Democrats can be Trumpists too?

[crazy canuck]

One of the things Trump did was violate international agreements.  People may have shrugged and put it down to Trump being Trump.  But now we have a Democratic governor who is also acting in clear violation of a treaty the US has with Canada by purporting to order a company operating an international pipeline to close down its operation within her state.

The treaty is not long - it would take you and the governor in question about 5 minutes to read.  It is also not difficult to comprehend.  So even a person with the intellect of a Trump can understand it.

There is a provision that requires 10 years notice to end the obligation.  The Governor (who does not have any authority to end the treaty) gave very little notice to the company to pack up its operation.

So what is going on here?  Do Americans have so little regard to their country's international obligations that there is no political price to pay for violating those obligations?  I think that is not an unreasonable conclusion to reach.  Hard to trust the US after 4 years of Trump.  Even harder now that this is happening under a Democratic administration.  It could be that Biden will step in and point out this is within Federal jurisdiction and tell the governor to stop the nonsense.  But, if the premise that the American public cares little about their country's internal commitments and agreements is accurate, why would he?  And perhaps that explains his relative inaction on this matter to date.

Here is the Treaty if you are interested

https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/text-texte.aspx?id=101884

[Zoupa]

Do Americans have so little regard to their country's international obligations that there is no political price to pay for violating those obligations?

Pretty much. That would be the case in most countries, perhaps with the US an even lesser political price.

[The Brain]

I assume the state in question still has a say on stuff like health and safety of a pipeline through its territory? What is the formal status of and given reason for the governor's decision? Is the governor actually cancelling the treaty or in fact acting on local matters that are beyond the treaty? NB I don't think or believe anything regarding all this, just curious.

[Valmy]

So what is going on here?  Do Americans have so little regard to their country's international obligations that there is no political price to pay for violating those obligations?

I don't know if the American populace is as plugged into hydrocarbon treaties from the 1970s as you seem to think. It is the Feds obligation to get the state to abide by the treaty.

I don't know how controversial this pipeline or whatever is going on is though. Is this one of those pipelines that enrages native Americans or something?

[garbon]

This seems like quite the whine even for CC.

[Jacob]

IMO it's all part of the push and pull of international relations, rather than particularly Trumpist.

[crazy canuck]

So what is going on here?  Do Americans have so little regard to their country's international obligations that there is no political price to pay for violating those obligations?

I don't know if the American populace is as plugged into hydrocarbon treaties from the 1970s as you seem to think. It is the Feds obligation to get the state to abide by the treaty.

I don't know how controversial this pipeline or whatever is going on is though. Is this one of those pipelines that enrages native Americans or something?

I don't think they are at all.  Which is my point.

[Valmy]

So what is going on here?  Do Americans have so little regard to their country's international obligations that there is no political price to pay for violating those obligations?

I don't know if the American populace is as plugged into hydrocarbon treaties from the 1970s as you seem to think. It is the Feds obligation to get the state to abide by the treaty.

I don't know how controversial this pipeline or whatever is going on is though. Is this one of those pipelines that enrages native Americans or something?

I don't think they are at all.  Which is my point.

Well you are correct. Normal people do not often know anything about the foreign relations and obligations of their country. Hell just getting the American people to appreciate when our country is doing something like bombing civilians abroad is difficult to do. It is just so remote from their day to day, you know?

[crazy canuck]

IMO it's all part of the push and pull of international relations, rather than particularly Trumpist.

If you can point me to a point in time when a US administration declared Canada a security risk (Trump's justification for granting himself authority to impose the aluminum tariff) or a US Governor purporting to order the closure of in international pipeline - I am all ears.  I think shrugging this off as normal is also part of the problem.  It is a new low imo.

[Berkut]

Source?

[crazy canuck]

So what is going on here?  Do Americans have so little regard to their country's international obligations that there is no political price to pay for violating those obligations?

I don't know if the American populace is as plugged into hydrocarbon treaties from the 1970s as you seem to think. It is the Feds obligation to get the state to abide by the treaty.

I don't know how controversial this pipeline or whatever is going on is though. Is this one of those pipelines that enrages native Americans or something?

I don't think they are at all.  Which is my point.

Well you are correct. Normal people do not often know anything about the foreign relations and obligations of their country. Hell just getting the American people to appreciate when our country is doing something like bombing civilians abroad is difficult to do. It is just so remote from their day to day, you know?

Yes, I know.  Which is why I posted this thread.  I am not sure what the answer is for how to deal with a country like the US.  During the endless softwood lumber disputes Canada has always prevailed when US transgressions get addressed at international trade tribunals.  But what does one do with something as bizarre as a US governor ordering an company to shut down its international pipeline? 

Acts like this are a strong signal that the globalization is is probably dead.  Countries cannot count on others to uphold their bargains (especially the US given its recent history).  China is a worse choice of dance partner.  The EU, if it survives, may become the reliable winner in all of this but its right wing nation states make that more dubious.  We probably go back to the bad old days of nationalism, each nation needed to be largely self reliant rather than having confidence in international trade,  and the wars that come with it.

 

[Berkut]

So that is it then - if this isn't resolved in the right way, the alternative is war.

An interesting take.

[Jacob]

If you can point me to a point in time when a US administration declared Canada a security risk (Trump's justification for granting himself authority to impose the aluminum tariff) or a US Governor purporting to order the closure of in international pipeline - I am all ears.  I think shrugging this off as normal is also part of the problem.  It is a new low imo.

I'm not disputing that Trump is Trumpist.

But a state level politician campaigning and being elected on an issue of local concern and trying to force the issue doesn't strike me as particularly Trumpists. I mean, Burnaby City Hall tried to stop a pipeline running through Burnaby. I don't think they're Trumpists. Local governments stretching beyond their authority and encroaching on Federal authority (or Provincial/ State authority to go one level down) is not particularly exceptional when it comes to environmental issues.

[crazy canuck]

Source?

You really don't know what I am talking about?

If you really don't know and you really can't find a newspaper article let me know.  But I hope you are really not that ill informed.

[Jacob]

Governor Whitmer has given her order. Let's see what happens next.