,
    The world is interconnected economically. Whether we like or do not like a foreign government, we will have to deal with them. On this case the Canadian government should have voiced their criticisms to Saudi Arabia privately. Making it public, and in such a fashion, is not what I call smart diplomacy.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Editor,

    I took a quick glance of this thread this morning and your thought was my first thought. Canada should have addressed such concerns privately. As to not being smart diplomacy, this seems par for the course for the Canadian PM and various individuals in the US as well.

    I recall after the trade negotiations he went to a microphone as the US president was leaving to attend a very important meeting with the North Korean leader. He took this opportunity to berate the US and its President for pushing Canada around or something like this. Such concerns could have very easily been addressed privately. It appears that this was carefully calibrated to undermine a very important diplomatic effort on the part of the US, was very, very stupid, or perhaps both. Blowback against him and his country would certainly be expected. As such, the US may not help him here.

    Pretty much the same thing could be said about Russia. We are going to have to deal with them. Berating arguably the most powerful person in the world publically, throwing temper tantrums, and making wild and reckless accusations will not help us.

    Not smart diplomacy at all. Give me Trump diplomacy over this stupidity and I will take Trump diplomacy every time. Is there a better way than Trump diplomacy? There may be but until it is presented this is the only practical way forward.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I wonder if Trump realizes that if say Saudi Arabia were to physically attack Canada the US has an obligation to help defend Canada. NATO obligations are not limited to attacks on members only by Russia.

    ReplyDelete

  9. A problem with the internet is it's ready availability for anyone to display their two cents worth. This coupled with the growth of one-upmanship with seemingly no drawbacks is increasingly tedious.
    A u-tube video of CNN's Chris Comuo[sp] interviewing Jim Jordan is representative. Why Jordan didn't simply get up and walk out is beyond my comprehension. CC's family must be turning over in mass in their graves and registering on the richter scale. No Ed Murrow here. Just rudeness beyond measure. Look at me! Look at me!
    Trudeau is young and unfortunately for the Canadians in Saudi Arabia, still learning.

    Hopefully.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Trudeau was exposing himself as an amateur in diplomacy by being so dramatic with his criticism, like he was in a play on Broadway. The Saudi's live in a tough part of the world, their rules are more bloody than the west's, and weak leaders tend to meet unpleasant fates. Unlike Trudeau's weak leadership of Canada, he'll retire to posh and well paid jigs for the UN or NGO's. In Saudia Arabia weak leaders are likely to get beaten, killed and their wealth stolen.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Bob,

    This is a problem with NATO. NATO essentially means the US and the US simply isn't in a position to keep its current commitments to this "alliance" let alone to add more commitments. Such an idea of adding more members not only should not be considered but is beyond foolish to even contemplate right now.

    Of course the US could always "walk away" from this. To use an analogy, say your take home pay is $6,000 US dollars per month. Your expenses are $4,000 per month, fixed expenses. You have a friend who spends $1,500 per month. She does contribute the occasional thing to you worth say $200 per month. Now another acquaintance sees the benefits your "friend" is getting. Guess what they want to be your friend too!! Gee imagine this. What good fortune for your new "friend" assuming you are dumb enough to take on this new "friend!!" Should you take on this new "friend?" The obvious answer is no. You simply cannot. The costs are simply to great relative to the benefits. Doing so will undermine you and these "friends" will probably abandon you once the largess runs out. In my opinion, a certain new former Soviet country wanting NATO membership should have simply pocketed their gains from their token assistance to us in various military operations and gone home. Asking for still more is at best misguided and at worst unconscionable.

    Now back to Trudeau. I'm sure Trump does recognize this regarding NATO. Also, as a business person he is going to understand the costs relative the benefits. Additionally having been bankrupt before he is going to understand what this does to someone. After Trudeau's stunt in the run up to the NK Summit where he sought to humiliate Trump and undermine this meeting combined with the doubling down on this action by the Canadian government would Trump then abandon Canada. I don't think so. He is very levelheaded and will not allow such a petty action by Trudeau to undermine our commitment to Canada. Can we actually keep such a commitment? As we already have to many, this may be problematic. Nonetheless if it comes to that we will try.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Roger,

    I agree with you about the internet and this problem. Also, I would add, if one posts regularly in forums such as this, every once in a while and perhaps more we will say something totally stupid. I know have. The great blogger Andrew Sullivan once alluded to this. If we post things regularly, we occasionally say something stupid.
    \
    I may have to try and watch the video you reference. Sometimes if people are being rude to us for no good reason this is the best thing to do. Get up and walk away!! I find such rudeness is often deployed when people have no good argument and hope by sliming the other side they can somehow come away looking good. By doing so they don't have to face up to their weak argument.

    Trudeau does look young. Fortunately also for him he has America to his south. His little stunt at trying to humiliate POTUS before a very important meeting with the leader of a very important country has not and is not likely to have grave consequences to his country. At the start of his term, POTUS actually took time to get to know the Saudi leadership and put in places teams of people who have such relations. I suspect they will be used behind the scenes to defuse the situation. Fortunately Canada has a stalwart ally in the US who has a stable leader who will can and will do such things.

    Anon (last post),

    I couldn't have put this any better myself AND to think the media and the "experts" accuse Trump of being the amateur while Trudeau is lorded over as one of the cool kids!! By such actions the media and the "experts" show themselves to be amateurs as well.

    This is a conflict that the amateur went out of his way to provoke, his country does not need it, and winning the conflict without significant outside assistance from another power or other powers winning the conflict is going to be problematic at best. His best hope is that perhaps Trump can defuse the situation. I suspect he will as spillover from this could adversely affect the United States. The ability to do stupid seems to have infected a number of "western" leaders.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Ok guys, a little reality check here. Saudi Arabia will not attack Canada and the US wil not need to defend anyone. This is just usual banter between Countries that have been going on for years. Because it's in the public eye, the nations have to respond according to their base. Like WNU said, this should have been quiet diplomacy!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Michael, nothing but delusional for anyone to think seriously about a SA attack on Canada. After all SA is fully engaged with Yemen and Qatar to take on the Loonies of the Great North, fearsome they may be.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I agree. SA is not going to attack Canada for the reasons mentioned in the last two posts. That is IF we assume the parties behave rationally. In this case, I am assuming they will. If not, I expect Trump diplomacy to cool things down through quite diplomacy.

    Speaking of being "delusional" the US is fully engaged in a number of places. There aren't the resources to take on another NATO member yet some in the government think this would be a good idea to the point that apparently such folly is actually being discussed. Very respectfully this is like asking the question "will it be a good idea to leap from a third floor window head first onto the concrete below?" Most wouldn't even ask the question knowing what a bad idea it is.

    The point being is that humans do not always think rationally. None of us are immune from the irrational thought or two.:-) With that said, in this case, I think rational actions will prevail if for no other reason than Saudi Arabia's leadership lives in a very rough area of the world and cannot afford stupid in the manner that "western" leaders can.

    Bottom line: the consensus is correct. This should have been handled through quite diplomacy. Prime Minister Trudeau went out of his way to pick a fight that he didn't need and winning would be problematic even if he actually got his fight. I have had plenty to say about going out of one's way to inflame conflicts that one doesn't need, winning is problematic, and there is nothing to gain from "winning." Basically stable and focused people and nations seek to avoid such conflicts. As Canada's ally who would be drawn into such a conflict, this creates problems for us as well. But again, I think we are going to avoid a hot conflict, this time.

    I like this analysis too!! This has been a good discussion. Much can be learned in these forums. Thank you all for the dialogue.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Saudi Arabia rules out mediation in Canada row, may take more measures
    The US, under any smart and decent leader, would step in to mediate...by not doing so, we are aligning with Saudi Arabia and turning our backs on a long-time ally
    Poster: I will not bother with you. Every remark is out of
    Russian Troll Summer Camp, 101

    ReplyDelete
  17. Fred,

    If these arguments are out of "Russian Troll Summer Camp, 101" then they would be easy to refute for a smart person such as yourself. You are unable to do so. As such, you have to come up with a catchy insult hoping to discredit me that way as you are unable to do so on the merits.

    I've noticed this about you. When you are losing an argument or recognize the weakness of your position you then resort to insults.

    I don't think I need to recap the entire thread but I will address some of the highlights. In the first anonymous post, "virtue signaling" as a conceit, I don't enjoy it being shoved but such conceit does place us all in danger. When the arrogant and undisciplined are allowed to manage anything, bad things seem to happen.

    Now in your first reply, you are right to raise this issue. As has been suggested elsewhere, this should have been handled privately. Yes, it is Trudeau's fault. Fortunately Saudi Arabia has taken it back. I suspect Trump diplomacy had an effect. Cooler heads seem to have prevailed for now. Operative words, for now. Trudeau picked a conflict his country didn't need and may not be able to win if it does ensue.

    As an anonymous poster pointed out, the Canadian PM showed himself to be an amateur. The media who has repeatedly fawned on him has the same problem. If I need to explain tot you that the media has fawned on this man, this would be a bit like explaining to you the sky is blue.

    The anonymous comments about Saudi Arabia being in a tougher world than "western" leaders are is especially spot on. Bad things happen to weak ones. In America and the "west" incompetent pols and tenured college professors get posh retirements. Naturally they are going to resent being used as props by the boy in a man's body named Trudeau. Canada did not need this conflict, went out of their way to provoke it, and now fortunately for now at least the Saudis took back the threat.

    All I really did on this thread is to expound upon some of the points made. For example, I added the fact that Trudeau sought to humiliate Trump after the trade negotiations. While I would not have used the term a Trump team member used by saying their is "a special place in hell" for such people, the actions on Trudeau's part were/are unconscionable. The doubling down on this by the Canadian government was/is even worse. I also expound upon the one-sided nature of NATO and how it needs to be altered. These are very minor deviations from the general theme.

    I suppose this means that everyone who does not take your position is now a Russian troll. Is the editor now a Russian troll for daring to point out the stupidity of this kind of diplomacy? Are suggestions that the Canadian PM is young and has much to learn constitute trolling for Russia? I suppose "not bother with you" is your way of censoring view points you don't agree with much like the Democrats are seeking to do by out and out censorship. Don't like the argument, can't counter it, the solution is CENSORSHIP!!

    Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Google have excellent business models. Slavish adherence to the Democrat party will run them into the ground. Prediction: They will tire of this at some point very soon.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Fred,

    I probably did not cover all the points in the thread. Time and patience are very limited right now. Now I will address your last post.

    At this point, any negotiations that the US might get involved with are going to have to back door. After Trudeau acted so foolishly anyone aligning with him publically will risk reprisals themselves. He picked a conflict he and his country did not need.

    With that said, while we cannot "know" for certain what is happening without real time information from on the inside and in real time, we can make inferences based upon prior experiences and what people have done in the past as well as applying common sense. Based upon this and the prior track record and experience that POTUS has at diplomacy and negotiations I suspect that such behind scenes back door negotiating is already going on.

    For POTUS to "step in" as you seem to suggest in a public manner would only encourage the Saudis to "dig in" and would make matters even worse for our Canadian ally. To conduct diplomacy in such a way right now would accomplish nothing good except perhaps political grandstanding while undermining the national security interests of us and our Canadian ally. Results oriented leaders such as Trump do not engage in such activities. As the editor points out and I will reiterate, not smart diplomacy on Canada's part. Now either Trump must bail him out or the Saudis decide to back down on their own. I suspect it will be primarily the Saudis backing down on their own with an assist from Trump diplomacy.

    A bit off topic but with the cancellation of the Iran deal that could very easily go off the rails meaning Trump and his team are going to be busy with diplomacy on this Trudeau picked a VERY BAD time to behave so rashly. Are the resources even available to assist here? Also, given Trudeau's actions after the trade meetings and the doubling down on this act by the Canadian government, I think it reasonable to question whether or not the Canadian government is even an ally. With that said any confrontation between Canada and Saudi Arabia threatens to spill over into America. As such, we are going to act behind the scenes to try and defuse the conflict in any way we can. Trudeau created a headache for us and Canada that wasn't needed. As has been said, he is a young man. Hopefully he learns from this.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Smith if there is a provision in the NATO Agreement that allows a member to weasel out of their commitment to come to the aid of another NATO member, based on "he said she said issues" or, any other inane reason, if attacked could you provide a link to it.

    But, of course we do know that the US has no compunction avoiding obligations under treaties and agreements so while I imagine that if an attack were to be made on Canada by SA the US will find a way to avoid fulfilling their commitment.

    I know it would be difficult for you to understand but coming to one's aid does not always have to mean from a military perspective.

    ReplyDelete
  21. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  22. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  23. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  24. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  25. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete