Canadian and American flags fly on the Gordie Howe Bridge between Windsor, Ont. and Detroit in May.Paul Sancya/The Associated Press
How does it look?
Re “Carney defends courting Saudi trade and investment” (July 10): Canada has no right to criticize the human rights records of other countries given our own shameful past, especially our treatment of Indigenous peoples and people of other races. The treatment of passengers, primarily Sikhs, aboard the Komagata Maru in 1914 is one of many examples of our barbarism.
I fully support Mark Carney and his approach to foreign policy, trade and investment. We have a leader who is a pragmatist and has no shortage of personal opportunities, yet he chose to serve our country. We should be grateful to him and mind our own business in our glasshouse.
Sarfaraz Ahmed Victoria
I don’t often agree with former foreign affairs minister Lloyd Axworthy, but I too am “not comfortable with Mr. Carney’s ‘transactional’ foreign policy.” It seems to give him permission to do business with countries with terrible human rights reputations.
Last year, he called China one of Canada’s biggest geopolitical and security threats. This year, he has proclaimed a new “strategic partnership” with China. What a difference a year makes.
Now he is pursuing Saudi Arabia, which has a record of serious human rights transgressions including political murders and lack of women’s rights. Mr. Carney says lecturing from afar is ineffective, but I’m not so sure. The optics are terrible.
I think getting too close to authoritarian tyrants for the sake of broadening our markets gets everyone’s hands dirty.
Marilyn Baker Richmond, B.C.
Re “The engagement question” (Letters, July 13): A letter-writer suggests Canada should be treating Saudi Arabia like we did South Africa in the battle against apartheid. But in that case, Canada was part of a broad coalition including United Nations endorsement of sanctions.
There is much to criticize about Saudi Arabia, but it is not an international pariah. The presidents of the United States, France and the European Council, the prime ministers of Britain and Italy and the Chancellor of Germany have all recently visited there.
Mark Carney is right in saying we need to respond to the world as it is. After more than two decades, a visit to Saudi Arabia by a Canadian prime minister was long overdue.
It will hopefully help to advance Canadian interests, as well as foster respectful and constructive dialogue about the societal reforms recently being advanced in that country.
Tom MacDonald Former ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Ottawa
Bridge too far
Re “A U.S. bridge shakedown in a rough world” (July 13): Keep the Gordie Howe bridge closed and let Michigan fight this one with the Trump regime.
In a few months, we may be in a better position to argue for a fair deal. They could give us $3.2-billion to start, then share the tolls from the start.
Marilyn Dolenko Ottawa
I am disappointed at Mark Carney’s capitulation on the Gordie Howe bridge deal.
This “renegotiation” will likely encourage Donald Trump to hold similar long-standing deals hostage. If Mr. Carney thinks this concession will make future negotiations smoother, he is very much mistaken.
Whatever happened to “elbows up?” Gordie Howe must be rolling over in his grave.
John Coo Ottawa
Once again, the United States shows that no agreement is an agreement, but simply a maybe.
Given the minimum information released about the terms, I am suspicious that the Moroun family, owner of the Ambassador Bridge, is about to be a recipient of the newly shared tolls.
Sure gives me faith in the honest workings of government.
Chris McCabe The Blue Mountains, Ont.
Seeing red
Re “The return of a Liberal Senate in all but name” (Editorial, July 10): This political football has been getting kicked around for decades and the result remains nil-nil.
Some say senators should be elected. This would make the upper chamber indistinguishable from the House and result in renewed calls to abolish it, another bad idea that would remove any hope of putting the brakes on an irresponsible majority.
We know the Senate as the ”chamber of sober second thought,” but what does that mean exactly? Shouldn’t senators remain free of the intoxicating effects of political power? Rather than forwarding a party’s agenda, senators should judge bills according to their potential to meet the needs of Canadians of all stripes.
This is all very idealistic, but if we’re not aiming for an ideal outcome, what are we aiming for? Let’s hope this deadlock can be broken, preferably without the sort of “own goal” Mark Carney seems intent on.
Steve Soloman Toronto
Oil outlook
Re “It’s good that we’re building pipelines, but not so good that we’re paying for them” (July 8): There is also the motivation for and magnitude of Mark Carney’s gamble to backstop another pipeline.
In the short term, he is trying to stamp out Alberta separatism. In the medium term, he hopes the economic impact of increased oil production will matter more than the detrimental effects that extra emissions will have on the environment.
Given that national leaders must strive to keep their countries together, the unifying goals appear laudable; given that anyone interested in the fate of our planet has an overwhelming responsibility to mitigate the growing impact of climate change, greenlighting a pipeline project seems enormously irresponsible.
Mark Sternman Somerville, Mass.
Canada is a country joined together by ribbons of steel rails that brought British Columbia into confederation and cemented us as a nation from coast to coast. That nation-building endeavour was costly, but essential.
Will steel pipes running to the B.C. coast be the glue that keeps Alberta in the country? No doubt the capital costs will be substantial, but I view them as reparations for the decade that the federal government sacrificed the Alberta economy, in a zeal to be the greenest nation on the planet, even if it had no measurable effect on global emissions.
My question is: Will it be enough?
Bryan McConachy West Vancouver
Generations to come
Re “FIFA gets big bucks. Canada’s out $1-billion. How can we actually make money off soccer?” (Report on Business, July 13): It’s debatable whether FIFA is a boon or a bust to the Canadian economy. However, the positive impact of this tournament on millions of Canadian children is priceless.
They came, they saw, they were inspired and many more will take up the sport.
The benefit this tournament will have on community and the long-term health of Canadians should also be considered.
Monique Dykstra Montreal
Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Keep letters to 150 words or fewer. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com