SPP and Canadian Sovereignty

Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) developing between Canada, the US and Mexico, a point of view that must be said.

The Corporation of the elite believes strongly in decentralized services starting at the local community level where local authorities makes decisions. Then, as the need for higher authority is required to provide a particular service so the decision making in respect of that service moves up a notch, until decisions respecting things like sovereignty, trans-national transportation and international relations comes to rest at the federal level.

When one goes through this exercise and then takes a hard look at where SPP is heading can one see its undesirable aspects. SPP requires international non-representative political structures to manage such things as border security and trade (currently regulated under NAFTA). The border in question is not just the border to the south of Canada, but the border to the north also, which brings me to the issue I wish to discuss, Canadian-US border issues in the context of SPP.

Alaska-Yukon Border dispute

There is a long standing border dispute between Canada and the US in the Canadian Northwest Passage at the US border with the Yukon Territory. The US claims that the border running northwards should be at right angles to the direction of the coast at the coastal border point, whereas Canada says that the border running northwards should follow the direction of the global north-south meridian. The result is an important triangle of oil-rich seabed in contention.

Hecate Strait dispute
There is also a long standing border dispute involving the sovereignty of the Hecate Strait, the ocean-connected channel immediately north of the Haida Gwaii (Queen Charlotte) Islands, which is actually, under a treaty with the US, Canadian internal waters. When Russia sold Alaska to the US (where were we?) the border between Alaska and Canada (BC) had to be resolved and so a triumvirate of British civil servants did the job. The Alaska Panhandle was given to Alaska (i.e. the US) in return for which Canada was given the Hecate Strait. A line was drawn from one headland to another on the southern coastline of the Alaska Panhandle representing the terminus of Alsaka, that is to say, US sovereignty. The line is known simply as the "AB Line". Everything to the south of the AB Line, i.e the Hecate Strait, is Canadian internal waters. The US now seeks to push the AB Line out to the centre of the Hecate Strait thereby providing for itself waters rich in fish and other sea-life and a seabed that is prime for oil exploration.

Canadian sovereignty over the Northwest Passage
There is also a serious threat to Canadian sovereignty by claims by the US, backed by Russia, EU and Asian countries, to the waters and seabed of the Northwest Passage, which is increasingly being more and more ice free each year with global warming. Already commercial shipping has used the Northwest Passage instead of the Panama Canal to save 4000-6000 kilometres on the voyage from Europe to Asia. Larger ships, oil tankers, that cannot fit through the Panama Canal go via Cape Horn, the southern tip of South America, and will save 10,000 kilometres to reach some Asian markets by using the Northwest Passage. The waters of the Northwest Passage in dispute have, since the inception of Canada as a country, been recognized as Canadian internal waters. Note, the Canadian Archipelago is not in dispute, nor the western end of the Northwest Passage, which is adjacent to Alaska and therefore US waters. If Canada loses control over its Northwest Passage it loses the right to regulate navigation rights, fishing rights, oil exploration rights and other economic rights over the waters and seabed involved, which is massive.

Explanation
A quick word about internal waters. There are internal waters, territorial waters and the economic zone. Internal is 100% sovereign, territorial is sovereignty limited by such things as right of innocent passage, while economic zone is an area "managed" by the littoral state with respect to environmental, mineral and fishing rights. Internal waters are the same as if they were land, territorial waters extend 12 nautical miles (6080 feet = 1 n. mile) away from the coast and economic zones extend 200 miles. For a non technical explanation of such matters, visit the web site at the following URL:

http://www.unesco.org/csi/act/russia/legalpro6.htm

Backup URL: http://tinyurl.com/2gylvv

Immigration
One final note. As a sovereign state, Canada enforces its immigration laws and regulations as the government of the day sees fit. Certainly, the US and Mexico are not consulted. Take a hard long look at the EU and the social strife caused in many of its individual states because of a lack of control over the movement of people from one country to another. I am, personally, in favour of increased immigration quotas for all ethnic groups, but in accordance with Canadian laws and regulations. If such laws and regulations are broken down or vacated by attrition under SPP, we will eventually have mass movement of people from the US and Mexico arriving in Canada whether we like it or not. That is the very essence of a NAU. No doubt, Canadians would equally be able to move south under those circumstances and such a move would be welcome to some, how many I cannot guess. But, is that the way we want to go? SPP will have its own laws and regulations that will trump ours. Given the unequal strengths of the partners under SPP, resolution of problems will be inevitably in favour of our cousins to the south.

Effect of SPP

Now, where does SPP fit into all this? I say, consider the resolution of such issues described above using the legal machinery of SPP. Ever heard of the "common good"? Well, think about these issues being resolved "in the common good" of an embryonic North American Union (NAU), which is, as Dr. Eaton says, where SPP is taking us. As far as I can see, it is good-bye Canada, hello NAU.
Moving to NAU

All of the problems I have outlined above will not arise today, but they surely will arise in the not too distant future in tandem with the encroachment on Canadian sovereignty by SPP/NAU. These are all hard issues that must be faced up to sooner rather than later if we are to retain Canadian sovereignty. I like the American people, but I don't care much for their political or juridical system, both of which are, if not controlled, then heavily influenced by the corporate personality