Canada to US - Sorry, you can't come through

[Wezil]

WASHINGTON - Prime Minister Stephen Harper "blew off" complaints from President George W. Bush about Canada's opposition to natural gas tankers passing through Canadian waters to get to New England, a U.S. coast guard captain told a briefing this week.

Capt. Charles Michel said the issue is a good example of why the United States needs to endorse the international treaty on the Law of the Sea. "Without being a party to the Law of the Sea Convention, we cannot avail ourselves of the dispute-resolution provisions," he said.

"This is a slam dunk. We would win."

"There's absolutely no question about it," said Michel, the coast guard's chief of the office of maritime and international law.

"My understanding is President Bush has personally communicated with the prime minister, who blew off (Bush) and said no, because he's playing to his local political constituency."

And the United States is not about to use force with Canada over the issue, he said.

"Right now, U.S. citizens are likely going to end up paying more for their natural gas and probably have less of it because of our inability to become a party to the (treaty). I don't know how much closer to home that can hit."

Harper and several other Canadian ministers have said it would be dangerous to allow liquefied natural gas tankers to travel through Head Harbour Passage leading into U.S. ports in northern Maine.

It's part of Passamaquoddy Bay in southern New Brunswick that straddles the U.S. border, near Campobello Island where former U.S. president Franklin Delano Roosevelt had a retreat.

The bay is also home to rich fishing grounds.

The issue, which originally surfaced in the 1970s, is prominent again with new plans to build new LNG terminals in northern Maine.

New Brunswick MP Greg Thompson calls the passage, with its high tides and rocky ledges, one of the most treacherous in Canada and says a gas spil would be devastating.

Thompson, who is Veterans Affairs minister, said Bush raised the issue with Harper at the August summit in Montebello, Que.

And while he wasn't there for the conversation, he said Harper gave a "polite" synopsis of Canada's position and its intent to use "every legal and diplomatic means" to ensure the tankers don't pass through the passage.

"We regard them as internal Canadian waters," he said from Ottawa.

Ambassador Michael Wilson wrote to the head of the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in February to say risks to the sensitive area from U.S. tankers are too great for Canada to accept.

U.S. officials have been lobbying the Senate to quickly endorse the Law of the Sea treaty for reasons including national security and access to untapped Arctic energy resources.

The upper house is expected to vote on the convention and it must pass with the support of two-third of senators.

The United States helped devise the treaty, which came into effect in 1994 and has been ratified by 155 countries including Canada.

But the United States never signed because of concerns it would be giving up sovereignty or losing rights.

Not joining is hurting the country in several ways, said U.S. navy Capt. Patrick Neher.

"It denies us the opportunity to submit a claim for our own extended continental shelf off Alaska and elsewhere" covering vast energy resources, he said.

Passing the treaty would also give the United States tools to claim an area of the Beaufort Sea that Canada considers its own.

Canada insists the international border continues through the ocean in a straight line from the land along the border between Alaska and the Yukon.

The United States argues the border angles 30 degrees to the east, an area with high energy potential.

Global warming is reducing ice cover in the Arctic, creating the prospect that a shipping route could open up within a decade, so there's more impetus for northern countries to stake their claims.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2...719516-cp.html

[Riesstiu IV]

Is all news from Canada this boring?

[Wezil]

We've pretty much had it with you guys. One more excuse and we''ll take you out.

[SlowwHand]

Moose dragoons.

[Lancer]

If Canada and the US go to war, where to all the draft dodgers wimp out to?

[Wezil]

Quebec.

[Lancer]

We must assume that they will have surrendered to Mexico.

[Wezil]

You guys could just sign the damn treaty.

edit - a triple x-post. Impressive.

[Combat Ingrid]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Moose dragoons.

[SlowwHand]

New Zealand makes their move in the ensuing chaos.

[Krill]

Sheep

[LordShiva]

qft

Sorry! Teh administrator has specified that users can only post one message every 30 seconds.

[Krill]

Bastard

[Flubber]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
New Zealand makes their move in the ensuing chaos.

Cute

Serioulsy though if the US wants the benefit of international treaties they have to take the obligations too-- You cannot have it one way

Personally I cannot see why an LNG tanker has to go through a narrow passage-- It can't be that big a detour to go around

[DinoDoc]

And the United States is not about to use force with Canada over the issue, he said.

Pfft. Why not?

[Whoha]

Originally posted by Wezil
You guys could just sign the damn treaty.

edit - a triple x-post. Impressive.

We will not be signing the law of the seas treaty.

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Don't know what they're worried about. They've been trying to get those LNG terminals built up here forever and every time they pick a new site they just get rejected again. I don't see that changing anytime soon.

[Richelieu]

[Reiko]

Canadians are a threat to the US!

The Americans should invade to secure the canadian bacon supplies.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Wezil
You guys could just sign the damn treaty.

I'm curious about this sentiment. Why should we sign it if you don't even follow it yourselves?

[Wiglaf]

And the United States is not about to use force with Canada over the issue, he said.

If they don't want our gas resources, then everyone in the country may as well commit suicide. There is simply no reason to refuse shipments of natural gas when the country consumes over 1.8 million barrels of oil PER DAY. If this is some sort of show of solidarity with Mexico, who has no oil and gets around on horseback and donkey, then good riddance to Canada. No one will miss you and hockey is dead in America anyway. How do you say "don't let the door hit your ass on the way out" in Britain.

[Sandman]

Mexico has lots of oil, they just squandered it all.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I'm curious about this sentiment. Why should we sign it if you don't even follow it yourselves?

So we can make them follow it! Canadians, fortunately for us, have a weakness to international shame.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


So we can make them follow it!

Exactly. If you think we are violating the treaty then sign up and make your case. Seems rather foolish to chide us for allegedly not obeying a treaty you don't even agree with.

[Spec]

Originally posted by DinoDoc

And the United States is not about to use force with Canada over the issue, he said.

Pfft. Why not?

You cant touch Canada. The whole planet will be after you guys.



Spec.

[Heraclitus]

US fears of loosing sovereignty by joining almost any treaty are always amusing.

Canada now
US when they get their way
Canada when the US forces them to back down
World adds one more to America’s list.

[Richelieu]

[Riesstiu IV]

Originally posted by Sandman
Mexico has lots of oil, they just squandered it all.

...on their own skin.

[Harry Tuttle]

Haha! Lighthouse.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by Spec


You cant touch Canada. The whole planet will be after you guys.



Spec.

Like a bunch of girl scouts?