Cross Border Politicians

In the midst of an enthusiastic welcome on his Canadian visit in February, President Barack Obama joked that if things didn’t work out for him politically in the US, he could move to Canada.

This past weekend Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper received fawning attention from Fox Media in an interview on Canada’s approach to the current economic crisis.

The PM was careful not to make any statement that could be taken as adverse comparison and haunt his relationship with the new US Democratic administration. One cannot escape the suspicion, however, that Mr. Harper is building a portfolio south of the border, for such time as his political capital in Canada runs dry.

This would not be the first time Mr. Harper has paid more attention to his offshore investments than his homegrown ones. In the 1990’s he made speeches in the US describing American values as “a shining light” while hard pressed to think of something to say he loved about Canada.

Then there was his early and unconditional support of the Bush Administration’s Iraq war. He was then Opposition Leader, not PM, in a largely Liberal Parliament that had just made non-participation in Iraq a matter of policy.

In Canada such criticism of Government foreign policy is not considered disloyal. In the US system the President is outside Congress. He speaks to it on significant occasions, and its members then usually rally behind him as Head of State.

The Prime Minister sits in Parliament as a Member with other members, open to the criticism of the Opposition across the floor and to that of his own party members in the privacy of caucus.

Opposition Leader Harper’s 2003 criticism of a former Prime Minister’s choice not to support the Bush initiative was not essentially un-Canadian. It can be seen as simply fulfilling the Opposition’s function to be a Devil’s Advocate—in two senses of the word, on this occasion!

As a US Senator, Barack Obama’s dissent on the war was more courageous. As a member of the US upper house, he had a constitutional responsibility to scrutinize Administration foreign policy.

But Senator Obama voted against the Iraq war as one of a tiny handful in the face of a highly orchestrated campaign to mobilize the US. That took more than what is required of an Opposition Leader in a system where criticism is part of the day-to-day job.

Now the two one-time dissenters find themselves allies in trying to lead North America out of recession. And in the reach across the border to each other's electorates, there is a delicious irony.

A Canadian Prime Minister who hitched his wagon to twin horses of American power and conservative ideology now finds himself in tow to an American President who is his ideological opposite.

And the President's critics at home--those who admit to wanting to see him fail--are looking longingly for a model at a Canadian Prime Minister who may not survive his next election.

Although at least one Canadian has become a state governor, only natural born Americans can become President, according to the US Constitution. Mr. Harper's options are definitely limited here.

One former Canadian Prime Minister who had cultivated his cross-border connections ended up in retirement on the Board of American Express. Given the present state of some US financial institutions, that might not now be a wise choice.

However, the energy sector remains strong. If allegations of hit contracts against Third World figures continue to haunt former Vice-President Dick Cheney, a opening on the Board of Halliburton is a possibility.

With a remunerative American directorship, Stephen Harper might wish to expand his portfolio with a British stock. He might follow his icon Margaret Thatcher into the House of Lords.

"Lord Harper of Halliburton:" that has a nice ring about it.

Meanwhile, if Barack Obama has to find another career, he call fall back on his community service credentials. Even more than profiteering, public service is a profession without borders.