Canada's Dispute with the UAE - Research Paper Example

?Running Head: Canada’s Dispute with UAE Canada’s Dispute with UAE [Institute’s Canada’s Dispute with UAE Introduction For the past few months, the relations between Canada and UAE have hit a new low. Before the New Year, Canadians did not require any visa for entering into the United Arab Emirates (Kukucha & Bratt, 2011); however, as of today, the UAE administration has imposed prudent visa requirements for Canadians to enter into the country. On the other hand, the United Arab Emirates has demanded an apology from the Prime Minister Stephen Harper on his recent comments about UAE. These countries have enjoyed great relations over the past 40 years and never in the history have these two “friends” fought on so many levels (Kukucha & Bratt, 2011). This paper is an attempt to explore the origins, causes, and consequences of this problem. Furthermore, the paper will also try to decide that who is to blame for this dispute. Discussion Origins of the problem It all started back in 2005 when the administration of United Arab Emirates decided to get into a partnership with Air Canada for Emirates and Etihad that would allow them to increase their flights from thrice a week to daily. Furthermore, the plan was that Emirates and Etihad would get a chance to Vancouver, Montreal, and Calgary instead of only Toronto (Keyrouz, 2010). Quite clearly, Emirates and Etihad would take the passengers from Canada and provide flights to many other eastern countries such as Pakistan and India. However, to the surprise of everyone, Air Canada demanded 50 percents of the profits in return of allowing the UAE airlines to take away the business of Air Canada (O'Reilly, 2011). The Canadian officials thought that it would hurt the business of the airlines and would result in the loss of thousands of jobs for Canadians, which is not acceptable considering the current financial crisis. Furthermore, Air Canada and the Canadian government strongly believe that it would be unfair to allow Air Canada to compete with Emirates and Etihad because of the fact that both these airlines enjoy unfair advantages. Both are state owned, they have access to tax-free fuel, and they are potentially subsidized (Kukucha & Bratt, 2011). On the other side, the UAE officials were unable to see any rational in demanding 50 percent of the share in profits without any investment and risk. Furthermore, a study conducted by Etihad showed that in presence of more flights, the government would earn around 26 million Canadian dollars in taxes and would witness the creation of more than 1900 employees (Patrick & Lennox, 2008). Consequences Towards the end of fall 2010, the Canadian media got headlines when they aired the news that Canadian Defense Minister, Peter Mackay has been “thrown out” of the UAE. However, the reality was a bit different. Weeks before this incident happened, the lease, which allowed Canada to have a military camp in UAE for its soldiers in Afghanistan, expired. It meant that now if any military plane, which had to land in UAE, would have to take authorization from the UAE administration. However, Mackay did not have any such authorization and therefore, the UAE officials had no choice but to restrict the landing of Mackay in UAE (Abma, 2011). The consequences of this dispute have been adverse and if the parties fail to show any flexibility or if there is no intervention from any third party to solve the issues, then this pay the trailer of what is going to happen next. Recently, the Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper amazed the world by blaming the UAE government on being soft on terrorism. Furthermore, the Prime Minister also linked the introduction of visa restrictions and ending of lease arrangement for Canadian forces to fight in Afghanistan with blackmail to get the UAE’s subsidized airlines to suck money out of Canada. In fact, Prime Minister Harper has been really loud and angry on this issue and has gone on to raise doubts on the intentions of the UAE administration in helping Canada against the war on terror as part of the plan to ask for bigger favors (Kukucha & Bratt, 2011). To make matters worse, UAE officials confirmed in November 2010 that the UAE government played an important role in lobbying against the bid of Canadian government to gain membership of the Security Council of the United Nations, which Canada was not able to get (O'Reilly, 2011). It is also important to note that the business groups, trade blocs, opposition parities and even local Canadian media has raised fingers on the efficiency and ability of Stephen Harper (Abma, 2011) and his administration to handle the diplomatic issues and foreign relations of the country. The Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff (Abma, 2011) has expressed his concerns over this recent dispute and the time, which would be required to bring back the 40-year-old friendship of the country back on track. In addition, the Former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien (Abma, 2011), who led the liberal government from 1999 to 2003 in Canada, said, “I think this problem has not been well managed”. He further added that, “I hope (the Canadian government) will resolve the difficulty because we need good relations with this part of the world” (Abma, 2011). Reactions of Both Sides In an interview to a Canadian news agency in January, Prime Minister Harper (O'Reilly, 2011) finally talked about the event openly and said, “That's not how you treat allies, and I think [this] tells us you better pick your friends pretty carefully in the future. I could never see [Canada] treating an ally like that”. He also added that, “When we, as a country, offer to be part of an international mission to help protect global security, then somebody comes along and uses that to try and leverage demands on our domestic airline industry, I don't think that's a situation we, as a country, want to be in” (O'Reilly, 2011). Most of the reactions from the side of UAE have been under discussion earlier, however, it is important to note that the UAE administration has now demanded a formal apology from the Canadian Prime Minister on his comments (O'Reilly, 2011). Who is to Blame Without any doubts, the blame for this dispute goes to both sides because both the countries failed to deal with a diplomatic and business issue in a mature manner. Instead, both Canada and UAE are responsible for converting a diplomatic issue to into a military, trade, and political issue. However, a closer look reveals that the Canadian administration has done more wrong then their UAE counterparts (Keyrouz, 2010). Canada should have understood that UAE had been standing by the side of Canada whenever Canada needed it. For most part of the last decade, Canadian soldiers who were wounded in the war against terror received free treatment in the UAE hospitals and accommodation until they were stabilized. Furthermore, it is no secret that when the role of UAE was crucial in ensuring the safe return of hostages which were held in Baghdad (Hampson & Heinbecker, 2009). In the absence of any help from UAE, there was no chance that those hostages would have survived. Canada also needs to understand that UAE is its biggest market in the Middle East for exports. In addition, currently, the foreign direct investment from UAE in Canada remains at 4.4 billion dollars making it the 12th largest investor in Canada. Another reason why Canada deserves the blame is due the fact that UAE gave a notice three months and then extended it for another month before the Canadian soldiers were asked to leave the Camp Mirage (Abma, 2011). This means that the Prime Minister Harper had his administration had almost four months to stop reaching “the point of no return”. Instead, the Canadian administration kept avoiding the issue and dealt with it like an arrogant and stubborn child. Furthermore, it appears that over the past four to five years, the approach of Canada has been the one with which it has been trying to invite trouble. It deliberately conducted the dialogue in such a way, which kept on going for weeks, and finally the UAE counterparts realized that it is dead end (Hampson & Heinbecker, 2009). Finally, when the Canadian diplomats gathered the courage to give a reply to the UAE administration that was even more frustrating because they were ready to accept the wish of Emirates and Etihad but only if they flew planes with smaller sizes. Furthermore, the Canadian government has to understand that avoiding the dialogue will do no good to the relations. It has been more than seven months that UAE’s “Ambassador to Canada, Mohammad Abdullah Al Ghafli did not get a chance to meet the Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Lawrence Cannon” (Abma, 2011). One the other hand, UAE needs to understand that Dubai is currently not at its best in terms of economy. Due to recession and many other factors, people are taking away their investment from Dubai. There are more than 200 Canadian companies, which have their headquarters in Dubai, and if these companies take away their business from Dubai then the country would be in big trouble. Furthermore, even if the intentions from the side of UAE are not bad, but in the recent wake of events, it appears that UAE “is trying to blackmail” the Canadians to give them what they want. If it was purely a business issue then there was no point in involving military and politics into it (Keyrouz, 2010). Furthermore, one could also blame the cultural differences between these countries. In the Canadian and Western cultures, differences are seen as a part of everyday life. Differences on one part do not mean that two people or groups cannot get along on their fields. In fact, in the absence of any conflicts and differences, the relation is considered as healthy and productive. However, the Middle Eastern culture sees the same with a different approach. For UAE, either we are friends or we are not friends and there is no middle way to it (Keyrouz, 2010). References Abma, D. (2011). Chretien criticizes Harper's handling of UAE relations. Retrieved on May 13, 2011: http://www.canada.com/news/decision-canada/Chretien+criticizes+Harper+handling+relations/4164918/story.html Bow, B. J., & Lennox, P. (2008). An independent foreign policy for Canada: challenges and choices for the future. University of Toronto Press. Hampson, F. O., & Heinbecker, P. (2009). Canada Among Nations, 2009-2010: As Others See Us. McGill-Queen's University Press. Heinbecker, P. (2007). Canada and the Middle East: in theory and practice. Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press. Keyrouz, W. (2010). UAE-Canada relations hit recent rocky patches. Retrieved on May 13, 2011: http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=42077 Kukucha, C. J., & Bratt, D. (2011). Readings in Canadian Foreign Policy: Classic Debates and New Ideas. Oxford University Press. O'Reilly, M. (2011). UAE-Canada relations at all-time low. Retrieved on May 13, 2011: http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/uae/government/uae-canada-relations-at-all-time-low-1.745401 Read More