CRS Issue Statement on Canada

CRS Issue Statement on Canada

.

CRS Issue Statement on Canada
Carl Ek, Coordinator
Specialist in International Relations
July 16, 2010
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
IS40304
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress
c11173008

.
CRS Issue Statement on Canada

he United States and Canada have extensive ties that encompass a number of areas,
including trade, security, the environment, and international affairs. The two countries
T cooperate widely in international security and political issues, both bilaterally and through
numerous international organizations. Since September 11, 2001, the United States and Canada
have cooperated extensively on efforts to combat terrorism, particularly in Afghanistan, where
Canada has made a sizable contribution to the ISAF military operation. Canada’s foreign and
defense policies are usually in harmony with those of the United States. Areas of contention are
relatively few, but sometimes sharp, as was the case in policy toward Iraq.
The U.S. Congress maintains an ongoing high level of interest in U.S.-Canadian relations. This is
manifested in the annual meetings of the U.S.-Canada Interparliamentary Group. The most recent
– the group’s fifty-first – was held in May 2010 in New Orleans.
Canada, a NATO member, was one of the first countries to join the U.S.-led military operation in
Afghanistan, and Canadian forces –about 2,830 currently – have long been serving without
national caveats in combat operations in the conflicted southern part of the country. Canada has
suffered among the heaviest casualties proportionally; a total of 138 Canadians, including one
diplomat, have fallen. As Canadian operations shifted from peacekeeping to counter-insurgency,
public support for the Afghan mission has diminished. Canadian troops are now scheduled to be
withdrawn by July 2011. Although the government is adamant about removing combat soldiers,
Ottawa intends to continue to contribute to civilian development efforts.
Border security has become a major concern in the post-9/11 world. The two countries have
launched a number of initiatives that attempt to better secure the common border without unduly
disturbing legitimate travel and commerce. Ottawa and Washington have been attempting to
resolve issues surrounding implementation of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI),
a provision of U.S. law that will require travelers to present a passport, or equivalent document, at
the border. During the second session of the 111th Congress, Members will likely continue to
closely monitor implementation of WHTI. Under the Bush Administration, the United States,
Canada, and Mexico created the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), which was intended
to provide security for the continent against criminal activities and external threats, while easing
the flow of goods and travelers who cross the borders. It also aimed to boost prosperity through
promoting cooperation in a number of areas, such as regulations. This initiative was discontinued
by the Obama Administration, but discussions continue on many of the issues that concerned the
SPP.
The United States and Canada maintain the world’s largest trading bilateral relationship, one that
has been strengthened over the past two decades by the approval of a U.S.-Canada Free Trade
Agreement and the trilateral North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Aspects of the
NAFTA may be reviewed by the Administration and Congress as U.S. trade policy comes under
increased scrutiny. Although commercial disputes may not be quite as prominent now as they
have been in the past, the two countries in recent years have engaged in difficult negotiations over
items in several trade sectors, affecting only a small percentage of the total of goods and services
exchanged. The second session of 111th Congress will likely see continued involvement by
Members in efforts to resolve certain trade disputes, particularly in the agricultural and forestry
sector. One issue that caused controversy recently was the “Buy America” provision that was
added to the U.S. economic stimulus package (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009, PL 111-5). The measure essentially would require that public works projects paid for by
stimulus funds be completed with raw and manufactured materials of U.S. content. While the
United States maintained that this provision was being implemented consistent with U.S. trade
Congressional Research Service
1

.
CRS Issue Statement on Canada

obligations, Canadians objected that the provision was protectionist, and was contrary to U.S.
obligations under the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (AGP), and the NAFTA.
Bilateral negotiations resulted in an agreement signed in February 2010 that would allow
selective Canadian participation in the stimulus projects in return for Canadian provincial
participation in the AGP. Canada is the United States’ largest supplier of energy—including oil,
uranium, natural gas, and electricity—and the energy relationship has been growing.
Finally, the United States and Canada work together closely on environmental matters. The
environmental effects of the extraction and processing of Canada’s oil sands have been an issue
of concern to some Members of Congress; among other effects, the U.S. and Canadian
environmental and scientific communities are concerned about the potential risk of oil sands
development for migratory birds. The two countries also have been discussing restoration of the
Great Lakes, as well as the possible impact that climate change might have, including the
alteration of habitat for marine wildlife. Also, global warming is forecast to open a navigable
channel through Canada’s northern archipelago, creating a so-called “northwest passage” that
Ottawa maintains would be a Canadian inland waterway and the United States and other nations
argue would constitute an international strait, open to international navigation. Canada’s
sovereignty claim raises commercial, environmental, and security issues, and may be the subject
of congressional attention.

Issue Team Members

Carl Ek, Coordinator
Pervaze A. Sheikh
Specialist in International Relations
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
cek@crs.loc.gov, 7-7286
psheikh@crs.loc.gov, 7-6070
Carolyn C. Smith
Cynthia Brougher
Information Research Specialist
Legislative Attorney
csmith@crs.loc.gov, 7-7798
cbrougher@crs.loc.gov, 7-9121
M. Angeles Villarreal
Eugene H. Buck
Specialist in International Trade and Finance
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
avillarreal@crs.loc.gov, 7-0321
gbuck@crs.loc.gov, 7-7262
Ian F. Fergusson
M. Lynne Corn
Specialist in International Trade and Finance
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
ifergusson@crs.loc.gov, 7-4997
lcorn@crs.loc.gov, 7-7267
Jennifer E. Lake
Kristina Alexander
Analyst in Domestic Security
Legislative Attorney
jlake@crs.loc.gov, 7-0620
kalexander@crs.loc.gov, 7-8597
Charles E. Hanrahan
Marc Humphries
Senior Specialist in Agricultural Policy
Analyst in Energy Policy
chanrahan@crs.loc.gov, 7-7235
mhumphries@crs.loc.gov, 7-7264
Randy Schnepf
James E. McCarthy
Specialist in Agricultural Policy
Specialist in Environmental Policy
rschnepf@crs.loc.gov, 7-4277
jmccarthy@crs.loc.gov, 7-7225

Congressional Research Service
2