Obama, Canada, NAFTA and Some ‘Straight Talk’

Obama, Canada, NAFTA and Some ‘Straight Talk’

Obama, Canada, NAFTA and Some ‘Straight Talk’

Did Barack Obama’s campaign quietly contact Canadian officials to tell them not to take seriously the Illinois senator’s tough talk about renegotiating trade agreements?

CTV, the well-regarded Canadian news network, reported this week that a top Obama adviser contacted the Canadian government to calm fears that the senator was serious about rewriting pro-corporate deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement to benefit workers, farmers and the environment. According to CTV, the Obama adviser told the Canadians that “when Senator Obama talks about opting out of the free trade deal, the Canadian government shouldn’t worry. The operative said it was just campaign rhetoric not to be taken seriously.”

After that report aired on Wednesday, an Obama campaign spokesperson claimed in an interview with CTV that “no message was passed to the Canadian government that suggests that Obama does not mean what he says about opting out of NAFTA if it is not renegotiated.”

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

Did Barack Obama’s campaign quietly contact Canadian officials to tell them not to take seriously the Illinois senator’s tough talk about renegotiating trade agreements?

CTV, the well-regarded Canadian news network, reported this week that a top Obama adviser contacted the Canadian government to calm fears that the senator was serious about rewriting pro-corporate deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement to benefit workers, farmers and the environment. According to CTV, the Obama adviser told the Canadians that “when Senator Obama talks about opting out of the free trade deal, the Canadian government shouldn’t worry. The operative said it was just campaign rhetoric not to be taken seriously.”

After that report aired on Wednesday, an Obama campaign spokesperson claimed in an interview with CTV that “no message was passed to the Canadian government that suggests that Obama does not mean what he says about opting out of NAFTA if it is not renegotiated.”

The problem, of course, is that CTV has a very credible source — a a high-ranking member of the Canadian embassy — who has provided the network with details of the call and a timeline.

Of course, the source is now being pressured to tell a different story by superiors. But few serious observers of the trade debate — with its history of back channel communications — doubts the scenario as it was first reported.

Attempts by CTV to get the Obama camp to respond to specific questions about the conversation and the timeline in question have so far proven unsuccessful.

According to CTV, “the Obama camp did not respond to repeated questions from CTV on reports that a conversation on this matter was held between Obama’s senior economic adviser — Austan Goolsbee — and the Canadian Consulate General in Chicago.”

CTV did contact Goolsbee, but he’s not cooperating.

The network reports that “(Goolsbee refused to say whether he had such a conversation with the Canadian government office in Chicago. He also said he has been told to direct any questions to the campaign headquarters.”

It is starting to sound an awfully lot like the Obama campaign may have gotten caught telling Canada one thing and Ohio something different.

What’s the bottom line on this story? According to the network: “Sources at the highest levels of the Canadian government — who first told CTV that a call was made from the Obama camp — have reconfirmed their position.”

And what’s John McCain saying?

“I don’t think it’s appropriate to go to Ohio and tell people one thing while your aide is calling the Canadian ambassador and telling him something else,” says the likely Republican nominee. “I certainly don’t think that’s straight talk.”

On this point, McCain’s right.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x